4 ms·

Fayetteville is less than 100K people, and the entire metro area (the so-called "Northwest Arkansas" region) is about 500K people. It seems small, self-containe

Fayetteville is less than 100K people, and the entire metro area (the so-called "Northwest Arkansas" region) is about 500K people. It seems small, self-contained, and isolated. I live in Alexandria, a famous historical neighborhood in the Washington DC metro area. Alexandria proper has about 160K people, in a metropolis of 6-7 million, and Alexandria attracts a large number of outside visitors from around the region because of its notoriety. I think that eliminating parking requirements for businesses is an interesting idea worth consideration. But I wonder how far this can really be taken in my city. We already have high and problematic overflow of visitor parking into residential neighborhoods. I wonder if Fayetteville can pull this off primarily because of its size.

kevincox 5y ago
> I wonder how far this can really be taken in my city. We already have high and problematic overflow of visitor parking into residential neighborhoods. The problematic thinking is that the cars need to be here in the first place. If it is easy to get to the residential neighborhoods by walking, biking or public transit then most of these cars don't need to exist. Of course it isn't easy. It takes a long time to shift habit, culture and perception. But the upsides are great. It is easier and faster to get around, less people getting hit by cars, less noise. Plus there are other benefits like I can go out and drink without worrying how I can get home or who is the DD.
- geofft 5y ago
  Not disagreeing, really, but - habit, culture, perception, and infrastructure. Minimum parking requirements, and more generally streets designed around cars, are a form of infrastructure. I'm not saying it's a good form of infrastructure, but it is one. Local government needs to invest in alternatives: pervasive sidewalks, well-designed protected bike lanes so that people who are interested in biking but worried about being hit - which is over 50% of adults in US metro regions, see https://jenniferdill.net/types-of-cyclists/ https://jenniferdill.net/types-of-cyclists/ - actually decide to bike, legal use of e-bikes, intersection designs that don't prioritize high-speed cars, reliable and frequent and ideally 24-hour public transit with dense stops (so probably buses and bus lanes), and so forth. And yes, to be fair, habit and culture and perception play into this too. Cities build this infrastructure when people demand it and can convincingly argue that it will get used. Potential bus stops are more useful when there isn't a parking lot separating the bus route and the store people want to get to. Useful sidewalks are a natural consequence of commercial districts designed to be accessed by foot/bike/transit instead of by car, and so forth. But it does take both of these.
  - kelnos 5y ago
    Also consider that many places in the US aren't conducive to pervasive, year-round cycling. I know there are some places in the world where people cycle in 85F and 30F weather alike, but I don't think most Americans (especially if they are visiting a city with a different climate than they're used to) would be interested in a freezing cold trip, or one where they have to take a shower when they arrive.
    - geofft 5y ago
      That part is getting a lot better with e-bikes, which is part of why I mentioned them. :) I'm in NYC, where the temperature does vary at least that much between summer and winter, and I recently got an e-bike in preparation for our office reopening, because I wanted to be able to avoid the subway in more weather than I'd be happy using an ordinary bike for (especially while the office's showers are closed!). On warm days, I can easily get up the bridge without sweating if I let the pedal assist do its thing and don't try to go super fast. And on cold days, if I do the same thing, I don't have the problem where I start to sweat under warm clothes - I can wear exactly what I'd wear without a bike (a warm jacket, decent inner