Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car • Hacker News Board

Re: Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car

#451

Post by Zach_the_Lizard » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 8:18 PM UTC

loeg wrote: post #427

Zach_the_Lizard wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are actually not correct; suburban areas have more intense and all encompassing parking minimum laws. Manhattan, for instance, has either none or none below 125th Street IIRC. Suburbs look like they do not because of preference but because it is not legal for them to look otherwise. The idea in the 50s was: A) Require cars to live and you will not have to live next to poor people or minorities since cars and main…

Do you have a source for the broader claim (outside of NYC) that suburban malls in particular have more intense parking minimum laws? My comment was not talking about residential parking or standalone businesses.

Here's an example from Tyson's Corner, VA, which you might know as the home of the world's first Apple store:

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/zoningordinance/articles/ar...

Example quote (in the context of commercial shopping centers and parking minimums that apply):

> 1,000,000 square feet of gross floor area or more: Four (4) spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area

EDIT: Note also that you get absurd scenarios like pools requiring a space per 4 people that can use the pool, or vets having to have at least 10 spaces, and so on and so forth. Absurd regulations

Re: Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car

#452

Post by dclowd9901 » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 11:39 PM UTC

cardiffspaceman wrote: post #386

dclowd9901 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It floors me that businesses are allowed to keep their parking lots off limits during non business hours. That alone would go a long way to freeing up spaces.

A property owner that allows the public onto their property needs to have insurance against claims that members of the public were injured by the property owner. Such claims can arise out of accidents that happen in the normal course of walking. The claim process itself is expensive to use for settling claims, regardless of the outcome, therefore the insurance premiums are significant. It is cheaper therefore, to onl…

>I suggest that non-free parking that belongs to a parking company would be preferable

I'd be totally fine with this. As is, the space just sits empty and wasteful.

Re: Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car

#453

Post by yason » Wed, Nov 16, 2016, 2:10 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #212

yason wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also roads are built for the peak consumption. Outside the peak, there's generally excess capacity quietly eating away space from pedestrians and human beings.

Roads are built for average consumption. If they were built for peak consumption there'd be no such thing as rush hour or traffic jams. You could make the same argument about sidewalks -- at 4am, sidewalks have excess capacity eating away space that could be instead planted with foliage and serve as a habitat for animals. Unless there's 24/7 equal use of everything, there's always going to be excess capacity at some…

The fact that we can't physically nor practically build ourselves out of congestion (and that demand is always induced to become the higher the more roadspace we build) doesn't change the fact that it's exactly the rush hour traffic that warrants the construction of new roads, bypasses, ramps, and is used to validate road widening.

No city would be building more capacity without the pain that is the rush hour traffic.

Re: Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car

#454

Post by manigandham » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 8:53 AM UTC

majewsky wrote: post #262

sandworm101 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one thing that definitely won't make people happy is someone else telling them they don't know how to make themselves happy. People want choice, even if that means making a few incorrect choices. >We know people in cities are, on average, happier and healthier. Some people really dislike cities. I need woods. I need open spaces. I need to see the stars at night. I need a place for my dog to run without some stran…

> People want choice, even if that means making a few incorrect choices. I don't agree. I often feel liberated when someone takes away a meaningless choice from me. If (and only if) the choices that are left are acceptable to me, of course. For example, I was going to shop for a new kitchen, and I hated the idea of it. Having to comb through dozens of wood and handle options, arguing all day about the layout, it soun…

> takes away a meaningless choice from me

What is meaningless is completely subjective to every person, so there is no way to remove options without affecting someone.

Also, how do you buy a "kitchen"?

Re: Poor people pay for parking even when they can’t afford a car

#455

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Nov 21, 2016, 6:26 PM UTC

thatcat wrote: post #404

Godel_unicode wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think that companies who only take cash will pay higher wages thus keeping that money locally? I would assume that lower cost would lead to lower prices rather than higher wages.

No, I think they would pay a net higher local labor cost and lower remote processing fees.

[deleted]