10687Re: [carfree_cities] Re: something to watch out for
- Jan 19, 2008In regard to parking: As someone on the parking management board for my city, I see the misperceptions of parking everyday.
First, no parking is free. Someone paid to build it, maintain it and other related expenses.
Parking requirements for most cities are based on the ITE parking guidelines which are based on outdated approaches to parking, suburban models, no transit and the belief that parking is an entitlement and that it is free and we have an endless supply.
A few cities are starting to take a new perspective with programs like shared parking (for instance a movie theatre and an office share spaces as the need for spaces are at different times of the day), unbundle parking (residential units come with no parking included and parking spaces must be bought separately or not at all), no parking minimums (required by ITE guidelines) and parking maximums.
In my opinion, anyone that owns more than one car should be taxed at an outrageous amount to subsidize the land requirements to house the vehicle, pollution generated, etc.
All this pavement we have created to park, and run vehicles has permanently damaged the earth's surface, caused water shortages, ground water pollution, heat island effects, disrupted wildlife, used natural resources, increased our dependance on foreign oil... the list goes on.
----- Original Message ----
From: dubluth <dubluth@...>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 11:36:19 PM
Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: something to watch out for
I've seen such "outbursts". Some people take the availability of
places to store their cars and trucks (without having to cover the
cost) very personally. They miss (and might take pains to avoid
seeing) the fact that supplying parking costs and that not just
wealthy empty-nesters pay those costs.
If a builder must supply just one stall per housing unit at a cost of
say $30,000 per stall, the builder will build larger more expensive
housing units unless customers actually value parking stalls that
highly. The observed effect of parking requirements on housing supply
and prices suggests that the cost of supplying parking exceeds its
value to those affected housing residents.
Unlike the examples I've seen, Tottenhamers might actually value
parking enough to pay its costs. If so, that should provide a profit
opportunity for someone willing to provide parking nearby, provided
available land exists. A builder would risk including too little or
too much parking, if not for the input of zoning rules or design
hearings. Government mandates have eliminated the risk of too little
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>