
A Designer's War on Misleading Parking Signs - mhb
http://priceonomics.com/a-designers-war-on-misleading-parking-signs/
======
juriansluiman
Although I completely agree the designed signs are much, much better than the
existing ones, there is another problem. Why should you have so many rules for
parking? Why can't you make the rules more simple?

I want to show you a few signs in comparison, which are Dutch and notify
drivers about free or paid parking. Those are (imho) very clear and _only_
show when you need to pay. If you're outside that time frame, it's free:

1\. [1] Paid parking all days between 18:00 and 24:00

2\. [2] Paid parking from Mondays to Saturdays between 9:00 and 18:00, you're
only allowed to stay for two hours max

3\. [3] Paid parking from Mondays to Saturdays between 9:00 and 24:00 _and_ on
Sundays from 13:00 to 24:00

Am I just crazy, or are those signs way more easier to understand than the
graphical green/red bars (especially from a greater distance)? I truly like
the designers take to the problem, but isn't it just crazy you have to
redesign individual rules to make the time slots understandable?

[1] [http://denhaagfm.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Betaald-
Parke...](http://denhaagfm.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Betaald-Parkeren.jpg)

[2]
[http://www.verkeerskunde.nl/Uploads/Cache/2013/2/13020510502...](http://www.verkeerskunde.nl/Uploads/Cache/2013/2/130205105025.betaald-
parkeren-ANWBAVD.resized.200x0.jpg)

[3]
[http://www.anwb.nl/bestanden/w280/content/gallery/anwb/nieuw...](http://www.anwb.nl/bestanden/w280/content/gallery/anwb/nieuws/verkeer/nederland/2014/april/parkeren-
bord-300-180.jpg)

~~~
BrianEatWorld
I think it has to do with maximizing revenue, not necessarily by tricking
drivers, but by using paid/free parking as a way to change driver incentives.

One example would be Downtown Austin. There are streets that are closed down
to allow for maximum pedestrian traffic, but this is only at night. During the
day, the parking is needed for people who have business in the downtown area.
However, to discourage too many drivers, the parking during weekdays is paid.
On the margin, this will discourage some potential drivers and they will take
alternate methods of transportation. On the weekends, when the downtown non-
retail businesses are closed, there is no longer the need to discourage
drivers. At this point, you want to encourage retail traffic, which means
making parking free.

Now, whether all this incentive manipulation is worth it, is another story,
but I believe the above is the rationale for having multiple rules.

In many cities, there is also street sweeping to consider. I know that is the
particular reason that has caught out many of my friends in LA.

~~~
VLM
>and they will take alternate methods of transportation

More likely they simply will not go there, or will visit another location
(drive to the burbs, etc).

There is another interesting aspect of the parking problem that hasn't been
discussed, which is the environmental damage parking regulations cause. If
you're not a $250K/yr programmer on the coasts, a $95 parking ticket is an
expensive surprise, and equivalent to at least 200 miles of driving. So, if
parking tickets are expensive and a uncontrollable confusopoly cost of living,
its cheaper / safer / more predictable to simply drive out to the burbs, where
theres usually a better selection of businesses anyway. Which wastes a lot of
gas. I can afford the tickets, and there's plenty of dying retail downtown
where I work, but I don't want to deal with getting tickets, paying tickets,
getting towed, I live in the burbs anyway, so the downtown loses a lot of
economic activity and the environment loses because of extra driving. But the
priority is people aren't driving downtown. Sort of a stealth zoning, this
area not fit for retail, but we'll categorize it as retail anyway. This also
fits into the "high cost of being poor" concept where I might save $100 on
rent on paper by living downtown in a bad area, but if the stealth tax of $95
of monthly parking tickets is applied, plus the hassle, I'm better off in the
burbs.

~~~
akgerber
Parking consumes a huge amount of land, which isn't free in urban
neighborhoods. Requiring businesses to provide it is a 'stealth tax' on goods,
which raises costs for people who can't afford or don't want a car. And when a
neighborhood is built out with enough parking for anyone who possibly wants
it, it becomes so spread out that it is essentially impossible to walk
anywhere or to serve it properly with mass transit. Requiring car ownership to
be employable (or at least to access most jobs) is a far larger stealth tax!

