Parking going to get fancy. From the May 4 council meeting.
6 Likes
The shared parking pass system and pay-as-you-go billing, especially, will be awesome! It’ll make it easier to carpool or to go out without worrying about how much exactly to pay to park (not only to make parking work better for hybrid working arrangements).
1 Like
Sorry if this was already posted on a thread I muted, but just saw this:
http://newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article251823113.html
Maybe would’ve been good before all the buildings now that are on top of a parking pedestal, but better late than never. I’m sure a lot people on here would be thrilled. I have mixed feelings. I like the ample parking downtown, and I like driving downtown and so do a lot of people. It’s too hot or too cold or raining almost all year long, so having to walk everywhere is kind of a pain. Plus all the people who already avoid downtown because they think there’s nowhere to park. I see the positives too, but I doubt I need to list them here. 
6 Likes
IMO there should be parking minimums for residential and hotel only. I wouldn’t live / stay somewhere where I could risk coming home from a long day and not having somewhere to park.
Other than that though, I think it’s time we get away from parking minimums because every development doesn’t generate 100% new trips. You can park one place and go to multiple places. Chances are if you’re going downtown you can park one place and do just about everything you need to do.
5 Likes
Here’s the city council documents, but thanks for finding a much more readable summary! I’m with you on the mixed feelings, too.
I agree about parking minimums, though. It also makes it all too easy to encourage redundant parking spots to be built around neighboring developments, not to mention the incentives for making people even more car-dependent (rather than truly choosing to drive).
One interesting thing, though: the article says Stormie Forte’s the lone dissenting vote.
4 Likes
You wouldn’t live there, and a lot of other people probably wouldn’t. And that’s fine, you’d just pick somewhere else to live!
Developers know this too. Removing minimums would really just allow developers to equalize project needs with market demands, and it would remove hurdles for smaller projects that cannot feasibly build adequate parking on-site. So this would make that 10 condo building that only has room for 6 off-street parking spots feasible, whereas the lot may be seen as un-developable without an assemblage at the moment. I think it’s totally reasonable that some people may drive infrequently enough to use monthly parking down the block – in other cities, these kinds of developments with no/low on-site parking have enforced 15-30 minute unloading zones for groceries and things like that. I want to see smaller scale urbanism, especially missing middle housing, and this would help.
8 Likes
We’re in good company, by the way. Richmond just did away with parking minimums this week, and Minneapolis did too a few weeks before that.
8 Likes
Even in saying that, I think I’d vote for the change if I had a vote. Think more good can come than bad as far as building an actual city here.
3 Likes
You don’t get a vote, but you could sign up to speak at the city council meetings, and be incredibly outraged and bitchy like all the cranks I’ve been listening to this evening. Just wanted to see if the East End Market gets approved or not, and it’s like hours of these nuts just complaining about everything. These councilors should get awards for their patience.
8 Likes
Lmaooooo I wonder if half of those people realize what this city would be if stuff just didn’t ever change. Ridiculous. I bet most of them won’t even be affected
6 Likes
I think that having concerns over spillover parking is an easy play if you are trying to cater to nearby residents. For me, it’s a Nimby play rather than thinking about good parking policy.
I’ll never forget but the reason Citrix’s parking deck is that tall is for that very reason.
I think we should compliment the removal of parking minimums with an improvement of on-street parking management for all neighborhoods surrounding downtown, as suggested in the article. I have no problem with the public streets accommodating 1 car per household and we even give the permits away for those making 50% AMI and below, for example. Need more permits? Then you can pay for it.
I feel that I trust developers on this one here to get it more right than the city. Related to the spillover concern is that developers will try and save a buck by building less parking. To the best of my knowledge, a development with little parking would be seen as more risky and have very little chance to get funding so while I want the minimums to go away, I’m not sure the parking decks will just disappear overnight.
I agree with Councilor Melton, if we have parking problems in the future, let’s work them as they present themselves.
8 Likes
Listen to the complaints about z-53-20. The original plan was 350 units. After back and forth, it is down to 185 units. The vocal minority (I live in this community) want only 70. This is not a compromise. This is some people arguing just to argue.
3 Likes
I’m sorry, what? Removing parking minimums will hurt the people who can’t afford to walk?? Who can’t afford to walk? This is a dumb argument lmao
2 Likes
OBNOXIOUS. Why does anyone even listen to these people, especially when final say is in the hands of the city??
Councilmember Forte’s full quote says “afford to walk and bike”, not “or”.
Besides, from the context of her quote, I don’t think she’s just talking about financial cost -but also social cost (e.g. feeling less secure about walking at night or alone when you’re a woman, Black etc.).
(I don’t think her reason is strong enough to vote down that rule change, either, but I just wanted to clarify how I understood what she said.)
1 Like
I mean I get that there’s more context to the quote, it just comes off as so sensitive that it’s almost parody. Especially when I know full damn well how much of an overabundance of free, on-street parking we have literally in every corner of the city. And I’m sorry but if you can afford an entire car and the gas it takes to drive around the city and park in a $14/day parking deck… I’m prettty sure you could afford to walk/bike lmao
3 Likes
I took that comment to mean, “afford to live close by and therefore walk” but now it could go many ways. 
3 Likes
Fair enough. I’m still not seeing it as a strong enough argument with the extreme overabundance of parking in the downtown area and beyond. I just gotta laugh anytime anyone of any background/income-level says “I can never find parking!” because what that translates to for me is: “I can never find parking directly out front of my destination” 
9 Likes
I do the same thing. 
1 Like
you forgot to add the word free.
4 Likes