Reply to Greater Greater Washington as a news source

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Greater Greater Washington as a news source"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
[quote]The people holding back more housing usually aren't residents because there's not much neighbors or even the government can actually do to restrain by-right development. [/quote]

Except by right usually means too few units, (sometimes too much parking) etc.  Zoning holds back by right, and the NIMBYs hold back waivers (and development on District owned land, like McMillan)[/quote]

Ask the developers who want to build less parking if they will covenant that their tenants and buyers cannot apply for RPP, to avoid shifting added private externalities on to the public.  Crickets will follow that question.  [/quote]

RPPs are shifting private externalities onto the public. You're storing your private car on the public street at well below market price.[/quote]

I have no problem raising RPP fees and certainly no issue with progressively rising RPP fees for multiple vehicles registered by the same owner.  But I have a huge problem with developers piously assuring the public and commissioners that their new residents will take transit or bike everywhere and that no offstreet parking is necessary.  Then the new residents bring their cars and overburden already overburdened street parking.  That’s a classic case of shifting costs from the developer to the public.  As for the argument that precluding new residents in parking-less buildings is somehow unfair, developers and smart growth advocates argue that by eliminating parking the cost of housing will go down.  So if these touted cost savings are passed along to renters and purchasers, then with notice those parties can decide if the benefit overrides the disadvantage of new RPP.

Developers are passing these claimed cost savings along in the form of lower prices, aren’t they?[/quote]

Terrific. Abolish mandatory parking minimums, abolish the RPP, set a market price on street parking for everybody - we're all set.[/quote]

But what about people on lower incomes and other marginalized people ?[/quote]

People with lower incomes and other marginalized people are the least likely to own cars that they need to store on the street, and the most likely to benefit from the improvements to transit, walking, and biking that will be possible once we stop making car storage a priority street use.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics