5 ms·

Your reflexive concern that parking wont get built is well-founded. Parking is just plain shitty. Let's have less of it.

closeparen 8y ago
Only a tiny portion of most metro area populations can live in the zoned housing capacity of central business districts. Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. Everyone else needs parking.
- paulsutter 8y ago
  You are so right. Let's attack both of the challenges you identified, and solve them > Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. > Only a tiny portion of most metro area populations can live in the zoned housing capacity of central business districts
- dantheman 8y ago
  And they and their companies can pay for it. There should be more parking garages and less parking lots and on-street parking. It's important to get make all the costs transparent so people can make good decisions. Maybe the office will move from downtown to somewhere closer to their workers -- reducing congestion and commute time.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    >And they and their companies can pay for it. There should be more parking garages and less parking lots and on-street parking. These statements are contradictory! Making business pay for their own results in on-street parking parking lots and minimum parking requirements. When you centrally plan parking you get parking garages.
- notatoad 8y ago
  >Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. Everyone else needs parking. They don't need parking. They need a solution to enable access to the downtown core. The solution you want is parking, because that's the status quo. Improving public transit is also a solution - It's not actually impossible to build.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - closeparen 8y ago
    Building out acceptable public transit over America's vast <1,000 people/square mile suburbia is probably not economical. First you would need drastically higher densities to become socially acceptable and legal. Then you would need decades of building until most of a metro area's population actually lived at high enough densities. Then public transit that's actually competitive with the status quo for mobility could start to pencil out. Even when the density is there, the social mission of public transit agencies is to be a lifeline for the very poor. Improving service for professional commuters is at the bottom of their priority list. I can't even argue with that: the middle class can drive as an alternative, without bus service the destitute are just stuck. The solution I want is unlimited construction of skyscrapers and travel mostly by foot and elevator. But if there's one thing our democracy is great at, it's preventing high rises. For the densities we have, our choices are cars or simply having commutes eat further into our already scarce free time. (No, public transit is not free time, as any vaguely useful train is crush-loaded standing room only).
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - adrianN 8y ago
      You could have parking spots at train stations that take you downtown. It's not necessary to have a bus stop at every corner in the suburbs.
      - closeparen 8y ago
        Indeed, those can work well, but the urbanist community is working hard to remove them (i.e. AB 2923 in California).

closeparen 8y ago

Only a tiny portion of most metro area populations can live in the zoned housing capacity of central business districts. Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. Everyone else needs parking.

paulsutter 8y ago
You are so right. Let's attack both of the challenges you identified, and solve them > Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. > Only a tiny portion of most metro area populations can live in the zoned housing capacity of central business districts
dantheman 8y ago
And they and their companies can pay for it. There should be more parking garages and less parking lots and on-street parking. It's important to get make all the costs transparent so people can make good decisions. Maybe the office will move from downtown to somewhere closer to their workers -- reducing congestion and commute time.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  >And they and their companies can pay for it. There should be more parking garages and less parking lots and on-street parking. These statements are contradictory! Making business pay for their own results in on-street parking parking lots and minimum parking requirements. When you centrally plan parking you get parking garages.
notatoad 8y ago
>Only a handful of cities have remotely passable public transit systems. Everyone else needs parking. They don't need parking. They need a solution to enable access to the downtown core. The solution you want is parking, because that's the status quo. Improving public transit is also a solution - It's not actually impossible to build.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- closeparen 8y ago
  Building out acceptable public transit over America's vast <1,000 people/square mile suburbia is probably not economical. First you would need drastically higher densities to become socially acceptable and legal. Then you would need decades of building until most of a metro area's population actually lived at high enough densities. Then public transit that's actually competitive with the status quo for mobility could start to pencil out. Even when the density is there, the social mission of public transit agencies is to be a lifeline for the very poor. Improving service for professional commuters is at the bottom of their priority list. I can't even argue with that: the middle class can drive as an alternative, without bus service the destitute are just stuck. The solution I want is unlimited construction of skyscrapers and travel mostly by foot and elevator. But if there's one thing our democracy is great at, it's preventing high rises. For the densities we have, our choices are cars or simply having commutes eat further into our already scarce free time. (No, public transit is not free time, as any vaguely useful train is crush-loaded standing room only).
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - adrianN 8y ago
    You could have parking spots at train stations that take you downtown. It's not necessary to have a bus stop at every corner in the suburbs.
    - closeparen 8y ago
      Indeed, those can work well, but the urbanist community is working hard to remove them (i.e. AB 2923 in California).