Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef
For the millionth time, this is not about “no parking.” It’s about letting market forces determine how much parking is actually needed and how it is sold. Cul de Sac is going to be an outlier for a long time, but it should not be unthinkable for a project to have unbundled parking with a reduced ratio of dwelling units to parking spaces. The developers and situations may be very specific, but they’re the ones the city should be cultivating right now. If that doesn’t work out, no harm is done. Everyone will still get their precious parking and skeptics can say “told ya so” as loudly as possible.
|
I understand your stance and I agree with you that it would be nice to get people out of cars and onto light rail, bicycles, and on foot. I'm not debating that.
Put yourself in the shoes of a developer who has 15 sources of cash (all of whom expect a certain return) to the your apartment building off the ground. Would you build something with limited, extremely limited, or absent of parking? I doubt you would but maybe I can be surprised. I will not be sticking my tongue out saying "I told you so" if someone tries the experiment and fails. I will feel bad for them like I feel bad for anyone who tries something they believe in and fails.