U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by graymatters on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @09:29PM (#38862355)

This is a dedicated political campaign aiming to convince people that dense urbanization is the (better) solution. However all data points at the opposite direction. Dense urbanization leads to super linear increase in crime, drives the population towards lower socio-economic status (again faster than linear). Dense urbanization is detrimental to health, physical and mental. Attempts to emulate old Europe where land is scarce is completely unnecessary for the US and other countries with large percentage of uninhabited land (over 80% in US). Now ask yourself who are to benefit from dense urbanization and abolishing of parking quotas? Only the land developers who can build and sell more units per sq. mile, wealthy corporate real estate owners who benefit from renting out to people, mega rich who advocate the “own-nothing” mode for the masses, since renting is always more profitable for the super rich. The dense urbanization leads to degentrification, driving out the middle class which is the strong backbone of the economy. This is already clearly observable with the big California exodus happening right now. Skilled workers leave CA to smaller communities in other states, working remotely and enjoying the increased quality of life.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by FarMcKon on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @09:46PM (#38862430)

You can just say 'I don't like this' instead of making up a bunch of 'just so stories' about why.

Fine if you don't like density, but the whole pseudo-science `Dense urbanization is detrimental to health, physical and mental` is just mental.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by azemetre on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @10:17PM (#38862561)

Very weird. My life has greatly improved since moving to a walkable city. It’s very nice to walk and get groceries for a meal that day or walk to a bakery or walk to a bar or walk to a store or walk to my doctors or walk to my friends.

When I lived in FL you had to drive everywhere. I’d rather be walking. We literally evolved to walk long distances, and cars don’t seem to be making our lives better with all the externalities getting ignored (air pollution, microplastics, and noise pollution).

I don’t mind if people want to drive, but they should be paying the true cost and not keep a massively subsidized lifestyle that can’t exist without massive federal funds.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by colechristensen on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @11:00PM (#38862837)

I live in a downtown high rise. It’s 25 degrees outside, I have a lady friend who lives a mile away. I feel unsafe riding public transit at night here, much less her. She experiences extreme harassment walking here during the day (did it once, never again, I was on the phone with her, it was horrifying).

How do you propose she visit me without a car and available parking?

Uber would cost her more than an hour of her workday.

GP is damn right the opposition to parking is detrimental to health physical and mental as well as wealth.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by Moldoteck on Thursday January 04, 2024 @03:26AM (#38864542)

You gave an anecdotal example. I can give one too: generally medium density, mixed use, bikeble areas are much safer compared to other options, bc there are always people around, some go to work, some go to shopping, some go to drink a coffee, etc, adn ppl usually feel safer in this areas. On the other hand, low density areas are less safe bc there's no one around to call police if something happens. It's also a health problem both phisical and mental: ppl are more isolated from other ppl, it's harder to meet other ppl, it's much harder when you are old and ppl generally move less bc they must use a car for everything instead of walking/biking to the destination. In low density areas there's also a deficit of 3'rd places to meet ppl

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:U.S. cities opt to ditch their off-street parking minimums by HomeDeLaPot on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @10:50PM (#38862780)

Dense urbanization is not the point. We need medium density. Bikeable. There should be more housing choices than an apartment in a giant building by a highway OR a single family home with a big yard out in the suburbs. With relaxed zoning, small developers could start building smaller multifamily homes that regular people can afford to buy so they don't have to choose betwen renting one of those apartments or being "house poor". We used to have that medium density housing; it's what lends many older neighborhoods their charm. Make it legal to build again!

And with a medium density, less car-centric neighborhood, people can reasonably walk or bike to work, the grocery store, etc., meaning a car is optional and it's easy to get exercise. Right now we drive everywhere, spend loads of money on cars and roads, and wonder why we are so fat! It is not cheap, healthy, or sustainable to base our communities on the idea that everyone must buy a 3-5 bedroom house on a quarter acre in the suburbs and commute 30 minutes in a Jeep.

People are not leaving California because it's too dense, they're leaving because it stopped building homes.

[ Parent | on HN ]