3900 block of N. Hall would be 2nd in area to enact restrictions
The parking situation for visitors to the Cedar Springs entertainment district may be on the verge of going from bad to worse.
A group of residents who live in the 3900 block of Hall Street, one block northeast of the strip, is petitioning to have their street become a "resident parking only" zone, meaning Cedar Springs patrons would be prohibited from parking there on weekend nights.
The 3900 Hall Street petition would affect only about 10 on-street parking spaces between Reagan and Throckmorton streets, and the block would be just the second near the entertainment district to become an RPO zone.
But conventional wisdom holds that the 3900 Hall Street petition — along with an RPO created in the 3200 block of Throckmorton Street last year — signals the beginning of a trend that could eventually ban nonresident parking on numerous side streets near the strip.
"It’s going to be viral, just like it was on our street," said Avi Adelman, a resident and neighborhood watchdog in the Lower Greenville Avenue area who’s helped create dozens of RPO zones near the East Dallas entertainment district in the last few years. "It’s not only viral emotionally, it’s viral physically, because when you push them off of one street, they’ve got to go somewhere else. It just dominoed for people over here."
Adelman and others say RPOs are needed not only to ensure that property owners and residents have ample parking, but also to cut down on noise, trash and crime associated with nightclub patrons.
"All we’re doing is taking back the neighborhood and saying, ‘These are our streets,’" Adelman said. "This is the only thing we can control."
The process for creating an RPO zone is relatively simple, according to Kerry Elder, a transportation planner for the city of Dallas. But Elder added that the spread of RPOs in Oak Lawn could be limited by a provision of the 10-year-old ordinance that requires a certain percentage of a block to be zoned for single family or duplex use before it’s eligible to become an RPO zone. Many blocks in the Cedar Springs area are made up primarily of apartments and zoned multi-family.
If two-thirds of residents or property owners in a block that meets the zoning requirements sign a petition saying they support an RPO during specified hours, the city conducts a survey to confirm whether the spaces in question are 60 percent occupied by nonresidents during those times.
The residents or property owners must then pay to install RPO signs and purchase "hang tags" for vehicles. Each resident can purchase up to six "hang tags" for resident and guest parking. Elder said the typical cost of an RPO is about $300.
Nonresidents who park in RPOs during the prohibited times are subject to citations and having their vehicles towed. In the 3200 Throckmorton RPO, nonresident parking is prohibited from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. Thursday through Sunday.
A man who lives in the 3900 block of Hall Street said this week that he’s one of the residents who’s been circulating the petition to establish an RPO there. The man asked that his name be withheld to avoid backlash from neighbors or business owners who may oppose the petition.
The man said part of the problem is that his condominium complex has only one parking space per unit because they’re mostly one-bedrooms, but many of the tenants are couples with two vehicles.
The man said although this isn’t an issue for him because he’s single, the parking situation prevents him from having guests on weekends.
"If I was to entertain on a Friday or Saturday night, I’d have to have people come over hours in advance just to try to secure a parking spot anywhere near my building," the man said.
Another Hall Street resident who reportedly initiated the petition couldn’t be reached for comment.
But not all residents of the 3900 block support the RPO zone.
"I think this would be a very bad thing for the businesses in the area, and it would make the horrible parking situation in the area even worse," said resident Jim Musick, who notified Dallas Voice about the petition last week.
Michael Milliken, president of the Oak Lawn Committee, which addresses quality of life issues in the area, said he also opposes the concept of RPOs, in part because the entertainment district was in place long before many of the current residents.
"They should have thought of that before they moved there," Milliken said. "It’s been that way for 20 years, so it’s not a new situation. What’s new is that certain properties have been converted from apartments and small homes to complexes of condominiums and townhouses. … If you paid $650,000 for a townhouse on Hall Street, you might get a little upset that people couldn’t park in front of your complex, too."
Milliken said he sometimes encounters parking problems near his north Oak Lawn home as a result of overflow from the Hidden Door, a gay bar off Lemmon Avenue.
"It’s inconvenient, but I work around it," Milliken said. "It’s just part of living in the city."
Oak Lawn resident and openly gay City Plan Commissioner Neil Emmons, whose district includes the 3900 block of Hall Street, said he supports the concept of RPOs. Councilwoman Angela Hunt, who appointed Emmons to the Plan Commission, is also a strong supporter of RPOs.
