Live data from Hacker News

Why parking spaces shouldn't always be wasted on cars

washingtonpost.com

1–10 of 100 posts

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

#5
post #4

> Other research suggests that cyclists may actually spend more than drivers at some kinds of businesses because it's easier for them to pop in often and unplanned. This is probably due to a shortage of parking spots.

and much more weather dependent.

As long as the businesses if the affected area do not mind the change I see little reason to not do it.

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

#6
It seems like roughly the same goal could have been achieved by condemning a comic book store and turning the space into a park. Is there anything to this article that isn't just the observation "People like to go where parks are" repurposed into anti-car propaganda?

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

#7
I wish valet parking was more prevalent. Does the additional real estate space from efficient parking lots/structures justify the labor cost of providing free valet to customers?

Of course, the real solution lies in eliminating personal car usage altogether (e.g. Uber)

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

#8
post #7

I wish valet parking was more prevalent. Does the additional real estate space from efficient parking lots/structures justify the labor cost of providing free valet to customers? Of course, the real solution lies in eliminating personal car usage altogether (e.g. Uber)

I'm still waiting on that self-driving car to go park itself.

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

#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 lot of time dodging cars on the sidewalk. I didn't notice as much this until I had kids, because while you can dodge the cars coming and going across the sidewalk as an adult (or the cars just parked on the sidewalk, which is common here but nearly impossible without curb cuts), for a kid, it actually is dangerous.

It's a shame that SF allows curb cuts to render even the sidewalks a hazardous place for people (esp kids) to walk, cause let's face it, SF likes to tout itself as a more urban city with a vibrant pedestrian life.

The irony is that curb cuts - the bit of concrete cut out of a curb so a car can get out of the driveway and onto the street, doesn't even increase parking much, since it divides the street up into tiny bits of actual curb too small to fit a car! What it does is take a spot from the public and turns it into a private "reserved" street space. In fact, one study estimated that 50% of garages in the mission are unusable for parking (used instead for storage or other purposes), so really, this is just a reserved parking spot on the street.

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

#10
post #4

> Other research suggests that cyclists may actually spend more than drivers at some kinds of businesses because it's easier for them to pop in often and unplanned. This is probably due to a shortage of parking spots.

It's impossible to have 'enough' parking spots. Induced demand shows that cars, like goldfish, always grow to fill the space they're given. It's politically difficult process, but just refusing to try to solve this problem (which leads to more New Urbanism-friendly locations) is often the right solution.
Post reply on HN