News
May 2, 2012 at 4:00 am
A new city proposal to abolish apartment and condo parking requirements will pass. Get over it, people—and get on with the new argument.
Click here to see a larger version of this map.
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In News
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Example from recent news: with no parking costs wouldn't a wider range of developers, including those who haven't the deep pockets for parking, have been clamoring to buy up the Bauhaus block long before the goofs from Bellevue did? And would the apartments or condos that would have already gone up there been priced lower than the market could bear? I don't see it.
My understanding is that what reduced cost means to a developer is that they book more profit to impress the lenders they approach to fund the next one, that's all.
Because somehow 'frequent transit stops' will always exist.
Second, people still like cars. They like going on vacation, hiking, mountain climbing, going skiing, etc. Many of those also like living in the cities. To do this, you either rent a car/truck/SUV for a day, or you have to get parking somewhere, somehow, for your vehicle while you're working. Because, you can't park on the street where you're only allowed to be 3 days maximum. More parking spaces means more freedom to leave your car at home.
...
"All of which reminds that in the end, this whole fight is really a fight about whether to build a city around cars or a city around people."
Wrong. Logical fallacy. This is not an either/or. Negates the whole article and renders any point you may have had moot.
Plus, it sucks to have to say this until you understand it, but our transit system sucks. It's getting marginally better, but it sucks. And, our transit system just depended on cars for a substantial tab fee (though not as substantial as it could have been) to keep it afloat...and it's STILL cutting service. You need cars because transit isn't self-sustainable right now.
"We must keep building off-street parking to make life easier for car owners!"
"Why are all the arterials suddenly so clogged all the time? We must do something about this traffic!"
The streets aren't getting any wider, people. Auto-sycophantic "density" can be more destructive than no density at all.
@22: "This is not an either/or."
Yes, it is. San Francisco and Boston are built for people. Vancouver increasingly is as well. All have absolute parking maximums to discourage increased congestion in their built-up areas.
Los Angeles is built for cars. Its parking minimums have done it no favors.
Actually, Boston just spent nearly $20 billion to do a better job of moving cars through the city, and the central business district is chock full of parking garages, both above ground and underground.
"Not as substantial as it could have been" because the voters here finally got fed up with the bullshit from the transit and bicycle lobbies.
@24, a lot of these cities that are supposedly "built for people" are nothing of the sort. They're simply geographically bound resulting in the density that just doesn't have enough room for as many cars as they'd like, or can afford. If there was no lake, sound, or mountains, Seattle would be much more spread out and full of cars.
I'm all for a better transit system, but it's going to be a while until we get there. In the meantime I'd like to still be able to park to take care of business in this town for those all too frequent times when it just doesn't make sense to take the bus. Will this new rule change that? hard to tell. If developers actually build units without parking, will car owners want to live in them? Will they park on the street? That's the part they really need to do a better job studying. Real impact to real people.
With the relaxation of the parking restriction, it may end up a developer will be empowered to build more units on the same footprint, but it's just as likely a builder will continue to include parking for its units since it's a great selling point and could be equally as profitable.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a mix of the two in most cases. (some units have spaces deeded to them at a premium or spaces available to rent, which in theory could create more affordable homes for those choosing to live without designated parking).
Living in a condo downtown, our building has building contractors constantly trying to find parking and charging our building for this purpose. this is a direct charge to our tenants/owners. If it cost a contractor $15 dollars to park then it costs the building $20. When the contractor has to drive to kent to get parts, this is added cost. However in reality we should ask these contractors to ride a bus to kent and pick up the parts, or have a bicycle messenger deliver them from the wall built around our city where all vehicles are stopped. This un-realistic approach is a very large problem. It is a spreading ignorance that many younger people spread because they are completely out of touch with reality. My advice stay ignorant, never grow up. Keep wasting your parents money, so they cant retire EVER. But, please do not complain, when any service that is crucial for a city to operate is now 10x the price and the bicycle ambulance is running a little late to take care of your kid that is going into anaphylactic shock.
Mis-management from city leaders can take decades to correct. please vote accordingly
"Why are all the arterials suddenly so clogged all the time!?"
L.A. -- which is actually a great deal denser than most people think -- is the logical conclusion of large-scale city-building that still demands easy access to and priority for automobile transportation via minimum-parking requirements. Wide boulevards, driveways everywhere, everything designed for cars... and total gridlock nonetheless!
