[sustran] Re: More about on-street parking

[Eric Bruun]

Walter

I wasn't taking an absolute position in favor of on-street parking, I am just pointing out that
sometimes there are advantages to it. 

If you are describing an ideal situation, I would agree with you.
But given the reality, at least in the US in the short term, getting rid of all on-street parking would mean even more parking houses in the central area, flight of businesses to the suburbs, and perhaps even widening
of roads to speed up through traffic. This seems to be what happened in residential areas in Baltimore -- some
are now throughways for commuters.

Eric Bruun 

-----Original Message-----
>From: Walter Hook <whook at itdp.org>
>Sent: Apr 25, 2006 10:34 AM
>To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
>Subject: [sustran] Re: More about on-street parking
>
>Not sure my earlier response on this went through, cause it didn't come back
>to me.
>
>Just wanted to add that I was surprised by the comments in support of
>on-street parking from the likes of Todd and Eric and Eric.  I thought we
>would be more on the same page on this. 
>
>Eric B's support for on street parking, that it is ugly and therefore will
>ultimately one day lead to citizen awareness, does not appear to be borne
>out by the facts.  Streets in most cities have been clogged with ugly,
>undercharged parked cars since the 20s, and it has not led to any
>consciousness raising: people just don't see anything wrong with it because
>it is just normal to them.  We need some beautifully redesigned streets to
>show neighborhoods that they don't have to live on ugly streets.  Once
>people see a better option, perhaps everyone would be clamoring for it.
>That is what is happening in china with pedestrian zones.  Now every
>district government wants one, to the delightful consternation of the
>traffic engineers.  Should we be encouraging congestion and on street
>parking in the hopes it will one day lead to a sustainable mobility
>revolution?  That is like rejecting safe working conditions and the minimum
>wage because it ameliorates the chances of some dreamed for utopian
>revolution.  
>
>Was also surprised to hear Todd all of a sudden the voice of parking
>efficiency, and Eric supporting parking as a buffer for pedestrians.  I
>mean, if it's a buffer we're after, surely flowers are better.   
>
>If folks are not familiar with the work of Prof. Hermann Knoflacher of the
>Univ. of Vienna, i recommend it.  He makes a compelling argument that on
>street parking is THE central problem with western traffic systems.   He
>goes so far as to say that if we dealt with the parking issue, we wouldn't
>need congestion charging.  Maybe.  He argues that total travel times are
>biased in favor of private car modes over transit modes largely because
>society allows people to park their cars right in front of their houses and
>right adjacent to their offices, while the nearest bus stop is likely to be
>some distance away.  Because the walking trip is taken at very slow speeds,
>and this has to be added to the waiting time for the bus, the total trip
>time is therefore significantly biased against the transit trip.  Therefore,
>on street parking has several significant dis-benefits: one, it biases modal
>choice towards private car use, two it consumes public space that otherwise
>could be used for children to play, people to sit and play dominoes, walk,
>etc. In addition, on street parking is generally badly underpriced in terms
>of land rent, subsidizing driving.  In addition, car parking if removed
>would also provide the space for a bike lane that could be physically
>protected from traffic, although on a residential street the bike lane isn't
>necessary if you can traffic calm the whole street. 
>
>Is KNoflacher for off-street parking?  I tried to nail him down on this.
>What I think he said was, if you can get rid of the parking without adding
>off street parking, that is the best.  If you need to make a political
>compromise, better to go for off street parking that is located on the major
>arterials with no direct access from the residential streets.  This creates
>then the conditions for no needed motor vehicle traffic on residential
>streets except delivery access, and hence creates conditions where the
>streets could be dramatically redesigned for children, public space, etc.  I
>asked him if there were concrete examples of where this had been done, he
>said there were some in Vienna but was a little vague...
>
>Best
>Walter 
>
>
> 
>
>Best
>
>Walter 
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org
>[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf
>Of Todd Edelman
>Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 2:32 AM
>To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport
>Subject: [sustran] Re: More about on-street parking
>
>Hi,
>
>I suppose I could admit I am a "carfree fundamentalist" who sees nothing
>sustainable about cities which allow individually owned and operated cars
>inside....so I will just mostly ignore this "better car parking" stuff. 
>So just comment:
>
>> ...
>> on-street parking can act as a buffer between pedestrians and a busy
>> arterial.
>
>I have heard this argument before. Arent there better buffers? For
>example, trees, plants, bikelanes, watercourses, sculptures, vending
>machines, and so on? In carcities, how about if it was a rule that if you
>are so close to pedestrians you simply have to drive really, really slow?
>This is not rocket science.
>
>---
>
>This list really confuses me sometimes.
>
>Do people want to spend their whole professional lives (and afterwards)
>regulating parking and trying to get cars to slow down? How many people on
>this would be perfectly happy to not be able to use a car if their city
>was designed to provide everything you need without one? To reference a
>recent thread on this list, are people ready to sacrifice
>sustainability(!) for peace, quiet, safety and proximity?
>
>Thanks,
>T
>
>------------------------------------------------------
>
>Todd Edelman
>International Coordinator
>On the Train Towards the Future!
>
>Green Idea Factory
>Laubova 5
>CZ-13000 Praha 3
>
>++420 605 915 970
>
>edelman at greenidea.info
>http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain
>
>Green Idea Factory,
>a member of World Carfree Network
>
>
>
>================================================================
>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
>equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
>(the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is
>on urban transport policy in Asia.
>
>
>
>================================================================
>SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.