4 ms·

What's wrong with just charging market rate for parking and road usage, i.e., just enough to so that there's always a few free parking spots and traffic flows a

What's wrong with just charging market rate for parking and road usage, i.e., just enough to so that there's always a few free parking spots and traffic flows at capacity?

novok 7y ago
That involves city law, and it's political suicide to do it everywhere, so it doesn't happen. You need bootstrap efforts like this so people can know what the alternative is like.
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  Why would it involve city law to charge market rate for parking at this particular development?
  - novok 7y ago
    Not at the particular development, but everywhere in the city, which is what I think he was implying. Imagine that the city started charging for the 'free parking' everywhere, either through permit schemes or parking meters, created photo enforced no stop tolling for major highways and busy commuting corridors and reduced property taxes w/ low income exemptions for the new driving fees. You would get a revolt even with the tax reductions. Small localized new greenfield experiments like this is not political suicide for a city to approve.
    - jessriedel 7y ago
      > Not at the particular development, but everywhere in the city, which is what I think he was implying. That's not what I was implying.
- jessriedel 7y ago
  I believe this neighborhood has already received special exemption from the city to not build normally-required parking with new apartment buildings. Logically, parking prices and road-usage pricing can be hyperlocal, so it seems very feasible to just use it in this specific neighborhood.
numtel 7y ago
The market doesn't capture the externalities of the car. Its downsides are pushed to the people who don't use them.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Cool, that doesn’t have anything to do with a market discovery mechanism for parking prices.
- jessriedel 7y ago
  What externalities are you thinking of besides road usage and parking?
  - numtel 7y ago
    * Pollution: exhaust, noise, brake dust * Wide right-of-way required for travel, stretching out cities, making walking impossible * Pedestrian safety: driving successfully requires full concentration * Both drivers and pedestrians experience stress. Traffic drives even the calmest to madness. * The industries that support cars are vast and environmentally destructive. The list goes on and on...
    - jessriedel 7y ago
      This isn't a thread for your general complaints about cars. This is a thread about the Culdesac's building project. As described in the article, the neighborhood is already going to have roads necessary for delivery vehicles, carshare vehicles (Uber, etc.), and the private vehicles of visitors. So your second and fifth points are off-topic. The other three points are easily covered by an already-mentioned road-usage charge.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

What's wrong with just charging market rate for parking and road usage, i.e., just enough to so that there's always a few free parking spots and traffic flows at capacity?

novok 7y ago

That involves city law, and it's political suicide to do it everywhere, so it doesn't happen. You need bootstrap efforts like this so people can know what the alternative is like.

TulliusCicero 7y ago
Why would it involve city law to charge market rate for parking at this particular development?
- novok 7y ago
  Not at the particular development, but everywhere in the city, which is what I think he was implying. Imagine that the city started charging for the 'free parking' everywhere, either through permit schemes or parking meters, created photo enforced no stop tolling for major highways and busy commuting corridors and reduced property taxes w/ low income exemptions for the new driving fees. You would get a revolt even with the tax reductions. Small localized new greenfield experiments like this is not political suicide for a city to approve.
  - jessriedel 7y ago
    > Not at the particular development, but everywhere in the city, which is what I think he was implying. That's not what I was implying.
jessriedel 7y ago
I believe this neighborhood has already received special exemption from the city to not build normally-required parking with new apartment buildings. Logically, parking prices and road-usage pricing can be hyperlocal, so it seems very feasible to just use it in this specific neighborhood.

numtel 7y ago

The market doesn't capture the externalities of the car. Its downsides are pushed to the people who don't use them.

kortilla 7y ago
Cool, that doesn’t have anything to do with a market discovery mechanism for parking prices.
jessriedel 7y ago
What externalities are you thinking of besides road usage and parking?
- numtel 7y ago
  * Pollution: exhaust, noise, brake dust * Wide right-of-way required for travel, stretching out cities, making walking impossible * Pedestrian safety: driving successfully requires full concentration * Both drivers and pedestrians experience stress. Traffic drives even the calmest to madness. * The industries that support cars are vast and environmentally destructive. The list goes on and on...
  - jessriedel 7y ago
    This isn't a thread for your general complaints about cars. This is a thread about the Culdesac's building project. As described in the article, the neighborhood is already going to have roads necessary for delivery vehicles, carshare vehicles (Uber, etc.), and the private vehicles of visitors. So your second and fifth points are off-topic. The other three points are easily covered by an already-mentioned road-usage charge.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]