Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

econlib.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 195 posts

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#21

Post by decafninja »

0_____0 wrote: post #15
jimbob45 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this framing of the zoning issue much more than “build build build on every scrap of land you can get your hands on”. Ownership of land is really important for ensuring everyone in America is literally bought into the American Dream. Until you’re ready to buy a house, I feel no compunction forcing you into high-density housing in the meantime (paired with greatly increasing low-income mortgage assistance).

Where I live, lots of people own a unit in a multi-family house as either a condo or a co-op. Coming from California, I thought of housing as always being a SFH on .25ac or something like that, but for what you get in terms of quality of life, I would be very happy to own a co-op in a triple-decker in my neighborhood.

I live in a midrise condo in the suburbs of NYC. One thing I've noticed is that similar condos in the area have not risen in price significantly (if at all) whereas SFHs have.

Is this because of the pandemic that the demand of dense multi-family housing has stagnated while isolated SFHs have risen?

The thought has crossed my mind the past two years where I've encountered more rude, aggressive, and hostile fellow residents in my building. Our building staff members have commented the same. Pleas from building management to mask up or avoid riding the elevator with other households go unheeded. Likewise pleas to not smoke in outdoor, but common areas (lounges, rooftops, etc.) go unheeded, and now add marijuana smell as a bonus.

It's gotten to the point my wife and I specifically want to move to a SFH so that we don't have to deal with such people.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#22

Post by samschooler »

jnwatson wrote: post #10

I live in a planned high density office/shopping/residential development. When the developer switched to paid parking, there were literal protests: folks with signs. It absolutely gutted the shops. Foot traffic was way down. And now with COVID, we have dozens of empty storefronts. Consumers vote with their wallet, and lots of folks are dead set against paying for parking.

The problem with paid parking in the US is we need to supplement the perceived/actual scarcity with adequate alternatives. If parking is made paid because of demand, that is one thing, however if made as a deterrent to drive, that is another and alternatives should be thought about before plans for paid parking are made.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#23

Post by 0_____0 »

newaccount2021 wrote: post #6

remove or charge for parking and people park on the street...no one is giving up their cars, all of the social engineering just ends up creating more problems in many Bay Area communities you will see cars as tightly aligned on both sides of residential streets as is physically possible...homeowners don't even have room to put out trash bins without blocking their own drives. and why? because apartment complexes and…

The last line of your reply there really says it all. Every facet of how our cities are built caters to the automobile owner. Universal street parking, parking minimums, highways through urban cores, not prioritizing public transit infrastructure... these things all reinforce automobile dominance, and they've been public policy for the last 70 years.

In order to fix the issue of congested and dangerous streets, we need to get drivers to shift to other transit modes, and part of the answer is to stop coddling them with free parking.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#24

Post by jurassic »

I think non-residential street parking, paid or not, should probably be illegal. Or at least eye-wateringly expensive and limited to a few minutes at a time (e.g. food pickups). I say this as someone who drives regularly. The lack of visibility street parking creates in densely developed areas is a major safety hazard for all. Cyclists can get doored, drivers have diminished environmental awareness of things such as pedestrians emerging unexpectedly between two cars (perhaps to get to their own car, or just jaywalking), parked cars blocking visibility of oncoming traffic for motorists trying to turn, etc. None of it good.

For residential street parking, I guess it should be up to those communities to decide what they want. The town where I live has outlawed overnight street parking which prevents people turning single-family homes into overcrowded communal living situations like you see in many parts of California. It makes the streets very safe and pleasant for walkers and kids on bikes, but also works against housing density which I recognize as problematic. I support density, but not density with cars; we need a lot of investment in transportation alternatives.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#25

Post by 0_____0 »

chizhik-pyzhik wrote: post #16
newaccount2021 wrote: post #6

remove or charge for parking and people park on the street...no one is giving up their cars, all of the social engineering just ends up creating more problems in many Bay Area communities you will see cars as tightly aligned on both sides of residential streets as is physically possible...homeowners don't even have room to put out trash bins without blocking their own drives. and why? because apartment complexes and…

> no one is giving up their cars When you live in the downtown of a city, and parking at your apartment is $300/month, that's a strong incentive to give up your car

As I've found out first hand, when you live in a neighborhood where it's more convenient to walk to the grocery, gym, bar, friends' houses, it really makes you wonder what you're spending all that money on that car for. Not just the parking spot, but depreciation, fuel, maintenance, insurance, parking tickets...