~~~
VLM
Its the "cars create economic diversity" argument. Can't have collectible coin
stores, gaming stores, beer brewing stores, makerspace, none of that without
cars because a walking or bus radius can't keep it alive in that small radius.
Even big venues like the local sports stadium and the music halls would be
dead without cars to bring in distant spenders.

You can run convenience stores and bars solely on walk in traffic, but there's
more to life than doritos and getting drunk, or there should be. The
destruction of brick and mortar retail by online will have some interesting
effects... Now, or certainly in the future, I could live in a city without a
car and unable to visit (closed/closing) retail shops as long as UPS still
delivers "the good stuff"

Lack of competition also has a stealth tax on the residents. Why sell a banana
for less than $5 if you're the only banana seller in walking distance. In car
country the market is more competitive so I may burn $1 of gas to go shopping,
but I'll save 50% on a bag of groceries so its a huge net win as long as my
bag of groceries costs more than $2 or so.

~~~
Noreaster76
> Can't have collectible coin stores, gaming stores, beer brewing stores,
> makerspace, none of that without cars

Strongly disagree. In Manhattan's SoHo neighborhood, there's a block with not
one, but two shops that sell only chess sets and things related to chess. Old,
walkable downtowns (the ones that have survived the advent of the car, at
least) have just as much diversity of retail businesses as the homogenous
suburbs (where you have your Best Buy, your Walmart, your Olive Garden, and so
on), if not more.

~~~
nl
The density and sheer population of New York makes that an example that
doesn't transfer easily.

~~~
akgerber
You don't need an automobile to travel beyond your neighborhood! You can take
a bus or a train or ride your bike, even in suburban areas.

Plenty of midsize cities worldwide work on various combination of mass
transit, automobiles, walking, and bicycles. The automobile monoculture in
most midsize American cities is a product of our early development of cheap
automobiles combined with federal policies massively subsidizing highways and
the racial paroxysms of the mid-20th century.

Even Canadian midsize cities, which in many ways are very similar to those in
USA (except for far worse weather) have far higher transit usage. In Calgary,
'the Dallas of Canada', full of oil money & newly-built single-family homes,
24.3% of commuters use transit, and that's considered low!
[http://www.calgaryjournal.ca/index.php/news/2538-calgary-
s-t...](http://www.calgaryjournal.ca/index.php/news/2538-calgary-s-transit-
usage-pales-in-comparison-to-other-cities)

Likewise, newly built Dutch suburbs have many features that resemble American
suburbia, but have good bike lanes and acceptable bus transit:
[http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/01/15/dutch-suburbs-are-
like...](http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/01/15/dutch-suburbs-are-like-
americas-and-protected-bike-lanes-work-fine-there/)

Manhattan is still dependent on transit because it's one of the few places in
America that's so dense, even 60 years of dedicated auto-first policy couldn't
change the facts on the ground. But America had many other transit-oriented
downtowns & dense neighborhoods, still has a few, and could have more again!

~~~
jwagenet
> You don't need an automobile to travel beyond your neighborhood! You can
> take a bus or a train or ride your bike, even in suburban areas.

Optimistic at best. Some cites like NY are better equipped for alternate
transport, but my experience in California is less than stellar. Although it
is my primary transport, outside of a ride between classes in university, I
rarely see people my age cycling for non-recreational purposes. No only is
there no desire, but most nonresidential streets I ride on have inadequate
accommodations for bikes.