G @25: The Big Dig made highway use slightly easier for intransigent suburban car commuters. It also went out of its way to limit access points so that every downtown street isn't a de facto highway ramp (the way that much of downtown Seattle is).
That said, it costs $40-$50 per day to park in Boston, because supply is constrained (as it should be). So your depiction of the city as "chock full of garages" is flat-out crap. Meanwhile, only a small percentage of work commutes from within the central metropolitan area are take in cars (compared to 80% in Seattle proper), and barely half of non-commute in-city trips use cars (compared to 91% here).
QFT
@11, You're being myopic. A vague, open-ended plan to lighten parking requirements someday in the future will do nothing to change the status quo. We can't just sit back for years and years and expect a solution to come to us. We have to be proactive about issues like transit, density, walkable neighborhoods, etc. And that's what the city council is doing, by lifting some of the parking requirements.
Now I assume if you buy a new condo, the parking space is still extra, right? They don't have to bundle it? What is the arguement for 1 space per condo? That people with cars will have to pay higher prices for a parking space? Good. The market should decide the price of having a car in the city. A city is meant to have less cars. And in Seattle we are lucky to have options (ok transit, zip, etc...). The pro-parking space arguement just sounds like a bunch of junkies complaining about the price of doing drugs.
But seriously, I bet some of these same parking proponents are the same people that think that the government can't do anything right... Well, the government is now de-regulating parking requirements. Isn't this what y'all wanted?
There will always be parking spaces folks, they just wont be subsudized by every condo owner. People will be in for a rude awakening in the coming decades. Car ownership is only going to become more and more expensive, along with gas. And as less and less people use cars, paying for the infrastructure will get more and more unpopular.
I'm middle age and far from hip. I'm sure it is easier for some people to throw a label on others with differing opinions, like they did with my gen (grunge, gen x, slackers), but these are used to stereotype and seperate people. And that's what they are, people. (I will now step off the soapbox).
The Big Dig included a new freeway and tunnel to the airport, which was a gigantic improvement for automobile access. As for access points, they are exactly the same ones that were there for the Central Artery. Nothing has changed in terms of access points.
No it doesn't. I worked at a building bordering Dewey Square, and paid $12 a day to park. Did you ever actually live in Boston? I'm starting to doubt it.
you must be a trust fund kid who gets all his money from these guys
I am getting curious about these eco-buildings though. They are more costly to build, because of materials, and the more of them they build, the more scare the materials, and higher cost. Yet there are numerous of them popping up, many are subsidized for low-income people in working class neighborhoods. It's strange actually. I developed a few conspiracies earlier. One, that the government is trying to ween us off oil, because the new critical element is going to be water itself, not oil. The housing authority controls some of them, and they appear very nice.
You can't have it both ways. You can't scream for a free market and then whine when that free market makes money by any means necessary because the big scary government is staying out of the way as you wished.
file:///Congress_Street,_Portland_ME.jpg">File:Congress_Street,_Portland_ME.jpg">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/file:///Congr&hellip">File:Congr…
In fact there is little need for a car in this area. This is the same street in 1920:
http://www.mainememory.net/artifact/2515…
Notice there are trolleys on train tracks going down the middle! Where did those go? Obviously even little cities have the potential for vast networks of public transportation.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c…
Only nearly my entire life.
As for your $12, either you were working there in 1975, or you parked way on the other side of the Fort Point Channel, almost to the new convention center, in lots that will soon cease to exist as development is finally getting going over there.
http://boston.bestparking.com/index.php
Find me parking in central Boston at less than $32-$45 a day!
Hell, find me parking at less than $7-$10 an hour!
You really are a gigantic pile of delusional bullshit, aren't you?
Besides, Seattle isn't nearly as sparse or suburban as you characterize it to be. It is much more walkable and has a much denser downtown than most American cities.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.c…
Also, I think it is a mistake to believe that elderly people need cars. My building has numerous elderly people and they have no car or parking. Some have been living here for 20 years or more in the same apartment. I sometimes see one of them has fishing tackle, as he was off fishing off the rocks. I live in a very diverse 8 story block, that has art students, immigrants, elderly, some children, hipsters, gays, and none of them have cars.
