Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

In Praise of Staunton’s Parking Lots

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

In my most recent column, “Parking Madness,” I skewer the practice so prevalant in Virginia of surrounding every mall, shopping center, office park, church, government facility and even recreational amenity with vast, expansive parking lots. Suburbia has paved way too much of its surface area with impermeable, run off-creating asphalt, and it has destroyed any memorable sense of “place” by treating its buildings as islands in seas of gray pavement. Gone are the urban streetscapes, which utilize parking spaces to help define pedestrian-friendly places where people enjoy spending time.

There was one issue in that column, however, that I dealt with only in passing. In an auto-centric society, there aren’t enough curbside parking spaces to accommodate everyone with a car. Where do you put the extra parking spaces? How do you avoid ruining pedestrian-friendly streetscapes?

If you’re in a neighborhood defined by city blocks, put the parking behind the buildings. That’s the solution adopted by Richmond’s “Libbie and Grove” shopping area mentioned in the column, but a solution only imperfectly adopted. The parking lot behind the shops and Westhampton movie theater preserves the streetscape along Grove Ave., but abuts Libbie Ave. for a lengthy stretch, creating an eyesore for the shops on the other side of the street there.

The best execution of this idea that I’ve seen can be found in downtown Staunton, where the parking lot is consigned to the center of the block and intrudes only minimally on the streetscape. The photos at the top and bottom of this post, which I took last fall during a weekend visit to the Blackfriar’s theater, show the interior of a block in the heart of downtown. Placing parking in the middle of the block preserves the integrity of the streetscapes, creating the charming pedestrian ambience for which Staunton is reknowned. The interior parking lot serves a bed-and-breakfast hotel, the Dining Room (one of the greatest restaurants I’ve ever dined in… anywhere), stores, boutiques and professional offices. A similar parking-in-the-center-of-the-block configuration can be found at the Woodrow Wilson birthplace museum.

This configuration is possible, of course, only in urban areas organized in grid-street patterns. If anyone has seen it adapted successfully to the surburban pod pattern of development, I would love to hear about it.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

8 responses to “In Praise of Staunton’s Parking Lots”

  1. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    I thought your article was on the money. Particularly the part about putting the sidewalks on the other side of the parking lot from the stores. The ususal situation in a mall is to have a thoughorfare or driving lane along the front of the stores – for cars. I think the lanes for traversing or cruising the parking areas should be located away from the stores and you should be able to walk from the lot to the stores without crossing the lanes, for the most part. In other words, put them as far from the store as possible.

    Then put sidewalks that lead to the stores in the parking lot, and make the sidewalk lanes wide enough to accomodate trees. In fact, add enough space between the car rows for some trees. This makes the area more pleasant and keeps the cars from overheating in the sun.

    All of this will make the lots more difficult to plow, but it will also prevent diagonal driving across the lot, and excessive speed.

    In other words, put the park back in the parking lots.

    Parking, and the expense thereof is a major driver in how things are built, and where. I don’t believe we can avoid the space that cars need to park, or that we should, but we can set standards that prevent them from being ugly or causing uncontrolled runoff.

    Those standards will raise the cost of providing parking enough so that more businesses will consider the kinds of alternatives you propose.

    I don’t agree that placing parking behind the commercial district is an answer. What this usually results in is that main street turns into two strip malls that turn their backs on each other. And now, since the parking is behind the store, it is uglier than ever because it has to share space with the loading dock and garbage collection.

    I’m also not sure I agree with what you say about excess parking spaces. For some retailers, their profit for the entire year depends on the Christmas season, without the space to support that peak load,they can lose the entire year. So, a parking space has two purposes: one is to provide a space to park which it does when it is occupied. The other is to provide an opportunity to park, whichit does when it is unoccupied. Its nice to say that churches can share their parking spaces with businesses, but what if there is a funeral in the middle of the week?

    Then there is the issue of private property. It seems to me that to make your idea work, parking spaces should be publicly owned, planned and designed, in order that they can also be shared more and alllow for more connections by preventing lots that cry out “MINE”. While the county or town would have to buy up the space, it could provide a nice source of revenue, and it would eventually be a means for the jursdiction to control what gets built and where because the most desirable places would be where parking is provided. (Infrastructure folks, infrastructure.) Combined with high standards for private lots, such a combination would have plenty of clout in urban design, tax generation, and parking revenue.

    As it is, parking lots are the new backyard fence. Teens congregate there (why they do that is beyond me) and they are the places we are most likely to encounter our neighbors. We do need to incorporate them more into the social fabric and make them less ugly, but I’m not sure that hiding them is the way to go.

    Finally, your description of conditions at the Walgreen store were probably required by some lobotomized automaton moron who wrote and enforced the drainage and sidewalk ordinances. Even the placement of the ornamental trees is probably prescribed.

    I know of several cases where the prescribed tree situation turned out to be unworkable and caused more problems than they fixed, but still, there ought to be a way to make it clear that we won’t stand for ugly.

  2. Agitator Avatar
    Agitator

    Jim, did you also take notice of the new parking garage behind Blackfriars configured to retrofit itself into the facade of the rest of the downtown city block?

    Ray… come on to Staunton and see how it works…. these lots are the alternative and they fit and usually provide the opportunity to have empty spots even on busy days. It goes along with metered spots on the street, metered lots and two municpal parking garages. Its an extrememly effective use of space without affecting the athestics of the area. People are choosing to shop and eat in downtown Staunton and this is one of the ways transportation needs are being addressed.