Trains in some cities are usable, but the coverage and stop frequency leaves
much to be desired. I didn't even bother with the bus in LA. Not only did I
have to travel 1 mile to get to the nearest stop, but when I wanted to travel
on weekends waiting 40min+ for a bus wasn't worth it. In stark contrast to my
experience Seoul which had a fantastic system of buses, trains, and taxis!

~~~
akgerber
Most American cities have many neighborhoods that aren't laid out to be
accessible by non-automotive means. But that doesn't mean we should have
zoning codes that require that to be the case always and forever, and that
doesn't mean new neighborhoods should be built in the same way. American
population is shifting and expanding, and we will have to significantly
rebuild our cities over our lifetimes— we should rebuild them wisely!

The fact that $200,000 houses sit on $800,000+ worth of land in Silicon Valley
means that, if policy were changed to allow reasonable density, Silicon Valley
would quickly densify to the point that walkable neighborhood retail and mass
transit would have a lot of customers. And mass transit needs a lot of
customers to run at a reasonable frequency.

------
andrewla
This isn't the first place I've seen this -- back in December of 2009, in
Manhattan (midtown somewhere, GPS says 53rd between Park and Lexington), I
happened upon this sign [1] and snapped a photo. Uses green and blue instead
of green and red, and is oriented horizontally instead of vertically, but
appears to be official.

[1] [http://imgur.com/IXv0WqB](http://imgur.com/IXv0WqB)

------
byjess
Parking signs are the worst. This designers improvements are clearer though
the type size is much smaller. Sometimes you can only see the parking signs as
you are driving by looking for a space. Its not much help if you have to park
your car, then read the sign.

I attempted a similar solution using a "universal language for time and date"
that I created.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o_n4XBKZUI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o_n4XBKZUI)
Never really went anywhere beyond the video though.

~~~
Carrok
The months section is actually how I've always viewed a year in my mind,
except IMHO you have it upside down. Winter should be at the bottom, summer at
the top.

~~~
reikonomusha
Summer and winter according to whom?

------
rmxt
A couple of thoughts:

1\. The current NYC signs have arrows indicating directionality of the
applicable rules. There are three kinds ( <\--, -->, and <\-->). Only one of
their design example shows this information and it's implementation seems
awkward.

2\. The current NYC signs are theoretically reproducible and modular. Stacking
them one on top of one another makes the driver feel like they are divining
tea leaves, but the city might see it as minimizing costs. They can cut a
couple hundred "Alternate Side Street Parking" signs for Mon./Wed.
9:30a-10:30a, and put them where they need to. With these signs, you are more
likely to have a unique sign for every block.

3\. I'm not colorblind, but are the green and red bars they've used colorblind
safe? The red stripes are hard for me to see on my monitor, but maybe that is
the intention. EDIT: Ah, I see in the infographic, that they've considered
colorblindness. Still, the difference in the reds seems pretty subtle.

4\. The text size gets increasingly small the more detailed the scheduled is.

EDIT: The relevant section for parking signs from the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices), the USA DOT publication on signs, says this:

Parking signs should display the following information from top to bottom of
the sign, in the order listed: A. The restriction or prohibition; B. The times
of the day that it is applicable, if not at all hours; and C. The days of the
week that it is applicable, if not every day.

If the parking restriction applies to a limited area or zone, the limits of
the restriction should be shown by arrows or supplemental plaques. If arrows
are used and if the sign is at the end of a parking zone, there should be a
single-headed arrow pointing in the direction that the regulation is in
effect. If the sign is at an intermediate point in a zone, there should be a
double-headed arrow pointing both ways. When a single sign is used at the
transition point between two parking zones, it should display a right and left
arrow pointing in the direction that the respective restrictions apply.

So overall, it seems that these would be rubbing against the established
grain, but perhaps a change like this is needed.

~~~
wernercd
"3." There is a picture about 2/3 of the way through the article that shows
the iterations she's went through and some of the changes for color-deficient
people.

