...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Planning Theory & Practice >'Fight the towers! Or kiss your car park goodbye': How often do residents assert car parking rights in Melbourne planning appeals?
【24h】

'Fight the towers! Or kiss your car park goodbye': How often do residents assert car parking rights in Melbourne planning appeals?

机译：“打铁塔！或亲吻您的停车场，再见”：居民在墨尔本计划上诉中多久主张停车权？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

At around 20 square metres per space and occupying over 30% of the ground area of many cities, car parking is an expected but unnoticed land use - pulling the proverbial devil's trick of "convincing the world it doesn't exist". Recent poster slogans in Melbourne calling to "fight the towers! Or kiss your car park goodbye" imply that frustration over a lack or perceived future lack of parking space carries weight in planning conflicts over intensifying Australian cities. The research in this paper was motivated by a suspicion that fears expressed by existing residents about parking are a frequent and prominent but rarely examined planning issue in Victoria. The paper interprets residents' claims made about inadequate parking as conflicts over asserted rights, and their allocation and reallocation through planning. It is based on a content analysis of four months (325 cases) of published Victorian planning appeals from 2012. It is found that over half the appeals featured car parking as a significant issue, and that of these, nine out of ten involved third party objectors. The planning system is called upon to respond to issues arising from car rather than land use, and to do so by making further allowances for cars. This asserted "folk legality" of individual car parking rights is difficult to reconcile with growing literature offering critical perspectives on aggregate costs from "predict and provide" car parking policies. Differences between public and planning interpretations of the role of planning in balancing car parking rights and common good are observed. Ultimately, conflict over asserted parking rights in planning draw out fundamental tensions around who - or what - has the right to occupy space.
机译：停车位面积约为20平方米，占许多城市地面面积的30％以上，是一种预期但未引起注意的土地用途-拉动了众所周知的魔鬼“说服世界不存在”的s俩。墨尔本最近的海报标语呼吁“与高塔战斗！或亲吻您的停车场再见”，这意味着对缺乏停车位或人们认为未来缺乏停车位的沮丧情绪在加剧澳大利亚城市规划冲突中起到了重要作用。本文的研究是出于一种怀疑，即现有居民对停车的担忧是维多利亚州经常发生且突出但很少研究的规划问题。本文将居民关于停车不足的主张解释为对主张权利的冲突，以及他们通过计划进行的分配和重新分配。它基于对2012年以来发布的四个月维多利亚式规划申诉的内容分析（325个案例）。发现，超过一半的申诉将停车问题视为重要问题，其中十分之三涉及第三方反对者。要求规划系统对由汽车而不是土地使用引起的问题做出反应，并通过为汽车提供更多的补贴来做到这一点。所谓的个人停车权的“民间合法性”很难与越来越多的文献从“预测并提供”停车政策中对总成本提出批评的观点相吻合。观察到公共和规划对规划在平衡停车权和公共物品中的作用的解释之间的差异。最终，在规划中主张停车权的冲突引发了关于谁（或什么）有权占用空间的根本矛盾。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号