Skip to main content

Structured Parking, a Stranded Asset?

Ryan Falconer of Arup posted some interesting thoughts about how automated vehicles (AVs) will change the parking that serves airports and train stations. My mind immediately turned to structured parking.

Due to both zoning mandates and client level-of-service concerns, projects that aim for anything approaching an urban level of density generally include a parking structure. The two most common forms in the recent housing expansion seem to be the sub-grade garage that serves a tower and the mid-rise pre-cast garage that is wrapped in wood-framed apartments.

If the coming of the AV does indeed radically reduce the need for static parking, purpose-built parking structures run the risk of becoming, if not stranded assets, non-performing ones. Only those garages that serve ultra-premium properties are designed to anything significantly above code minimums for floor-to-floor height. Smaller garages generally slope the floor plates rather than have dedicated ramps. While cars are heavy, they are also large, meaning the structural loads are actually quite a bit lighter than those for general office or storage uses. That combination of low height, sloping floors, and light loading means that these structures will be very difficult, if not impossible, to adapt to other productive uses.

Structured parking is often seen as a necessary evil, but how much darker is it to have such a large, unnecessary evil?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Value of Pop Economics?

A friend recently posted a meme about rising income inequality to Facebook. One of the comments was a link to a piece from Economics Explained with the provocative title " How The Dutch Economy Shows We Can't Reduce Wealth Inequality With Taxes " I'm starting to see a pattern in these sorts of economics articles: 1. Make a pointed and contrarian claim about the power of economics to address a major issue in contemporary society (taxes won't fix inequality). 2. Compare related economics concepts that have much narrower definitions than the ones that drew in the reader (GINI vs income & wealth inequality vs a few specific aspects of Dutch taxes and culture). 3. Add some artfully selected facts to keep people interested (Heineken family info). 4. Also artfully avoid saying explicitly that the narrow comparison proves or disproves anything specific about the broader societal problem. 5. Make a generally agreeable statement about the world: Inequality doesn't ...

Operational Tension

When it comes to how we do our jobs, where do architects find inspiration? It seems to me there are three perspectives: Sui Generis - Treats architecture as a unique field, looking to other architects Creative Orientation - Lessons can be found in other creative fields Business Orientation - Seeks to apply general management principals The limitations of the sui generis approach are self-evident (that is, I don't want to look for references at this moment). By focusing only on the practices of other architects, our ability to adapt and innovate relies on other architects to experiment and disseminate that information. How consistently do the major trade publications look at these issues? I suspect not often. I also suspect readership of more specialized publications is thin within the architectural community. This approach has the self-serving appeal of defining our work as special and by extension, we are special. Maybe architects aren't more prone to that sort of status...

A Golden Failure

It's 2020, and unless things really truly go to literal hell, everyone will recognize what that means for a long time. I've been trying to find a way of tying these many struggles together, COVID-19, racism, violence, climate change. I wish I could remember where this idea came from, because it isn't mine. The Golden Rule, to do unto others as they would have them do unto you, isn't enough. Not by itself. It lets us rest on a sense that we can get by being polite, that we can rely on reacting to circumstances as we encounter them in a positive way. These challenges stem from an entire society's dysfunctions. An LED lightbulb and a meme or two isn't remotely enough. I understand this to be the core belief of the progressive movement: what we want for ourselves, we must work to provide for others, for everyone else. Every decision about our collective welfare has to start there.  Choosing not to is the core of bigotry, of environmental destruction, the genesis of ...