[http://pix-media.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/883/process.png](http://pix-
media.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/883/process.png)

Edit: I see you saw what I see. Without being colorblind myself, I'm not
sure... but I would think the different textures (Solid vs striped) should
stand out. I can only assume that she's received valid feedback on "Red with
white background" vs "Red with red background" in choosing what she chose.

~~~
dodders
I'm red/green colourblind and the final version (with the stripes) is pretty
readable. The first version (with out the stripes), not so much.

------
cjensen
Great idea and format. I'm disturbed that some of the examples in the article
appear to have errors.

One sign has a column for "MWF" and a column for "T-Th". The latter I guess is
meant to mean Tuesday and Thursday, but it sure looks like Tuesday _through_
Thursday.

Another example shows two traditional signs, one says "No Parking Nightly
10PM-6AM". The second says "1 hour parking 8AM-6PM except Sunday." The
designer somehow interprets this as allowing parking from Midnight-6AM Sunday
morning, but no parking 10PM-Midnight on Saturday night.

Lastly, she uses "T" for Tuesday, "Th" for Thursday, "Sa" for Saturday, and
"S" for Sunday. The "T" and "S" should be "Tu" and "Su" to be less ambiguous.

Like I said, great ideas. But I also think I know why the designer gets
parking tickets a lot...

~~~
dddrh
My personal system for Days is S M T W R F Y.

(S)unday for the start of the week. Thu(R)sday since the R is pronounced with
a strong "urr". Saturda(Y) since it's the last day of the week.

It still a bit ambiguous, but it has helped me over the years.

~~~
oxryly1
I'm surprised no one took you to task for ending the week on Saturday instead
of Sunday.

~~~
reportingsjr
The week does end on Saturday though. Go look at any calendar and you'll see
they all end on Saturday.

~~~
avalaunch
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. In case you're not, here's an
example, from Germany, to disprove that all calendars start on Sunday and end
on Saturday.

[http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?country=8](http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/?country=8)

Choose other countries from the dropdown and you'll see many, if not most,
have the week starting on Monday and ending on Sunday.

------
wkz
Allow me to present a standard swedish parking sign:
[http://i.imgur.com/e4KVoaC.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/e4KVoaC.jpg)

Avgift means fee. The intervals specify when the fee applies.

* White digits: Hours of weekdays.

* White digits in parens: Hours of days before holidays (read: Saturdays, Christmas eve etc.).

* Red digits: Hours of holidays (Sundays, Chistmas day etc.).

~~~
pluma
I'm guessing in the case where parking is forbidden entirely at certain times
there'd simply be a second (visually distinct) sign beside it as in most of
Europe?

~~~
wkz
Yes. The [P] sign indicates that this area is intended for parking, and that
outside of the hours specified in fee-sign, parking is free.

In the case where the default is "no parking", the top sign will be a dashed
or crossed red circle (the first meaning you can stop to let people off but
not park, the other meaning that you can not stop there for any reason). There
can then be a sign below it that specifies times when parking is allowed.

------
jrub
The poor design of these parking signs is actually "a feature, not a bug."

Parking tickets in the cities which have these sorts of sign issues (DC, NYC,
Chicago, ATL, etc) make up a significant amount of income for the city. Paid
parking certainly adds up but if a single space nets the city $10-$20 per day,
a single parking ticket could cover a weeks worth of revenue for that single
spot while still allowing the space to earn $10-$20 a day for the rest of the
week.

I agree it sucks, and I was burned by this exact problem when I traveled to DC
with my family last winter. However it's unlikely to change, because not only
would the change actually cost money to implement, it would (significantly)
reduce the income to the city from parking tickets.

~~~
basseq
As a DC resident, I agree. My wife got a ticket for parking illegally, but
could not find a sign (among many) that prohibited it. She took pictures of
everything and went to court. They upheld the ticket under the argument, "the
sign must have been there somewhere".

There is also a disconnect between intent and enforcement. For example, I live
by a school. No parking M-F, 8am-3pm because busses have to get through. Makes
sense. But neighbors have been ticketed on the Friday after Thanksgiving:
they're violating the sign, but not the intent of the sign.

~~~
mikeash
I'm always baffled at how the burden of proof can be so low for traffic
infractions. Why doesn't "innocent until proven guilty" apply? Just because
the stakes are so low doesn't mean we can toss that out.

~~~
Goronmon
Probably one of those situations where the city can't afford to have people
fighting smaller fines regularly, so they try to discourage people from doing
so.

------
eli
I'm not actually a huge fan of the redesigned signs. It seems like it would be
really hard to make work for even slightly complex cases -- alternate side on
Mondays during the Fall for example, or 2-hour parking during the day except
for residents.

Also, like most unsolicited unofficial redesigns, it ignores real-world
constraints. How much does it cost to produce these very specific signs vs
combining modular and reusable generic signs?

~~~
Patrick_Devine
> How much does it cost to produce these very specific signs vs combining
> modular and reusable generic signs?

Probably less than the cost of a single parking ticket.

As for your corner cases, there are some signs depicted with text at the
bottom which can cover those scenarios. Not perfect, but I think it's a step
up from what people have to deal with today.

~~~
eli
> Probably less than the cost of a single parking ticket.

I really doubt that, but my point is that none of us know. Design is a lot
easier when you're ignorant of any cost or logistical constraints.

> As for your corner cases, there are some signs depicted with text at the
> bottom...

I guess it's better, but it seems like greatly more complexity in creating and
managing signs for only a little benefit. At least around me those aren't
corner cases: pretty much every sign would have one or more additional
restrictions or exceptions. In front of my house it's two-hour parking Monday
through Saturday except for residents, and no parking on Mondays during the
Fall. I think that's pretty typical for DC.

------
intopieces
If you're going to replace signs, how expensive would it be to just have one
that changes from "Parking" to "No Parking" on a timer? My city already has
similar signs for intersections that become no-left-turn when kids are around.

~~~
apenguin
That doesn't tell you how long you can stay parked. How useful is it to know
that you're currently allowed to park, without also telling you it's going to
change to "No Parking" as soon as you've left your vehicle?

EDIT: If you could do a countdown timer to the next state, though, that'd be
useful.

~~~
oxryly1
Also, what if you need a permit?

------
maxxxxx
After parking in DC I always thought there should be a "parking lawyer"
service. You take a picture of the signs (sometimes 6 on top of each other),
you upload it to the service and they tell you whether it's OK to park.

~~~
daxelrod
There's an app for NYC called Can I Park Here[1]. It does location queries
against the NYC DOT parking regulations database[2]. Perhaps something similar
exists for DC?

[1]: [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/nyregion/iphone-app-
tells-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/nyregion/iphone-app-tells-if-you-
can-park-here-there-and-anywhere.html?_r=0)

[2]:
[http://a841-dotvweb01.nyc.gov/ParkingRegs/ViewController/Loc...](http://a841-dotvweb01.nyc.gov/ParkingRegs/ViewController/LocationValidation.aspx)

------
petegrif
Now add a code so that you can scan with your phone and it will tell you if
you can park there.

~~~
bduerst
Why not make a public API for the city so you can access it with an GPS-
enabled app immediately?

Come to think of it, many cities could stand to benefit from a public API with
alerts and infrastructure notices. Too bad it's probably not in their budgets.

------
meej
NYC took steps to unclutter their parking signs a couple years ago.
[http://www.wnyc.org/story/283907-nyc-unclutters-parking-
sign...](http://www.wnyc.org/story/283907-nyc-unclutters-parking-signs-with-
redesign/)

------
peterwwillis
There is a reason why parking restrictions & signs are maddening, and it's not
to generate revenue as the cynical claim when they have no other explanation.

The #1 reason is that parking laws change.

Where there was no rule a year ago, there may be now, for all kinds of
reasons. This means a sign needs to be added or changed. Some reasons for rule
adds or changes:

 __* new growth in the area causes increased demand for parking, requiring
restrictions on non-resident parking. __* a new area gets appropriated as part
of a city /county and new enforcement follows. __* residents are tired of
their spaces getting yanked by people outside the neighborhood. __* street
traffic changes due to development, causing increased demand along a new
street, creating the need for more restriction. __* street cleaning is
(finally) implemented, or schedules change. __* a new commercial entity
requires loading zones. __* a new school pops up or is [re]moved

The #2 reason for the current sign design is visibility.

