Support OpenDurham.org
Preserve Durham's History with a Donation to Open Durham Today!
OpenDurham.org is dedicated to preserving and sharing the rich history of our community. Run by our parent nonprofit, Preservation Durham, the site requires routine maintence and upgrades. We do not ask for support often, but today, we're asking you to chip in to help us reach our goal of raising $7,500 for annual maintenance by the end of the year. Your support allows us to maintain this valuable resource, expand our archives, and keep the history of Durham accessible to everyone.
Every contribution, big or small, makes a difference. Help us keep Durham's history alive for future generations.
Comments
Submitted by Joe (not verified) on Fri, 12/8/2006 - 5:54am
Perhaps people put parking lots street-side hoping for noise abatement? Except I guess most urban noise is caused by cars; more parking -> more cars -> more noise. :) Everything else being even (and ignoring accessibility, I guess), they'd be better off using the buildings to enclose the parking lot, then doing noise abatement as part of the building's construction. I guess then we'd get big, ugly, windowless walls along the streetscape.
Submitted by Sven (not verified) on Fri, 12/8/2006 - 12:18pm
Joe
There are quite a few factors at work here, but I don't think the noise is a major consideration; I think the dominant motivation is a convenience factor. No one should have to figure out where the parking lot is, because it is the most prominent feature on the property. Noise is an interesting factor - if you put buildings closer to the street (create more enclosure), cars slow down, which generates less noise. Understudied (there's no equation out there) but intriguing.
I'm not a parking nihilist, but parking as the dominant feature of a property, (and an overabundance of parking at that) seems to be seen as a benefit without costs. (not talking monetary here - just how does it help hurt the project/the neighborhood).
While it is typically much more the purvey of retailers to push for dominant, overabundant parking, churches are a close second. In fact, I might say that while retailers are beginning to understand purely the aesthetic costs of big surface lots, churches seem to be about 40 years behind the curve. Often, this has a much more deleterious effect on their neighbors, because the lot sits largely empty except for one morning a week.
Well, I could babble about parking for awhile. I don't remember if I've mentioned it before, but Donald Shoup's "The High Cost of Free Parking" is excellent.
GK
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 12/9/2006 - 7:30pm
I seem to remember that it took a while to strike a deal with the hot dog stand owner and that probably affected the site plan. Don't we wish we could start with all the possibilities being possible? :-)
Submitted by coco (not verified) on Mon, 12/11/2006 - 9:22pm
what building? all i see are cars
Submitted by Sven (not verified) on Mon, 12/11/2006 - 11:56pm
Anon
Thanks for the info about the hot dog delay; my guess is that this is the site plan they wanted, though.
Coco
It's back there somewhere... keep looking.
Submitted by sudima (not verified) on Thu, 7/3/2008 - 5:17pm
As a parishioner of Immaculate Conception, my understanding is that the original concept for the site was to have the Emily K Center at the corner of Chapel Hill and Buchanan. Unfortunately, when Don's Dogs was demolished, they discovered old gas tanks underground from a gas station that existed there previously. The cost of removing the tanks and cleaning up the site was deemed cost prohibitive, so the decision was make to leave that area as it was - a parking lot.
Add new comment
Log in or register to post comments.