Opening of U-M's new North Quad dorm prompts Ann Arbor officials to create parking district
With the opening of the University of Michigan's new North Quad dormitory this fall, Ann Arbor officials are taking steps to ensure nearby neighborhood streets don't fill up with students' cars.
The City Council this week unanimously approved creating a new residential parking permit district in the Old Fourth Ward, setting up a program to maintain on-street parking for near-downtown residents.
The new parking permit district for the Old Fourth Ward. Click here to view larger map.
Residents will pay $50 per year per permit, allowing them to park on the street in front of their houses. Permits will be issued only to residents who live in the affected area.
The city will use $20,985 from its general fund reserves to implement the program, which includes placing signage on the following streets:
• East Ann Street — North Division to Glen Avenue. • Catherine Street — North Fifth Avenue to North Ingalls. • North Division Street — East Huron to High Street. • Elizabeth Street — East Kingsley to High Street (west side only). • High Street — North Division to North State. • East Huron Street — North Division to North Ingalls (north side only). • North Ingalls Street —East Huron to East Kingsley. • East Kingsley Street — North Division to North Ingalls. • Lawrence Street — North Division to North Ingalls. • North State Street — East Huron to High Street (excludes west side Kingsley to High, St. Thomas Church). • North Thayer Street — East Huron to East Kingsley. The Old Fourth Ward Association has been involved in lengthy discussions with 1st Ward Council Members Sandi Smith and Sabra Briere because of the expected increase in parking demand associated with the opening of the new dormitory at the corner of State and Huron.
U-M spokesman Jim Kosteva said there will be 460 students moving into the new North Quad dorm before school starts this fall.
Smith and Briere said with no parking provided on site at the new dorm, the nearby neighborhood would suffer an unpleasant situation absent a permit district. They said the neighborhood streets already are filled up on a regular basis by students, university employees and downtown workers.
"The neighborhood immediately to the north has what appears to be lots of free, ample street parking," Smith said. "I see a conflict and the neighbors see a conflict coming, and we want to avoid that."
Smith said the program might cost the city money upfront, mostly because of the installation of signs, but over time it should break even.
The city already has similar residential parking permit districts established for the Old West Side and the Spring-Brooks-Summit area.
The Old Fourth Ward Association has been unsuccessful in past attempts to set up a parking permit district due to the difficulty of collecting the required 60 percent of signatures from residents in the affected area.
The City Council stepped in this week and took action to waive the signature requirement, essentially unilaterally establishing the district.
Implementation of the district, including installation of signage, mailings to eligible properties and sale of permits, is expected to take six to eight weeks.
Permits for the district will be sold annually with the permits effective Aug.15, 2010, and expiring Aug. 14, 2011.
In addition to the $20,985 to implement the program, other costs will be absorbed into the operating budgets of various city departments.
Kosteva said the university has no objection to neighborhoods seeking council authorization for permit parking restrictions. Asked whether the university bears any responsibility for the costs, he said the city's budgetary considerations for providing municipal services are its own.
While there is no parking onsite at the new dorm, Kosteva said there is limited parking provided on U-M's North Campus. In addition, the university provides free park-and-ride locations, and there are about 2,000 commuter lot permits that juniors, seniors and graduate students can purchase.
Kosteva said students are reminded of the multiple transportation options available and discouraged to bring vehicles to campus, but there is no university regulation prohibiting students from having vehicles.
The city's traffic control order for the new district establishes a two-hour parking limit on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on the north and east sides of the streets.
On Tuesdays and Thursdays, two-hour parking limits will be enforced on the south and west sides of the streets.
Residents with permits will be exempt from the two-hour limits. The limits also will not be enforced on weekends and holidays.
Streets currently signed for "no parking" or other restrictions will remain the same, city officials said. However, residents who live on streets signed for "no parking" still can purchase a permit and park on another permit-designated street within the district.
Smith and Briere said they plan to bring forward another proposal next month to establish a residential parking permit district for the South University Neighborhood Association to address the same challenges.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529.
Comments
Derek
Tue, Jul 6, 2010 : 3:23 p.m.
Let's not forget that the large UM lot on the corner of Kingsley and Cornwell is free and usually empty on weekends and evenings. I parked there quite a bit when I was an OFW resident last year. I will be parking there tonight for a show at Power Center.
fuse
Sun, Jun 27, 2010 : 9:49 a.m.
I live in the old west side on West Washington Street. All I can say to those living in the Old Fourth Ward, is welcome to our world. Ever since the City allowed the Y to be built without "ANY" useful parking, the front of our homes have become the parking lot for the Y. You shortly will be paying a fee to troll for parking spots in front of your own home. You will not be guaranteed a parking space. I hope for all of your in the new parking district that you're not inundated by the trolling cars, zipping up and down your streets and scraping the bumpers and side view mirrors of your cars as the new north quad students looking for a parking spot. It could be worse, it could be people trying to get a perfect parking spot with in steps of the Y, so they can do a couple of miles on their treadmills Sounds like another money stream for city hall, and nothing more. It won't solve the problem. Believe you me the two hour signs and the $50 will not put anything to rest. The title of your article makes me laugh...