layers, and gloves, nothing more complicated than that) and it works fine, too. It's a lot harder if it's more than a few degrees below freezing, extremely hot, or heavily raining/snowing, but I think it's pretty manageable most days. But also, that's one of many reasons that bike infrastructure isn't enough to displace car infrastructure on its own. Good public transit helps, apart from being a viable year-round transit option in its own right, helps here because it allows people to decide that they can bike on days with good weather, knowing they have fallback options the rest of the time, whatever their own comfort level with with weather may be. And frankly taxis/ride-hailing services can also solve the problem of getting people from place to place without requiring a huge amount of parking spaces.
cortesoft 5y ago
I don't think it is a fair assumption to say that reducing the number of available parking spots will automatically mean it is harder to find parking. If there are fewer parking spots available, fewer people will try to drive and park there. There is an induced demand that more parking spaces provides. Now, will that mean less people in the area? Maybe, or maybe they will use alternative transportation.
- anamax 5y ago
  > There is an induced demand that more parking spaces provides. Increased parking does not increase demand, it satisfies more of the demand that has always been there.
  - cortesoft 5y ago
    What makes you so sure of that? Parking inducing demand is pretty well accepted in the urban planning community: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/study-the-strongest-evidence-yet-that-abudant-parking-causes-more-driving https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/study-the...
    - anamax 5y ago
      They're not measuring demand. They're measuring usage. Ticket sales don't tell you how many people didn't go to Disneyland because the tickets cost too much.
thebradbain 5y ago
> But I wonder how far this can really be taken in my city. It can and should be taken to 100%. Even Los Angeles and Dallas – much bigger cities than Alexandria – are studying eliminating parking minimums. Practically, eliminating parking minimums does not mean there will be no parking built: developers will still include enough parking that makes sense (and sometimes that's – gasp – none!) for a project, because in real life a large apartment buildings with absolutely no parking makes just as little sense as an apartment building with twice the number of parking spaces as tenants, especially in an urban area where car ownership is certainly not 100% (or in some neighborhoods, much less than 50%). This is something that almost every other major city in the world figured out long ago. Philosophically, parking minimums are only something Americans think is necessary because it's been that way for so long. Why don't we have bike rack minimums? Parking maximums? Anecdotally, my single family home in Los Angeles technically has a parking minimum of 8(!) cars, due to weirdness with the zoning laws. I live right near transit and don't even have one car. I'd love to replace part of my driveway with a deck and expanded backyard, still leave a few spots for guests, and it would effect literally no one, but doing so would mean my home is no longer up to code.
- SeanLuke 5y ago
  > Even Los Angeles and Dallas – much bigger cities than Alexandria Well... LA is huge but Dallas is not that much bigger than DC.
  - thebradbain 5y ago
    Dallas is the 9th (soon to be 8th) biggest city in the US at 1.4M people in its city limits alone. DC is about half that size. That’s not including the 800k within Fort Worth just 30 miles away from downtown Dallas. DFW metro area is about 7-8M people as of 2022. That puts its the fourth largest metro area in the country, behind only NYC, Los Angeles, and Chicago (which it will also soon pass, if migration trends continue), respectively. I think by all metrics Dallas is much bigger than DC. Though if you’ve only ever lived on the coasts, that may surprise you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_are...

