Readers overwhelmingly support a bill before the St. Louis Board of Aldermen to require bike parking for some projects:
A proposed law would require bike parking for new construction or renovations in
accessexcess of $1 million dollars. Auto parking requirements would be reduced.
- Great, more bike parking is needed 44 [50%]
- A good start, but it doesn’t go far enough 18 [20.45%]
- Ugh, more government regulation 16 [18.18%]
- Other: 9 [10.23%]
- Unsure/No Opinion 1 [1.14%]
I had a stupid mistake in the poll, corrected above, and a few of the other votes pointed that out:
- A good first step; besides handicapped parking there should be no reqirements
- don’t you mean “in excess?”
- What comes first demand or supply?
- need more bike lanes and paths first…
- Like the bike part, but no reduction for cars
- excess =/= access. We need more accessible and safe biking paths first.
- How about an option for not a good idea?????
- excess, not access
- Security is a MAJOR concern of those who use bike racks. Theft is a conern.
The 20% that said this bill is a good start but it doesn’t go far enough are correct, the number of projects in excess of $1 million dollars are few.The amount of verbiage to describe what is required in the context of our tired & old use-based zoning code is a nightmare to read and understand. Take a few minutes and read any section of Title 26 (Zoning) and you will quickly realize it’s easy to get lost in the cross references and lists of prohibitions all the while you don’t get an image of what’s actually desired.
Instead of trying to improve the city by amending our 1947 zoning code to current standards we need to toss it out completely and start over with a form-bsased code that is easy to read and understand.
- Steve Patterson