Parking isn't "the third rail" of local politics, it's the car and automobility

In the past, I've made the point that car parking "is the third rail" of local politics, in discussing various proposals concerning "parking," be it the price of residential parking permits, taking parking spaces for other uses such as bike lanes or car sharing vehicles ("Car-Share Companies Get Coveted Parking in New York City," New York Times), closing streets for pedestrian-centric activities, double parking/parking for churches on Sundays, or in the suburbs, free parking at libraries (but no co-equal advocacy for transit subsidies for patrons). Also see "Flip flop on Dyckman Street: Anatomy of a bike lane debacle," Streetsblog NYC.

But it's not really so much about parking as it is the primacy and the privilege of automobility.

This comes out in fights against tolling, congestion pricing, automated speed camera enforcement (Maryland Drivers Alliance: Arguments Against Speed Cameras), automated red light camera enforcement ("Gov. Greg Abbott has a solution for anyone who hates red-light cameras in Texas: Ban them," Dallas Morning News), increases in gasoline excise taxes (Top Five Reasons Not to Raise the Gas Tax | Americans for Tax Reform), etc.

Amanda O'Rourke, the executive director of the 8-80 Cities initiative, makes a good point in a recent article, "Smart cities are making us dumber," that cities are far more invested and continue to be more invested in supporting automobility. She writes:

I don’t have a problem with the term “smart city” per se. Embracing evidence-based, data-driven decision-making and using technology to capture that data is a laudable goal. My problem with the idea is that it’s often presented as a panacea. There is an underlying assumption that technology is the key to unlocking the smart solutions our cities most desperately need. To believe this is to completely miss the plot. ...

graphic from IOT Agenda 

We already have overwhelming data on what makes cities more engaging, vibrant places for people and what doesn’t. For example, when it comes to our streets—the largest public space in most cities—the solutions are simple when you put people at the center.

By building safe and connected walking and bicycling infrastructure, lowering traffic speeds, mixing land uses and investing in public transportation and a more welcoming public realm—including amenities such as street trees and comfortable seating—cities can promote and encourage physical activity, social engagement and higher quality of life.

However, according to Bloomberg Philanthropies, 108 cities around the world are either working on or preparing for autonomous vehicle pilot projects. Billions have been invested in AV technology alone.

Jan Gehl, the world-renowned Danish architect, famously said that cities “measure what they care about.” For decades, cities have collected extensive data on car traffic—making their priorities clear. Mr. Gehl was one of the first to systematically measure people in the public realm, using that data to make the case for inviting public life back into public spaces. A truly smart city has to be one that works for people. Currently, the data smart cities are collecting is distracting us from the data we already have and the reforms that are truly important.

This comes up to in Annapolis, Maryland, where a bunch of people have written letters to the editor in response to an article about a "bike lane experiment" on Main Street, to which they are against ("Letters: Readers react to the Main Street bike lane experiment," Annapolis Capital-Gazette). Most of the writers argue that the loss of parking spaces--36--will have extranormally negative impacts on business, tourism, etc.

This even though Annapolis has an extensive network of parking garages. Annapolis has four city-owned garages, 12 other public and private lots and garages, and a circulator bus system connecting these facilities to destinations in the city.

And they've even kept up to date on parking planning, with a Parking Utilization Study having been released in 2017.

======
In DC, I've written about how a majority of the city's elected officials live in the "Outer City," where the car dominates, rather than in the core or inner city, where sustainable mobility modes cover a preponderance of trips overall and a majority of commuting trips.

-- "DC makes the Wall Street Journal twice in one week," 2013
-- "Understanding why Upper Northwest DC residents don't buy into the sustainability mobility paradigm," 2013
-- "DC as a suburban-agenda dominated city," 2013