You have to be able to read a parking sign from your car, on the road, while
moving, in inclement weather, and considering not everyone's sight is 'ideal'.
Even if there was one sign, often there are multiple overlapping restrictions
which can't simply be put into a single time slot. Even if this design
incorporated every single day and different times depending on different
criteria, it would have to be _humongous_ to read all that detail without
getting out and going up close.

The #3 reason is ambiguity.

Si no hablas ingles, 或者你住在一个历史的民族地区，તમે નિયમો કયા છે ઈન્ટરપ્રીટ થોડી મદદ જરૂર
પડી શકે છે. The various colors, bolded words, and arrows help give insight as
to what each sign is intending to tell you, without necessarily needing to be
a native speaker. Other countries tend to use more pictograms on their signs
which certainly help in these cases.

I think the redesigned sign is very useful, but one single sign is just not
going to replace the accessibility and functionality of several large simple
signs. Less signs is definitely better, though.

------
joshuaheard
Parking tickets are primarily given to generate revenue for the city, so they
have no incentive to make it easier for the user to park.

~~~
greggyb
Or maybe to enforce parking rules that make sense, e.g. keeping all lanes of a
busy thoroughfare clear for moving traffic during rush hour; alternate side
parking in snowy states to keep the streets drive-able.

Edited out snark.

~~~
wtbob
> Or maybe to enforce parking rules that make sense,

Denver recently decided that, since the fine for parking in a tow-away zone is
twice that of parking in a street-sweeping zone, _and_ since one can be towed
in order to enable street sweeping, then parking in a street-sweeping zone is
really parking in a tow-away zone, and doubled the fine.

I'm pretty sure that while the parking rules are there to make sense and
regulate the commons, their implementation is based on revenue maximisation.

------
rayiner
Parking signs in DC remind me of logic games:
[http://www.griffonprep.com/logicgame.html](http://www.griffonprep.com/logicgame.html).
You'll see four signs on a pole, made with no contemplation of each other, and
try to figure out whether you can park. Worse are the complicated signs for
roads that are one-way only part of the day, or where left turns are
prohibited only part of the day.

And in Wilmington, DE, you can park for free on holidays, but the city
celebrates Vetrans' day in October instead of November.

~~~
eli
They should really just add a little note on all of them explaining that the
most restrictive sign always wins. A surprising number of people seem not to
know that.

------
scottnyc
As someone who is neurotic about parking (I will walk up and down the street 3
times making sure I didn't miss anything), I think this is wonderful. I don't
care if it's hard to read or if I have to re-park at times. Simply being 100%
confident that my parking is ok is a big relief.

Revenue shortfall? Raise our taxes or fix your budget, just stop profiting
from misleading confusion.

------
ape4
The article says "looked a lot like a Google Calendar". In other words: any
calendar program / app.

------
encoderer
One issue I have is... if there is "no parking 1st monday" her sign will
instead say "no parking any monday". That's wrong 3/4 of the time.
Simplification or not, it's wrong.

------
DigitalJack
Another red/green debacle for the 15 million color blind men in America.

~~~
aw3c2
Yeah, completely ignorant design:
[http://i.imgur.com/QWGUw31.png](http://i.imgur.com/QWGUw31.png)

It's actually more than that unless you meant just the USA, not both north and
south america.

~~~
Amezarak
In English, "America" is nearly always synonymous with "USA".

If GP meant "North and South America", he would have said "the Americas"
instead. I understand this is different in other languages which I imagine
must be confusing and arrogant-seeming for those with English as a second
language.

------
techiferous
This design does not account for non-weekly parking rules, like "No parking
during street cleaning on the third Tuesday of the month."

------
vacri
The signs are too small to read easily from a car trying to find a park. As
the hours are not in standard positions, a small block of red high in the
green bar would only mean 'sometime in the morning' when seen from a distance.

Similarly, the allowed parking duration is far too small. Even if it's green
all day, you still need to know if it's 30 minutes or 4 hours or whatever.

------
Strilanc
This is an improvement. I think it needs more iterations.

For example, the free sections look too much like the 1 hr sections (e.g.
glance at the right-most sign in this blurry shot: [http://pix-
media.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/883/process.png](http://pix-
media.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/883/process.png) ). How long did it take you to
distinguish them?

------
allending
Complex rules are easy fodder for code. Would be awesome to have an app that
simply answers:

"Can I park on this street right now? (and until when)"

~~~
Vexs
That sounds incredibly brilliant- issue being accurate GPS locating, and
actually finding out what rules are there.

