Tyler Johnston

Mrs. Haskins
English 103
12 April 2016
Community Improvement Project Research
Guo, Zhan, Luis Schloeter, Charles Rivasplata, Richard Lee, and David Keyon. "Amenity or
Necessity? Street Standards as Parking Policy." Mineta Transportation Institute (2012):
0-66. Web. 11 Apr. 2017. <http://transweb.sjsu.edu/PDFs/research/1001-2-street-
standards-street-width-parking-policy-investigation.pdf>.
Task: To show the amenities and necessities of street parking, along with the importance of it in
neighborhoods.
Purpose: To help the HOA see some of the benefits that street parking can provide.
Audience: Homeowners Associations (Specifically Sierra Verde).
These additional spaces would double the amount of off-street parking available
to a typical single-family home. As a result, the average single-family home has access to
approximately eight to ten parking spaces, although average household car ownership in
the United States is approximately 2.3 cars.
Allowing cars to park on the street would double the space of
parking.
The average cars for families is 2.3 cars meaning that with the
provided driveway holding 2 cars only some families would need to extra street
parking.
Is an average middle-income household willing to pay $1,000 per year for four
to five street parking spaces in front of their house? The answer may depend on the
households level of car ownership, the availability of off-street parking, housing size,
parking habits, and household attributes.
Street parking would most likely come with some costs that the
families would have to be willing to pay in order to widen the streets and even
pay for the availability of the parking provided.
There is a variety of street parking needs depending on house size,
parking habits, household attributes, and car ownership.
Decision makers believe that parking is provided because it is needed by
residents and visitors, but in actuality it is provided through the minimum width
requirement under the guise of technical necessity.
Due to the minimum width of streets there is provided room for the
cars to be parked on the streets.
However, the decision makers believe is is necessary but in reality
it is forced to be there.
The first belief is that the mandate is a technical requirement because it
addresses traffic safety concerns. Wide streets with parking are believed to be better able
to accommodate peak traffic flows, remove safety hazards, and guarantee access to
emergency vehicles. The second belief is that the mandate addresses market demand for
extra parking, which is provided as an amenity to residents and visitors.
Streets, especially in neighborhoods, are designed to automatically
hold the demand for the parking.
 Any belief for not having room for emergency vehicles or safety
hazards are dismissed because they are designed by engineers and city codes to
have these wide enough streets.
Denser areas may have more traffic flow as well as more limited off-street
parking, which seems to support the notion that these areas should have wider streets.
However, the width differences do not always validate the two beliefs that wide streets
are needed to meet traffic safety standards and parking demand, because the differences
are often not large enough to change the number of traffic lanes or parking lanes.
While there are some smaller street areas that arent as big as
others, but the differences dont account for lack of traffic lanes and parking in
neighborhood parking because of the regulation size and engineer design.
EQ: What is the impact of change?
The study showed that there wouldnt be much change by allowing
cars to park on the streets due to the regulation size and the streets provided. The
audience (HOA) wouldnt have to do much to change the, except put some
regulations and limitations for allowing parking on the streets.

