4 ms·
> This ignores the potential drastic reduction of space allocated for parking, including space that is already part of roadways. Except that if a car isn’t in
by erentz 7y ago
> This ignores the potential drastic reduction of space allocated for parking, including space that is already part of roadways.
Except that if a car isn’t in a car park then it’s on a street moving (circling, going to pick up a passenger, etc) and contributing to congestion (maybe more so for that reason as some other articles have speculated). So basic geometry of road capacity still applies.
- michaelt 7y agoIf a car that would otherwise be parked for 8 hours in the city can instead drive 30 minutes back to the suburbs, park for 7 hours, then drive back in, we can trade 1 car-hour of freeway and 7 car-hours of suburban parking to regain 8 car-hours of city parking. And maybe we think that suburban parking is 'free' because it would have otherwise been sitting empty. Obviously within the constraints of that model it's still debatable whether that's a good deal, between the emissions and the doubling of near-rush-hour freeway traffic. And beyond that simple model, how cars performing pick-ups will impact congestion and whether people are willing to summon their cars 30 minutes in advance is also debatable.
- CydeWeys 7y agoIf every car did two daily round trip commutes into the city center instead of one, that would double congestion. I just don't see this being workable at all.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoI don't like the idea, but I've noticed that in my city, if you're heading into the city centre you're absolutely out of luck as far as traffic is concerned, but if you're heading the other way, it's extremely light. So you wouldn't so much be "doubling" congestion as just applying it to both in and out flow equally. I don't know if that would actually cause more difficulties or not.
- ant6n 7y agoNot everybody is going to the exact same spot downtown, and there's also some actual reverse commuting, so there will be some overlap between the to-work and from-work trips, especially where there's the most congestion (I e. Downtown).
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoAbsolutely, I just don't don't know how much that will increase congestion. I don't think it would actually be a 2x worse experience due.
- CydeWeys 7y agoIt's really not light going the other way, not in big cities. Try looking at the traffic patterns in NYC or LA. It's just bad traffic all day long.
- wysifnwyg 7y agoExcept that on the departure trip after dropping off and the arrival trip before picking up does not have to take congested routes and instead take paths that could reduce congestion. It's not like the car has somewhere to be during non-peak hours.
- nicoburns 7y agoUnless reducing parking incentivises people to not have a car in the first place.
- erentz 7y agoIf that’s the case you can reduce parking and incentivize reduced car use regardless of automation. It’s just an urban planning matter. It doesn’t follow that automation reduces the need for parking which then causes people to not own a car because there is reduced parking.
- nicoburns 7y agoHmm... but if someone only actually need a car occasionally then there's a saving. Automation could enable car-sharing.