First hurdle: dealing with street parking
- Does not have government directly charging for parking
- Does not remove parking rights from current homeowners in the area (though condo owners and renters will face a parking squeeze)
- Quantifies the number of parking spots and allows for them to be traded on an open market
- Does not require complex and expensive enforcement, residents will do the enforcing themselves
Here is an example, take this area:
|Example for parking permits based on street fronting width|
What about fractional permits?
This is the biggest problem with this approach. In the previous example, I made it simple, each lot width was a multiple of the width associated with a permit, but in real-life, it's not going to be the case. For example, what if instead of 1 permit per 6 meters, we had 1 permit per 10 meters, to take into account driveways and fire hydrants? Well then, you'd have:
Houses 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 deserve 1,2 permit each.
Houses 1 and 4 deserve 1,8 permit each.
House 7 deserves 2,4 permit.
Second hurdle: dealing with parking requirements
|Single-family house with a double-width driveway, deep enough for 4 parking spots, next to a vacant lot|
|The triplex can go ahead thanks to a parking transfer|
This has a big advantage of allowing small-scale developments in densely-built areas, even with some off-street parking requirements. A big problem of low-rise walk-ups in dense urban areas right now is the parking requirement, even if it's just 0,5 space per unit, it's nearly impossible to have underground parking to satisfy this requirement in a way that isn't absolutely dreadful. The only way (without rear alleys) is to have front-loading slip-under garages like this:
|Low-rise walk-ups in Montréal, built in the era of parking requirements|
|Mid-rise 130-meter wide building in Montréal, with just one curb cut to enter the parking garage underneath|