And my point was that even when Alliant was in that building, there were still spots available in the city ramps. People can park there all day if they want - no one is stopping them. Since we are not filling the parking spaces that currently exist, there seems no reason to build more.
Subsidizing parking is a very bad idea. However, if they give the subsidy pre-tax to those who do not use a spot, then it would be fairer. EG: * City ramp spot might costs $120/month to general public. * Employee A at XYZ Corp gets that spot for $60/month. That employee is getting a $60 untaxed benefit. * Employee B who bikes or walks to work gets zilch. Employee B is getting screwed out of $720/year of untaxed benefits. Or.... they could let the employees fend for themselves as most employers in cities do. There is plenty of parking in downtown, plus the other perfectly good transportation options available. If a few employees MUST have a car for work, the employer should be renting a spot for those employees as part of his/her jobs and possibly even allow use of company cars parked in that spot instead of assuming employees will have access to a private vehicle. At 11:13 AM 10/25/2002 -0500, Paco . wrote: >> > Where is the parking crisis? >The parking crisis they are talking and are planning on rectifying is in >reference to filling the Alliant building and some other locations. [snip] >Companies don't want to open/move/locate there >is they don't get parking for themselves and customers. _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
