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

The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 108 posts

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#81

Post by breuleux »

jj999 wrote: post #61
elyobo wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I prefer trees and grass over parking lots I don't see a meaningful distinction between a consolidated parking lot and one that's distributed along the side of the road when it comes to tree and grass cover. For dense urban situations car parking buildings allow more than either surface lots or surface street parking.

Nearly half of parking lots' space a dedicated to move in and out. That space isn't needed with street parking because the street itself accomplish this function. Parking lots are mostly used only half of the day and empty otherwise, because typically people drive their car around in a few different parking lots. Streets are useful all day long. I'm unconvinced removing street parking would allow for smaller streets…

As a cyclist, removing street parking would free up space for dedicated bike lanes and remove risks of being doored. It would also increase visibility a good deal, especially at a time when cars are getting so massive.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#82

Post by swader999 »

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #25

I don't remember the details and searches aren't turning up anything, but I remember somebody managed to camp on public streets without being bothered for a surprisingly long time by building a tent that looked like a car with a cover on it. I think this was a bit of performance art rather than being done out of necessity, the point being that people just think of that space as being for cars and don't really questio…

Now that everyone is doing it it's not as easy. But ten years ago I lived out of a white utility van and lived rural with my family in the weekend. Parked commercial or industrial areas of the city, nobody ever bothered me.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#84

Post by JambalayaJim »

userbinator wrote: post #57
totetsu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really want to know what 5D chess went on to make put "livable cities" and "urban planning" on the truther, red-pilled, plandemic, crowds hit list. It is something that should be examined and critically discussed thats not what i'm talking about I'm talking about how suddenly people who have never so much as listened to an episode of 99PI before or showen any interest are suddenly passionately saying livable cities…

are suddenly passionately saying livable cities are a way to control us. Look at what the government and Big Tech are doing. There are constant articles here being posted about surveillance, loss of privacy, etc. It's a whole lot easier to control the population when you gradually make it harder for them to travel unhindered and untracked. Chickens in a factory farm can be described as being in "livable" conditions.…

Urbanism is in fact premised on making it EASIER to move about unhindered

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#85

Post by ComposedPattern »

userbinator wrote: post #57
totetsu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really want to know what 5D chess went on to make put "livable cities" and "urban planning" on the truther, red-pilled, plandemic, crowds hit list. It is something that should be examined and critically discussed thats not what i'm talking about I'm talking about how suddenly people who have never so much as listened to an episode of 99PI before or showen any interest are suddenly passionately saying livable cities…

are suddenly passionately saying livable cities are a way to control us. Look at what the government and Big Tech are doing. There are constant articles here being posted about surveillance, loss of privacy, etc. It's a whole lot easier to control the population when you gradually make it harder for them to travel unhindered and untracked. Chickens in a factory farm can be described as being in "livable" conditions.…

> It's a whole lot easier to control the population when you gradually make it harder for them to travel unhindered and untracked.

Cars are required to have registration and license plates, and most of them have GPS tracking as well. If you don't want to be tracked, ride a bicycle.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#86

Post by RugnirViking »

jjallen wrote: post #39
Arainach wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per-business lots are incredibly inefficient. They have to optimize for peak demand or lose sales during crucial peak seasons - when was thr last time you saw a Walmart parking lot full? They make it more difficult to visit multiple stops in one trip. Instead of parking downtown, going to an appointment and grabbing lunch I have to move my car in between those trips, generating more emissions and waste.

> when was thr last time you saw a Walmart parking lot full? Sounds like they could make them much smaller > They make it more difficult to visit multiple stops in one trip. Instead of parking downtown, going to an appointment and grabbing lunch I have to move my car in between those trips, generating more emissions and waste. A general, private garage is an existing possible solution to this problem.

