PT BLOG
JVH comments on Parking News every day at PT Blog – log on at
www.parkingtoday.com. Each month, there are at least 40 other comments like these, posted daily.
If you go to the online edition
of January 2011 Parking Today, you will find all the “hot links”
below.And evenmore current com- ments by PT Editor JVH.
An Example of Zoning Overreach… (Posted Dec. 14) Shoupistas often gloss over the third
leg of Professor Shoup’s theory, that of doing away with mandated parking requirements. It’s urban planning gob- bledygook that fascinates professors and PhD candidates but bores the rest of us to tears. The City of Redding in Northern California has come up with a textbook example of why these requirements should be junked. Read about it here. The city is in the process of approv-
ing the development of a parking lot that the city had declared as surplus proper- ty. It was little used. The new develop- ment is picture perfect for the downtown are with all the mixed use requirements cities love. It would mean, however, a net loss of 18 spaces whilst and at the same time increasing density and traffic. So far so good. Less than a block away, a building
owner wanted to turn 8,000 square feet of storage into rentable space. He has been turned down for his permit because that 8,000 additional sf of offices would, according to the zoning regulations, require an additional 17 parking spaces. Virtually the same number that the city was losing less than a block away. As the Redding Record Search-
light reports: But the bottom line remains: The city is selling a parking lot and subsidizing
CONSULTANTS
new development in its place, costing a net 18 spaces even while dramatically increasing the residential and commercial density. And within a block it’s stonewalling the full use of an existing building for lack of 17 parking spaces because, hey, rules are rules. You could circle the block all day
and still never find the common sense in that scenario. The planning wizards have rules in
place except when they want to override them. In truth both projects will probably get along just fine without the additional parking. Who knows better how much parking is needed for a development, the person risking their money building it, or bureaucrats in an office somewhere? And no, those risking money aren’t
just greedy fat cats looking for a quick buck. They have factored in the parking as an amenity and know just how attractive
CHANCE MANAGEMENT ADVISORS, INC. 1600 Market Street, 26th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103-7219 Tel: 215-564-6464
info@chancemanagement.com www.chancemanagement.com
TIMHAAHS 550 Township Line Road Suite 100 Blue Bell, PA 19422 Tel: 484-342-0200
ryoka@timhaahs.com www.timhaahs.com
WALTER P MOORE 1301 McKinney Suite 1100 Houston, TX 77010 Tel: 713-630-7300
JMarcus@walterpmoore.com www.walterpmoore.com
46
JANUARY 2011 • PARKING TODAY •
www.parkingtoday.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56