www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/10/01/parking/print.html
for the article "We paved paradise"
This is a short (4 page) article giving a good overview of the history of parking requirments and the horrible ramifications of continuing in the path of requiring parking and providing free parking, in terms of cost, environment, and sprawl.
I am about to update the petition about the McMoble site, putting this link into it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I believe this article elucidates the issues of parking at the McMobile site on 53rd. While I believe most new developments require parking I think that some in our community tend to either disregard the environment when considering parking, or act in the complete opposite matter. What we need is realistic parking requirements for developments in Hyde Park. Lets not assume everyone needs a car, if not two!
Greg
Less is more. Community meetings often boil down to one issue: PARKING. No matter the development, parking is the reoccurring and universal theme at community meetings—and that more parking is always better.
A ground-breaking book, The High Cost of Free Parking, by UCLA economics professor Donald Shoup, argues less parking is actually better for a community. This slap in the face of conventional wisdom has sparked new discussion about the propriety of so much free parking. It even challenged the notion that the parking is actually free.
Shoup argues that the cost of free parking is hidden in the higher prices of everything else. He says “free parking” distorts transportation choices, produces bad urban design, interrupts the natural vitality that comes from parking once and walking from place to place, wastes valuable land and hurts the environment. He predicts that in twenty years current parking policies will be considered as much of a failure as high-rise public housing and urban renewal are viewed now.
Residents often say that they do not want more density (but want better retail options) because it will add congestion.
Greg is correct. We need realistic parking requirements in Hyde Park as part of new development. Everyone does not need or own a car.
In Chicago, neighborhoods like Hyde Park, Andersonville, and Lakeview have access to public transportation and offer more destinations to walk to. There are more people to support businesses. People get exercise. The streets are safer. The 2000 Census indicates that well over 30% and in some cases close to 50% of households in these and other dense neighborhoods do not have access to a private vehicle.
What great city or neighborhood is known for its abundant parking supply?
So, the next time you are debating how much parking should be included in a new development remember the High Cost of Free Parking.
I don’t understand why we have so many issues about the potential lack of parking spaces inside the city. One of the main reasons people choose to live in cities instead of in suburbs or in the country is to be close to all of the amenities. I like being able to walk to anything, or to hop on public transportation to find more options. I agree that it is nice to be able to get in the car and drive somewhere, but that is why people move to the suburbs and park their cars in garages. Think of all of the possible businesses that parking lots replace. I would rather have more shops, restaurants, doctors’ offices, schools, and parks than more parking in my neighborhood. I think it would be great if we had more options in Hyde Park. We could use more stores and restaurants and income generating businesses to employ more people.
Post a Comment