Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
If that fifth of people would attend local council meetings and petition their municipality to remove parking minimums, maybe we'd get housing developments that encourage a car free lifestyle.
A property nearby is being developed into a midrise apartment building with fifteen units. The building itself takes up about a third of the land, and the rest will be asphalt, no outdoor space at all. It could have easily been a 30-40 unit building with a common green space, but oh no where would the cars go.
One of our recent council meetings had a developer wanting to rezone a lot to medium density but needed a variance to allow for less parking given the size of the parcel.
Council unanimously approved the rezoning citing the need for more medium density projects, but were completely divided on the vote for the parking variance. They could not fathom that a developer would know best how many parking spaces would be needed to still be functional and profitable. All they wanted was to reduce the requirement from 1.5 spaces per unit down to 1.25 spaces per unit. A decrease of like 9 spaces total.
Luckily the variance was eventually approved but not before a lot of debate and grandstanding about what people are supposed to do with their cars.
That's good to hear a reduction was able to be approved. Nine spaces is even enough square footage for an additional apartment per level, if that's what they were building. It would nice to see more developers push for less parking in favour of more living space.
Surely it's in their interest, with revenue coming from the housing not the car park. Of course, this is a difficult status quo to challenge. It's almost as if a building would need constructing on half a parcel, follow the parking minimum, then the units only be rented to people without cars simply to prove it can be done. Then put up a second building.
It would be a bit silly to build a literal proof of concept, though sometimes an example people can lay eyes on is a necessity.