
If You Can’t Ban Cars Downtown, Take Away Parking Spaces - awjr
https://www.fastcompany.com/40434409/if-you-cant-ban-cars-downtown-just-take-away-the-parking-spaces
======
iambateman
In my city - Columbia, SC - we have a magnificent Saturday farmers market that
takes up three blocks of Main street. Thousands of people come to eat and hang
out with hundreds of vendors for several hours.

And yet.

The cross streets between the blocks remain driveable. As a result, little
kids cross the road as SUV's come barreling past. Last week I saw a driver
speed through with his hands up in disgust, staring down an old couple
crossing the street.

Walkable cities face very real opposition from the norms of society. Despite
10,000 people creating a hive of street life, we still keep cross streets open
for the ~100 cars that will use them.

are there examples of American cities who do walkability well? And by well, I
guess I mean to European levels.

~~~
KekDemaga
How sure are you about those numbers?

100 cars commuting daily is 4.1 cars an hour that is typical of a rural farm
road not a busy city.

10,000 people is Prince George's Stadium[1] full to capacity.

[1][http://www.theballparkguide.com/graphics/bowie-
baysox/prince...](http://www.theballparkguide.com/graphics/bowie-
baysox/prince-george's-stadium.jpg)

~~~
Spooky23
The key word is Saturday morning.

I've been able to get easily get street parking in lower Manhattan on Saturday
morning. People don't work in business districts on Saturday.

------
lazyjones
I don't understand this concept of banning cars, especially by removing
parking spaces from cities under the pretext of a reduced environmental
footprint. Norway is on the forefront of the EV revolution, so they can go
"green" by just banning gasoline cars.

There seems to be a second movement hidden behind the climate debate and it's
keen on removing private transport altogether (except bicycles, for now),
apparently driven by people with a particular urban hipster lifestyle. This is
a massive reduction of comfort, a burden for families with small children and
people with disabilities, as well as businesses and logistics.

~~~
beambot
I don't understand why such a large fraction of our usable land in people-
dense areas needs to be consumed by expanses of ugly, dead cement full of
giant deadly "creatures" traveling at high speeds, nor why that state of
affairs needs to be imposed everywhere on everyone.

It's all about balance...

~~~
lazyjones
> _I don 't understand why such a large fraction of our usable land in people-
> dense areas needs to be consumed by expanses of ugly, dead cement_

What other useful space would you put between tall buildings? Pedestrians have
plenty of space to walk, at least I don't hear much about pedestrian traffic
jams.

Roads are very valuable and they're being used for many things that everybody
needs: buses, ambulances, fire service vehicles. Do you really want them gone?

~~~
matt4077
The services you mention could be run using just a single one-way lane,
alternating between blocks.

And, yes, pedestrian traffic jams do happen. There's also untold other costs
of traffic, and potential uses for more space:

\- Outdoor dining

\- retail displays

\- kids playing

\- Trees, bushes, etc

\- Bike lanes

~~~
lazyjones
See, that's what I mean by "urban hipster lifestyle".

Outdoor dining can be done in backyards (pretty much every 2nd tavern in
Athens, a big, sprawling, dirty city) does this.

Retail displays - pardon me, how many more do you need and why do they need to
be in everyone's faces in the middle of the street?

It seems that millennials don't really know what they want and aren't flexible
enough to choose from available lifestyles in different cities, countries etc.
- instead, they what _everything_ together immediately right in the place they
live, no matter how contradictory those things are. If you want trees, go to a
park. Kids can play there safely, too, without being run over by an ambulance
or biker. ;-)

~~~
majewsky
The spirit of capitalism, condensed into one statement: If your kids want to
breathe non-toxic air and play, they better be prepared to walk (or, rather,
drive) half an hour to the park.

~~~
lazyjones
> _If your kids want to breathe non-toxic air and play, they better be
> prepared to walk (or, rather, drive) half an hour to the park._

Wake up, "cars" is no longer synonymous with "pollution". I take offence at
such ignorance as an EV owner.

