3 ms·

It's very difficult, politically, to take away something that people are accustomed to getting for "free". Easing mandates for developers is much easier than re

It's very difficult, politically, to take away something that people are accustomed to getting for "free". Easing mandates for developers is much easier than removing existing, free, on-street parking that residents have built their lives upon. One of the main drivers of NIMBY sentiment is the threat of having to share free, public parking with people who would live in new developments. Shoup's approach to this difficult political problem is the establishment of "parking benefit districts", which create an incentive to switch to market-rate parking.

sidewndr46 3y ago
Not sure where you're at but where I live the opposite is true. There is massive public sentiment against public street parking because it makes it possible for people to come and go from the area at will. A significant fraction of property owners believe they own the road too. It's common enough that plenty of homeowners put up their own no parking signs, which are obviously un-enforceable. There is at least one sign that I'm aware that I think was put up by the city as pacification measure. There is no possible mechanism the city could use to enforce it, but it does appear to have been installed by the city.
- masfuerte 3y ago
  In most places homeowners do own the road up to the centre line. This ownership gives them approximately no rights over it though.
  - sidewndr46 3y ago
    That's unique, my property line goes out to the curb. But my rights stop at the sidewalk approximately. I can put gardens between the curb and the sidewalk, but they tend to get dug up by maint. workers.
- pandaman 3y ago
  A lot of places have permit parking, where permits are only available to the residents. Following this route seems to be more productive than making fake signs to me.
blamazon 3y ago
Depends where and when you are. The current mayor of Paris has found substantial political support for her urbanist post-car policies including a commitment to remove 72% of on-street parking spaces: https://www.distilled.earth/p/how-paris-is-taking-back-its-streets https://www.distilled.earth/p/how-paris-is-taking-back-its-s... There's a 'critical mass' aspect to this where if enough incentives to a car-free (or car-light) lifestyle are provided within a certain area, public support in that area will eventually shift against unlimited free public storage of cars.
josephcsible 3y ago
> One of the main drivers of NIMBY sentiment is the threat of having to share free, public parking with people who would live in new developments. This has a really easy fix: mandate a new reserved, dedicated parking space for every new residence. For single-family homes, this is basically a no-op because driveways exist.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- everforward 3y ago
  Sure, but then don't we have to pay for somebody to enforce those parking spaces? Is that enforcement cheaper than building the extra parking? I've seen something similar, but it was placard-based for the whole neighborhood. You needed a parking pass to be able to park, but there were no reserved spots (which I imagine would raise enforcement costs a lot).
- pandaman 3y ago
  I lived near a cluster of apartments (not very big, probably a half a dozen of 5-15 units buildings in my block) and even though each had dedicated parking and I parked in my driveway myself, the visitors of the apartment-dwellers used the street to park and would not mind parking across my driveway regularly (either because all the spots were already taken or to save a couple feet of walk, I have no idea).

sidewndr46 3y ago

Not sure where you're at but where I live the opposite is true. There is massive public sentiment against public street parking because it makes it possible for people to come and go from the area at will. A significant fraction of property owners believe they own the road too. It's common enough that plenty of homeowners put up their own no parking signs, which are obviously un-enforceable. There is at least one sign that I'm aware that I think was put up by the city as pacification measure. There is no possible mechanism the city could use to enforce it, but it does appear to have been installed by the city.

masfuerte 3y ago
In most places homeowners do own the road up to the centre line. This ownership gives them approximately no rights over it though.
- sidewndr46 3y ago
  That's unique, my property line goes out to the curb. But my rights stop at the sidewalk approximately. I can put gardens between the curb and the sidewalk, but they tend to get dug up by maint. workers.
pandaman 3y ago
A lot of places have permit parking, where permits are only available to the residents. Following this route seems to be more productive than making fake signs to me.

blamazon 3y ago

Depends where and when you are. The current mayor of Paris has found substantial political support for her urbanist post-car policies including a commitment to remove 72% of on-street parking spaces: https://www.distilled.earth/p/how-paris-is-taking-back-its-streets https://www.distilled.earth/p/how-paris-is-taking-back-its-s... There's a 'critical mass' aspect to this where if enough incentives to a car-free (or car-light) lifestyle are provided within a certain area, public support in that area will eventually shift against unlimited free public storage of cars.

josephcsible 3y ago

> One of the main drivers of NIMBY sentiment is the threat of having to share free, public parking with people who would live in new developments. This has a really easy fix: mandate a new reserved, dedicated parking space for every new residence. For single-family homes, this is basically a no-op because driveways exist.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
everforward 3y ago
Sure, but then don't we have to pay for somebody to enforce those parking spaces? Is that enforcement cheaper than building the extra parking? I've seen something similar, but it was placard-based for the whole neighborhood. You needed a parking pass to be able to park, but there were no reserved spots (which I imagine would raise enforcement costs a lot).
pandaman 3y ago
I lived near a cluster of apartments (not very big, probably a half a dozen of 5-15 units buildings in my block) and even though each had dedicated parking and I parked in my driveway myself, the visitors of the apartment-dwellers used the street to park and would not mind parking across my driveway regularly (either because all the spots were already taken or to save a couple feet of walk, I have no idea).