Marsden, G.R. (2006) The evidence base for parking policies - A Review. Transport policy, 13
(6). Pp. 447-457. ISSN 0967-070X WEB. 12. Apr. 2017
http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/2023/2/ITS15_The_evidence_base_for
Task: To show the parking policies for transportation in many different areas, along with the
importance of it in neighborhoods.
Purpose: To help the HOA see some of the parking policies that could be provided in order to
keep a clean looking neighborhood.
Audience: Homeowners Associations (Specifically Sierra Verde).
The debate on residential parking concentrates on whether and where to provide
off-street parking and how this provision should relate to demand. Research in North
America has highlighted the extra costs that requirements for the provision of off-street
parking, to at least minimum standards, have on housing costs and on the resultant social
inequity that these extra costs bring to non-car owning households.
Street parking is based on the demand for it in the neighborhood,
through observation and many community complaints, the need for street parking
is shown and in high demand.
To allow on street parking or to have a separate spot for parking
cars there would most likely have to be a fee that homeowners would have to pay
in order to keep this amenity and help with some of the problems the HOA sees
coming with it. The community would have to be okay with paying these fees for
the ability to park in these areas.
Current residential parking restrictions are typically established to manage
commuter or event parking by non-resident commuters and therefore do little to address
the pressures described above.
The parking situations are established to manage the parking and
commuting for the non-residents that travel through, however, most of the people
affected by the parking situation are residents of the community.
The two principal barriers to tackling residential parking policies are
enforcement costs and community acceptance. The former can increasingly be tackled by
 new technology. The latter might usefully be addressed through consultation where at
least a common view on the existence of a problem should be possible to establish.
Some HOAs are concerned of the reactions of those in the
community, however, due to personal observations and experiences, shows that
the community would be accepting and encouraging of the new change.
Even if there were some hesitation within the community there
would be ways to go around it and bring everyone together on the change through
rules and regulations.
Even if they do not own a car..., the possession of a space is important in their
perception of property value or investment. In similar vein, they may be frequent
consumers of public transport, but still require the option of car ownership, with its
associated benefits in terms of convenience and lifestyle.
While some neighbors wouldnt need the parking space on streets
it leaves the space open for the possibility for people to invest in a car or even
have more space for other things or visitor parking.
The room provided for on street parking would allow people to
have options for their lifestyle and family car situation.
This section examines why this might be and what impacts the continuation of
current residential parking policies are likely to have in the future. The management of
residential parking has been highlighted as a priority area of concern to transport planners
particularly in inner-city and some suburban areas.
There have been communities with managers of residential parking
concentrating on the problems or concerns that HOAs may have with changing
and allowing car parking with rules and regulations.
EQ: What is the impact of change?
The study showed that there would be some adjustments and
consideration needed to allow for street parking, but there are ways to go about it.
Even with many different concerns there are managers or committees that can be
put into place for focusing on these concerns and working around them.

Opposing Side -
Roberts, I., R. Norton, R. Jackson, R. Dunn, and I. Hassall. "Effect of environmental factors on
risk of injury of child pedestrians by motor vehicles: a case-control study." BMJ. British
Medical Journal Publishing Group, 14 Jan. 1995. Web. 13 Apr. 2017.
<http://www.bmj.com/content/310/6972/91.short>.
The risk of injury for children living in neighbourhoods with the highest traffic
volumes was 13 times that of children living in the least busy areas. A high density of
parked vehicles was also associated with a greatly increased risk.
More traffic, busy neighborhoods, and more parking on the street
has been shown to relate to more risks and child injury.
Child injury is directly related to busier traffic area, rising to 13
times more injuries.
Parked vehicles may increase risk by obscuring drivers' views of children as they
start to cross a road. Our study provides empirical support for the proposition that curb
parking should be restricted at certain crossing locations.
 Parked vehicles are shown to provide risk towards children in the
area.
Street parking can limit the view of peoples mirrors leading to
injuries on them or others.
Nevertheless, when our analysis was limited to children injured within 500
metres of their home and their matched controls, there was still a substantially elevated
risk for children living in neighbourhoods with high traffic volumes.
Children in the areas of high traffic and parking are more prone to
injury due to many different factors.
High density of curb parking was also associated with greatly increased risk of
injury.
There is a lot of risk going with curb parking meaning that HOA
might prohibit street parking for that reason.
For the variables related to the traffic environment adjusting for potential
confounding factors increased the magnitude of the odds ratios. There were particularly
strong associations between risk of pedestrian injury and high traffic volume and a high
density of curb parking.
There is strong correlation with parking cars and the injury
inflicted on others.
HOAs might prohibit or limit that amount of street parking
available in order to prevent or limit these injuries or damages.
EQ: What is the impact of change?
Changing the HOA rules might lead to a huge impact of damages
and injuries on others. These changes would lead to many different damages
throughout the neighborhood. This would be reason for the HOA to leave the
parking rules as they are to be able to prevent these damages and injuries.