3 ms·
Some percentage of people don't have a car. It's safe to assume that trends to lower income. So parking mandates are also a form of (hidden) economic apartheid
by bruce511 2y ago
Some percentage of people don't have a car. It's safe to assume that trends to lower income.
So parking mandates are also a form of (hidden) economic apartheid. If my city mandates say 2 spaces per apartment, it's intrinsically reducing housing stock for "poor people" - hence "more exclusive neighborhoods."
Which sounds good, except that the services needed (often done by the poor) get hard to supply.
Cynical me suggests that selective zoning creates 'pockets of poor' - but pragmatically me points out this is good for clustering car-alternatives making them more effective.
On balance I think it's a win - and frankly is good for everyone.
- davidw 2y agoThe history of zoning is very much about keeping certain people out of the "nice" neighborhoods after Buchanan v. Warley declared explicitly racial zoning to be unconstitutional. This book has a concise and very readable history of zoning in the US: https://islandpress.org/books/arbitrary-lines https://islandpress.org/books/arbitrary-lines https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801479878/zoned-in-the-usa/ https://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9780801479878/zone... has a deeper dive into the history of zoning here compared with other countries.
- 4death4 2y agoEverything is interconnected. People who commute to work need a car. If parking is unavailable, then commuters cannot live there. If workers can't live there, then property taxes are lower and less money enters the local economy. You can't apriori say what impact these parking policies have.
- pjc50 2y ago> People who commute to work need a car Quite a lot of lower income workers can't afford to commute by car. Breaking that "need" relation is the #1 priority for people trying to design lower-car cities.