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

U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 432 posts

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#111

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

busterarm wrote: post #100
coldpie wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before: If you build a building of this size, you MUST also build at least X parking spaces. Now: If you build a building of this size, you MAY build as many parking spaces as you think you need. Seems like a strict improvement to me.

When it comes to property development, anything that you leave to optionality in code enforcement ends up being a thing that never happens ever. For something to be available it has to be required by building codes.

Except this sort of code has a very real impact on volume of business, in the case of retail outlets, restaurants, venues or anything that's open to the public.

Can you see the design conversations going, "let's provide for practically no parking spots, so we can get less foot traffic and nobody will want to come shop here!"

In areas that support public transit and promote multi-modal, the businesses which thrive there are ones which cater to folks who eschew private vehicles. And that's a distinctly different crowd! So I think it'll work out great.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#112

Post by njarboe »

foxyv wrote: post #38
_dain_ wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like the parking was underpriced. EDIT I am rate-limited so can't reply, but this part: "If you have 200 cars" This is only the case if the demand for parking / driving is perfectly inelastic, which would be quite extraordinary. Empirically, when you charge for parking or institute toll roads, traffic tends to fall, in some cases sharply (because many journeys are low value). I repeat: if the parking spaces…

Parking, Roads, Gasoline, Pollution, etc... We so heavily subsidize people's cars for no reason. For the cost of all of it we could have free healthcare and amazing public transportation then lower taxes with the left over money.

Um... Just US healthcare spending is 17.3% of GDP. $4.5 Trillion per year. No way this works.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#113

Post by busterarm »

londons_explore wrote: post #23
DoneWithAllThat wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “let’s make life shittier for people so they’ll do the things I think are right” is bad politics and bad policy.

Worked for Europe. Everyone there lives in houses perhaps only half the size of a typical US home, and they're happy with it. Most people have the option to go live in the countryside, have a big house and drive a car, all for the same money, yet they choose to have a small city apartment and use public transport.

Europe was already built before cars existed whereas most cities west of the Mississippi were designed for automobiles save for a tiny downtown core.

This is especially true about Austin.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#115

Post by brigade »

oceanplexian wrote: post #22

> "I think our country has used its land wastefully, like a drunk lottery winner that's squandered their newfound wealth," said resident Tai Hovanky. This sounds like a comment from someone who lives in a city and doesn’t get out. There is an incredible, vast, mind-boggling amount of empty space in the US. I have flown and driven across the country many times. City dwellers are occupying a fraction of 1% of the space…

Cities should be dense so rural lots don’t get subdivided into 7000 sqft suburban lots. As you say, literally no one is forcing you to live in cities. But preventing dense cities will force you to live in the suburbs.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#116

Post by thelastgallon »

Lot of comments on building public transit first, before removing parking minimums. Public transit takes forever to build and its impossible to build usable transit with suburban sprawl. Usable transit --> reach destination in a reasonable time.

Instead of public transit, cities should encourage Uber/Lyft. Car payments + insurance + gas + repairs/maintenance + parking might be close to $800 - $1000/month for most people. Thats probably just the amount that works for ditching car and just use Uber.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#117

Post by pramsey »

elektor wrote: post #2

There is a thorough book on this topic, Paved Paradise: How Parking Explains the World. Highly recommend it if you're interested in the causes of so much of our dysfunction in housing costs. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/634461/paved-paradi...

Yep, good read and wonderful on the vicious cycle that led to the downtowns of most US cities looking like WWII bombed out zones by 1975.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#118

Post by hardcopy »

elektor wrote: post #2

There is a thorough book on this topic, Paved Paradise: How Parking Explains the World. Highly recommend it if you're interested in the causes of so much of our dysfunction in housing costs. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/634461/paved-paradi...

There's a lot of people commenting in this thread that would benefit from reading this book...

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#119

Post by busterarm »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #102
busterarm wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to property development, anything that you leave to optionality in code enforcement ends up being a thing that never happens ever. For something to be available it has to be required by building codes.

> anything that you leave to optionality in code enforcement ends up being a thing that never happens ever No code requires marble countertops. Yet they get installed because buyers want them. Cities like Austin have regulated themselves into a housing-cost crisis. It’s almost a miracle that rational economic policy is being given space by voters.

Marble countertops aren't competing for space that you could otherwise use to build more apartments to sell/rent.

Parking is.

Until parking spaces cost more than apartments do, developers are going to favor building apartments over parking one hundreds times out of one hundred.

Re: U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

#120

Post by [deleted] »

voisin wrote: post #3

It’s one thing to ditch parking minimums, but it has to be matched with investment in public transit. Simply eliminating parking spots doesn’t eliminate demand when there are no other options for getting around. And I suspect the public transit investment will be way more controversial and difficult to implement.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN