this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2025
113 points (93.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

12165 readers
1316 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (3 children)

Changing rules for parking generally serves only to create local parking shortages (and subsequent emotional discussions) as rhetoric underlying problem is not addresssed. This is a bit chicken-and-egg, but consider what happens if a standard subdivision is built without driveways, parking lots, or garage space. A 2 mile walk to the grocery store doesn’t really work. Instead, the regulations should be for higher density, space for bicycles (and transit), and space for essential amenities like small, local grocery stores and restaurants. ETA - with current conditions creating unplanned multigenerational housing, dad, mom, kid1, kid2, and partners makes for tight parking even with 3 spots.

You know, like they used to build before it was about maximizing the revenue per square mile of land?

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 3 points 5 hours ago

An apartment building in a walkable area with a parking garage is more walkable than a regular suburb without the cars.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Are you conflating the idea of banning parking with repealing mandatory parking? These are two very different policies. Developers will still build parking infrastructure when the market demands it and it makes sense for the neighborhood and project. They just won’t be universally required to even when literally no one wants it.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It’s not always the case that builders provide parking. The market demands shareholder profits, and if you don’t build a driveway, that’s more units you can fit on a given plot of land.

This is the trend I’m observing, but I’m certain it is not universal. 

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Parking is for residents. If they want more parking, they can pay for a property that has that, which will usually cost more. If not, they can pay less and go without. This is a good thing and it’s not something the government needs to involve itself in. Right now the vast majority of places (in the US at least) have a really excessive amount of parking, so it may be that segment of the market is temporarily saturated, and they’re building for a market that wants less, which has gone unserved for a long time due to these pointless laws.

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

The issue here is that for those things you suggested to exist we would inherently need to reduce parking as part of the change in regulation. Parking spaces are currently taking up the spaces that those amenities would be built, just as you described.

Unfortunately, NIMBY fools hear "reduce parking" and completely turn their brains off to screech about it, without ever considering the rest of the proposal and what it would do to benefit the community, simply because it makes them change their habits and they don't want to.

Like, yes, there will be parking shortages, but that's kinda the point so that people have to utilize alternatives instead.