"It’s a way to keep the residential vital, because if it’s so choked that people can’t enjoy their homes, they move out," Emmons said.
Emmons said it’s also a safety issue, because parking in residential areas results in nightclub patrons walking down dimly lit side streets late at night to get back to their vehicles. Last week,
Dallas Voice reported that the Cedar Springs entertainment district is situated in what has been the third-most dangerous area of the city for violent crime through the first eight months of this year.
Emmons said ultimately the onus is on Cedar Springs business owners to provide more public parking on the strip for their customers. He said the city has granted too many variances to minimum parking requirements on Cedar Springs over the years, creating a "huge parking deficit."
"At some point, businesses need to take care of the patrons whose money they’re depending on for their livelihood," Emmons said.
Rick Espaillat, a spokesman for Caven Enterprises, which owns four nightclubs on Cedar Springs, said this week that he wasn’t aware of the North Hall Street petition, but he added that Caven "far exceeds" legal requirements for parking.
Scott Whittall, president of the Cedar Springs Merchants Association, which is made up of business owners on the street, said he hadn’t been aware of the petition but brought up it during a board meeting this week after being contacted by the Voice.
"We would love to meet with whoever’s starting the petition and just listen to what they want," Whittall said after the meeting. "We’d just like to hear what
they have to say and see what we could do collectively to work together to solve it."
Whittall said the Merchants Association is well aware of the age-old parking issues in the area and is working to come up with a long-term solution. He acknowledged that the solution likely will eventually entail a paid public parking garage, but questions remain about how to pay for it and where it would be.
"Obviously it will make us have to be a little more aggressive when it comes to developing public parking in the area if this trend gets going," Whittall said of RPOs.
"You can’t blame people for wanting to be able to park in front of their own houses."
This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition September 11, 2009.
I live in the 3900 block of N Hall and I oppose this restriction. Everyone I know goes the common rule of “you snooze you lose” concept. I tell my friends that if you plan to visit me, be prepared to park your car a long distance away from my apartment. That is the price you pay when you live in an entertaiment district. Everyone knows that. There is no need for change. I go through the same hassle when I visit friends who live in Lower Greenville or Deep Ellum.
I have lived in the Oak Lawn area for over 15 years now and parking has ALWAYS been an issue. Rather that go through the red tape and undoubtedly hard feelings that will result from an RPO, the city needs to get off it’s collective butt and grant the variances to it’s codes to allow a paid parking garage. How about one behind the Round-Up and one behind the Caven bars? I think a 4 level garage in each spot would do the trick!
IT’S TIME TO PUT OUR BOXING GLOVES ON!!!!
I have to ask the question did any of these people who are complaining move to the area before there was the Cedar Springs strip? They are like residents who move in next to an airport and then complain about the noise.
Yes, parking in the Oak Lawn area is not great, but that comes with the territory. If you want more parking, move to the suburbs, or how about this “new” idea, use public transit and drive less?
Yet when several companies suggested a parking garage in the area they were vetoed.
If I recall correctly the area where Illume went in had several competing bids for the property which included public parking.
If each resident gets 6 passes is there really a 6 to 1 ratio of parking to residents on the street?
I could see a nice side business for residents. You could charge folks to use your passes. You could rent them by the night/week/month, etc…
I would also like to add that I’m guessing that apartment residents in 3900 are not aware of this petition b/c I’ve definitely not been asked to sign anything. It looks like the condo elitists are trying to take over the neighborhood one block at a time and trying to make things difficult for patrons.
Latisha… I was wondering if apartment residents had been involved. Thanks for answering that. I live on Cedar Springs and I knew when I moved here what I was getting into. I am well aware that on Pride Sunday I better have my car where I want it ahead of time or I’ll be hiking a ways to my apartment. Unfortunately, these RPOs are pretty easy to get so I don’t know if we can fight it.
who even goes to the strip anymore..its gross and ghetto these days…I thought thats what manhunt was for…..my friends and I take our business where our shoes don’t stick to the floor…
I’ve been going down to the hood since the early 90’s, and parking has always had its issues. I can guarantee, if PRO’s are passed, it well bring a slow death to the gay hood. If there is no parking or hard to find parking in that area, where it’s not save to walk after dark. The customers will find some other palace to go, really there are so many other places to go where there is plenty of parking, that are gay owned. Also if you really get down to it the area has already lost most of its personality.