I really wish there was some sort of public works API where you could pull
sign data, traffic lights data, etc. Seems like there could be some very
interesting applications developed from that.

~~~
rmxt
Here's a baby step in that direction for NYC:

[http://a841-dotvweb01.nyc.gov/ParkingRegs/ViewController/Loc...](http://a841-dotvweb01.nyc.gov/ParkingRegs/ViewController/LocationValidation.aspx)

CSV and shapefiles can be found here:

[http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/datafeeds.shtml#parki...](http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/datafeeds.shtml#parking)

------
politician
This parking sign example seems like a good way to communicate the problems
with the practice of piling on new rules or features without resorting to
using analogies to financial instruments -- technical debt or unhedged call
options.

The image of a totem pole containing a list of signs is a tangible day-to-day
example that should evoke fear of unexpected fines ahead.

------
stegosaurus
I don't think the problem is that of signage.

The issue is zero-tolerance. It expands beyond simply parking. The lack of
discretion that computerised solutions seem to beget. The incentive structure
that means parking wardens feel inclined to ticket for being 10cm over a bay.

------
reedcat
This is amazing! I have always been baffled by the ever more convoluted
parking signs. This is especially useful since very often you have to figure
out if you can park while driving by, so you don't have much time to analyse
the signs.

------
larrydag
This project looks like its begging to be built into a mobile app. Either a
geolocation app or a Q scan code that tells you if you can park at any given
location at any given time.

~~~
Someone1234
I don't see it.

Let's assume that the app exists and has a good database. Parking rules and
regs change on a regular basis in the context of a city, typically both
tickets and drivers utilise the same signage to determine if an offense has
occurred. So for all intents and purposes the signs are the decider of if a
ticket is issued.

So when a driver arrives, they load the app, they'll still have to check the
signs to make sure the rules haven't changed. And in the time it took to load
the app and have it figure out your location (and you'll likely have to enter
side of the street due to GPS limitations) you may have well just read the
signs.

And when the app is wrong (as it rarely will be) then the driver has no
excuse. Saying "an app told me I could part!!!" will be laughed at, and the
app creator will likely need legal protection as they will get sued even if
the app is free. Lawsuits that you win are still expensive.

~~~
dodders
The DOT website in NYC already has a street parking function which displays
the rules in effect for any specified street / intersection. I don't know if
this is legally admissible, though - I believe the rules can only be enforced
if the signage is in place.

------
teye
Graphically representing all times wastes space, making the rules easier to
understand for those who can read them, but decreasing legibility.

This is a tradeoff, not an all-around win.

~~~
Someone1234
Consistency is more key than minimalism.

Plus producing identically sized signs has economies of scale that variable
sized ones likely won't counteract.

~~~
teye
Not minimalism. Information density. Visibility.

Representing time with colored spaces decreases information density. Green &
red blocks aren't enough -- the primary data, the numbers, are still required
labels, and are made smaller to accommodate the new elements.

Shrinking the primary data decreases visibility, so you, with decent eyesight,
need to be closer. My grandmother will have an even harder time resolving it.

Visibility hasn't been addressed, but deserves to be in any conversation about
signage.

------
nnd
Parking violations is a business. It's in their best interest to make the
signs and the laws even more confusing so you'd pay the fee.

------
snambi
This is one of the best redesigns I have seen recently. Designers can have
great impact on the world that we live. This is a great example.

------
halayli
Not sure if cases like "No Parking 7AM - 9 AM every 3rd Thursday of the month"
are covered in her design.

