Preferred Parking for Hybrids
Out of Chicago comes an interesting discussion – preferred parking for hybrid vehicles in the retail environment. Apparently Whole Foods is attempting to receive a LEED rating for their new stores, and one way they’re doing this is by designating parking spots near the front door for the exclusive use of hybrid vehicles. Chicago Tribune articles here and here.  And yes, the LEED process does give points for providing preferred parking for alternative-fuel vehicles.
Most of the previous applications I’ve seen have been in places of employment, where the goal is to wean commuters away from their single-occupant vehicles. I don’t have much of an issue with providing preferences in this environment, since providing and enforcing them over time seem to be two very different things. Seeing this applied in a retail situation is, to me, a much different dynamic, much like my negative reaction to designated parking for new or expectant moms – any time you designate spaces for specific uses, you both diminish the actual supply (since most “special” spots are rarely fully-utilized) and you force everyone else further out.
We can obviously discuss the larger issues of whether free parking should be limited by the government (to force people to use other modes) and how free parking is making most of us fatter and lazier, but I’d like to focus on the apparent movement away from everyone being considered equal. We already provide special parking for people with documented disabilities, as we should. And I don’t have a problem with any business providing reserved parking for anyone they choose – it’s their land, their money and their business model. But I do take exception with any public program that creates special incentives without a strong basis in reality.
Short term, these spaces may provide a small incentive for some people to consider more-efficient vehicles, much like how “compact” spaces were meant to encourage people to buy smaller vehicles. Longer term, as hybrids become more common, the Law of Unintended Consequences WILL kick in. Much like how many cities have seen increased demand for hybrids when they can be driven by solo drivers in HOV lanes, or how transit agencies in Illinois have had to accommodate the unfunded mandate of allowing all seniors to ride for free, these spaces will soon become oversubscribed.
Where this issue stands now is in sort of a gray area – it’s not the law of the land, yet, but I can see it becoming that fairly quickly. Whole Foods has every right to do this; the real issue comes down the road, where LEED compliance is either mandated by local legislation, or, as is the case in Chicago, going green gets you an expedited permitting process. And I’m not aware of any applications around here (yet), but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it tried fairly soon.
– Jim Zavist
I wonder how they plan on enforcing this? Are they going to have your non-hybrid vehicle towed if it’s parked in a hybrid only space? That doesn’t seem very good for customer relations…
What about the average sedan that often gets better gas mileage than the majority of Hybrid SUVs?
What about cars like a 10 year old Golf diesel that gets the same real world MPG as a hybrid?
Also, to echo Herbie’s comment, what about an Escalade Hybrid? Does that get preferred parking?
I agree with the others about the hybrid hype. I rented a hybrid Altima recently and it got approximately 34 MPG, same as my similar size non-hybrid Mazda 6. The batteries also took up a considerable amount of trunk space (and I assume added weight as well). What are the environmental implications once these batteries need to be replaced or junked. Instead of offering points for LEED certification isn’t more important to look at the materials used for parking lots and run off (which I know is a factor in certification).
Yep, dumb. Also, some cities are giving preference to hybrid taxis, allowing them to jump the line at airports, etc.
Better than “preferred parking for hybrids” is the total elimination of “free parking” for motorized vehicles, it is the more important issue and shouldn’t be dismissed. “Grey areas” (a traditional way of governing in the Lou region) only leads to more confusion, infighting and delayed progress. To learn more, start here: http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/
– –
The result is a land use that is as ubiquitous as it is vapid and that, according to Shoup, “disfigures the landscape, distorts urban form, damages the environment, and wastes money that could be spent more productively elsewhere.†Shoup estimates that the total annual subsidy of free off-street parking exceeds $300 billion per year.
– –
Even Metro embraces the car culture by designing “free parking” spaces around its stations and destroying green spaces to do so. The result? More demand for parking as our dependence grows! The worshipping of the car culture is ruining cities and destroying our collective ability to improve the quality of our lives. The costs go up every year as we prefer to live in the “grey zone”.
– –
Until we learn how to CHANGE, simply charge a lower price to hybrid owners, expectant moms, etc. Perhaps some day the public will learn that delivery services are part of the answer instead of more free parking. Parking lots need to be assessed at much higher valuation levels for tax purposes, MSD rates, etc., closer to their real costs.
I drive a 2006 Prius, get 47 miles per gallon, even though it is all city driving and I have a heavy foot because of previously always driving big heavy cars. The reason to drive a hybrid is that there is some much less pollution released into the air.
But it will matter to me as I have stopped going to Whole Foods because the owner is financing the tea-baggers and has even written articles against health care reform.
I agree with the increase in taxes for parking lots.
make it “so much” and “will not matter to me”
I need to proofread before submitting.
I really don’t want to threadjack, but in regard to Reese’s post:
“I have stopped going to Whole Foods because the owner is financing the tea-baggers and has even written articles against health care reform.”
Is there any proof whatsoever, that Mr. Mackey has “financed” tea-party supporters? Nothing I found online even hinted at this. He wrote one Op-Ed in the WSJ. That’s it.
I just wanted to correct, what in my opinion, is a fallacious statement. If I am wrong, feel free to correct me.
PS I really don’t want this to devolve into a healthcare debate, but I thought it necessary to address this.
Lots o’ good stuff: http://parkingtoday.typepad.com/parking_blog/
So people wealthy enough to buy a hybrid get preferential treatment? Nice world we live in.
I’m not wealthy enough to buy a new car, hybrid or not. Now just think of all the CO2 I’ll be emitting as I walk past the hybrids to get to the store.
I haven’t read through the USGBC’s LEED for retail program, but the second version of LEED for New Construction (LEED NC) has a point for having preferential parking for cars that get greater gas milage. My guess is that Whole Foods decided to just say “Hybrid Parking Only” instead of list out every car that gets good gas milage like the ones mentioned above.
With the new LEED 2009, the preferred parking is for low emitting and fuel efficient vehicles, as defined by “the american council for an energy efficient economy” annual vehicle rating. That includes both hybrid cars and fuel efficient cars like the Honda Fit. LEED has an agenda they are championing, like trying to encourage development in urban areas and trying to encourage use of fuel efficient cars. With LEED – you soon realize there’s no LEED Police, so you have to wonder about how they regulate some of this stuff, but I think their head is in the right place.
This project was most likely done under LEED 2.2
At least they (whole foods) are being blatant about what they are trying to encourage (hybrid cars). Think about all the stuff our government encourages that isn’t so visible.
I would add to that that the biggest difference in Version 3 of LEED is that there is now the threat of decertification. No LEED police, but the ever looming threat of getting taken down a notch from platinum to gold or getting booted off altogether, which would be pretty devistating PR for Whole Foods.
Being just a little sarcastic–If we can’t have a free lunch, how can we have free parking?
The walk-in customer is subsidizing the parking customer, as is the re-usable bagger is subsidizing the store provided bagger. I doubt the market will react to this as the costs are so miniscule in the grand scheme of things.