Since my comments are included in this article, please allow me to add a few replies…
– We have a website where you can see how the process works –
https://www.residentparkingonly.com
and how Lowest Greenville has RPO’d 18 streets.
– Notwithstanding the questions about variances on the street, RPO is not an anti-anybody proposition, it is a pro-neighborhood issue. Saying you should have looked before you leaped is offensive and does not account for changes in either the business or residential community.
– The onus is on the business community to provide parking spaces per their requirements. It is my understanding that Oak Lawn/Cedar Springs is not as bad as Lowest Greenville, where we are 1,000s of spaces short of what is needed for the current uses
– RPO is forever, while bars may come and go
Avi,
Unlike your neighborhood our bars don’t come and go. For the most part they have been the same bars, businesses and restaurants for years. We are talking single family homes that have been torn down and replaced with 4-8 family condos. These people knew what they were getting into when they moved into then neighborhood.
It’s unfortunate that the city doesn’t require 2-3 parking spots per unit going up on a formerly single family lot. Dallas has some of the worst building codes in the country. It’s also a city that doesn’t give a shit about refurbishing, they just tear down and add more and more residents before thinking out a plan for the roads, parking and other infrastructure. You take care of Greenville where the bars and businesses change over night. We’ll take care of the ONLY neighborhood we have.
Mike
Thank you for your comments.
Yes, you are right, bars come and go here, and there are differences in the areas as regards parking requirements.
But we care as much about our neighborhood as you do. After the Arcadia burned, we asked for the marquee sign so we could do good things in our neighborhood. That meant things like a new website, IRS certification, and RPO.
I agree that Dallas has a long way to go before the residents feel comfortable in all areas like this.
But under the circumstances, I can understand why some folks reach for what is the only tool we control from start to finish.
I can also point to a major flaw in RPO rules. When it was created 11 years ago, there was no way to see our neighborhood would RPO 12 streets, with just as many RPO zones and a variety of enforcement hours. Eventually we will need to create RPO based on neighborhoods or contiguous streets (like San Francisco).
How about a high rise lot on the property standing in ruins on the corner of Douglas and Cedar Springs. No one could prefer a pile of rubble to maintained parking.
Maybe Caven could use their Expensive lot they already own for a parking garage! They already charge 10.00, that times 400 spaces in a 4 story parking garage seems rational and profitable! After all Cavens large bars are the main reasone for the parking problems anyway! In these economic hard times, if they did not charge for parking now, I would probably go out more, but the pay lot is about the only safe parking anymore! Get with the program Caven, you profit off of your patrons, take care of us!
Caven won’t do shit about it. When they were ruining, I mean expanding, TMC they placed all the building materials on the handicap spots behind TMC. When I went to park one night I couldn’t believe what I was seeing and I contacted Caven. Rick Espaillat comment was the same as the one above. As long as they are within “legal” limits on anything they don’t give a shit.
People in the multi-family homes on the side streets knew exactly what was happening when they moved to Cedar Springs and if they didn’t then it was piss poor planning on their part.
It will take hundreds of us to go to the public hearings on this RPO at city hall to speak and fight or as soon as they give one or two complexes RPO’s it’s going to take off. Let’s not forget people since they tore down everything in that area, the majority of the people moving in are straight. We fight NOW or pay LATER.
I always love how people move into a neighborhood that’s got energy and character then do their damnedest to homogenize it. Living in Cedar Springs means living in the gay entertainment area. You knew there were bars and restaurants there when you moved in. Now you realize that may mean parking is a problem? To me that’s a failure on your part.
But okay, let’s find a solution. Where can we put a new parking garage? Who pays for it? The city? What do we do in the meantime? Removing parking spaces without providing alternatives will create the same problems as Avi’s beloved RPOs have in Lower Greenville. No parking, no public transit alternatives (where’s the closest DART station?), and antagonism.
There should be a hold on any further RPO’s in the area until a parking solution can be found. Ideally, the eyesore that’s been torn down at the corner of Cedar Springs and Douglas? And while we’re at it, changing the building codes to force new apartments and condos to provide adequate parking for their residents?
Zelda
Your comments about looking before you leaped are the same we hear about the bars.
In my case, I have been here 30 years, and I have neighbors who have been here 50+ years. When do you stop the clock?
Don’t ask the City to build a parking garage, there’s no money to build it, or people to operate it.
