5 ms·

When you become dictator, maybe that will be viable. In the meantime, what sane city council member is going to tell residents they need to pay for parking in

When you become dictator, maybe that will be viable. In the meantime, what sane city council member is going to tell residents they need to pay for parking in front of their own townhouses?

valuearb 9y ago
Everyone would jump on board if the city would just allocate the parking revenues to the home or building owners.
- linkregister 9y ago
  Where has this successfully been implemented? There's a similar mechanism to what you proposed, resident-only parking permits. This pits the business owners against the residents. It also means that a resident can't have their friends come to visit without risking a ticket. The knee-jerk HN-ism of quick fixes doesn't work here. The only actual solution is the long-term dual-pronged approach: parking structures in the interim, while improving public transit coverage overall.
  - jseliger 9y ago
    Japan, for one: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/08/the-japanese-zoning-system.html http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/08/the.... Washington State also makes some zoning decisions and targets some growth targets at the state level (see http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1728&context=sulr http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a..., although I can't find a better piece off the top of my head), which helps matters. The only actual solution is the long-term dual-pronged approach: parking structures in the interim, while improving public transit coverage overall. The actual solution is people paying for what they use, i.e. markets: If people want parking structures, they'll pay for them. I'd really suggest that you look at the link in the comment I posted above.
    - linkregister 9y ago
      Please don't link-bomb me in order to "win". Explain, with citations. Your Japan link is not applicable to this conversation (though I love that article, it comes up whenever NIMBY stuff is discussed on HN). I consider that arguing in bad faith. Zoning isn't going to magically help residents get parking, nor is it going to provide a place for paying customers to put their cars while eating and drinking. > They'll pay for them Who? The customers would all love to pay for parking, but there wasn't a structure. You're arguing against some point you think I'm making but I'm not.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    Many many cities in Europe. People who live there can park for free, anyone else has to pay a meter. This solves the issues.
    - linkregister 9y ago
      1000 people need parking. There are 500 spaces. Paid parking doesn't solve the problem in this instance. The overall effect of paid parking isn't at issue.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        Yes it does. Make it so expensive that overall only 500 people (including those who live there) can afford to park there. Problem solved. And that’s how my city got $1/min parking spots.
        linkregister 9y ago
        Now you made it full circle to my original comment, "you can do this if you're a dictator. Otherwise, residents won't agree to pay for parking in front of their own homes."
        kuschku 9y ago
        No, I have not. The residents still get free parking, of course. If there’s more residents than parking spots, well, that sucks.
        snowwrestler 9y ago
        Which also cuts in half the number of customers for the businesses. In urban planning, one has to be careful to solve the correct problem. The problem is not too many cars parked on a residential street. The problem is getting customers to businesses with minimal bad side effects. Any "parking solution" that kills the businesses to fix the parking is not actually a solution.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    Resident only parking permits is nothing like private parking meters.
jpalomaki 9y ago
Give residents special permits which allow the to park for free. That's how it works here (Helsinki, Finland). Permit is not free, but cheap. It is for specific vehicle and the registered owner needs to live there. There permits are not per street, but the city is divided to several areas.
- tajen 9y ago
  Resident parking, €20pm in Lyon, France, knowing that the public transport is excellent. I wish they would ban cars entirely in the 500,000ppl area, but you need a car from time to time, when you're pregnant, old, have a sprained ankle or back, need to carry an iMac around or to just get out for a hike in the countryside. Still, one-day pollution permits would be better than taxing only parking.
Keyframe 9y ago
It's common in Europe. Residents get a special (yearly) discount. Road and sidewalk are not property of the house owner.

When you become dictator, maybe that will be viable. In the meantime, what sane city council member is going to tell residents they need to pay for parking in front of their own townhouses?

valuearb 9y ago

Everyone would jump on board if the city would just allocate the parking revenues to the home or building owners.

linkregister 9y ago
Where has this successfully been implemented? There's a similar mechanism to what you proposed, resident-only parking permits. This pits the business owners against the residents. It also means that a resident can't have their friends come to visit without risking a ticket. The knee-jerk HN-ism of quick fixes doesn't work here. The only actual solution is the long-term dual-pronged approach: parking structures in the interim, while improving public transit coverage overall.
- jseliger 9y ago
  Japan, for one: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/08/the-japanese-zoning-system.html http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/08/the.... Washington State also makes some zoning decisions and targets some growth targets at the state level (see http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1728&context=sulr http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a..., although I can't find a better piece off the top of my head), which helps matters. The only actual solution is the long-term dual-pronged approach: parking structures in the interim, while improving public transit coverage overall. The actual solution is people paying for what they use, i.e. markets: If people want parking structures, they'll pay for them. I'd really suggest that you look at the link in the comment I posted above.
  - linkregister 9y ago
    Please don't link-bomb me in order to "win". Explain, with citations. Your Japan link is not applicable to this conversation (though I love that article, it comes up whenever NIMBY stuff is discussed on HN). I consider that arguing in bad faith. Zoning isn't going to magically help residents get parking, nor is it going to provide a place for paying customers to put their cars while eating and drinking. > They'll pay for them Who? The customers would all love to pay for parking, but there wasn't a structure. You're arguing against some point you think I'm making but I'm not.
- kuschku 9y ago
  Many many cities in Europe. People who live there can park for free, anyone else has to pay a meter. This solves the issues.
  - linkregister 9y ago
    1000 people need parking. There are 500 spaces. Paid parking doesn't solve the problem in this instance. The overall effect of paid parking isn't at issue.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      Yes it does. Make it so expensive that overall only 500 people (including those who live there) can afford to park there. Problem solved. And that’s how my city got $1/min parking spots.
      - linkregister 9y ago
        Now you made it full circle to my original comment, "you can do this if you're a dictator. Otherwise, residents won't agree to pay for parking in front of their own homes."
        kuschku 9y ago
        No, I have not. The residents still get free parking, of course. If there’s more residents than parking spots, well, that sucks.
      - snowwrestler 9y ago
        Which also cuts in half the number of customers for the businesses. In urban planning, one has to be careful to solve the correct problem. The problem is not too many cars parked on a residential street. The problem is getting customers to businesses with minimal bad side effects. Any "parking solution" that kills the businesses to fix the parking is not actually a solution.
- valuearb 9y ago
  Resident only parking permits is nothing like private parking meters.

jpalomaki 9y ago

Give residents special permits which allow the to park for free. That's how it works here (Helsinki, Finland). Permit is not free, but cheap. It is for specific vehicle and the registered owner needs to live there. There permits are not per street, but the city is divided to several areas.

tajen 9y ago
Resident parking, €20pm in Lyon, France, knowing that the public transport is excellent. I wish they would ban cars entirely in the 500,000ppl area, but you need a car from time to time, when you're pregnant, old, have a sprained ankle or back, need to carry an iMac around or to just get out for a hike in the countryside. Still, one-day pollution permits would be better than taxing only parking.

Keyframe 9y ago

It's common in Europe. Residents get a special (yearly) discount. Road and sidewalk are not property of the house owner.