> Sounds like they could make them much smaller

You're not really adressing the point of what they were saying. If they were smaller and utilised more efficiently, there would be at least some days where you shop up and its full, so you go somewhere else. Walmart want your money, so they're incentivised to have more parking lots than they'll ever need. Pushing everything into private lots only will exacerbate this problem

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#87

Post by HDThoreaun »

CharlesW wrote: post #48
polygamous_bat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sometimes when I hear discussions like this, I can't help but think back to several places I've lived or stayed where using a car was not possible. Example? Us in New York are going by fine taking the train or biking, and if we really need a car we call a cab or an Uber, and that we have to pay extra makes us really think if we need that car or is that just us being lazy. I won't ever understand the joy of punting…

Similarly, being car-less in Chicago is the way to go. Even pre-Uber it was far better — it can take an hour to find a parking space in certain neighborhoods at certain times.

The train blows since the pandemic. Blue line is coming like once every 10 minutes during rush hour so you can't count on ever actually getting on due to crowding.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#88

Post by breuleux »

userbinator wrote: post #57
totetsu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really want to know what 5D chess went on to make put "livable cities" and "urban planning" on the truther, red-pilled, plandemic, crowds hit list. It is something that should be examined and critically discussed thats not what i'm talking about I'm talking about how suddenly people who have never so much as listened to an episode of 99PI before or showen any interest are suddenly passionately saying livable cities…

are suddenly passionately saying livable cities are a way to control us. Look at what the government and Big Tech are doing. There are constant articles here being posted about surveillance, loss of privacy, etc. It's a whole lot easier to control the population when you gradually make it harder for them to travel unhindered and untracked. Chickens in a factory farm can be described as being in "livable" conditions.…

You control the population through psychological isolation, not physical isolation. In general, people driving cars are no harder to control than people without cars. They are no harder to track. Like, at all.

You also have to realize that the only car that increases your freedom is your own: everybody else's reduces your freedom. They take a lot of space, they make a lot of noise, they reduce visibility, they hinder pedestrian and bicycle movement, and so on. If you believe in freedom, you have to be holistic about it and learn to make some compromises.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#89

Post by userbinator »

saalweachter wrote: post #70
totetsu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really want to know what 5D chess went on to make put "livable cities" and "urban planning" on the truther, red-pilled, plandemic, crowds hit list. It is something that should be examined and critically discussed thats not what i'm talking about I'm talking about how suddenly people who have never so much as listened to an episode of 99PI before or showen any interest are suddenly passionately saying livable cities…

It's not going to be true for every conspiracy or every conspiracy theorist, but like most things in the US you can connect a lot of dots with racism. In the Robert Moses era mass transit was destroyed because it benefited poor African American communities, and highways were put down to tear apart their neighborhoods. Today, people use "urban" as a dog whistle for "black". People decided the pandemic was no big deal…

You don't think blacks want to have cars too? This has nothing to do with race; that's just a distraction. As others have noticed, it's about corralling the population into more easily "managed" areas and depriving them of ownership.

Re: The High Cost of Free Parking (2005)

#90

Post by amanaplanacanal »

felixfbecker wrote: post #53
kijin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because most of those cities were built up before cars existed, and even horse-drawn carriages were a luxury for the few. Many American cities on the other hand have grown up with the car, with wide streets dividing neighborhoods, and essential facilities scattered far away from one another. Reducing car usage in a typical American city (not downtown Manhattan) is not just a matter of banning cars or replacing…

This is untrue. Most American cities were built before the car and even had wide streetcar networks. Buildings and (often poor and black) neighborhoods were torn down to make way for urban highways. Car manufacturers literally bought up streetcar companies just to rip out tracks and sell more cars. Europe picked up on this trend too a little delayed in many places, but luckily not to the same degree and realized the…

I’ve spent time looking at a map of my city, and it’s pretty easy to see the transition. The older streetcar suburbs have streets on a grid, and alleys down the middle of every block. The post WW2 areas are all widely separated and full of cul-de-sacs, and the alleys are gone.

Walking anywhere in the older areas is easy, though a lot of the amenities like mom and pop stores are now gone. Walking anywhere in the newer areas is pretty much impossible. The streets don’t connect and there is nowhere to walk to.

Post reply on HN