“It’s not like the government is forcing you to buy a car!”

If you live in a city with parking minimums, yes they fucking are.

  • menemen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The problem with this line of thought is that oftentimes cars then will just be parked wildly (or on adjacent areas) and that can lead to large problems. A traffic concept is almost always a basic neccesity. I agree that this must not necessarily be a car optimized one (and in these times probably shouldn’t be).

    But leaving it to the business owners is a road to utter chaos and will in most cases lead to very unpleasant and potentially dangerous situations. Also keep in mind that if the public hand takes care of the resulting problems this will come out of tax money and thus will cofinance the business owners profits, taking it from the general public. This is also oftentimes not desirable (unless you are a business owner).

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      huh? if there’s no parking you don’t get to park, not having parking doesn’t lead to chaos what are you on about?

      • menemen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        In our city we have shops without parking. People do defintly park where there is no parking, blocking everything wildly. I personally had a car crash into me, because of the resulting chaos (the driver backed up without looking). This is quite common in places without a sound transportation concept (as said above, the concept does not necessarily have to be, and imo shouldn’t be, car focused). Yes, the driver is responsible, but as a city planer this is something that has to be considered unconditionally. (I might also add that I work in public infrastructure planning, though not roadways, but I have meetings with those guys quite often.)

    • amelia@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      While that does seem to make sense, in my opinion it really just gives people more incentive to use a car. If you ban wild parking completely, that might be a different story. But just creating more and more space for cars is not going to solve the problem. The problem is that there are too many cars in the first place.

      • AchtungDrempels@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        You mean if wild parking was banned completely, it would be a different story if you’d still need regulation in those places. There i’d agree. But in general street parking is not banned in Germany, and illegal street parking is widely tolerated by lots of communes. Where i live the street parking capacity is being used at around 150-200% lol (numbers from a few years ago).

      • menemen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        As I said before, different concepts are possible. Nowadays e.g. the trend in Germany goes towards central parking (Quartiersgarage) and an otherwise completly car free neighbourhood (the central parking then gets financed over the plots), combined with public transport and bikeways. Even less car-friendly concepts are possible. But you defintly need a concept. Just “let the plot owners decide themselves” will almost always lead to desaster.