kevincox 5y ago

> I wonder how far this can really be taken in my city. We already have high and problematic overflow of visitor parking into residential neighborhoods. The problematic thinking is that the cars need to be here in the first place. If it is easy to get to the residential neighborhoods by walking, biking or public transit then most of these cars don't need to exist. Of course it isn't easy. It takes a long time to shift habit, culture and perception. But the upsides are great. It is easier and faster to get around, less people getting hit by cars, less noise. Plus there are other benefits like I can go out and drink without worrying how I can get home or who is the DD.

geofft 5y ago
Not disagreeing, really, but - habit, culture, perception, and infrastructure. Minimum parking requirements, and more generally streets designed around cars, are a form of infrastructure. I'm not saying it's a good form of infrastructure, but it is one. Local government needs to invest in alternatives: pervasive sidewalks, well-designed protected bike lanes so that people who are interested in biking but worried about being hit - which is over 50% of adults in US metro regions, see https://jenniferdill.net/types-of-cyclists/ https://jenniferdill.net/types-of-cyclists/ - actually decide to bike, legal use of e-bikes, intersection designs that don't prioritize high-speed cars, reliable and frequent and ideally 24-hour public transit with dense stops (so probably buses and bus lanes), and so forth. And yes, to be fair, habit and culture and perception play into this too. Cities build this infrastructure when people demand it and can convincingly argue that it will get used. Potential bus stops are more useful when there isn't a parking lot separating the bus route and the store people want to get to. Useful sidewalks are a natural consequence of commercial districts designed to be accessed by foot/bike/transit instead of by car, and so forth. But it does take both of these.
- kelnos 5y ago
  Also consider that many places in the US aren't conducive to pervasive, year-round cycling. I know there are some places in the world where people cycle in 85F and 30F weather alike, but I don't think most Americans (especially if they are visiting a city with a different climate than they're used to) would be interested in a freezing cold trip, or one where they have to take a shower when they arrive.
  - geofft 5y ago
    That part is getting a lot better with e-bikes, which is part of why I mentioned them. :) I'm in NYC, where the temperature does vary at least that much between summer and winter, and I recently got an e-bike in preparation for our office reopening, because I wanted to be able to avoid the subway in more weather than I'd be happy using an ordinary bike for (especially while the office's showers are closed!). On warm days, I can easily get up the bridge without sweating if I let the pedal assist do its thing and don't try to go super fast. And on cold days, if I do the same thing, I don't have the problem where I start to sweat under warm clothes - I can wear exactly what I'd wear without a bike (a warm jacket, decent inner layers, and gloves, nothing more complicated than that) and it works fine, too. It's a lot harder if it's more than a few degrees below freezing, extremely hot, or heavily raining/snowing, but I think it's pretty manageable most days. But also, that's one of many reasons that bike infrastructure isn't enough to displace car infrastructure on its own. Good public transit helps, apart from being a viable year-round transit option in its own right, helps here because it allows people to decide that they can bike on days with good weather, knowing they have fallback options the rest of the time, whatever their own comfort level with with weather may be. And frankly taxis/ride-hailing services can also solve the problem of getting people from place to place without requiring a huge amount of parking spaces.

cortesoft 5y ago

I don't think it is a fair assumption to say that reducing the number of available parking spots will automatically mean it is harder to find parking. If there are fewer parking spots available, fewer people will try to drive and park there. There is an induced demand that more parking spaces provides. Now, will that mean less people in the area? Maybe, or maybe they will use alternative transportation.

anamax 5y ago
> There is an induced demand that more parking spaces provides. Increased parking does not increase demand, it satisfies more of the demand that has always been there.
- cortesoft 5y ago
  What makes you so sure of that? Parking inducing demand is pretty well accepted in the urban planning community: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/study-the-strongest-evidence-yet-that-abudant-parking-causes-more-driving https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/study-the...
  - anamax 5y ago
    They're not measuring demand. They're measuring usage. Ticket sales don't tell you how many people didn't go to Disneyland because the tickets cost too much.

thebradbain 5y ago

> But I wonder how far this can really be taken in my city. It can and should be taken to 100%. Even Los Angeles and Dallas – much bigger cities than Alexandria – are studying eliminating parking minimums. Practically, eliminating parking minimums does not mean there will be no parking built: developers will still include enough parking that makes sense (and sometimes that's – gasp – none!) for a project, because in real life a large apartment buildings with absolutely no parking makes just as little sense as an apartment building with twice the number of parking spaces as tenants, especially in an urban area where car ownership is certainly not 100% (or in some neighborhoods, much less than 50%). This is something that almost every other major city in the world figured out long ago. Philosophically, parking minimums are only something Americans think is necessary because it's been that way for so long. Why don't we have bike rack minimums? Parking maximums? Anecdotally, my single family home in Los Angeles technically has a parking minimum of 8(!) cars, due to weirdness with the zoning laws. I live right near transit and don't even have one car. I'd love to replace part of my driveway with a deck and expanded backyard, still leave a few spots for guests, and it would effect literally no one, but doing so would mean my home is no longer up to code.

SeanLuke 5y ago
> Even Los Angeles and Dallas – much bigger cities than Alexandria Well... LA is huge but Dallas is not that much bigger than DC.
- thebradbain 5y ago
  Dallas is the 9th (soon to be 8th) biggest city in the US at 1.4M people in its city limits alone. DC is about half that size. That’s not including the 800k within Fort Worth just 30 miles away from downtown Dallas. DFW metro area is about 7-8M people as of 2022. That puts its the fourth largest metro area in the country, behind only NYC, Los Angeles, and Chicago (which it will also soon pass, if migration trends continue), respectively. I think by all metrics Dallas is much bigger than DC. Though if you’ve only ever lived on the coasts, that may surprise you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_are...