Is it even true that new parking zones mean more parking spaces?

By Gunnar Schupelius

The district offices are constantly setting up new zones for metered parking. A really valid justification is rarely heard, says Gunnar Schupelius.

The Berlin Senate has a clear goal in mind: Within the S-Bahn ring, all streetside parking spaces should be subject to a charge. The parked vehicle should cost two to four euros per hour, residents pay 240 euros per year for the “resident parking permit”.

The district offices are constantly working on new parking zones. Tempelhof-Schöneberg, for example, is introducing two more in April, zone 85 (Barbarossaplatz) and zone 86 (Großgörschenstraße).

The green city councilor Saskia Ellenbeck explains the reasoning: “The parking space management leads to a fairer utilization of the parking areas and a clear relief for craftsmen_inside, the severely disabled and residents”.

But that’s not entirely true. Severely disabled people get their own parking space anyway, not just in the parking zone. Craft businesses in the parking zones do get a company vignette, but usually only one. A cumbersome application is required for each additional vehicle, which may or may not be approved. Medical practices and offices have the same problem.

Finally, the residents are not relieved either, because they have no right to a specific parking space with the resident parking permit, none is reserved for them.

On the website of the “Senate Department for Mobility and Climate Protection” there is a similar claim: “Parking space management influences the supply of parking spaces and demand and thus contributes to a balanced parking space balance.” However, there is no proof of this anywhere.

If parking spaces become chargeable, then they will no longer be charged. In the residential areas, the number of cars remains the same, with or without a parking zone.

The SPD, the Greens and the Left get themselves into contradictions in their advertising for parking zones. In December, in Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf, they decided to “unseal” and plant parking spaces on the side of the road. The program is called “City green for everyone instead of asphalt”. At the same time, they promised more parking spaces through 21 new parking zones in the next five years.

However, resistance is growing. A citizens’ initiative made up of local residents and traders is collecting signatures for a referendum, which is called a “citizen’s decision” at the district level.

How the citizens are likely to decide is obvious. Because 16 years ago, in September 2007, there was a similar referendum. At that time, 86.9 percent voted against paying parking in Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf.

If parking zones don’t create more parking spaces and aren’t even wanted by local residents, why are they enforced with such determination?

The subjects in the background are difficult to see. Should driving a car generally be made more expensive so that people can switch to buses and trains? The SPD, the Greens and the Left really want to achieve that.

For the district offices, however, the parking zones are also of financial importance. Let’s take the example of Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf again: If all parking spaces within the S-Bahn ring were subject to a fee, the fees could generate around 60 million euros per year, which is an enticing prospect for district politicians.

More honesty is now required: those who set up parking zones should prove that they are of benefit to the general public. And if they aren’t, then parking should remain free.

Is Gunnar Schupelius right? Call: 030/2591 73153 or email: [email protected]

Read all of Gunnar Schupelius’ columns here

ttn-27