POINT OF VIEW
Do Commercial Operators Get the Press They Deserve?
BY JOHN VAN HORN I
WAS INA BIT OFA KERFUFFLE LAST month over an article that never appeared in
ParkingToday.The details aren’t important. Suffice it to say that the article wasn’t in the best of taste.A couple of operators got wind
of it, and therein lies the tale. The article got loose for a couple of days, and before I could
corral it, feelings were hurt and tempers rose, and rightly so. In addition, it gave the impression that PT and JVH were arch ene- mies of commercial parking operators. Nothing could be further fromthe truth. For all this, I can only offer my sincerest apologies to those
involved. As I have saidmany times on these pages, operators have an
impossible job, are paid very little to do it, and are often placed in positions where it’s very difficult to
succeed.Yet they show up every day, provide a service that is necessary and important, and all in all, performit well. If any good came of this incident, perhaps it brought to light
the fact that some in our industry have a negative opinion of oper- ators. That opinion is often fed by rumor, gossip, and sometimes personal experience. Are parking operators perfect? Of course not. Neither are
owners, asset managers, customers, auditors, or for that matter, editors. Everyone has issues. What we need to do is not paint with too wide a brush.We
hear about an operator having a problem, butwe don’t hear about the 500 other locations that are running smoothly. If I can say anything negative about commercial parking
operators, it is that they don’t spend a lot of time telling the posi- tive side of their story. They aren’t alone. Few of us in the busi- nessworld take the time to tout our good sides.We are very busy making a living, and let’s face it, in trying times, that’s often hard enough. However, theirs is a good story and needs to be
told.Many
smaller companies just don’t know how to do it; larger ones are enjoined by everything fromcorporate rules to Sarbanes-Oxley. Themainstreammedia like bad news. “If it bleeds, it leads.”
They get a story about a manager who is less than honest or a mistake by an enforcement officer and, boy, it’s banner headlines on the front page. However, if an operator institutes a new pro- gram to let people pay their parking fees with toys at Christmas, or adds additional staff to help senior citizens find their way in complicated garages, no one will ever hear about it. So we here at PT are adding a new monthly feature.We are
going to tell the operator’s story. Itmay be about a successful off- airport operation, or howan operator helps folks trying to catch a train into town. It could be about that new shuttle program being set up to “increase” the amount of parking at a university or hos-
6 APRIL 2009 • PARKING TODAY •
www.parkingtoday.com
pital by providing convenient off-site parking for employees. We start thismonth. See if you can find the article.Oh, don’t
worry, we will continue to bring you ideas and help with your parking operations, just as commercial operators do every day.
***
FromanAssociated Press story by Daisy Nguyen: Traffic engineers across the country are turning to an unlike-
ly weapon in their fight against congestion on city streets – park- ing
meters.And drivers will feel the pain in their pocketbooks. To reduce traffic caused by drivers circling the block to
find parking, cities are testing new technology to direct peo- ple to open spots and experimenting with a concept known as congestion pricing. The strategy calls for hikingmeter rates during peak hours
when parking is scarce and lowering the cost when spaces are plentiful. Transportation officials believe the higher prices will dis-
courage drivers from staying put for too long. That, in turn, could increase the turnover of spaces and reduce carbon emis- sions caused by cars on the prowl for curbside spots. They suggest the extra money from the meters could be used
to improve mass transit ... It drones on and one for two pages, but you get the point.
The problemis that the reporter didn't know the questions to ask, ormade up answers. True, fancy meters will enable the cities to alter pricing
more on a free-market model, but the result isn't necessarily turnover; it’s enticing people to make parking decisions based on their pocketbook. If there are cheap spaces off-street and expensive spaces on-
street,most people will immediately to go the cheap spaces, thus getting them out of the cruising mode. Congestion is reduced because people park quickly.Turnover is caused by setting limits, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you will have less cruising. Quick parking choices eliminate cruising. So the reporter neglected to ask whether the pricing on-
street was going to move parkers off-street and if there was parking off-street to handle the change. In addition, using the money from the meters to improve mass transit is, from my point of view, a non-starter. The money should be used in the neighborhood for infra-
structure to helpmake each local area a better street scene. Better formerchants, better for visitors, better for
residents.Mass transit should pay for
itself.Yeah, right.
The May Parking Today is our
“run-up to the IPI” issue. Look for IPI stories both here in the magazine and on our new fabulous webs i te at
www.parkingtoday.com
PT
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64