<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>MentalPolyphonics &#187; parking</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mentalpolyphonics.com/posts/tag/parking/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mentalpolyphonics.com</link>
	<description>Committees exist to share blame.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 01:29:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Parking vs Density</title>
		<link>http://mentalpolyphonics.com/posts/parking-vs-density</link>
		<comments>http://mentalpolyphonics.com/posts/parking-vs-density#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:52:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryley</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[urban planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mentalpolyphonics.com/?p=5023</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jared pointed me to this Times Colonist letter, which suggests that Victoria needs to critically examine our zoning policies with respect to parking. In the letter, they talk a lot about urban sprawl, and various other, relatively boring outcomes of strong parking requirements for new development in urban centers. I think a much simpler comparison [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jared pointed me to this <a href="http://www.timescolonist.com/business/fp/Tackling+high+cost+free+parking/1823995/story.html">Times Colonist letter</a>, which suggests that Victoria needs to critically examine our zoning policies with respect to parking.  In the letter, they talk a lot about urban sprawl, and various other, relatively boring outcomes of strong parking requirements for new development in urban centers.  I think a much simpler comparison might have more impact:  LA has similar policies to Victoria, San Francisco and NYC do not.  </p>
<p><a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/los-angeles-transportation-facts-and-fiction/">Freakonomics</a> did a big series on misconceptions about LA, and why downtown LA has a reputation for sprawling, whereas downtown San Francisco is considered &#8220;vibrant&#8221;.   The most interesting thing they linked to was <a href="http://www.uctc.net/access/25/Access%2025%20-%2002%20-%20People,%20Parking,%20and%20Cities.pdf">this study</a> on the true costs of parking in LA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mentalpolyphonics.com/posts/parking-vs-density/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

