709
"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.
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
709 points (91.7% liked)
Fuck Cars
9818 readers
106 users here now
This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.
This community exists for the following reasons:
- to raise awareness around the dangers, inefficiencies and injustice that can come from car dependence.
- to allow a place to discuss and promote more healthy transport methods and ways of living.
You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.
Rules
-
Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.
-
No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.
-
Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.
-
No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.
-
No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.
-
No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.
-
No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.
Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You gonna pay for it? Our city's entire annual budget wouldn't even begin to pay for that.
That's where parking requirements come from.
If you already have existing transit it likely wouldn't cost an exreme amount to add a couple stops. If your city doesn't have any transit then someone should plan some.
Once again, who is gonna pay?
The city can't afford it without a bond, and voters will never approve an increase in taxes to remove parking and install transit that will increase local (e.g. Voter) commute times and invite the "undesirable elements" from the city they fled to the suburbs to avoid.
We can't legally force developers to build public infrastructure that isn't directly required due to their individual business (e.g. traffic signal or wastewater line extension).
Know what we can do? Force developers to build parking for their business through zoning ordinances with minimum parking requirements based on use. So a restaurant needs more parking spaces per square foot than an office building, which needs more than a warehouse.
Most cities cannot afford their extisting road infrastructure maintaince. Once built transit systems and walkability are far cheaper to maintain.
Great.
Your still haven't offered a solution for how to pay for it.
Our roads are 30 years behind on maintenance, but we can patch them here and there and do one out two major projects a year. And when a street collapses it's relatively easy to get a bond to fix it because the citizens want their roads back.
We can't patchwork a public transit system, and the citizens are overwhelmingly against it anyway. We tried buying a single bus to shuttle people around and we had a new city manager following that backlash.
Planners aren't kings. We're public servants subject to the will of Council, which is made up of people who represent voters, who overwhelmingly don't want more density, new people, etc. We have pretty much zero input on the direction of the city.
Shit... we spend way more time reviewing swimming pools for code compliance than actually developing plans. When it does come time to do a new comp plan or transportation study, almost every city outsources that to a third party company.
We pay for it by redeveloping massive multi lane roads into multi transit corridors when their major repair/resurfacing work is due. A few places have used this strategy to redevelop car centric areas into areas with better transit and pedestrian accesses.
That requires a public process.
And guess what voters and politicians want? More roads and more barriers to the "unwashed poor" who use transit.
You are really just making excuses to maintain the same short-sighted status quo that has you so frustrated. The solution is offering education to those voters you are so vehemently concerned about. The money comes from managing existing budgets better and making cuts to public programs that are wasteful. You raise funds by implementing bonds and taxes. Voters will get the fuck over taxes being raised if they actually see some benefit from it. Bullshitting your way with the same tired-ass excuses just shows you should quit your job and let someone, who actually cares, do it.
Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about.
A few years ago, the planning director made a presentation at council about putting in sidewalks and bike lanes. The citizens freaked out and all complained to Council that the city would be invaded by the homeless if it were made more pedestrian and bicycle friendly or had bus stops.
2 weeks later, that planning director was fired.
Planners don't actually get to plan cities. We implement comprehensive plans set by council, write code amendments when instructed to by council, review development plans for compliance with code, and enforce code.
My small department also handles building permits and inspections, oversees civil engineering (our actual engineers are third-party), and manages public works projects.
Pretty much no city planners actually make policy. The "planning" we do is pretty much scheduling the work that's already been approved.
What about the comprehensive plan updates? We don't really get involved with that because we're too busy with everything else. When comp plan season comes around, cities hire outside firms to help them develop the plan.
Oh shut up. You asked for an answer to how it would be paid for and how to implement. You keep moving the goalposts. Shut the fuck up.
No. I explained why politics prevents planners from implementing these ideas.When did you get your planning degree, and how many years of experience do you have in municipal planning?
Or did you watch a few YouTube videos and read some blogs and decide you know more than those of us in the field?
Do you also "do your own research" about vaccines and second-guess your doctor?
No, I just can tell when someone has given up on their field of work. You sound like you've given up. Quit your job.
No. You just literally don't know what the job of a city planner is.
A planner doesn't design a city any more than a police officer writes laws. We implement policies written by others.
Quit acting so high and mighty. You aren't special.
Exactly! Planners don't get to circumvent the process and enact legislation because we aren't special.