Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Reducing Housing Costs by Rethinking Parking Requirements

Expand Messages
  • rauch@mit.edu
    This report by the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association gives figures on how eliminating parking can be a big help in creating affordable
    Message 1 of 2 , Oct 6, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      This report by the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
      Association gives figures on how eliminating parking can be a big help
      in creating affordable housing.

      http://www.spur.org/spurhsgpkg.html


      This web site in Berkeley presents an analysis of how parking impacts
      housing affordability and presents the case for "Unbundling" parking
      from housing:

      http://dcrp.ced.berkeley.edu/students/rrusso/parki
      ng/Developer%20Manual/index.htm

      (The URL may be split, in which case you need to copy the two parts
      into your browser).
    • Chris Bradshaw
      I posted this to the worldcarshare group after the same item was posted. Chris Bradshaw Ottawa = = = = = = The unbundling of parking from housing is a very
      Message 2 of 2 , Oct 10, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I posted this to the worldcarshare group after the same item was posted.

        Chris Bradshaw
        Ottawa

        = = = = = =

        The unbundling of parking from housing is a very important step, one
        that naturally comes out of the "transit-first" prioirty. [BTW, in
        Ottawa, I was part of a group that got the politicians to include the
        "green transportation hierarchy" into the 1997 plan, which puts walking
        first, cycling second, transit third, and private auto last (although
        they didn't agree to differentiate the first three explicitly, but did
        list them each time in the GTH order).]

        I was in SF this summer, and found that, as compact as most of the city
        is, the ubiquitous 3-4-storey row housing has the ground floor given
        over to a one/two-car garage, with only a narrow entrance way,
        presumably leading directly to a stairway to a second-floor entrance.
        One could
        not have a better example of the _design_ limitations imposed by parking
        requirements (even if, at the beginning, the requirement was only
        imposed by the "market" or banks). The effect is almost no people-
        presence at ground level: no garden, no veranda, no space to even stop
        and
        talk out of the paths of motorists. There obviously are cost
        implications, too.

        Here in Ottawa, Vrtucar is just about passed the 21-day waiting period
        after a major victory -- on our first try -- to get just such an
        "unbundling."

        A local developer has taken a proposal from our company that would
        _reduce parking demand_ for their 40-unit apartment project, rather than
        meet the demand that would otherwise (at least according to planners'
        formula) have occurred. The project will replace a 30-unit project that
        burned, and which had no parking. That means they only have to meet the
        parking "demand" for the 10 additional units, which they don't want to
        meet with on-site parking (five spaces, one-half space for each of the
        additional units).

        And rather than meet it with the parking-in-lieu charge of about $2,500
        each space (which goes into a "fund" for use by the city, m-a-y-b-e, to
        build a parking structure nearby at some time in the future), they
        submitted our proposal to pay that money into a Vrtucar trust fund, the
        interest of which would reduce the trip charges, for tenants who join,
        by 12%. Incidentally, we also said that, if the City were to contribute
        a street parking spot, we could reduce the rate another 10%.

        This mechanism, but never touching the $12,500 principal of the fund)
        will provide for reactivation of the P-I-L arrangement later on if too
        few tenants subscribe, a feature Vrtucar felt was necessary in order to
        get approval.

        Although staff opposed the proposal, the Committee of Adjustment (five
        citizens appointed by council), approved it, and directed the specific
        agreement to be part of the site-plan approval, to be executed in a
        couple of months.

        By reducing parking, we also reduce reduce _driving_ in this central
        area neighbourhood, and by having car-sharing "bundled" with the
        marketing
        of the building, we can offer car-sharing not just to the tenants of the
        10 extra units, but all forty. And, with a car in the area, we will
        stimulate demand from the existing neighbour base (and offer existing
        members in the area more convenient access).

        What is ironic about requiring off-street parking and its provision in
        close-to-the-street garages and laneways, is that each off-street spot
        reduces on-street parking by one spot, in order to guarantee access to
        the private spots. That actually _reduces_ parking in such an area
        since private spots are not available for those visiting the area (not
        even the host's spot, who is usually home at the time of the visit).
        Also, the reduced street parking frees up _driving_ space, both
        increasing speed and capacity for motorists' movements, reducing the
        security
        of walkers (many cyclists, unfortunately, think on-street parking is a
        threat to them, however).

        And, at the city scale, "squeezing" out parking will "squeeze" out
        congestion, since it will result in reduce ownership, which itself is
        the
        primary cause of road congestions. With widespread car-sharing, there
        are simply not enough cars in the city to cause congestion. Another way
        to look at it is to think of which is better: having congestion occur on
        the road, or at the point where the car keys are picked up?

        Chris Bradshaw
        Vrtucar, Ottawa
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.