It's gonna be really fun trying to convince people to live in neighborhoods that you can't get in or out of because the nearest parking space is 2 miles away.
The law doesn't say you can't build parking spaces with the dwelling(s) nor does it make it harder to include parking in the proposal for the dwelling(s).
People will buy there because it is slightly cheaper. And then it will all fail, because the limited parking will be filled with cars and everyone will complain.
Agreed, good public transport is never profitable. Where I live it's great but very subsidized.
Which is not a problem to me considering it helps solve many societal problems for everyone, like climate change, too much traffic in the city, air quality etc.
But the US is very conceptually opposed to subsidization so I don't think it would work there. And leaving it to the free market just won't make for good enough transport.
I agree, I just think that right now there is a risk no one will actually provide a working alternative. They will either change nothing, or squeeze more plots in and when the whole place grinds to a halt for lack of space they will have moved on already.
I really think the problem with lack of walkable (liveable really) neighbourhoods is that it needs both state planning AND developers to be properly incentivised. That is why no one has managed it yet, there is very little overlap between those groups.
Donald Shoup, who the article credits in large part for this change, has given many talks about parking. Some are available on YouTube [1]. Well worth a listen.
It's been half amusing and half depressing to watch so many people espousing the freedom of cars, and the moment the government says it won't force homebuilders to include parking spaces, they are all up in arms decrying the loss of their perceived freedom.
17 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 57.3 ms ] threadMust be cheap based on this metric. Remember that soho has one pretty crappy subway station, so it’s not particularly transit rich.
Which is not a problem to me considering it helps solve many societal problems for everyone, like climate change, too much traffic in the city, air quality etc.
But the US is very conceptually opposed to subsidization so I don't think it would work there. And leaving it to the free market just won't make for good enough transport.
I really think the problem with lack of walkable (liveable really) neighbourhoods is that it needs both state planning AND developers to be properly incentivised. That is why no one has managed it yet, there is very little overlap between those groups.
Thanks for listening to my ted talk!
[1] https://youtu.be/r0gokb4rPik
There is also a good Econtalk episode on it, https://www.econtalk.org/donald-shoup-on-the-economics-of-pa...
What does freedom even mean here?