The Parking Deck Euphemism
In her column yesterday, Cynthia Tucker wrote on the principle showing that parking decks tend to make cars multiply. Therefore, the Piedmont Park parking deck should not be built:
The advocates of a six-story garage in Piedmont Park tout it as the solution to the district’s traffic frenzy — the parked cars that clog neighborhood streets and the (barely) controlled chaos that accompanies the jostling of automobiles, bicycles and baby strollers.If they are right — if an 800-car garage in the city’s premier park will cure all those problems, then let’s build parking decks everywhere. Let’s stack one atop every MARTA station, hotel, hospital, park, school and restaurant within the city limits. Let’s even tunnel under a few mini-mansions and build underground decks. That will really solve the traffic problem, won’t it?
As expected, the column generated some of those letters to the editor we all know and love. Two of the three published letters showed support for Tucker’s column, which presumably means that two-thirds of the letters sent in to the AJC were against the deck. This means there was one letter published in support of the deck:
Garage a winner from all anglesCynthia Tucker incorrectly claims the Piedmont Park parking garage is touted as a traffic solution. It is touted as one component of a multilayered system (Beltline, streetcar, MARTA, etc.) to address traffic problems. And it is not offered as the solution to parking problems, but as a means to meet specific garden and park needs while mitigating parking issues of the local public.
Claiming that a six-story garage is an odd idea for conservationists, Tucker is again off the mark. Three levels are underground, with three levels tiered above to ground level with the Atlanta Botanical Garden while the exposed portion is landscaped to blend in with the green space.
The proposal adds green space to the park, expands peacefully green experiences for the community, rids us locals of crime crevices and better positions Atlanta for 2030, when we are projected to be a metropolitan area of 7 million inhabitants.
STEVEN P. FAUST, Atlanta
So, let me get this straight. The deck is not what Cynthia Tucker says it is, but it is exactly what Cynthia Tucker says it is, but using softer terms. It’s not really a parking deck; it’s really a temporary storage facility for automobiles. In other words, the parking deck is a euphemism, and this is why it should be built.
By the way, while we’re on the subject of Atlanta politics, we should bring a thinly veiled element of racism into our argument. As far as Faust is concerned, these “crime crevices” are hurting what is presumably metropolitan Atlanta’s only public park, and our only hope for solving this problem is with a parking deck.
And the way to accomodate a growing population is to build parking decks for the local parks rather than use those funds to build more green space. It’s all a Faustian bargain for a euphemism.
May 6th, 2005 at 11:04 am
I’m ambiguous at best about the parking deck. On the one hand, decks do save space (green or otherwise). If Emory, for example, were to move from decks to lots, it would need to pave most of Druid Hills.
On the other hand, decks do tend to centralize and therefore at least make it feel like there’s more traffic, especially where a deck’s traffic pours in and out. But this should mean that roads that aren’t in the main flow should see a significant decrease in traffic. If I lived on one of those roads, I’d be happy about that.
The larger issue is that we only have one large metro park. I had hopes that DeKalb’s green space initiative would help here, but Jones hasn’t exactly managed that well. Most of the other parks seem to devote most of their space to golf courses. Great for golfers, I suppose, but not for the rest of the metro. If we opened up the golf course land for general use instead, we’d find ourselves with much more green space. (Might be interesting to find out how much Atlanta green space is devoted to golfing…)
The even larger issue is Atlanta traffic, and the beltline should help as far as Piedmont is concerned. In addition to stopping at Piedmont Park, the beltline will connect several smaller (but still hefty) public parks and make seeing them a part of people’s daily commute. Perhaps those parks will start to see some of Piedmont’s users. And they’ll be that much less of a reason to drive to any of those parks.
If the beltline is successful, I suspect we’ll forget that Piedmont even has a new deck. Or at least that’s my hope.
May 6th, 2005 at 9:56 pm
The deck is exactly what the area needs and no one seems to understand it. I worked in midtown for the better part of a decade and still go down there often. Where do people park presently for the Garden? Ansley Park. You can ride Marta to the gardens but then it is a few block walk. The people are going to drive there, so would you rather they clog side streets and block businesses? Residents of the area, paying obscene taxes might want to be able to park on their streets.
Tucker is not far off, but misguided. People will drive their cars and park where they want regardless. The solution is to offer choice and alternatives. MARTA is a joke, there is no decent cab service, parking is at best a nightmare and Atlanta wants to be a big city? HA.
May 8th, 2005 at 8:08 am
Name a major public park with a parking deck, similar to what is proposed here. I don’t know of any.
May 9th, 2005 at 11:11 am
Boston Common has a large underground deck.
May 20th, 2005 at 9:28 am
“It’s not really a parking deck; it’s really a temporary storage facility for automobiles.”
Huh? Then what facility in Atlanta would you call a “parking deck”? Unless you are going to disable the automobile once it is parked (we call those “junkyards”), they are all “temporary”.
And I’m not sure if you’re last paragraph is satire directed towards Faust but I fail to see how parking decks at other parks would be any better than they would be at Piedmont Park.
May 20th, 2005 at 10:01 am
The point of calling it a temporary storage facility was to mock the letter. The letter writer used euphamistic language to describe the parking deck, so I took the language and carried it a step further.
Do I have to explain all my jokes? Then they’re not funny anymore.