~~~
cortesoft
They explained this sort of situation in the article.. She would just mark 7am
to 9am as no parking for EVERY thursday. She erred on the side of telling you
not to park.

~~~
halayli
Well that's wrong. It's only the 3rd Thursday of the week.

------
himeag
You dare rob the municipalities of this important income with your good
communication?

------
petegrif
I live in LA. She's right. Thank God for her.

------
725686
15 minute free parking to analize parking rules.

------
codereflection
I have become so tired of sensationalism in headlines, in this case use of
"War", that I refuse to read the articles.

------
jbob2000
This is all well and great, but it will lead to a reduction in revenue for the
city, as well as an increased expense in having all of the signs reprinted. As
long as someone somewhere is making money, it's never going to change.

------
army
Some of those issues are just a lack of common sense. Of course no stopping
implies no parking. Reminds me of an episode of Parking Wars where people were
trying to argue that they didn't know what "No Standing" meant so it was ok to
park there. I don't understand why you wouldn't apply the principle of caution
she's invoking and not park somewhere if you're not sure that you understand
the signs.

That said, the signs are an improvement and are pretty nice. It's a bit harder
to deal with issues like school days - maybe there needs to be a number or web
site on the sign that you can use to check school days?

------
pjlegato
This article (and many comments here) grossly misunderstand the nature of city
parking regulations.

> Cities could make it easier for them, and improve parking compliance, just
> by making the parking signs clearer.

The signs are confusing _on purpose_. Parking tickets are a huge source of
revenue in most cities. Improving parking compliance is not the goal in most
places. The goal is to maximize revenue from fines.

Any assessment of the design merits of the signs must at least be aware of the
actual context of the design they're evaluating. The signs are very well
designed in the context of their actual goal -- to confuse people and generate
more income for the city.

Note that I am not endorsing this practice, just pointing it out. That's
simply the way it actually is in most cities, irrespective of anyone's
particular moral evaluation of whether it ought to be that way.

If you think it's wrong that this happens, the first step towards fixing it is
acknowledging that it's happening, rather than ascribing the confusing signs
to simple ignorance of good graphic design practices.

------
secabeen
The proposed solutions come from a misunderstanding of local government. Many
cities don't have a central office of parking that is responsible for all
parking rules. Different city departments have the right to restrict parking.
That creates different signs. In both of her examples, the additional sign on
the bottom is a add-on restriction. It may or may not have been coordinated
with the above signs. (In California, there are lots of parking restrictions
for street sweeping)

The author also attacks the little sign at the top. People like to know why
things are the way they are. That little sign (I can't read it exactly) helps
citizens understand why the parking restrictions are present, and helps.

She also seems not to understand the difference between "No Stopping" and "No
Parking", which is pretty clear to me.

I don't see any system in her solution for handling permit parking.

Finally, her proposed solution would require a much more detailed (and
expensive) master parking system. Cities don't have the resources to maintain
those, and they would incur huge costs if a city-wide parking rule was
necessitated. (For example, if street sweeping is changed with the current
system, they only need to replace one or two signs per block. Under her
system, every parking sign in the city would need to be changed)

~~~
jameshart
The designer had performed research and learned that no, people DON'T care why
they can't park, they just don't want a ticket; and that they don't care about
fine distinctions, they want clear unambiguous information.

As for complaining that this misunderstands local government: that's the
point, it's user-centric design. Parking signs should not be a catalog of the
internal departmental divisions in city hall, they should clearly communicate
to street users the way in which the street is permitted to be used. It's like
complaining about the design of the iPhone on the basis that it completely
failed to reflect the reality of how cellphone carriers operate. Yes, yes it
did. That was the point.

~~~
thrownaway2424
That research is incorrect in my experience. People _do_ care why they can't
park, because if the restriction is for street cleaning, and the street has
already been cleaned, you can park (in my city). If the restriction is for
construction, and work hasn't begun by 10am, you can park. So you do need to
know _why_ you can't park, if you want to park in certain cases.

