Report a Comment

“The truth is that the city is responding to overspill (sic) through its use of multispace market-based meters in neighborhoods.”

David, It seems that with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Perhaps this hammer works in some situations, for example when event parking might overwhelm a residential neighborhood which normally has sufficient parking for residents and visitors. But many of the District’s neighborhoods have spillover that isn’t a result of special events like the Rose Parade (parade rate in Pasadena municipal garage is $28) or baseball games, but have spillover because there are large number of residents, many of whom own vehicles, who already live in houses and apartment buildings that don’t have sufficient parking to meet the needs of the residents. By and large, these aren’t residents that bought cars frivolously, but who need private vehicles since public transportation does not serve to meet many of their needs. Market-based meters do nothing to address this problem. There is one tool that addresses that issue: that is to at least make certain that new construction in and near the neighborhood has sufficient on-site parking, so as not to make a bad situation worse. The District’s minimum parking requirements, as low as one space for every four apartments, don’t assure sufficient on-site parking for the residents’ needs, but at least set a floor on the impact that the new building will have on the neighborhood. But, since you have a hammer (“performance parking”) and want to use it, you not only see the issue as a nail, which it isn’t, but also want to throw out the tool that is actually relevant.

by JR on Sep 22, 2008 4:20 pm • link • report