Quote:
Originally Posted by takascar
No offense, but why does that attitude not smack of NIMBYism? They wouldn't build the parking podium unless there was a demand for parking at these kinds of buildings.
Why do you think you have a right to restrict potential renters from their choice of transportation.
This is America. We drive cars. It is offensive nanny-statism for elite snobs to dictate to citizens what kind of transportation they can have.
If they didn't drive cars, there wouldn't be a market for a large parking to unit ratio.
I find anti-auto parking "nazis" to be exceedingly annoying.
Signed - a native Detroiter from a proud UAW family.
|
Not to pile on, but the law in 99.9% of America requires parking to be provided with housing.
That means those of us who can't or don't want to own a car have to pay hard-earned money for a parking spot we will never use. It's just a hidden tax, really, that only benefits car owners. That's a problem, since people who don't own cars tend to be lower-income and have less money to throw around.
In a perfectly free market, the corner of State and 9th would be an ideal location for people who choose not to drive, for the reasons I outlined. In the South Loop, it's already possible and often even
pleasant to commute to work and perform all of life's tasks without climbing in a car. But, until recently, the law still required developers to provide excessive parking for residential buildings, increasing the cost of housing for everyone.
Car owners still have the freedom to buy housing with parking virtually anywhere they want, but now non-motorists have the freedom to avoid the "parking tax" by choosing to live in TOD buildings.