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

Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 100 posts

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#91

Post by metaphorm »

brc wrote: post #86
metaphorm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why are you so eager to defend cars and car-culture? cars are the single most dangerous thing in the daily lives of most Americans. they are rolling manslaughter engines. they are destroying the environment, leading us inexplorably down a path of global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion. they have been undermining good public transportation infrastructure investment for decades. they are destructive…

How about the freedom to set your own travel plans, efficiencies in travel with all the attendant economic benefits and vital tool in improving real estate quality? The road-and-traffic free utopia you seek cannot exist. >leading us inexplorably down a path of global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion You forgot creating runny noses and ingrown toenails. Rhetoric is a tad overblown.

clearly we need the ability to travel. allowing every person on the planet (with sufficient money anyway) to ride around in their very own 3 ton machine, moving at 80 mph is not the right way to do it. a better world would have different vehicles than cars.

global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-collected sunlight, previously sequestered deep in the crust of the Earth, and burning it at a rate so fast that the biosphere of the planet cannot keep up with the changes in the climate. there are other fossil fuels as well that contribute to this besides just the petroleum burned by cars, but petroleum burned by cars is a huge factor here.

seriously, you shouldn't be dismissive of these problems. there is a basic need to provide transportation to people. we have done a terrible job of finding a good solution to that needs. what we do now with cars is one of the most destructive and unsustainable ways possible to solve the problem.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#92

Post by metaphorm »

chc wrote: post #83
Kluny wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's lots of choices. Bikes, walkind, public transit and rideshare for nearby travel. Planes, trains and buses and boats for far travel. The only restriction in the relatively small percentage of the earth that's so crowded that there isn't an extra plot of land for you to leave your property on. And you're still allowed to go there - if you don't insist on bringing 2 tons of metal with you.

> There's lots of choices. Bikes It would take me several hours to get to work and back. It would be even worse for my wife. If we wanted to go out to dinner, the restaurant would be closed by the time we got there. > walking This is even slower than biking. > public transit About as slow as biking, but smelly and without the health benefits. > rideshare Unless I misunderstand, this involves cars, so it is not an alt…

we understand that you drive because you have to. the problem is that most people aren't trying very hard to imagine ways to drive less, or ways to build communities that don't utterly rely upon everyone owning a car.

its not a problem that an individual can fix overnight. its got to become a social movement with lots of new technology and new social institutions and new beliefs and values behind it.

as things stand now its easy to feel powerless and give up and say "doesn't matter, I'll be dead before our society changes enough to make not driving a viable alternative". and that's why nothing ever gets done about this problem. its still a problem though and at the rate things are going now we won't ever solve it before it becomes a crisis. so that's what will happen. inevitably there will be a crisis and then we'll have to confront the problem under much more desperate circumstances.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#93

Post by chc »

metaphorm wrote: post #91
brc wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the freedom to set your own travel plans, efficiencies in travel with all the attendant economic benefits and vital tool in improving real estate quality? The road-and-traffic free utopia you seek cannot exist. >leading us inexplorably down a path of global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion You forgot creating runny noses and ingrown toenails. Rhetoric is a tad overblown.

clearly we need the ability to travel. allowing every person on the planet (with sufficient money anyway) to ride around in their very own 3 ton machine, moving at 80 mph is not the right way to do it. a better world would have different vehicles than cars. global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-co…

> global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-collected sunlight, previously sequestered deep in the crust of the Earth, and burning it at a rate so fast that the biosphere of the planet cannot keep up with the changes in the climate. there are other fossil fuels as well that contribute to this besides just the petroleum burned by cars, but petroleum burned by cars is a huge factor here.

These are not problems with cars, though. These are problems with internal combustion engines. Over the next half a decade, electric cars are going to take off in a big way, as EVs with low prices, long ranges and good performance characteristics become common (so far we know about the Model 3 and the Chevy Bolt, both coming in two years, and a significant range bump on the Leaf is likely by then too).

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#94

Post by metaphorm »

chc wrote: post #93
metaphorm wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

clearly we need the ability to travel. allowing every person on the planet (with sufficient money anyway) to ride around in their very own 3 ton machine, moving at 80 mph is not the right way to do it. a better world would have different vehicles than cars. global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-co…

> global climate destruction and natural resource exhaustion are realities. this is not overblown rhetoric. we are removing millions of years of fossilized plant-collected sunlight, previously sequestered deep in the crust of the Earth, and burning it at a rate so fast that the biosphere of the planet cannot keep up with the changes in the climate. there are other fossil fuels as well that contribute to this besides…

electric motors are more efficient than gasoline powered motors, so there is some real gain to using cars of that type. however, the electric energy still has to be generated by something, and frequently that something is a coal, gas, or oil burning power plant. its still better than burning the gasoline in the car engine directly but not a fundamental solution.

the fundamental solution is to drive less, to carpool more, and to reorganize our communities to make effective public transportation a focus instead of an afterthought. we have to find ways to meet the transportation needs of people without using so much energy to do so.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#95

Post by aluhut »

wmil wrote: post #71
aluhut wrote: post #58

Wouldn't that just cause the clients that came by car (because of distance, health, whatever) to go somewhere else because there is no parking space? It looks to me like just another gentrification result. The new hip clients never needed those parking spots.