Jay Thomas
Fri, Jun 25, 2010 : 4:05 p.m.
The more the U expands the more Ann Arborites have to pay. Bottom line.
Rod Johnson
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:32 p.m.
Students *are* allowed to bring cars. They're discouraged, in the case of freshmen, but lots bring them anyway, and cars are very, and increasingly, common among older students.
foobar417
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:32 p.m.
While I'm not inclined to support permit parking districts for the reasons articulated above (equity to other residents of the city, including student renters in dorms, new or not), I would point out that in Ann Arbor's older neighborhoods, there are often houses without adequate parking on the property and the houses are so tight that none can be added. Some houses even lack a driveway. Others barely have room for a single car. In those older neighborhoods, I think its reasonable to treat reliable access to "nearby on-street parking" as a grandfathered in exception, and permit parking enables that sort of grandfathering.
Tarc
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 4:31 p.m.
I find it interesting that several comments are missing some points: 1) You live in a world class city and enjoy the advantages, including free on street parking that is unheard of in most world-class cities: 2) the new dorm is built on university property with no additional parking for a reason: staff parking already exists nearby and the students are not allowed to bring cars, hence no legitimate need for new parking; 3) any additional parking in the neighborhood will be illigitimate, and the city is providing a cheap way to improve the situation (which would otherwise create more griping of a different kind; 4) residents can always PARK IN THEIR OWN DRIVEWAYS (on their own property) FOR FREE instead of parking on city property; 5) there are some pretty hefty bonuses for adding that many people to the area, including a new CVS within walking distance, virtually assured safety improvements due to foottraffic, economic support for local businesses, and for economic growth. I think that the residents of Ann Arbor deserve their statewide rep as whiners, and should be grateful that the University (hospitals, related businesses, income from the student body, etc) shelters the area from economic downturns and greatly enchances the quality of life. I'm sure Port Huron would be happy to take the University off Ann Arbor's hands - they could use some help with that 30% unemployment level. Somehow a few people having to spend $0.15 a day for onstreet parking seems incredibly, astoundingly unimportant.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 4:27 p.m.
I think that it is bad public policy and unwise governance to pass an ordnance of any type that has an impact on our college students when most of them are out of town on Summer break. The legislative process and principles of good governance are best served when all voices are heard before a decision is made! Students have come to City Council repeatedly to make this point. We disrespect the democratic process to ignore their complaints.
Lokalisierung
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 3:49 p.m.
"I pay $3500 plus dollars to live in your city..." If only all that money went to the city we would all be sitting pretty.
scooter dog
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 3:17 p.m.
WOW,Pay to park in front of my own house!, Whats next,maybe a tax to open your windows or maybe a tax to use the street lights?? I pay $3500 plus dollars to live in your city and I think this extra tax is a true farce.
A2G
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 1:24 p.m.
"Kosteva said the university has no objection to neighborhoods seeking council authorization for permit parking restrictions. Asked whether the university bears any responsibility for the costs, he said the city's budgetary considerations for providing municipal services are its own." Don't you love how the University never seems to take any responsibility for anything it does? The only reason this is an issue is that it acted unilaterally to build a dorm in the center of town where there are limited roads and parking without input or consideration from the city or local residents. The cities budgetary considerations are only going to get worse as the University continues to add to its current 48% hold on the taxable land in the city. At some point, it would be nice if the University recognized that part of what makes it a great University is its partnership with the city and its citizens and that it does have some responsibility for the actions it takes that impact all the citizens here.
Lokalisierung
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:30 p.m.
"Certainly there will be allot open parking spaces available; I mean who wants to park 4 or 5 stories under ground?" I think it's the same as parking 4 or 5 floors above the gound like now. "And what the hell. Built a dorm that will house 460 with no provisions for parking and then charge (tax) near by home owners to (allow) them park in front of their own property." you know the city didn't build the dorm for the U right?
Jake C
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:10 p.m.
Two points in defense of this new policy: 1) If you live in the near-campus area affected by the parking permit change, you probably already work for the U of M or for some business directly affected by it. So an expansion of the U is good for you, one way or another. 2) Therefore you can't complain when the U of M provides jobs for the region, *and* also complain when students start moving into "family housing areas" because there's not enough space in the Res Halls, *AND* complain when the U actually builds a new Res Hall to meet the demand from decades ago *AND THEN* then implements a policy that protects parking spots for those who actually live in the "barely off-campus" neighborhoods. Unless the City and the U magically change the laws of physics to allow twice as many cars to be parked in half as small of an area, compromises have to be made somehow. It'd be nice if A2 could give away parking permits for neighborhood residents for free, but then other people would be complaining that their taxes are subsidizing people in some other side of town, because someone has to verify those parking permit applications and handle the enforcement. You can't please everyone...
