4 ms·

So long as the developer makes a profit, that's all that matters? Who cares if it results in a transit nightmare, that's someone else's problem. Sounds like a g

• twblalock 10y ago
  It is, actually. Car-centric cities are pretty bad, but people are willing to live with them because they like their cars, and they often don't know any better because they haven't lived somewhere with good public transit. If it was hard to park or drive a car in a city, past a certain point, people would vote for more mass transit. They would end up with walkable cities with good transit, instead of the car-centric messes we have now. Every time you mandate parking spaces in new developments, you mandate the continuation of the car-centric city model that is simply unsustainable once the population grows past a certain point. Cars are effectively being subsidized by the government in most cities. That money should be spend on transit instead.
  • superuser2 10y ago
    > people would vote for more mass transit Serious rail projects take on the order of 30 years. I think it's much more likely that people would go somewhere else, rather than endure an entire adult life without acceptable transportation options so that maybe the grandchildren would have it better.
    • twblalock 10y ago
      Serious rail projects take a lot less time than that in many first world countries.
    • CalRobert 10y ago
      Correct. I moved to Europe because I was tired of waiting for California to get its shit together. Unfortunately not everyone has that option. They sure as hell don't take 30 years when they care, though. How long was it to get 405 expanded with another lane? And for all that it's now even slower than before!