As for kids who want everything while condemning capitalism: the problem isn't
that they want clean air and play time, the problem is that they demand just
as vigorously warm pizza delivered to their home in 10 minutes, furniture
brought to their doorstep by whoever sells it on Amazon and the fire brigade
to arrive quickly when they set their WLAN-enabled fridges on fire. Obviously,
they don't understand how these things relate to each other, but they moan
about it nevertheless.

------
z1mm32m4n
This is already like what many European cities do; the shops and restaurants
all cluster in in a pedestrian only zone (in Germany they call it a
fussgänger).

I've found these places quite pleasant; you can eat outside without fast loud
cars passing by. You can cross the streets at will.

There's usually even a parking garage at the outset, though a metro system or
ride sharing also works.

~~~
pif
That's fine, if at the same time you have private businesses and public
offices out of the pedestrian zone.

~~~
matt4077
These are usually the most expensive parts of town, and of course there are
offices and luxury apartments on the upper floors.

People are expected to walk two or three blocks, and that distance is kept
down by the pedestrian-only zones usually being only two or three streets
wide.

------
dionidium
There's an even easier way to start: ban regulations requiring a set number of
parking spaces in new developments. Removing these minimums returns parking to
the market. Already dense areas would likely end up with fewer spaces that'd
cost more, driving the desired result.

~~~
icebraining
Does Oslo have such regulations?

~~~
dionidium
I don't know. I'm speaking more generally.

------
throwaway2016a
So only people who live downtown can go downtown unless they want to spend an
hour in public transportation. Go it.

This is a terrible idea.

I live 40 minutes outside of Boston but sometimes I have meetings in downtown
Boston. If I'm on time I'll park at the T (subway) station and take the T the
rest of the way in but if I'm running late I'll usually drive directly in and
park downtown. Sure it costs $20 for a couple hours but it is worth it when
you are in a time crunch.

Making public transit the only way to get downtown is essentially saying you
don't want people doing business in your downtown. Since taking public transit
turns my 40 minute drive into two hours (each way).

Edit: of course I can park and take a taxi or Uber just like I can park and
take the T but that adds a lot of time (and cost) to my trip. And that money
is money I might spend at business downtown if I didn't just blow it on a
taxi.

~~~
Frondo
Yes.

Life will be a little less convenient for you for those "sometimes" that you
have meetings, and a lot better for a lot of people.

That kind of trade-off is something we call "society".

~~~
closeparen
The people we are taking from have less money (housing is cheaper far from
center) and the people we're giving to have more. This is a regressive policy,
not something we do often.

------
hedora
My guess is that this works well if you have a workable public transit system
(and since 61% of Oslo's carbon is apparently from public transit, they
probably do).

When places like the SF Bay Area do stuff like this, it ends up being warped
into NIMBYism where there is no meaningful investment in public transit or
affordable downtown housing to counteract the reduction in car volume. It just
increases discrepancies in housing costs, and increases the already punishing
commute times of the middle class.

I guess eliminating parking would solve the "six figure salary and a trailer
by the river" problem we're starting to have where young engineers just buy a
motorhome and live out of that.

------
sxates
I'm not opposed to limiting car space in favor of people space, but I also see
EVs as a solution if the problem is emissions. No need to ban all cars, just
gas-powered ones.

~~~
lazyjones
> _No need to ban all cars, just gas-powered ones._

Seconded. Especially since while riding a bicycle, people likely emit more CO₂
than an electric car. ;-)

~~~
yladiz
Directly, sure, but charging your car generates carbon dioxide, as do the
manufacturing processes behind the components. Manufacturing an electric car
is in some ways worse for the environment than a traditional car.

~~~
lazyjones
> _charging your car generates carbon dioxide,_

Not if you charge from a PV array ...

> _as do the manufacturing processes behind the components._

Same as every other manufacturing process, even for bicycles, your clothes
etc. ...

> _Manufacturing an electric car is in some ways worse for the environment
> than a traditional car._

That's nonsense. Says Elon Musk and so do various studies (in contrast to a
recent, widely quoted swedish one).

~~~
majewsky
> > Manufacturing an electric car is in some ways worse for the environment
> than a traditional car.

> That's nonsense. Says Elon Musk and so do various studies (in contrast to a
> recent, widely quoted swedish one).

