Editorials

Ah yes, parking. Glad you asked. Today we’re exercising a little-used editorial prerogative, reading an opinion submission before it’s published and responding in the same paper.  

We’ve noted the approach of Earth Day, and been heartened by the number of letters on environmental topics which have accompanied our Earth Day special issues. And of course number one on the list of What Can We Do About It items is the damage done by emissions from conventional gasoline engines.  

Our regular correspondents have continued their usual vigorous exchanges about buses: are buses the answer, or would they be if they worked better? It seems that the most avid riders of buses are their strongest critics, particularly when it comes to the comfort and performance of the particular models AC Transit is currently buying. The consensus which seems to be emerging is that buses MIGHT be the answer, but only if they worked better than they do now. A similar dialogue about the usefulness of ferries is in progress, also with no clear answer as yet. 

And in the meantime, how are people who live in the “large areas of Berkeley [and El Cerrito and Albany and Richmond and Oakland] which are not served by transit” supposed to get their groceries, their books, their movies and their clothes? I agree with Councilmember Capitelli that it’s a hugely complicated question.  

I do think he slightly misunderstood my remarks about parking in my editorial about not scapegoating street behavior for the woes of downtown Berkeley. I didn’t actually say that there is not enough parking downtown. I did say that “shoppers still expect to find a free parking space right in front of the store of their choice”.  

The problem is not how many parking spaces are available, but how many shoppers think there are, and how hard it is to find them. It will never be possible, in older downtowns like Berkeley’s, to recreate the El Cerrito Plaza experience of parking at the front door of the store—even new malls like Emeryville’s Bay Street have had to turn to big garages (or so I’m told, since I confess I’ve never been there.)  

UCLA’s parking theory guru Donald Shoup has pointed out that sensible parking schemes should charge much less for spaces in parking lots and garages, and much more for on-street parking, in order to encourage rapid turnover for people with short errands downtown. This seems to be working well even in places like Pasadena, which already had parking problems when I was in high school there in the fifties. In Santa Cruz you can park in garages off the main street for as little as $2 or even free, but the meters on Pacific are very expensive and patrolled seven days a week until 8 at night. You can almost always park on the street just long enough to pick up a pizza if you’re willing to drop a quarter or two in a meter. In contrast, Berkeley doesn’t have any well-organized parking hierarchy downtown. 

But there’s still enough parking in the downtown-Telegraph area—if you can find it. The Transportation Demand Management Study of a few years ago confirmed that. It’s a question of perception: If you go downtown expecting to be able to park, you will find your spot eventually, though not necessarily at the door of your destination. Spaces in garages are seldom filled up. The TDMS recommended better signs directing cars to available spaces, and some have been put in place, but many more are needed.  

A major problem—one the DAPAC should be addressing—is UC, which controls a large fraction of the available spaces in the downtown-Telegraph area and is reluctant to share them. The huge garage next to Zellerbach is often empty at night, so empty that I’ve seen cheerleaders practicing marching drills in there. Wouldn’t it be great to provide free parking in the Zellerbach Garage with a shuttle bus for downtown moviegoers? Yet UC plans to build still more parking spaces for its commuting workers and students which will be off-limits to shoppers, and DAPAC doesn’t seem to be able to stop them.  

Those who have regular commutes to UC, both workers and students, should be using the available transit options, imperfect though they might be. UC should provide financial incentives: charging more for parking single-occupancy vehicles, reducing prices for carpools, paying for passes. The city of Berkeley should do the same for its own parking garages and lots. 

Transit advocates are indeed sometimes self-righteously unrealistic about the groups Councilmember Capitelli cites: “seniors, young parents, and disabled who rely on single occupancy vehicles for basic transportation.” A lot of people just can’t use bicycles or buses, but a well-designed parking plan could take that into account. Special parking permits could be provided not just for disabled people, but for anyone who can show that they need to use cars sometimes, for example parents who have to pick up kids from childcare.  

Building more parking lots and garages is not the answer to the problems of the downtown retail segment’s problems, however. Like rousting street people, it’s a simple “obvious” solution—much too simple, in fact. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Capitelli’s choice of words: Solutions must be “nuanced, balanced and negotiated”.  

Donald Shoup suggests that parking revenues should go directly to the areas where they are collected: What people pay to park downtown should be used to add amenities for shoppers. That could include making public parking more user-friendly, employing pleasant humans as parking attendants and security guards instead of relying on automated systems that are hard to use. But this alone will not bring the right mix of stores to downtown Berkeley. 

I quizzed one of the best-informed experts on Berkeley retail about how business is doing these days: the Planet’s senior advertising account executive. Since she’s talking to business proprietors every day in the interest of selling them ads, she has a very clear idea of what’s working and what’s not. She reports that downtown businesses tell her they’re paying ultra-high rents, hoping for walk-in traffic.  

Unique stores like Games of Berkeley do attract both walk-in and regional customers. Restaurants are hard work and have narrow profit margins, but they are successful for independent owners. Student-oriented specialty businesses, especially clothing, books and music stores, continue to do well on Telegraph, but not if they’re too expensive for the average student. Mall-type chains—which have been welcomed with open arms by the city’s ever-optimistic economic development department, desperate for any kind of sales tax revenues—come and go with surprising rapidity. . 

Single-owners malls (even Berkeley’s Fourth Street) have a great advantage over heterogeneous older shopping areas, in that they can control the mix of retail tenants to create the right “shopping experience”. Business improvement districts don’t work well when they’re controlled by property owners with votes allocated on a square-footage basis, since high rents are a major cause when retail fails. 

In some cities the economic development department is well-enough funded and organized to seek out the right independent retailers and to help them succeed. That’s not the case in Berkeley. A coordinated city plan for salvaging downtown, funded by parking revenues, must include people who have a long track record of mentoring successful stores.  

Planet Public Eye columnist Zelda Bronstein articulated a wide range of possible remedies for Berkeley’s small businesses during her unsuccessful mayoral campaign. She’s had a long-time interest in independent retail because her family operated a music store in a small-town downtown when she was growing up. We’ve now asked her to begin a series of columns on retail in the urban East Bay, taking a hard look at what works and what doesn’t.  

Making our traditional shopping districts work again is in everyone’s best interest. Successful local businesses help the Berkeley Daily Planet by generating advertising revenues, and they help Planet Earth by making it possible for more and more people to meet their basic needs without driving long distances. We appreciate Councilmember Capitelli’s contribution to what should be a continuing dialogue on what will help our downtown succeed.