zlacker

A common expression is "parking is the third rail of local politics". More parking is the number one demand for every aged driver in City Council meetings and absurd parking costs the chief reason why development projects are cancelled.

Much of our housing shortage is directly due to parking minimums and its resulting tacit ban on high-density housing.

>>mperha+(OP)
the people against parking minimums live in a fantasy world

what you get is people parking on the sidewalk

what you get is people leaving garbage bins out all week to "protect" their spot

what you get is legit road-rage level violence over people blocking driveways or protecting spots or leaving cars parked too long

people have cars, they need a place to put them, even in fantasyland

>>0zemp2+G1
but imagine that they weren't forced to own a car and could do everything they need to do without one.

>>0zemp2+G1
Well now, this is an interesting take that you don't see applied to any other resource.

"If this harmful, expensive thing isn't free, a few people will steal it."

"Better make it free forever then, and force all of society to pay for it, whether they use it or not."

>>0zemp2+G1
Sounds like something the market can solve. Instead of giving limited parking spaces to whoever got there first, sell them to the highest bidder.

Monthly parking in Manhattan is $1000/month. If you want a car, you gotta pay for the space it takes up. We could be using that space for better things.

People parking on the sidewalk? Great! Tow them and fine them, and now the city has another source of revenue.

>>mperha+(OP)
I've only ever heard of parking complaints in urban areas.

Suburbs are awash with parking. Maybe we should require parking to be "behind" stores instead of in front.

>>welshw+z7
I have always thought we should do away with free street parking. It is a valuable resource that should be used for the city to make money or turn into something everyone enjoys. This is a direct impact for the poor (like tolling a road) and will be met with serious resistance. What the OP talks about is what happened in the LA suburbs I lived in (SFV). People even got non-working cars that they pushed around to save spots (you can space the cars out so no one can park and tighten them up so you can park).

>>bombca+Dk1
Except at the mass transit railheads, where it is severely lacking. If you want suburban people to use mass transit, then stop discouraging them, and give them a place to park their cars (which are necessary to get from their homes to the miles away railheads).

>>wrycod+9C1
Building giant parking garages ("commuting park and ride") is a failed concept and does not work. No one wants to live around a giant parking area and no one will walk through it to get to the train because there's no housing density nearby. Better to build high density housing around the station with little parking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxWjtpzCIfA

>>bombca+Dk1
Even in suburbs, parking can be used as a talking point to block densification projects. Oh no, we're going to build a 10-storey apartment, where are the residents going to park??//

>>nayuki+2X1
It's just that, a talking point. If they add a huge parking garage underground the people who don't want the development will find something else to complain about.

>>mperha+sE1
A thousand residences takes a lot more space than parking for a thousand cars.

In my area, the lot is full, but the buses are fairly empty, as there is not enough parking to support the bus station.

I agree about zoning for density. That’s not the problem in this case.

There’s nothing wrong with individually owned vehicles in rural areas. Work with that, instead of fighting it.