Tanzor
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 12:03 p.m.
Hay, I have a solution. We dig a massive tunnel connecting the dorm to the idiotic unwanted underground parking hole that that is currently under construction near the Library. Certainly there will be allot open parking spaces available; I mean who wants to park 4 or 5 stories under ground? The DDA with its parking hole and our Mayor with his self indulgent new city hall are going to cost us tax payers allot of money. And what the hell. Built a dorm that will house 460 with no provisions for parking and then charge (tax) near by home owners to (allow) them park in front of their own property.
phdeez
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:53 a.m.
Is this going to be like the Old West Side, where residential permit holders can park on any side of the street, but non-permit holders can only use one side of the street, depending on the day of the week? That would make sense. But to close off the entire neighborhood to non-residents seems extreme.
rusty shackelford
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:50 a.m.
The spaces are not individually reserved, no.
Mick52
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:39 a.m.
I have a question. Will the spaces in front of residences be numbered or designated as reserved for residents of the address? If not,suppose a resident buys a permit and comes home to find a car, with a permit parked in front of their home? I know this can happen now, but when you are forced to pay, its more of a stick in the craw when you can't find a space you pay for. In this area with multiple dwellers at each structure, the number of cars can easily outnumber the spaces. Again this surely happens now, but imagine if you had to pay for a permit and had to park your car a ways from your home after finding a free spot outside the parking zone.
Mick52
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 11:30 a.m.
What a terrible cash grab by the city. I have no problem with the neighborhood parking permit, but to charge residents for it is a slap in the face. Despite how little the fee maybe based on per day, its gouging when other neighborhoods don't have to pay for it. Here the residents suffer based on something the U did. The decision to place this dormitory in this spot is one to the dumbest things done by the Univ admin. To place such a large building at the corner of N State and E Huron with no parking and no room for move in/out is absolutely incompetent when there is ample room elsewhere, N Campus and Palmer Field. Add that to tearing down a building of some historic value just shows a real lack of respect for the city. The UM is just not being run at the quality level it used to be.
Phil Dokas
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:31 a.m.
I honestly like this. Here's how I see it. It's not "$50 to park in front of your own house" it's "$50 to reserve a spot from the hundreds of never-there-before residents showing up in August". The population of the neighborhood is going to *spontaneously* explode in August and freshmen aren't allowed to live in that dorm so the likelihood of car ownership will be higher than purely average. As for the price, yeah, it could be free, but on the other hand this is a neighborhood with zero meters and thus is currently unpatrolled by parking enforcement staff. Case in point: just this morning I had to call for the second time in my single month of living at my house to get a car blocking my driveway towed. This increased monitoring labor has to be paid for somehow. And with the enormous flood of people moving into the neighborhood suddenly I do hope they enforce the crap out of the permits! $50 / 365 days is ~14 per day and that's a price I can afford.
rusty shackelford
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:31 a.m.
The other thing that's quite annoying is that when Ann Arbor creates one of these zones, it restricts EVERY space in this manner. Most cities, when they create resident-only parking zones, do so only for some of the spaces in the neighborhood, not all.
rusty shackelford
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:23 a.m.
I agree with Woman in Ypsilanti. Every household in Ann Arbor should be entitled to 1 (only 1) parking permit per year for x dollars that will be good in any of these zones. For example, when I lived downtown I would often park in that area, since it was 4 blocks from my house and my street didn't allow overnight parking. Why would people like me be less worthy of parking there than those who live in that neighborhood--where most of the properties have driveways anyway? I never got to park directly in front of my house on the public street, why is it a "right" for these people do so so?
Ted Annis
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 10:06 a.m.
GEE and XMO make great points. There were community meetings with the UoM when the dorm was announced. To its credit, the UoM did improve upon the original dorm design based upon community feedback. During this period, the lack of parking was pointed out multiple times. The UoM simply ignored the matter and said "Students are not supposed to bring their cars." I submit that underground parking at the dorm could have been a source of Revenue for the UoM, and would have avoided the coming conflict with City residents and coming dissatisfaction by the dorm students. For the life of me, I cannot understand the UoM's thinking on this (and other several other current construction matters). Thoughts anyone? Jim Kosteva, let's hear from you.
Woman in Ypsilanti
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:42 a.m.