This is a smaller city than Seattle, so I dont know, maybe we are tougher here? Are the people in Seattle not tough?
All those republicans that are against bigger government and anti-"socialism" should be 100% on board with this move. No way the government should subsidize or require public storage for your personal automobiles. You want parking, you have to BUY it at a premium, just like I have to buy my bus pass at a premium. No more free lunch for freeloader drivers!
I guess, i am neutral because I like the idea of more people walking and biking and transiting, but The last thing i want is to look back 20 years from now and say, gee, we sure f#*@ed up this city by allowing that, now, parking is so ridiculous that businesses are failing, only kids who work at the coffee shop down the street and people with a lot of money can live here, and Most people are stuck out in the suburbs. The cost of housing in Seattle is bad enough without making it more costly to live here.
The car or auto was always a Protestant-mobile to run away from the Catholics in the city. If the protestants want a car yet, then what is the problem with them just running off to the suburbs like they always did?
Car ownership is clearly part of American imperialism.
A work transportation vehicle may need special licensing or something.
@83 You need to hear some Protestant Rock!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Giat1MIF…
The end result of this short-sighted move will be the very demographic Seattle wants to attract as residents will likely choose to live outside the city.
City removing mandates for parking? Where's my Nanny State?!?! Think of the children!
Please tell us how your apartment is heated. And be honest.
The transit system looks good there. I was just looking at a map. In fact, most of the west coast has fairly good transit. San Diego is also well developed. One can take a trolley from downtown right to the Mexican border.
Oh boy. Where does one even begin? San Diego a transit haven because you can take a trolley to the border, so you can walk into Tijuana! You don't get out much, do you?
I took the bus today for the first time in 15 years, and it was pretty easy to see why they're in such bad financial shape.
When I was growing up, I'd take the bus all over Milwaukee. Got very familiar with it. Transfers worked in one direction only, and were good for one hour. In Seattle, they work in both directions, and are good for 3-1/2 hours.
The result, my ride to and from downtown was $2.25. It should have been $4.50. And on the way back, I boarded in the free-ride area, and the driver never checked when he left the area to make sure that people paid.
Like I say, no wonder it's in such bad financial shape.
http://www.gpmetrobus.com/index.php?opti…
Look at all the open spaces where no buses go. When I first moved here, there were only old old buses! Finally they installed natural gas buses, but that remains the only public transportation. Nevertheless, I ride it even during a snow storm. I like public transportation. Even airports seem nice to sit in for me.
BTW, my apartment is heated by ancient radiators that run off boiling water from a communal boiler. I dont control when it turns on, but I can turn it off by turning a dial that shuts off the water. In fact, this is a very efficient form of heating. everyone is heated the same in the building. Also, from what I have read, car usage is the primary use of oil. Cars alone! And I dont have a car!
And that boiler is heated by ... drum roll ...
San Diego looks quite nice, and having been to Seattle myself, I know you have nice buses. Having a glance at my local metro map, you can see how retarded it really is
San Diego is an okay town. Has its pluses and minuses. But let me assure you, as someone who actually does know what he's talking about because he's been there, San Diego is no place to live if you think you'll be able to get by without a car.
I am glad to say that I am most probably not using his oil and dont own a car.
If I were you, I wouldn't be quite so certain about not using any oil until I checked out how that boiler is powered.
But hey, maybe you can still say "Fuck America," at least if that boiler uses the really dirty shit. That's what comes from Venezuela. The clean stuff? Gulf Coast. Can you say British Petroleum?
As you grow up, you will come to realize that none of us has clean hands, including you.
I am a 33 year old man and have never owned a car. It is a fact that the car is what takes all the oil. if Mainers would get off their fat asses and walk sometimes instead of whipping around in big trucks, they wouldn't use so much oil.
As an Adult, I still say Fuck America, and will continue to do so bipedally if necessary. That heating oil that Mainers use is in their homes. I do not own a home. I live in a large building. I read that it is very efficient to live in an oil heated building, the heating a large old house may be different.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/76428775@N0…
You can see how much it snows here...
http://www.newmainetimes.org/articles/20…
But it is a fact that I do not NEED the USA for anything really. If Canadian immigration wasnt so tight, I would just move over there and leave this land behind!