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

Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

danrodricks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 389 posts

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#271

Post by sgu999 »

shiroiuma wrote: post #206
HEmanZ wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have experience living in any variety of urban areas in first world countries outside of the US? Have you been to many cities in the US? I don’t think you can possibly have done either of these and still think the US has any urbanism. And literally all most moderate urbanists ask for is “please lower regulations so that the free market can build what some of us want and I can actually have a choice.”

>Do you have experience living in any variety of urban areas in first world countries outside of the US? The vast, vast majority of Americans have never even been outside the US (except maybe to Canada, and possibly Mexican tourist spots), let alone lived outside the US in a first-world country, and this includes the OP and most people on HN. It's why reading comments on urbanism on forums like this is both entertain…

> because it's so wrong and US-centric

I'm reading these threads from my walkable town in western Europe for the same reason ;D

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#272

Post by nraynaud »

it's funny how older countries are sometimes ahead of some trends. Here in France we can ignore some local height limits to install solar pannels, it's now forbidden (in the genreal case) to toss your rainwater to the street, you have to get in back in the ground on the area it was collected, etc. But it's true that being an old country they did not really trash everything for the car, so we are not too much left with the very wide scar of a highway cutting through a downtown.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#273

Post by cassepipe »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #268
jamil7 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that they’re still vastly less efficient than mass public transport, bikes or just walking.

I'd love to see public transit that can go from arbitrary-point to arbitrary-point door to door in the same amount of time as a hailed EV could. I genuinely really would. I've never seen a proposal for such a system, only proposals that are less time-efficient than that.

You don't go arbitrary to arbitrary, you make the most of the transportation system and you walk/bike the last part. Of course the city has to be designed in a way where it's not a pain.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#274

Post by jamil7 »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #268
jamil7 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that they’re still vastly less efficient than mass public transport, bikes or just walking.

I'd love to see public transit that can go from arbitrary-point to arbitrary-point door to door in the same amount of time as a hailed EV could. I genuinely really would. I've never seen a proposal for such a system, only proposals that are less time-efficient than that.

That would be one of the least efficient ways to move people at scale around a city, which just enforces the original point.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#275

Post by mlsu »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #243
trimethylpurine wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's because urbanites keep getting suckered into letting builders do "condensed affordable housing" under the false premise that more housing means cheaper housing. Obviously that would only be true if the units were owned by competitors. Where one contractor owns all the units they set the prices, and they have no reason to make them "affordable." Just condensed.

For the downvoters, nice of you to hope I'm wrong but unfortunately: https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-and-w... Honestly who is downvoting this anyway? Do you work for big contractors or just like unaffordable housing as long as it's condensed? Evil much?

This is entirely unrelated to the presence or lack of housing in urban areas.

If anything, a monopolistic landlord would like to expand and build more apartments, to extract a higher volume of above-market rent.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#276

Post by mlsu »

bagels wrote: post #57
J_Shelby_J wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about city owned and maintained on-street parking. I think we can agree that the sane thing to do is charge for it and let the market set the price. If home owners or developers want to build their own on-site parking, they're welcome to. Personally, I'm sick of having four parking spots in my garage tacked to my rent despite being a one car household. Or did I misunderstand, and you feel on-street fre…

If your neighborhood or development is the one with no parking and you are not in a walk-able city, you are trading dollars for the stressful situation of trying to figure out where to park, getting in to conflicts with neighbors over parking, and getting your car crashed in to or vandalized. I tried it, I didn't like it.

Everything you are describing can be solved by paying for parking. Even in the busiest areas of a downtown American city, you can find a monthly parking lot that will rent you a secure parking spot that is truly yours.

Of course, it won't be free -- it will cost what it should cost, market rate.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#277

Post by JoshTriplett »

jamil7 wrote: post #274
JoshTriplett wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to see public transit that can go from arbitrary-point to arbitrary-point door to door in the same amount of time as a hailed EV could. I genuinely really would. I've never seen a proposal for such a system, only proposals that are less time-efficient than that.

That would be one of the least efficient ways to move people at scale around a city, which just enforces the original point.

It's more efficient than requiring parking.

And define "efficient"? People's time and effort have value, as well, and saving time and effort is a win. If a proposed solution is "it takes longer to get from place to place, and additionally requires walking or biking", many people will rightfully consider that proposal worse.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#278

Post by JoshTriplett »

cassepipe wrote: post #273
JoshTriplett wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to see public transit that can go from arbitrary-point to arbitrary-point door to door in the same amount of time as a hailed EV could. I genuinely really would. I've never seen a proposal for such a system, only proposals that are less time-efficient than that.

You don't go arbitrary to arbitrary, you make the most of the transportation system and you walk/bike the last part. Of course the city has to be designed in a way where it's not a pain.

> You don't go arbitrary to arbitrary

Yes, I currently do. Not being able to do that is a downgrade. We can and should do better than telling people to accept a worse solution.

Re: Tear up unused parking lots, plant trees

#280

Post by mlsu »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #267
PeterisP wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a walkable city you go by a store every time you go outside - you come back from work, you pass by a store or two where you can buy fresh groceries. This has also an impact on healthy diet, giving access to fresh goods which wouldn't possibly last a month and thus wouldn't get eaten if people drive shopping every few weeks.

> In a walkable city you go by a store every time you go outside I'm all for designing for walkability, but this is a case study in failing to understand audiences. If you make this not just a possibility but a requirement of walkable cities, many people won't want to live in your "walkable" cities at all . There are much better arguments possible here. For instance, you could promote CSAs for regularly delivered far…

If you don't want to live in a walkable area boy have I got great news for you. Close your eyes and point at the map!
Post reply on HN