U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2014, 08:59 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stateofnature View Post
Of course you don't manufacture it out of thin air. You manufacture it by capitalizing on the demand that exists when people are willing to pay for parking. A developer builds a commercial parking garage. A private citizen rents out his driveway or garage.
But if you put in place a requirement that some arbitrary amount of free parking be built, this demand will be suppressed. People won't be willing to pay for what they can get for free. As a result, the most efficient solution won't be found. This is exactly why in so many cities and towns a massive amount of space is wasted by unused parking.

As for expecting guests to rent a space, if I wanted guests to visit me by car, I would move somewhere with available free parking. If I choose to live somewhere with very limited parking, there is no reason for the city to subsidize my guests by giving them free parking. It was my choice to live there.

But really, the cases where there is no street parking for guests are pretty rare. Yes, there are many neighborhoods in the densest cities like NYC, DC, Boston and San Francisco where street parking is almost impossible to find. Those cities also have great alternatives to driving such as walking or public transit, so it's not a huge problem. If I live in those neighborhoods, guests can visit me via other means than driving.
In most places, though, the difficulty of finding street parking only comes up when people are too lazy to learn how to parallel park well or too lazy to search for a spot a few blocks away from their destination and walk. I would argue that this laziness is an exact product of the excessive minimum parking regulations found in most places that have made people think that having a massive parking lot outside every destination is a reasonable thing.
Who is building commercial parking garages in residential neighborhoods? It's probably not even allowable by code.

I'm not expecting "the city" to subsidize parking. I've said I think the property owners should provide a minimal number of parking spaces.

Just who are you calling "too lazy" to learn how to parallel park? Then you expand on that theme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:04 AM
 
1,998 posts, read 2,931,177 times
Reputation: 2150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Who is building commercial parking garages in residential neighborhoods? It's probably not even allowable by code.

I'm not expecting "the city" to subsidize parking. I've said I think the property owners should provide a minimal number of parking spaces.

Just who are you calling "too lazy" to learn how to parallel park? Then you expand on that theme.
I thought we were talking about both commercial and residential developments. My parking garage example was for commercial developments.

If the city requires the property owner to provide spaces, yes, that is a form of subsidy. It's forcing the property owner to spend money on devoting space to parking that might not be needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:23 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The research has been done. I think property owners should be required to provide at least one space per unit, except in extenuating circumstances, e.g. midtown Manhattan or somewhere like that.
Not just Midtown Manhattan, but few places except Staten Island and some of the outermost areas of the NYC provide close to one space per unit. The city average is 0.43 spaces per unit, Manhattan as a whole (Midtown Manhattan is maybe 5-10% of the area of the island) only 0.05 spaces per unit, Brooklyn is 0.4

http://furmancenter.org/files/public...1_12_final.pdf [page 5]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 09:45 AM
 
113 posts, read 127,535 times
Reputation: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeepRightPassLeft View Post
They can manage, but it usually sucks. The tradeoff of this sucky parking arrangement is usually that the density provides more walkability or transit usage, but if you own a car and either want or need to use it on a regular basis (or just let it sit), it kinda sucks.

This is of course partially biased, but I think if you were to ask many urbanophiles living in arrangements like that, they would agree that the parking arrangement kinda sucks. They make do because of the above mentioned reasons. For someone who values automobile transportation more, I don't think its the optimal solution. Even on my block where parking isn't terrible, it gets really frustrating when spots run out in my immediate vicinity of my house. I'm glad that we can at least squeeze all three of our cars in the driveway if we need to, but it's a hassle to keep moving them or to have to park around the block. Is it doable? Yes. Does it suck for a lot of people? Yes lol.

I lived in one of these neighborhoods in SF. It sucked. My solution? I got rid of my car and zipped with I needed it. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Living on the Coast in Oxnard CA
15,726 posts, read 26,753,064 times
Reputation: 20351
I am not sure about city mandated parking requirments. I do know about code requirements though. For example a business has to offer so many ADA spots for those in Wheelchairs or that have some other kind of dissability. Also a building is required to have so many spots on site. For example we are building a new hospital and we will also be building a new parking structure. We need 320 spots. We are trying to get our city to help pay for a larger structure because it will benefit others in the area. Our idea is to have a 600 spot structure built. The local businesses will benefit and everyone will be happy.

