>Phoenix area town seeks federal funds for useless parking garage


According to this article, Gilbert, AZ is considering seeking federal stimulus funding for a parking garage.  The Gilbert, AZ garage is projected to cost $7.5M for 350 spaces (not sure if that’s total or marginal) but that’s $21,400 per space.  Article states that their downtown “needs more parking”.  Here’s an aerial view of the site mentioned in the article.

I think before we use federal funding to buy a garage for this low-density site, we should probably figure out how much parking is worth to the people driving, by pricing or managing the parking they have already.  I’m going out on a limb here, but I’m willing to bet that the parking is not going to be worth more than the $200 per month you’d need to build such a parking garage (based on amortized construction costs and operating costs).  If the small downtown shopping area is popular enough, people should be willing to chip in a couple of bucks to park there in exchange for knowing there will be a space available when they arrive.

Update:  Commenter Mark points out that the town is over 200,000 people, so I’ve edited the title which used to refer to Gilbert as a “small town”.  It’s still officially a town, and from the look of the aerial view, still low density.


About perkinsms

I'm an engineer and father interested in transit, parking and economics.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to >Phoenix area town seeks federal funds for useless parking garage

  1. Dave Murphy says:

    >Wow… this is infuriating. Arizona strikes me as particularly bad for urbanism. You can’t go around the corner without getting in your car in that state.

  2. K says:

    >This is one of those stories where I really hope there is another side that helps it make a little more sense.Happy Holidays.

  3. Michael says:

    >Thanks for your comments, I can see if I can call over to Gilbert, AZ and see if anyone is willing to discuss. I think there was also a congressman mentioned in the article and I could call his/her staff.

  4. Mark says:

    >I agree federal funds are inappropriate (they should pay for it themselves if they need something), but 207,000 isn’t exactly a ‘small town’.

  5. Michael says:

    >I updated the title. From the aerial view, it looks pretty low density, but I guess it’s pretty extensive in land area and it’s pretty high density for single-family home suburbs.Thanks, Mark.

  6. Geoff says:

    >You are correct about the land density usage and the single family homes. I have been to Gilbert and the buildings are low density and the many single family homes are a suburb of Phoenix.

  7. Mark says:

    >Well, PART of Arizona tried to give you a Christmas present…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRO_Light_Rail_(Phoenix)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s