141–150 of 195 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it impractical for dinner and a show?
Some commuter rail lines in the U.S. are designed to only cater to commuters. So they may not run any train into downtown at night, or they may stop running well before the shows end at night, so there's no way to use the trains to get back home.
So, to solve the problem for myself, I built BTON:
you signal that you're leaving... someone comes and hands you a bton - you can use it to find your next spot; BTONs also have floating value to incentivize the spot leaver. Its free and in the App Stores; Again - I built it for a problem I directly and repeatedly experienced (trying to find parking in NYC). Would love to hear your feedback.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Residential bans on overnight on-street parking are essentially a tool for preventing new affordable housing from being built. It doesn't so much work against housing density as foreclose on it. I live in one of two Chicago suburbs notable for excellent connectivity to Chicago's transit fabric (we're on both the Blue and the Green CTA train lines, a major regional commuter rail route, and a zillion bus routes). But p…
> I live in one of two Chicago suburbs notable for excellent connectivity to Chicago's transit fabric (we're on both the Blue and the Green CTA train lines, a major regional commuter rail route, and a zillion bus routes). But people have jobs all over the metro area; to live here, take a job anywhere but the center of the city, and rely on public transit, you'd have to commute downtown and then back out, adding 45-90…
> Rational people quickly become emotional about parking, and staunch conservatives turn into ardent communists I don't follow the reasoning. Conservatives are against taxes, right? How is not wanting a tax on parking, something that is naturally free, "communist"?
Parking spots are often small enough, used for short enough periods of time, or in places with low enough land prices that it's not worth charging for them, but people often continue to insist that parking should be free even when those descriptions no longer apply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Residential bans on overnight on-street parking are essentially a tool for preventing new affordable housing from being built. It doesn't so much work against housing density as foreclose on it. I live in one of two Chicago suburbs notable for excellent connectivity to Chicago's transit fabric (we're on both the Blue and the Green CTA train lines, a major regional commuter rail route, and a zillion bus routes). But p…
> What we should be doing is eliminating all off-street parking requirements […] and then simply charging for convenient on-street parking Where does all this on-street parking come from? It does not compute that it’s impossible to build sufficient parking on the lot, but there is an abundance on the street. To the extent there is an abundance of street parking, this almost certainly means that previous development c…
> 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), pa…
I think it's useful to consider that SF downtown parking is - in the grand scheme of things - an exception, not a norm.
As it turns out, parking is free in most geographical locations. Even within SF, there's plenty of free street parking around areas like the Sunset or Potrero Hill for example, a mere 20 mins away from downtown core. Go another 15 mins further south and there's free parking at Home Depot, Costco, etc. Go further out to places like San Jose, and strip malls with abundant free parking dominate the landscape.
IMHO it doesn't make sense to think parking space can be easily replaced with residential space. This has been a theme in places like downtown Toronto, where parking lots were literally getting turned into condo buildings. Without a supporting transportation strategy, all that ends up happening is overloaded roads because more residences equal more people, and people need transportation. Going back to Toronto, they're now apparently talking about expropriating businesses to make space for public transit expansion in the worst congested subway station (Ironically, several businesses were already displaced from a lot to build a high rise mix use condo building in this exact intersection some 5 years ago, and there's now another high rise in construction right across the street from it). I honestly wish them good luck with scaling public transit to match demand, as all forms of traffic there - including the subway - already get to pretty bad levels.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it impractical for dinner and a show?
It takes longer (with reverse commute traffic and less going home). I'd have to leave early to make it in time for dinner. And I'd have to hope I hit one of the infrequent trains that run after rush hour. It's completely impractical. I just wouldn't do it.
Trains would allow kids, elderly, people without a driver's license or the financial means to afford a car to participate in society as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What we should be doing is eliminating all off-street parking requirements […] and then simply charging for convenient on-street parking Where does all this on-street parking come from? It does not compute that it’s impossible to build sufficient parking on the lot, but there is an abundance on the street. To the extent there is an abundance of street parking, this almost certainly means that previous development c…
On-street parking comes from the streets, obviously.
I expect my house’s lot could hold a 6 unit building. I have exactly 2 parking spots in front of my house. It would be 3 if I had no driveway. So at best residents could get 50% of their parking needs met with street parking if my house were converted to a multi family dwelling. This holds for many of the apartments and townhomes around me. Lots of my neighbors have 1 or even 0 spots for cars in front of their houses.
Looking at a map of Chicago, I would roughly guesstimate that streets are maybe 15% of the land area in gridded areas. Assume that half of that is “parkable” space. I don’t buy that this is sufficient space for all the cars to park. And if I’m wrong, I fail to see why developers are unable to set aside similar amounts of space off-street for their residents to park.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thansk for the comment. I have no problem with multi-generational living. I'm not Asian but I lived with my in-laws for a few years while we were saving up to buy a home and it was great. The problem I have is when there are more people in a given housing unit than it was designed to accommodate and so you make up for that lack by consuming something in the commons, specifically street parking. The pattern I saw in t…
That's an interesting observation! I've noticed from my Instagram feeds that there is a trend of "hackerspace" homes where multiple SWE/tech people will live in a SFH dormitory style. I reckon this might be peculiar to the SFBA and the tech scene?
For lower wage people, like the janitors, cooks, gig economy people, etc needed to serve tech elites, there's really no option except to crowd in with other people. Even if you move to the limits of a practical commute, it's still very very expensive for those not pulling engineering salaries.
> Rational people quickly become emotional about parking, and staunch conservatives turn into ardent communists I don't follow the reasoning. Conservatives are against taxes, right? How is not wanting a tax on parking, something that is naturally free, "communist"?
Parking isn't "naturally free". You're using a scarce resource, land, which typically isn't given away for free in a capitalist system. Parking spots are often small enough, used for short enough periods of time, or in places with low enough land prices that it's not worth charging for them, but people often continue to insist that parking should be free even when those descriptions no longer apply.
The "scarcity" is largely manufactured. Go to Google earth, take the street view dude, plunk it randomly anywhere in the central United States - and there will almost certainly be untapped free parking space as far as the eye can see.