I always hate these kinds of parking schemes but since I don't live in Ann Arbor, I am not too upset. But if I was a resident of Ann Arbor, I would be mad. Everyone's taxes go to maintaining public roads and just because someone lives on a particular road, they are not entitled to a parking spot on that road. The city should open the permits to all city residents and not just those who live in the affected area. A parking spot is a valuable thing and this permit plan essentially takes a public asset (on street parking) and gives it to private parties for practically nothing.
rusty shackelford
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:36 a.m.
Not sure why students who live in dorms in the same neighborhood are less entitled to parking spaces than anyone else. In other words, why does the type of structure one lives in entitle one to more or fewer parking rights?
ChrisW
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 9:33 a.m.
Why would the rules change based on the day of the week? It seems like the city just wants to make parking more complicated and expensive rather than solve any particular problem.
JackieL
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:38 a.m.
This will be no different than the horrible street parking situation on Washington near the Y. the permits don't really help unless there is very aggressive enforcement. Those of us with property in the area can never park on Washington. I am all for a city income tax. Hundreds of people come in from surrounding areas to work in Ann Arbor and pay nothing. It is time to collect from the real users of our neighborhoods, parks, and services.
BernieP
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.
Inquiring minds want to know. How tightly do the parking Tsars patrol which neighborhood a tag holder parks in? Currently there is a North Central RPP designated street in the Old Fourth Ward ( Detroit Street ). Which tag should we be certain to acquire to continue to park on Detroit Street when the new tags are made available? My jaded side thinks the DDT will just add Detroit Street to it's metered jurisdiction.
stevo
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:23 a.m.
parking should have been designed into the building and residents should get at least 1 permit to park in front of their house[or nearby] for free.
Linda Diane Feldt
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:18 a.m.
I think it is a legitimate question to ask who should pay the administrative costs of establishing and operating a residential parking district. But $50 a year is hardly "gouging" the residents. That's less than $.15 a day to have easier access to parking. Compared to the other costs of owning and maintaining a car, a little over $4 a month to park is pretty small. That area is also highly transient, with a large percentage of renters. Organizing, educating, collecting signatures, is a far greater challenge than in the west side neighborhoods where the parking districts have been so successful. Sometimes it is OK for our elected representatives to step in and help out. It has been a very long time since I lived in that neighborhood, and when I did I didn't have a car. Parking has been an issue for decades, and certainly was only going to get worse. The UM just upped the pressure, I'm glad the city responded in time. Long term? Continuing to make walking, biking, buses and zip cars easier for everyone will also be a positive step.
Phil Dokas
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:16 a.m.
I'm an old fourth ward resident and I don't find 13 per day to park my car to be gouging at all, honestly.
Richard Dawn
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 8:08 a.m.
Looking at things a bit more realistically, central campus dorms do not generate any significant parking demand. West Quad and South Quad house over 2100 students (5x North Quad's pop.) and you don't find any extraordinary crush for parking in surrounding neighborhoods.
CountyKate
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:43 a.m.
I have to wonder why residents have to PAY to park on the streets in front of their own homes. Seems to me there should be a free permit to residents and anyone else who parks there gets fined, so the financial burden ends up on the interlopers, not the residents. This is gouging residents, who have done nothing to bring this on themselves. The U may not want to help out the city with the problem it created, but that might change if enough students get ticketed and complain.
xmo
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:30 a.m.
So it sounds like, U of M can build a dorm and impact a neighborhood without city council's approval but a developer can not build an apartment complex with parking places because it will have an impact on the neighborhood?
Paula Gardner
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:23 a.m.
Here's today's story from Business Review on the progress at North Quad: http://www.annarbor.com/business-review/175-million-north-quad-dormitory-construction-heads-into-final-stages/
Gee
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 7:03 a.m.
Having worked in that area, my very first thought when I heard about this project was "where will people park?!?!", knowing that the neighborhood had little ability to absorb any influx of vehicles. So this large new dorm was built with absolutely no consideration to parking issues. NOW it's an issue. I am not a "U basher" by any means, but this shows an appalling lack of foresight and discourtesy to the people in the neighborhood. The suggestion that students can park in the "limited parking" spots on north campus and shuttle bus into town.... yeah, right. I have to wonder exactly how limited those spaces are, how long cars are allowed to stay there, etc. Considering the parking problems the city already has, I don't see how ANY new project can get approval without a companion plan on where users of the new project will put their vehicles.
yohan
Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 6:12 a.m.
If the majority of the area residents don't want the permit program then why is it being implemented by the city? Maybe Sandi Smith and Sabra Briere don't have to listen to their constituents because they "know what's good for them"? Or maybe just another of Roger Fraser's cheesy "fees instead of taxes" money grabs. I would go with the later. The city makes a big deal about how much it will cost them to implement the program but don't mention how much additional income will be generated by the new TAXES placed on the residents. $50 /year just to park in front of your own house! Maybe Hieftje is planning a new "Campus Transit Center" to provide parking for the dorm residents.