Report a Comment

Did I say I was against this? No ... not at all. I was just pointing out some of its shortcomings that we all need to deal with so that we can be in the driver's seat as far as how it operates here in the District ... Unlike ZipCar where it has been very much in control since the beginning. For starters, I'd advocate for no free parking for this commercial endevour. I mean Daimler is far richer than most of us taxpayers ... and even the District itself is having problems paying its bills. I'd prefer no on street car storage for anyone in this city in those areas where curb space is limited, but if we're going to be using the curb space for car storage purposes, then let's be sure that Daimler pays full fare for this parking. Yeah, it's not reserved parking and therefore not the going $200 - $250 per month that a downtown spot gets, but it's also worth a lot more than a $20 RPP sticker. If there're going to store their cars in our RPP zones then the city needs to receive lots of mula for each car allowed to do so. Secondly, if they're going to be allowed to park at meters and the like, that should be even more mula. Let's not subsidize this business model like we did ZipCar. And from the other end, as consumers we need to sit down and figure 'is this really economical over the long run?' I remember a time when a owning and operating a car was fairly inexpensive. It's still not that expensive ... at least not when you consider what owning and operating a car in Europe costs. And the reason for the difference? The Europeans have guilibly fallen for the line that 'it's better for everyone if most people use mass transit'. Yeah, it's better for the wealthy who want less traffic to deal with and more available parking. For those for whom money is no object, Europe's policies of making it difficult (i.e. EXPENSIVE) to own and operate a car is their way of keeping the good life to themselves without having to build enough car infrastructure to ensure the good life for everyone. The average person there gets pushed into second class status ... having to schlepp it on the train, ride a bike, or walk ... and similarly has their work and social opportunities constrained by where the schlepping will take them. There's a reason it's not the land of opportunity over there ... The wealthy have ways of keeping a handle on their monopoly of the good life, and this is one of them. So, before we start advocating for policies that push us down that same path let's keep in mind that part of what differentiates us for the better is that rather than looking how to allocate 'what is' (with the better parts going to the rich) we look at how to makes things better for all. The mid-20th Century ideal of building more cities, more shopping, more office space, AND more roads and cars to get us there, sure served us a lot better than Europe's policies served them. Some 60 - 70 years on from where we parted ways has left us able to accomodate a growth rate (both internal and from immigration) which would have pushed Europe into total chaos had it attempted it based on its 'allocate what's already here' mentality. We instead have not only absorbed a far greater number of people desiring the American dream but accomplished it in a manner where we haven't had to push to be 'economical' about everything on the mistaken belief that 'we only have so much to go around' ...

by Lance on Jul 20, 2011 6:58 pm • link • report