If the business property owners want it, then make sure you RPO every space, or you are simply giving them more spaces and money without any benefits to your community (read – quiet streets).
All of the solutions you provide – except the hold on RPO – are long-term solutions that don’t mean squat today.
Asking for an RPO hold – which can’t be done – is forcing the discussion to be postponed while the residents fume.
This is why RPO is so cool – no matter how much everyone in the neighborhood argues the final decision on RPO rests with the 66% of the residents on the street in issue. It’s their street, no matter how they got there, what was there before, etc.
And if things change in a few years, RPO can be removed with the same petition by the same (or new) residents.
I wonder if anyone from Caven reads this and would care to comment.
A few years ago, (5? 6?) Caven Enterprises tried to have a parking structure built behind TMC. (They (Caven) are no fools are know that this would make them additional revenue over time and enough each month to pay on the loan for the cost of construction.) The City of Dallas denied the variance citing it would be taller than other buildings in the area. That would not be the case now with Ilume opening and some of the 3 story loft structures in the area.
What say you Caven?
@ Mike Lo Vuolo
you wrote
“It will take hundreds of us to go to the public hearings on this RPO at city hall to speak and fight or as soon as they give one or two complexes RPO’s it’s going to take off. Let’s not forget people since they tore down everything in that area, the majority of the people moving in are straight. We fight NOW or pay LATER.”
I hate to tell you this, but RPO is not determined by a hearing of ‘hundreds’ – it is determined by the residents on the street in question, and the number of cars on the street.
If there are 35 residences on a street (either the one side going for RPO or both sides at one time), then you need 24 signatures on the petition.
If one person owns a whole building, he can sign the petition for his property and the units therein. If one person owns two units, he can sign for two.
If a property owner does not sign, the resident can sign it since he lives there. (this gets a little hairy if there is a big schism between the two parties).
A duplex equals two residences. An eight-plex equals eight residences.
A multi-family property with 10 units equals ten residences for the petition count.
It ain’t easy but it can be done.
On Lowest Greenville, we DO have hundreds of people who protest RPO every single weekend they come down here.
If they live in the suburbs, we tell them they have no vote in Dallas and no one cares what they think. When they say we can park in the streets of (fill in the blank with the name of a suburban town), we ask how many bars are crammed near that street, and then they can pass the RPO law there.
If they live in Dallas, we tell them to call their council person – just don’t expect a council rep from North Dallas to file a request to cancel RPO.
If they live in District 14 or 2, where we have RPO, we tell them to call our Council Rep and see if she wants to revoke RPO – the answer is No.
But finally, we tell them – You do not live on this street, and we really don’t care what you think. Now get back in your car and skedaddle to a street three blocks away and walk yourself to Lower Greenville Avenue.
Yes, someone from Caven did read this board, and I’ll give you my personal opinion, apart from any company-authorized statement.
It is personally frustrating to me that Caven Enterprises is often made the villain in so many discussions like this one. I could write a few paragraphs about the good things that we do and have done, but to stay on topic:
First, Caven Enterprises provides hundreds of parking spaces on our property. Yes, some of them we charge for, and then only on some days. There are many other pay lots within a few blocks of “the Strip”, created by the fundamental principal of “supply and demand”, but that fact has not been mentioned in this forum. Also, our pay lot has donated a portion of the proceeds to the Resource Center of Dallas since its inception over thirteen years ago – Please ask any other parking attendant or valet if they are benefiting our community.
Caven Enterprises is the largest provider of parking in the neighborhood. Is there enough? No. In the 20 years that I’ve been working here, parking has always been an issue. There are scores of other businesses along the strip – bars, restaurants and retail – all of which contribute to the vitality, diversity and personality of the neighborhood – and all of which contribute to the need for parking. So I’m frustrated by the posts here that seem to want to make this exclusively a Caven problem.
Second, there have been attempts in the past to research and fund larger parking structures. At the time, there were serious issues with city and neighborhood approval, and the price tag would have been in the millions of dollars. One poster says that we are the “main reasone for the parking problems anyway” (sic), but then suggests that we should go ahead and build the structure, claims it would be profitable, but then objects to us charging for it.
The Oak Lawn area is clearly in a period of transformation. The parking issue is very complicated, as it involves City restrictions, Oak Lawn specific ordinances, and crime issues (some of which are creations of the State). I think there should be more conversations on this topic – conversations with more cooperation and less accusation.
