The Thornton-Tomasetti Group presented and discussed parking alternative plans for the current Buckeye Lot, which may cost Madison up to $16.1 million, at the Mid-State Street Parking Evaluation Team Meeting Monday evening.
The group presented several different plans for the new Mid-State Street Ramp, which would be located between Gorham Street and Gilman Street.
The original parking ramp proposal was to be built almost entirely underground with 184 parking spaces available to the public and 65 spaces for residential use. However, according to land use and transportation liaison for the office of the mayor Jeanne Hoffman, the structure would be below the saturation level of water, which means the entire structure would have to be waterproofed.
"One of the biggest issues of the project is the water table," Hoffman said. "There are differing opinions as to what the soil under the parking table is like."
The Thornton-Tomasetti Group said once the company does investigate the soil underneath the lot, city officials would have a much better idea about the feasibility of the various parking ramp proposals.
Of the eight different parking alternatives, five of the options would require more land than the Buckeye Lot provides. Purchasing three homes in the area for land use would cost the city an additional three million dollars.
The very cheapest parking alternative would still cost $2.88 million, but Hoffman said these costs are only estimates.
"As we figure out the rate water is moving into the site [underground], that might significantly change some of the cost numbers," Hoffman said.
Half of the parking alternatives presented by Thornton-Tomasetti provided limited retail space, condos and townhouses in addition to increased public short-term parking. Hoffman and other committee members agreed the aesthetic value of housing and retail to the parking structure would benefit the city.
Archie Nicolette, of the city's planning unit, said the most important thing is to be cost efficient, whether taking homes or adding limited retail space.
"To make the options economical, we need to use the space we have effectively and efficiently," Nicolette said.
Ald. Robbie Webber, District 5, said the cost of creating more parking is extreme considering the potential benefits.
"If you look at the per stall cost it ranges from $50,000 to over $70,000 per space," Webber said. "That seems ridiculous considering most cars don't even cost that much."
Webber said she is reluctant to support such a proposal to the budget because parking is not a big problem downtown. Webber added that an alternative plan would be to make current parking more expensive to encourage short-term parking.
"I would oppose anything that doesn't have residential or retail space on top," Webber said. "There are parking spots downtown, people just don't know where they are."
Currently on the table for Tuesday's Common Council meeting is a budget amendment that would completely eliminate funding for the ramp in 2006. The main concern the Parking Evaluation Team has is whether any of the parking alternatives will pay off.
"With construction costs rising, it is going to be difficult to construct the ramp within the budget identified," Hoffman said. "We need to close the gap and figure out how it can be financed."