The problem with parking spots is that with single occupancy vehicles you're allocating 170 sq feet per customer for a few dollars. That's a terrible deal given real estate prices downtown. Also very few people are going to drive a significant distance for tacos or ice cream. These shops only cater to foot traffic.

Yes few people are going to drive significant distances for tacos or ice cream but people drive distances to shop and buy then tacos and ice cream. Those are also cars with a whole family in it. Try to park your van with 3 kids in it in that gentrificated area for some ice cream. But hell...you don't want those loud suckers in your fancy eco-cafe.

Upper class gentrification people don't need to drive to shop. They eat in restaurants or order online. Because they can afford it.

You are causing a separation of classes here again. The whole argument runs on it and the arrogant way this class handles that by writing such 1st world problem articles is disgusting.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#96

Post by mixmastamyk »

mzs wrote: post #75
geebee wrote: post #9

On a closely related note, I read a very interesting piece about "curb cuts" in San Francisco. http://www.spur.org/publications/article/2008-06-01/eye-stre... The image showing the difference between Park Slope (without curb cuts) and a stretch of Dolores street in San Francisco (with curb cuts) is really eye-opening. It's a bummer, because a lot of SF really is small and walkable, but you know, we really do spend a…

This is funny to me cause I came from different background where parking on sidewalk or partially on sidewalk is very common, and there are no cut-outs in the curb. I think your POV is very American, and that is fine. Here are some examples of parking signs, in Poland you will get a ticket for example if you do not park diagonally with at least one tire over the curb when there is a parking sign indicating you must p…

I've noticed when that is the case in Europe, the curbs are low and rounded, so it isn't hard too drive over them slowly. When they are high and square like in CA, it wouldn't be easy at all to get on the sidewalk (even if the fascist parking dictatorship were to allow it).

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#97

Post by mixmastamyk »

moron4hire wrote: post #13

Philadelphia does not have a very good public transit system. It's fine if all you want to do is get to the center of the city, but to actually travel around the city it sucks. And parts of Philadelphia have a severe parking problem. I'm convinced that the only reason South Philadelphia works is because 1/4 to 1/2 of its population isn't at home at any one point in time. It's like sailors hot-bedding on a submarine.…

There's a train from near downtown to PHL... so the world is their oyster.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#98

Post by aluhut »

aluhut wrote: post #95
wmil wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with parking spots is that with single occupancy vehicles you're allocating 170 sq feet per customer for a few dollars. That's a terrible deal given real estate prices downtown. Also very few people are going to drive a significant distance for tacos or ice cream. These shops only cater to foot traffic.

Yes few people are going to drive significant distances for tacos or ice cream but people drive distances to shop and buy then tacos and ice cream. Those are also cars with a whole family in it. Try to park your van with 3 kids in it in that gentrificated area for some ice cream. But hell...you don't want those loud suckers in your fancy eco-cafe. Upper class gentrification people don't need to drive to shop. They ea…

Downvoting without comments. Great.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#99

Post by meej »

mc32 wrote: post #81
meej wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that drove me nuts about curb cuts when I lived in SF were all the people who used them as sidewalk-blocking private parking spaces (which is illegal, not that the city ever did anything about it), forcing pedestrians into the street. It was especially maddening when I was pushing my bike up a steep hill; I can only imagine how frustrating it would be for those in wheelchairs or pushing strollers. Car cultu…

The city owns the fist two squares worth of sidewalk, if there are more those belong to the residence and you're allowed to park there. If your vehicle etc. block or intrude on the city parts you do get cited. Enforcement may vary, however. Plus you're free to call the SFmta to ticket violators.

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean by "first two squares of sidewalk". I lived on Coso Ave in Bernal Heights, where a bunch of garage doors are right next to the sidewalks. Some of my neighbors would park their cars in their driveways, with the tail end sticking out into the street, and blocking sidewalk users from crossing their driveways as a result. I can't imagine how that could be legal.

Re: Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

#100

Post by mc32 »

meej wrote: post #99
mc32 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The city owns the fist two squares worth of sidewalk, if there are more those belong to the residence and you're allowed to park there. If your vehicle etc. block or intrude on the city parts you do get cited. Enforcement may vary, however. Plus you're free to call the SFmta to ticket violators.

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean by "first two squares of sidewalk". I lived on Coso Ave in Bernal Heights, where a bunch of garage doors are right next to the sidewalks. Some of my neighbors would park their cars in their driveways, with the tail end sticking out into the street, and blocking sidewalk users from crossing their driveways as a result. I can't imagine how that could be legal.

That is quite illegal.

Typically sidewalks are not uninterrupted planes of concrete, but are divided into squares so that in case there is sidewalk buckling, they have some give and don't break up the whole thing, plus repair is made easier.

So, usually the first two squares' width belong to the municipality, any others are property of the residence.

Here is a decent FAQ on parking in SF: http://www.excelsiorsf.org/district/parking_summit/summit_st...

Post reply on HN