Report a Comment

tt, I don't think David ever said the regs apply to houses ... 'cause I don't think they do. They apply to large office buildings, commercial space, large apartment buildings and condominiums ... I.e., the type of buildings that pack a lot more density (and parking needs) in them than can possibly be satisfied by the curbside parking on the street they front. To not mandate that they bring some parking along with their construction is to allow them to siphon off parking from others near them ... Including those rowhouses without parking that are depending on streetside parking ... or (what I think more unfair) siphon off the use of streetside parking for people going about doing their business ... such as the suburban friends of the people in the rowhouse who are simply coming by for dinner ... The parking on a street needs to circulate and open up. That one extra building that brings in hundreds of extra residents without a place for them to put their cars, can mean the difference between those friends coming to visit being able to park or not. IMHO, the ideal really should be for all residential and office parking to be off-street ... and street parking priced appropriately to keep it moving. I.e., If we all had off-street parking for our vehicles when either at home or at the office, we'd all have more parking available to us when we need to make that quick run to pick up something at a store. After all, streets are for shared transportation needs (pedestrians, cars, buses, etc.) and not for car storage which is what where're doing when we park at home or at the office. Eliminating the parking minimums for the large buildings will convert that convenience parking into longer-term residential and offic park.

by Lance on Aug 1, 2008 12:28 am • link • report