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#26

Post by godot »

emptybits wrote: post #9

> Rational people quickly become emotional about parking ... Thinking about parking seems to take place in the reptilian cortex, the most primitive part of the brain responsible for snap judgments about urgent fight-or-flight issues, such as how to avoid being eaten. Lol. A bit melodramatic, but sure. Charge for it, yes, but give motorists a civilized experience when possible. Some of the emotion and impatience and a…

I feel like that's not all of it; there is a certain expectation for parking to be free from many people and I feel like it's because the demand for parking can be drastically different in geographically nearby locations.

For example, in the bay area, parking in SF is difficult to say the least and usually in paid garages. But go less than 30 miles to east bay (far east or south east bay, not Oakland or Berkeley), parking is much more plentiful everywhere and the expectation for parking is free.

If you live in the east bay and visit SF once in a while, you are coming from a daily life of the expectation of free parking to suddenly seeing signs for $20 a day, $50 a day, and so on. Without really consciously thinking about the economics and thinking, oh, it makes sense, because millions of people want to park in the city, it can definitely drive some emotional responses. If you live in SF and have thought about the economics and have accepted that parking is expensive, then the emotion and impatience and anxiety can be reduced/removed by the UX.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#27

Post by criddell »

emptybits wrote: post #9

> Rational people quickly become emotional about parking ... Thinking about parking seems to take place in the reptilian cortex, the most primitive part of the brain responsible for snap judgments about urgent fight-or-flight issues, such as how to avoid being eaten. Lol. A bit melodramatic, but sure. Charge for it, yes, but give motorists a civilized experience when possible. Some of the emotion and impatience and a…

If parking gets too expensive, I can imagine self-driving cars circling the block until the owner is ready to go.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#28

Post by _dain_ »

newaccount2021 wrote: post #6

remove or charge for parking and people park on the street...no one is giving up their cars, all of the social engineering just ends up creating more problems in many Bay Area communities you will see cars as tightly aligned on both sides of residential streets as is physically possible...homeowners don't even have room to put out trash bins without blocking their own drives. and why? because apartment complexes and…

>any time there are measures to make parking inconvenient, you end up with annoying ordinances banning street parking...or "members only" local passes...or meter maids who exist to torment us all

"annoying ordinances banning street parking", as if street parking isn't itself extremely annoying to pedestrians and cyclists.

"free" parking is not free. just like any other scarce good that the government mandates to be "free", someone, somewhere is paying for it.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#29

Post by marcosdumay »

glial wrote: post #2

> Parking clouds people’s minds, shifting analytic faculties to a lower level. Some strongly support market prices — except for parking. Some strongly oppose subsidies — except for parking. I wonder if you could replace this with: "some people strongly support X - except in circumstances where it negatively affects them personally".

People do divide things up. There are some stuff they don't care much about paying, and some they care a lot.

Re: Charge, Baby, Charge for Parking

#30

Post by ars »

jnwatson wrote: post #10

I live in a planned high density office/shopping/residential development. When the developer switched to paid parking, there were literal protests: folks with signs. It absolutely gutted the shops. Foot traffic was way down. And now with COVID, we have dozens of empty storefronts. Consumers vote with their wallet, and lots of folks are dead set against paying for parking.

I'm the same way, if there's only paid parking, or a parking shortage, I just don't go there unless forced.
Post reply on HN