Seattle to Buildings: Give Tenants Transit Passes, Not Parking Spots

[brooklynite]

CityLab:

After decades of telling residential developers to build a minimum amount of parking for tenants, smart cities are now looking for ways to discourage the creation of unnecessary spaces. That’s because while some people enjoy the amenity of a personal spot, residential parking also makes housing less affordable (by jacking up rents to defray the cost of building a garage or a lot) and makes traffic more awful (by encouraging commuters to drive to work). It's a small win for a large loss.

Seattle is among the U.S. metros working hard to change the situation. Years ago it eliminated a rule requiring developers to build parking for new buildings located in downtown or transit-friendly areas. That policy has produced mixed returns; some housing developments provide no parking for tenants, while some still build nearly a spot per person, leading to just over half a space per unit, on average:

A new idea, presented recently to the city council, would take that parking policy a step further by requiring developers to offer new tenants a suite of alternative transport options. So instead of getting a parking spot, a resident might get a transit pass or a bike-share membership instead—a trade that, over time, should reduce parking demand and promote car-free living. Here's the basic gist of the proposed "residential transportation options program," via the city's planning department:

Require bus passes for new residential developments in center city neighborhoods and other areas frequently served by transit, along with car share memberships, bike share memberships, or similar services.

[KamaAina]

1. Xposting to Public Transportation & Smart Growth

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1130

[whatthehey]

2. Wonderful for folks like me

200 yd walking range. About 2 minutes max standing. Yep buses would be wonderful. Why doesn't the granola crowd ever think that not everybody can run and bike their day?