4 ms·

I'm not defending parking on street parking, and I am not saying we should force developers to add parking (I just find the fingers-in-ears ignoring of the issu

I'm not defending parking on street parking, and I am not saying we should force developers to add parking (I just find the fingers-in-ears ignoring of the issue frustrating), but with respect I think your views on the parking are a bit maladjusted. That's because you could use your same argument about any public service. We pay for it in spades through income and council taxes. Deliberately semi-quoting your argument: You get public services for an insanely low price (healthcare, firemen, police, libraries, schools) for your own private benefit. You are forcing everyone around you to pay for you to not die/not have your house burn down/not get robbed/learn/get your kids educated etc because you don't feel like paying for it yourself. Can't afford your own healthcare/fireman/police/library/school? Then perhaps we shouldn't let you use them unless you are willing to pay market rate for the service.

praptak 7y ago
There are reasons why most services aren't public ones and should not be - this argument actually works. For each service that is public there's usually a good counterargument. Is there one for public subsidizing of private car parking?
- secabeen 7y ago
  In and around a commercial district, there is. If your customers are living in a standard suburban area around your commercial core, the city will often provide parking so that those customers can reach the businesses in that area. See the publicly owned parking lots in Santa Monica, Santa Barbara, Palo Alto, etc. Without those lots, there would be a lot less business (and thus less tax revenue) because the customers couldn't get to the businesses.
  - biggestdecision 7y ago
    Or you can design your city to not be so car-centric. Why aren't commercial districts designed so that walking or using public transportation to reach them is viable? If you put cars right at the center of urban planning, you'll always build cities that require people to own cars.
    - secabeen 7y ago
      This is true, but the challenge is that you can't just change how wide the streets are or how big the buildings are in an urban area overnight. It takes decades to change the transportation orientation of a neighborhood, and in the meantime, people have to live/work there.
  - CalRobert 7y ago
    When I lived in Santa Monica it was pretty frustrating they used my taxes to subsidize homes for cars and not people.
CalRobert 7y ago
Every service you named has huge positive externalities for the community. Parking is the opposite.

praptak 7y ago

There are reasons why most services aren't public ones and should not be - this argument actually works. For each service that is public there's usually a good counterargument. Is there one for public subsidizing of private car parking?

secabeen 7y ago
In and around a commercial district, there is. If your customers are living in a standard suburban area around your commercial core, the city will often provide parking so that those customers can reach the businesses in that area. See the publicly owned parking lots in Santa Monica, Santa Barbara, Palo Alto, etc. Without those lots, there would be a lot less business (and thus less tax revenue) because the customers couldn't get to the businesses.
- biggestdecision 7y ago
  Or you can design your city to not be so car-centric. Why aren't commercial districts designed so that walking or using public transportation to reach them is viable? If you put cars right at the center of urban planning, you'll always build cities that require people to own cars.
  - secabeen 7y ago
    This is true, but the challenge is that you can't just change how wide the streets are or how big the buildings are in an urban area overnight. It takes decades to change the transportation orientation of a neighborhood, and in the meantime, people have to live/work there.
- CalRobert 7y ago
  When I lived in Santa Monica it was pretty frustrating they used my taxes to subsidize homes for cars and not people.

CalRobert 7y ago

Every service you named has huge positive externalities for the community. Parking is the opposite.