The trend is certainly against requiring as much parking for buildings. The earlier requirement of requiring large parking lots and underground parking is now disfavored. In fact, requiring large amounts of parking for buildings can cause sprawl and add unnecessary costs to building downtown.

The top reference for parking is The High Cost of Free Parking if you really want to wonk out. Of course, it’s a $50 book.

Its very difficult to have a successful mass transit system if there is so much cheap parking around.

The idea that people — particularly the disabled, elderly, those with children, etc — are going to just give up their cars is usually propounded by 20-30- somethings making mucho $ who can afford to rent a car when they need it — and, incidentally, who usually have no children. Of course, developers love the idea that they won’t be req’d to provide parking. In the meantime, their residents and guests have to park blocks away, risk having their cars vandalized, risk being victims of street crime esp. late at night, and those who do have cars take up parking spaces of those who must drive into the city because, for instance, they live elsewhere and have business there. As sometime who has ferried around several people who have “given up their cars” — usually late at night or when it’s raining — I can tell you that cars serve a useful purpose, and that in many cases those with cars make trips out of their way to take those without cars home. Yes, developers should provide parking.

Of course we need parking. But building more parking only increases automobiles and the reliance on them.

Instead, we should be asking questions like:
How much parking should be required?
Should we think in terms of a maximum parking requirement as opposed to a minimum?
And who would pay for parking?
Should a developer have the option of paying into a public transit fund, streetcars for example, instead of building parking garages?
If we are talking condos, and I prefer to not have an off-street parking space with my unit, should I be charged to have a parking space constructed? Or should the space be offered for sale separately from the the condo unit to someone willing to pay more for it?

According to the most recent census data, about one quarter of Pierce County residents commute to King County for their employment. Going back to drizell’s initial comment, if we want to change our current course of being a bedroom community of King County commuters, then we need to make some changes now. We should be doing more to encourage sustainable development and affordable housing in such a way as to build our public transportation infrastructure. These three items go hand-in-hand and all support each other.

The question then becomes, what types of public transportation should we support? While buses have their place, they have only a limited appeal to both potential riders and developers. When was the last time you heard a developer move forward on a project because it was on a bus line? However, as we now see in Portland, streetcars are proving themselves to once again be catalysts for new development.

Can streetcars happen in Tacoma? I don’t see why not- especially since we’ve already had them. Tacoma was built on streetcar lines: as new areas were developed, streetcar lines were created to link the new developments to downtown. As the areas got built-out, and more people wanted to live on or near a streetcar line, developers were able to intensify their efforts and build multi-storied apartment buildings. This was the beginning of the type of density Tacoma needs and we should pick up and continue this. A drive down almost any main arterial (transit corridor) within a stones throw of downtown – “I” Street, Tacoma Avenue, MLK or “K” Street – will reveal a similar pattern: strings of older apartments punctuated by small pockets of commercial buildings with larger commercial districts at main intersections.

By reducing parking requirements, we can help reduce the cost of housing and increase density. By connecting this density with streetcars, we can create a system which benefits young and old, rich and poor while making our city more walkable and sustainable.

Vote to make 2007 the year Tacoma gets streetcars!

Is anybody talking about making the streetcar and Link the same thing?

It’s cost prohibitive and impractical to only have a single system. The infrastructure footprint and cost of Link is significantly more than any streetcar proposal. Let’s think about smaller, more frequent, systems that don’t require loading platforms. Link the two up and we have a city-wide solution.