Finally, Mr. Lo Vuolo, if you read the original article again you will see that I said that Caven Enterprises “far exceeds” the legal requirements for parking – meaning that we’ve met our requirements and gone well beyond them. In my opinion, your confrontational and insulting comments say much more about you than the subject you’re addressing. I would hope for a more rational discourse in the future.
As a gay resident of Oak Lawn who lives 2 blocks off the strip, I knew the parking situation(s) when I moved back.
It’s unfortunate that Mr. Lo Vuolo has such a ‘potty-mouth’ and negative outlook with just about everything. He is burning many community bridges and the organizations in which he is affiliated with should reevaluate and/or reconsider…or join QL.
I live in an apartment in 3900 and I think it’s unacceptable for the property owner the represent an entire building. I live in an 11 unit complex. This is 12 individuals, 12 minds, 12 opinions, 12 votes. Again, this policy seems to only benefit the condo owners and not the people living in the “crappy” apts. I’m definitely gonna look into this b/c this does not sit well with me. I don’t want people who own property (but don’t live in the neighborhood) making these decisions alone.
Does Mr Lo Vuolo even live in the neighborhood? Isn’t he the one that drives in from another part of Dallas to squat at Buli and get the DPD to set up those speedtraps? Gee…thanks alot mister
@ Latisha
The RPO law was written 11 years ago, and it was not perfect. We have encountered numerous issues that make me want to pull out what little hair I have.
EG – One corner property extends from the front to back, where it hits another street (very short walk).
Since he is the only owner on his side of the block, he cannot sign the RPO petition – there must be at least two properties on the map and both would have to sign.
Re property owners vs tenants – this is a soft treading area, but in general our experience has been that the owner of the property has rights that trump the tenants…
Here’s the applicable city code…
(1) A petition for designation of a resident-parking-only zone must be filed, on a form provided by the director, by owners or occupants of residences and any business establishments located within the proposed zone. The petition must be signed by owners or occupants of two-thirds of the residences and any business establishments abutting the side or sides of the street block or blocks for which the zone is requested. Only one signature per residence or business establishment is allowed on the petition.
Thanx Avi…you have been most helpful. The selfish part of me would love to make it more convenient for my friends and family to find parking when they come visit me but the conspiracist in me believes that this action is part of a larger plan. If you can’t find parking in the entertainment district, then you will stop coming. Business will decline and eventually disappear. There goes the only remnant of a “gayborhood”. I could be totally off my rocker but I’ve lived on N Hall since 2005 and I’ve seen a lot of changes in my almost 5 year residence. The gayborhood is struggling to stay alive. An RPO is a nail in the coffin.
And the end of the gayborhood cometh….ever so slowly…
Au contraire! (I hope I spelled that right)
RPO did not spell the end of the neighborhood on Lower Greenville. And the more I look at that issue, the more I think it might benefit your area too.
Why? Because RPO has flipped the responsibility of parking for business uses back where it belongs – on the businesses. On Lower Greenville we are 1,000’s of spaces short. Now that we have taken back all the free spaces from the business use in favor of quality of life issues, the patrons are deciding – with their entertainment dollars – that they will not accept $10 and $20 valet charges.
Slowly the bad bars (the ones that are claiming to be restaurants) that have almost no spaces to their name are and will close. Then – we hope – the proper businesses for the zoning will be able to move in (after the landlords stop charging $35 an sf).
Daytime businesses are NOT impacted by RPO, and maybe in a few years we will hae the urban walkable environment the landlords claim they want here.
RPO on your side of town might cause a shaking of the spaces there, but I don’t know enough to say how.
GaryK is a good husband defending Rick… Lets all try to play nice..
Parking is already at a premium in this area and I can tell you there have been numerous times when I wanted to stop by one of my favorite haunts for a drink or two and couldn’t find anywhere to park. So I just went home.
The business owners are going to have to come together to work toward solutions with the city if they want their businesses to continue to thrive. Yes, as Mr. Espaillat says – Caven probably does meet requirements for their establishments based on city code. However, the lots that they do have surely do not provide enough parking for the number of people that pack into their clubs on any given Friday or Saturday night. I’m sure the same goes for other non-Caven owned clubs as well. A solution needs to be found.
RPO zones are going to force people to park further out and the major concern there is safety. And I think we already have enough issues there.