Polk Street: future development, market rates, revenue reports, and legal authority (91)

(91st in a series of posts on parking)

Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley.

Good questions, Gadfly!

The “future development” justification assumes that the city should provide parking to increase profits for developers — an entirely inappropriate use of public fund.

“Market rates” — The rates you mention are not true market rates, they are actually rates based on subsidizing private development. Total cost of land acquisition, design, & construction spread out over a 20-year period is one way to calculate what the cost should be; another is what it would cost for a developer to provide parking at its own expense.

Revenue reports — Have we not yet seen reports covering revenue & utilization for the New Street Garage? (I remember you asking for these months ago.) Actually, why doesn’t BPA publish them on their website or the city’s website every month? Would they prefer RTK requests every month? Why doesn’t the council require these on a monthly basis? —the city is failing to provide the oversight needed for this big-budget, big-impact city entity.

Does the BPA actually have the legal authority to build a parking garage that is outside their mandate. Why would the city allow this? (Maybe it’s time to decertify BPA as a city agency.)


Leave a Reply