Well, how much better is an EV car, compared to an ICE car, in terms of
emissions over its whole lifetime? If it's only 5% better, or even 20%, it's
not enough. If we're judging a mode of transport by its emissions, then EVs
don't have to compete with ICEs. They have to compete with bikes and walking
where those modes of transport can reasonably displace cars.

~~~
lazyjones
> _If we 're judging a mode of transport by its emissions, then EVs don't have
> to compete with ICEs. They have to compete with bikes and walking where
> those modes of transport can reasonably displace cars._

Emissions somewhere else than the place where they're used are irrelevant for
the question whether to allow them in cities or not. EV cars are 100% emission
free in cities and if you're being pedantic, they compare favourably to
cyclists and pedestrians because these emit _more_ CO₂ than EV car + driver
due to being physically more active and exhaling CO₂.

------
jeffdavis
When I have travelled around the world, I enjoyed public transportation.
Everything is new to me, and I have plenty of time to enjoy it. A couple hours
to make it somewhere is no big deal.

But I have to wonder if it's still as nice when I have things to do and need
to get somewhere further from the main transit lines. Or when I need to finish
something at work and miss a train. Or when I just want to be home for dinner.

------
donatj
AKA How to keep suburbanites out of downtown completely, lose massive amounts
of business, and become a slum.

~~~
obstinate
I would be interested in seeing some empirical numbers on this. I live in NYC
and have driven a Zipcar here a handful of times for errands. The experience
is . . . not great.

This has made me wonder: who are these people in cars? And parked up and down
the street? What are their reasons for using the mode of transport they do? I
ponder this regularly. Sometimes I have the most irrational urge to go around
and knock on people's windows to ask. I never do, of course.

I know for most things I do, the car would be the worst possible way to
accomplish them. Walking or subway are better, and biking is best. But maybe
for others the story is different. There are some obvious good reasons:
tradespeople, delivery trucks, taxis and ride-sharing services. But who are
the rest?

That said, I don't think you can really expect people to buy this claim
without providing evidence.

~~~
burkemw3
My anecdotal NYC experience has been that private cars are useful for leaving
the city (upstate, Long island, Jersey shore, etc) and occasional off-peak
trips.

The outer parts of the boroughs can also be far from transit, and cars don't
seem such an inconvenience to deal with.

~~~
obstinate
True, true. I live in Chelsea. I'm not surprised that people in outer Brooklyn
drive in that area. I'm wondering why people drive in lower Manhattan.

------
wolph
Lousy solution, improve public transport so people have a decent alternative.

Public transport is not a valid alternative if it takes more than twice as
long...

~~~
pyrale
Public transport is not a valid alternative because cars create endless
neighbourhoods.

You can't make an effective transportation system with low pop density because
few people will be able to get to stations on foot, and you can't make a fast
transportation system because low density means downtown is very far away.

On the other hand, in downtown, cars are a big nuisance: they take most of the
public space, they pollute, they are dangerous, etc.

------
jackskell
From a crippled guy who finds (American, at least) public transport unteniable
- thanks!

------
pif
Some idiots will never understand. If you have private cars in your town, it's
because there are good reasons for people to come to your town. You'll never
get to keep the latter without the former.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
Perhaps towns should be more focused on the people that live in them rather
than drivers from outside.

~~~
pif
We are not saying opposite things. I'm stating that a town can _either_ focus
on itself, thus strictly limiting private transportation, _or_ try and be the
reference centre for the surroundings, which had many advantages but also a
cost. In other words, if you are annoyed by the cars parking in front of the
regional agency of the national bank just below your windows, ask for the bank
to be moved, not for the parking to be dismissed: public services are, by
definition, public!

------
avenoir
Why is there this assumption that everyone lives like some of you do in
London, NYC, San Francisco, Boston and other large trend-setting cities where
you can ride a bike to and from your pad and shit all over people driving
cars? This article makes no sense to me having previously lived in a fairly
large Midwestern city where a typical wait time for a bus is half an hour in
the 'burbs with no other options but driving my own car. Public transport has
to be a commonly efficient way of transportation everywhere before we even
begin discussing taking parking away.

