Los Angeles, known for its iconic architecture, has a lesser-known architectural gem: the “dingbat.” These squat apartment buildings, also known as “dingbat flats,” feature a carport on the ground floor and one or two floors of apartments above. Built in the 1950s and 1960s to meet the housing needs of California’s growing workforce, the dingbat represents the influence of cars on the city’s design.

The creation of dingbats was largely driven by a city ordinance that required new apartments to provide a certain number of parking spaces, based on the number of habitable rooms. This ordinance forced architects to prioritize car parking over the needs of the residents, leading to the development of car-centric buildings. As a result, Los Angeles became a city where cars were prioritized, with vast expanses of parking spaces surrounding buildings.

While the dingbat may seem unremarkable compared to the city’s more famous architectural landmarks, it has gained praise in recent years for its efficiency and affordability. The dingbat provided relatively cheap housing, a rarity in today’s Los Angeles where the median rent for a one-bedroom apartment is around $2,100 per month. However, the era of the dingbat came to an end in 1965 when the city increased the parking requirements for new buildings.

The prevalence of free parking is a significant factor in shaping cities worldwide, particularly in America. In the United States, parking is often mandated by law, resulting in cities being designed around cars and the need for parking spaces. This hidden subsidy for parking is costly, as it requires valuable urban land that could be used for other purposes, such as housing. The provision of free parking also inflates the cost of goods and services, as businesses pass on the cost of parking to consumers.

Donald Shoup, an economist at the University of California, Los Angeles, has extensively studied the impact of free parking and its effect on public transportation usage. He argues that the abundance of free parking makes driving the easier and more convenient option, discouraging people from using public transport. This is particularly evident in Los Angeles, where the public transport system has struggled to attract ridership despite significant investment.

The issue of free parking goes beyond its economic implications. It also contributes to urban sprawl and the fragmentation of cities. The emphasis on providing ample parking spaces leads to isolated buildings and a lack of pedestrian-friendly environments. Cities become dominated by car-centric spaces, leading to less vibrant and less walkable neighborhoods.

Challenging the status quo of free parking is a difficult task, as it is deeply ingrained in public policy and supported by drivers who benefit directly from it. However, there are examples of cities moving towards a more sustainable approach. San Francisco’s SF Park program, which adjusts parking prices based on demand, has shown success in managing parking availability. Some cities have also started to replace parking minimum rules with parking maximum rules to curb excessive parking provision.

Overcoming the path dependency of car-centric design will require a gradual shift in thinking and a reimagining of urban spaces. This includes prioritizing alternative modes of transportation, such as walking, cycling, and public transit, and reclaiming urban land for housing, commercial, and recreational purposes. While the transformation may be gradual, there is growing recognition of the need to rethink the role of cars and parking in shaping cities.

Words: 559