The Seattle NIMBY Nightmare: A Five-Minute Walk From House to Car

A 400-unit apartment building is in the works for an area of West Seattle zoned as a “transit village,” with frequent, convenient transit connections. Attached to the apartments will be 122 parking spaces. Can you tell where this story is headed?

The relatively low ratio of parking to housing recently yielded a hyperbolic news report that’s very sympathetic to neighboring homeowners who fear an impending “parking jungle.”

Will West Seattle become a "parking jungle" where people are forced to walk five minutes to their cars? The Seattle media is ON IT! Image: ##http://www.king5.com/news/local/Homeowners-fear-urban-villages-will-turn-neighborhood-into-parking-jungle-215177281.html##King5##

Erica C. Barnett at Publicola says the report is revealing in a number of ways. First, homeowners make some wacky assumptions about who street parking belongs to. Second, project opponents are bent out of shape about some very mundane future scenarios:

The nightmare outcome KING 5 envisions—”Imagine having to walk a quarter mile from your car to your home after work”—works out to about a five-minute walk from car to porch. Is that tiny inconvenience—a shorter walk than many transit riders somehow manage to undertake daily—really a sufficient reason to demand that developers add hundreds of new parking spaces, thereby driving up rents and forcing lower-income renters further out into the suburbs (where they’ll definitely need to own a car)?

Talk about social engineering.

And, more to the point: Even assuming the story’s absurd premise—everyone who moves into a new apartment building in a dense urban village will own a car—the fact is that no one, including [angry West Seattle resident Gary] Reifel, other homeowners, or even those theoretical multi-car-owning renters, actually owns the streets. You have no more right to park in the space in front of your house than you have to your favorite park bench, or the prettiest view, or the nicest spot on the beach. Public amenities like parking are just that: Public—not private facilities to be enjoyed only by those who happened to get there first.

Elsewhere on the Network today: Cyclelicious reports that a peaceful neighborhood bike party in Santa Clara was broken up by police, who called the event “unlawful assembly.” The Alliance for Biking and Walking explains how different states are adjusting to the new “Transportation Alternatives” funding program, introduced in the last transportation bill. And at Shareable Cities, Jay Walljasper remembers what it was like being part of Minneapolis’s first successful highway revolt.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Real Estate Trend: Parking-Free Apartment Buildings

|
A wave of new residential construction projects in places like Seattle, Boston, and Miami are showing that, yes, modern American cities can build housing without any car parking on site. Officials in Boston gave their approval last week to what Curbed called the city’s “first big-time parking-less condo,” a 175-unit project named Lovejoy Wharf. The “plan was met with […]

Apartment Blockers

|
Alan Durning is the executive director and founder of Sightline Institute, a think tank on sustainability issues in the Pacific Northwest. This article, originally posted on Sightline’s blog, is #9 in their series, “Parking? Lots!” Have you ever watched the excavation that precedes a tall building? It seems to take forever. Then, when the digging […]

The Price of Parking: Let the Free Market Decide?

|
The Wall Street Journal ran a piece this weekend by Conor Dougherty on the municipal move toward charging more for parking. It’s available online to paid subscribers only, but here’s a taste: As anyone who has ever circled the block for a marginally better spot knows, parking is an American obsession. It occasionally boils over […]