How about simply altering the Minneapolis Zoning Ordinances so that automobiles aren't favored?
The Code is disgusting:
541.220. Bicycle parking.
(a) Uses. A minimum of four (4) bicycle parking spaces may be provided in
lieu of not more than one (1) required automobile parking space.
(b) Location. Bicycle parking spaces and racks shall be located in a convenient
and visible area no farther from the principal entrance to the building served
than the closest automobile parking space. With the permission of the city
engineer, bicycle parking may be located in the public right-of-way. Bicycle
parking may be provided within a building, but the location shall be easily
accessible for bicycles.
(c) Covered spaces. If accessory automobile parking spaces are covered, bicycle
parking spaces shall also be covered.
There is no point at which bicycle parking is required. There is no way to avoid providing motor vehicle parking.
If I owned a business (lately I've been dreaming of a North Mpls bike shop or bike oriented cafe), I wouldn't want to have to provide a single parking spot for motorists. But the law forces me to do so.
And no matter how many bicycle parking places I provide, I cannot reduce my obligation to the motorists by more than a single space.
It's an offensive interference with the free market.
If on-street parking is a problem, rather than force businesses to provide motorists with places to park their death traps, perhaps the solution is to simply ban on-street parking in problem areas except by permit.
The context of the bicycle parking codes you listed is a little unclear. But there should definitely be more bike racks around town. (Is it legal to lock them to parking meters? - I see it pretty often) The purpose of car parking requirements in offices and residences is so they don't overwhelm on-street parking. But, somewhat paradoxically, the off-street parking requirements encourage more car dependence because surface parking lots spread things out even further. It's my understanding that there are now areas of the city where parking requirements can be waived or reduced.
> > We need to fight hard to stop the walmartization of wages and our urban > > communities.
Why is that? As I understand it, a great number of people like shopping at Wal-Mart. They find the prices, goods, and service to be preferable to the alternatives.
Big box stores externalize the cost of the final distribution of goods. They generate more traffic and increase all sorts of the private and public costs that go with that - highways, intersections, gasoline, etc which are not reflected in the prices you pay there. You were complaining about taxes... For a little more see Jim Kunstler's May 2nd post: http://www.kunstler.com/mags_diary10.html
Personally I conclude that many of our zoning ordinances (especially those that require small businesses to provide black top for the parking of motor vehicles) are quite anti-small-business. Remove these anti-competitive barriers to entry for small businesses and Wal-Mart would have a much harder time competing on a fair playing field.
Imagine if you had your small bike shop, on an urban street with several other small businesses around it. You would benefit the symbiosis with other small business from the casual strollers-by patronizing your store, and the feeling of living in a place where biking is a viable, pleasant way to get around. Now imagine that the free market's invisible hand dictates that there must be a 100,000 square foot super-mega mart in your neighborhood. Half of the small businesses are bought out and physically demolished to make way for the new store. Traffic doubles, but the people park in the gigantic new parking lot rather than on the street, and they don't amble around what's left of the neighborhood. The symbiosis and the atmosphere is now dead, and the remaining businesses wither.
Other than giving small businesses a chance to flourish instead of forcing them out of business (or to never open in the first place), I see no reason to "fight" Wal-Mart. Their customers and employees are free actors in society and have chosen to shop and work there. It is not your place to force these people to change their lives because you don't like it.
For the social and economic reasons I have discussed, I believe curtailing big box stores is the right thing to do, especially in an older city like Minneapolis.
Freedom is not just about freedom from government, its also about the freedom to participate in democracy to make our world a little better. It's idealistic but its true.
> Great idea! The taxes raised could be set aside for programs designed to > reduce dependence on the automobile and explore alternative means of > transport like LRT and PRT.
That is a horrible idea. I don't want my taxes raised one penny. Not directly, not by proxy, not by any means at all. Every day I go to work and the first 3.5 hours out of 8 go to keep the government from throwing me in jail for tax evasion.
I especially don't want the government wasting my earnings on garbage like PRT and LRT. That choo-choo train in South Minneapolis is a useless drain on the transit system. Look at how much roadway has been given over to this single use. How many people were those roadways carrying before LRT? How many will they carry once LRT opens (assuming it ever does)?
PRT is even worse. Pie-in-the-sky, Jetsons-esque fantasies about miracle transportation systems. If PRT is such a great idea, it should be able to attract investors and research money from someone looking for a "socially responsible" investment. Meanwhile, Toyota is doing more intersting things with concept cars by far. Seen their PM? (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/toyota-pm.htm)
Do you know how much money the government spent on LRT? Over 700 million dollars. That amount of money boggles the mind. Do you know what? You could have bought one million metro area citizens a $700 bike each for that price. You could have widened a large number of roadways to make biking more comfortable and safe. You could have perhaps resurfaced all the bikeways in the City so that they are actually worth riding on. You could have expanded bus service in new and interesting ways.
I agree with you that PRT is a joke, but this antagonism between bike people and transit people is silly. We both want a more humane environment that is less auto-dependent.
Mike Jensvold East Isles
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