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I read your commment and then the referenced articles. Some thoughts – (1) you are not thinking about how this sort of arrangment affects women shopping alone after dark, which is extremely common, and (2) you don’t appear to live in Richmond, as your take on the dynamics of the neighborhoods there is a bit off, to put it mildly.

    Libbie and Grove is in the middle of a wonderful old neighborhood of huge houses, CCV, and U of R. Not exactly your typical arrangement for a shopping center.

    It’s great for the students and wives that shop there during the daytime. It’s a great place to go on weekends or in a group. BUT – that sort of behind the street parking is not safe after dark for women shopping alone.

    Most women shop alone after dark a LOT. Given a choice between a stark, well-lit, safe parking lot out front, or a aesthetically pleasing, dark parking lot behind a building, I’ll choose not to risk rape or a mugging every time.

    Carytown is similarly popular during the day and weekends, and after dark for the young set at the clubs. It is not a safe place to hang out alone after dark. The last time I was there after dark, with a group, someone was shot about a block down the street from where we were eating.

    A lot of these “new urban” ideas do not take into account that today we have many women with responsible jobs and irregular hours, who don’t feel safe parking in dark, hidden parking areas, and who don’t feel safe waiting alone after dark for public tranportation. Rightly so – those are not safe or smart things to do.

    Short Pump Town Center is popular because it has hot stores that are nowhere else in the area, the stores it has have a HUGE selection, it’s new, it’s closer to where many of its customers work and live, near Innsbrook and the West End suburbs and exurbs, it has great restaurants – and it has plenty of well-lit parking. It is not popular b/c of its aesthetics.

    I have friends who will drive an hour to eat at the Cheescake Factory – they’ve never even shopped at the mall. They drive specifically for the restaurant.

    At night, I shop where I feel safe. I do not park behind buildings at Libby and Grove when I’m by myself – and that’s an upscale neighborhood – and I NEVER shop or eat in Carytown by myself after dark.

    New Urbanism should not make women unsafe. I don’t care WHAT it helps with the environment or transportation, I’m not putting myself at risk.

  4. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I think Ray’s parking lot idea – move them out – is great.

    Need to do something for handicap.. folks.

    re: Christmas/Public lots.

    We have a LOT of parking lot asphalt that is not used much of the time. This translates into adverse impacts to Rivers and the Bay. At the same time, we build huge expensive commuter lots – while Mall parking lots sits empty.

    Why not look into combining the two functions? Issues/details to work out – yes – especially at Christmas but either stacked parking (garages) and/or overflow parking on permerable surfaces could be solutions.

    re: safety – I don’t see this as an either/or situation. I would think that parking – no matter where or what kind should have those things that make them safe (safer) including lights, cameras, proximity to places that have people “traffic” on a regular basis, et al.

    And .. think about commuter parking lots… and how they are safe or not.. depending on one’s point of view and/or the reasons that folks think they are safe.

    And.. I’d also point out.. that mall parking lots – the way they are configured now.. place women in vulnerable situations… where there are numerous examples of people being abducted … almost daily.

  5. Ray Hyde Avatar
    Ray Hyde

    All good comments. I know Staunton’s situation seems to work well, but as the comments point out, no one solution is best everywhere. Grid streets are one solution for some places and cul-de-sacs are another solution for other places.

    Neither one is necessarily best, or if it is, we can’t prove it yet. Mixed use is one solution for some places and separate uses are another.

    Not only that, but the answer will change over time. Staunton’s situation works now, but it might not work over time.

    Re handicapped. My idea is that the parking lot ends in cul-de-sacs near the stores, and they culs are separated by walkways. The driveway that now passes dierctly adjacent to the storefronts would be moved out to the outside edge of the lot, similar to a service road, and could double as such. As it is, the store frontage road is a barrier and a hazard to pedestrians.

    Handicapped parking and drop offs would be reserved in those spots closest to the stores. Pick up and delivery would be behind the stores, based on the same alley way idea that is a popular new urbanist theme.

  6. Waldo Jaquith Avatar
    Waldo Jaquith

    I’d just like to point out how much I’ve enjoyed your blog entries on urban planning and related matters recently, Jim. This, the military housing piece, the C’ville building height piece, and the C’ville riparian buffer piece — all interesting and engaging, and all on a topic to which I’ve given a lot of thought recently. Thanks for that.

  7. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Waldo, Thanks for the encouragement. I’d be interested to know your thoughts on the subjects we touch upon. You have the advantage of living in a hotbed of urban experimentation, and you’re in a position to observe a lot of things that I never see. Shoot me an e-mail if you start posting on your blog. I am a sporadic visitor but I could easily miss something. Good luck with the blog conference. I wish I could attend.

  8. Waldo Jaquith Avatar
    Waldo Jaquith

    You know, I simply haven’t had anything to add to the recent urban planning discussions — your post and the initial comments cover anything I’m capable of adding.

    I heard lots of talk about Bacon’s Rebellion at this weekend’s conference — this blog was repeatedly held up as an example of what blogs can do very well, better than the media is likely to do, focusing on very specific topics of public interest and discussing them in great depth. So while we were disappointed you couldn’t come, you were far from absent. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Read More