View Single Post
Old Posted Dec 19, 2011, 6:17 PM
pesto pesto is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post

This sounds like it will be very close to the Expo line station. People who live within walking distance of rail transit stations, especially someone willing to pay more to live next to rail transit, have fundamentally different travel patterns than people who live elsewhere. They also have much lower vehicle ownership rates, thus allowing for reduced off-street parking requirements.

Here are two excellent studies on the topic:
Transit Oriented Developmentā€™s Ridership Bonus: A Product of Self-Selection and Public Policies

Vehicle Trip Reduction Impacts of Transit-Oriented Housing

More parking leads to more driving. This is especially true if the price of the expensive off-street parking, which can cost as much as $30,000 - $40,000 for each spot if it is subterranean parking, is bundled into the cost of housing and not priced separately. Including more parking, which may or may not be used, also raises the cost of housing, limiting affordability.
Agreed. In this particular area, where parking is already very bad, if the developer is willing to put up a building (apparently mostly for transients, since it's mostly studios) with no parking and adjust rents, then do it.

But when this process occurs where street parking is available, it's just handing free money to the developer at the expense of other apartments, businesses, etc. Besides in the basin, dense areas around Ventura Blvd. (Studio City, Sherman Oaks, Encino, Tarzana, etc.) have this issue: massive apartments put up with inadequate parking and resultant injury to existing home-owners and businesses.
Reply With Quote