Back to the original question though, parking is code related and in California we use the International Building Code.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:21 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
It's a little hard to "move your car" when the whole neighborhood is essentially in the same situation, e.g. way more cars than spaces available on the street.
The building where my daughter lives was built in 1889, as a 2 BR house. (No wonder it doesn't stay warm, but that's another story.) At the time this house was built, there were zero cars per house. It was at some point in time converted into two apartments. Currently there are five people living there, each, presumably with his/her own car. I'll go out on a limb and say that I bet the rest of the neighborhood is similar. That makes the street very crowded; this in a city where cars must frequently be moved due to snow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:21 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,828 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
I see a lot less freaking out about small changes in minimum parking rates than I do about the existence of minimum parking. YMMV. I didn't freak out when they built the movie theater complex downtown with zero parking or when they did a bunch of infill development in the mall parking lots. Now, those were probably well above whatever the minimum was at, probably still well above whatever the old requirements were (if they changed at all) even after the infill.

San Francisco has steadily been reducing minimum parking requirements for 40 years. Maybe I've just been asleep and missed all the SF Chronicle articles about everyone freaking out. Hell, Rincon Hill has maximum parking requirements (and no minimums), require parking to be decoupled, requires all parking be underground, prohibits parking garage entrances on certain streets. That happened nearly a decade ago. It hasn't stayed isolated to Rincon Hill.
Though you may not have spotted it in the news, up and down the peninsula, community activists have challenged developments on the basis of traffic and parking. See Geary BRT, any of the apartments in SF, and developments up and down the CalTrain corridor. That is to say, in general, people view parking as a right or near to one, even on public streets, and as so dear to them that it is more important than any of society's competing demands--for housing, revenue, mobility, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:34 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,828 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The building where my daughter lives was built in 1889, as a 2 BR house. (No wonder it doesn't stay warm, but that's another story.) At the time this house was built, there were zero cars per house. It was at some point in time converted into two apartments. Currently there are five people living there, each, presumably with his/her own car. I'll go out on a limb and say that I bet the rest of the neighborhood is similar. That makes the street very crowded; this in a city where cars must frequently be moved due to snow.
To be clear, my position on parking is caveat emptor. So, while it's a miserable situation for your kin and her neighbors, it doesn't sound like something they couldn't forsee as a problem and thus have taken in to account.

We should be careful not to put too much emphasis in our immediate needs and, thus, under-emphasize the needs of others, or of ourselves at other times in our lives. I mean, we shouldn't treat the problems we face today as so static that they are the rule, not the exception. We should transparently take local, modern context in to account when discussing parking requirements. The needs of Tar-Mart in Podunk, Nebrahoma will be different from Manhattan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:36 PM
 
1,998 posts, read 2,931,177 times
Reputation: 2150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The building where my daughter lives was built in 1889, as a 2 BR house. (No wonder it doesn't stay warm, but that's another story.) At the time this house was built, there were zero cars per house. It was at some point in time converted into two apartments. Currently there are five people living there, each, presumably with his/her own car. I'll go out on a limb and say that I bet the rest of the neighborhood is similar. That makes the street very crowded; this in a city where cars must frequently be moved due to snow.
My neighborhood sounds very similar. Most people park on the street as there are few garages or driveways. When I park, I have absolutely no issues spending a few minutes searching for a spot a block or two (or more) away if my block is full of cars. For me, those few minutes a day are a price well worth it for a neighborhood where more space is devoted to things I enjoy like parks, interesting buildings and restaurants, rather than things I don't enjoy, like off-street parking spots.

I can see how someone would think differently and prefer a neighborhood with more parking. Those people should move to a neighborhood that more fits their desires. They should not demand that the law cater to their whims and force property owners to build parking spots for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 12:38 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
To be clear, my position on parking is caveat emptor. So, while it's a miserable situation for your kin and her neighbors, it doesn't sound like something they couldn't forsee as a problem and thus have taken in to account.

We should be careful not to put too much emphasis in our immediate needs and, thus, under-emphasize the needs of others, or of ourselves at other times in our lives. I mean, we shouldn't treat the problems we face today as so static that they are the rule, not the exception. We should transparently take local, modern context in to account when discussing parking requirements. The needs of Tar-Mart in Podunk, Nebrahoma will be different from Manhattan.
You know, I agree. It was their stupidity (and I do think it was stupid to rent a place with NO off-street parking). OTOH, this situation does create a mess on the streets of St. Paul. That's why I think perhaps city officials should require a minimum off-street parking at least when a building is remodeled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top