Giving Parking Garages New Life
Blame local government parking minimums for the overabundance of parking in the U.S.

I recently found myself descending what looked like subway stairs into a dark underground parking garage. All alone, on the Portuguese island of São Miguel, in the city of Ponta Delgada—if you can even call it a city—I stumbled upon a veritable wonderland of baby pineapples, passion fruit, and magnificent clusters of tiny bananas. Wheels of soft sheep's milk cheese adorned one stall. The salty stench of dried fish wafted from some distant corridor.
The Azores are smack dab in the middle of the Atlantic. Technically a chain of Portuguese islands (so far apart from each other that one must island-hop via planes, not boats), they're verdant, yet sparsely populated. São Miguel, the largest, is home to thermal springs, a few active volcanoes, and consistently decent surf—the reason I was visiting.
Stumbling upon this bounty of produce at Mercado da Graça came as no surprise. What was a surprise was that this splendid farmers market was housed in a decommissioned parking garage.
Word below the street was that the market had shifted underground in October 2021 because the open-air stalls were getting much-needed renovations. But in typical Portuguese style, as of September 2023 construction was still active. The temporary location could well be considered permanent.
It's not the first parking garage I've seen repurposed for good.
Take Austin, Texas, where I used to live. If you ever find yourself on Colorado Street, between West 5th and 6th, late at night, it may just look like you're surrounded by parking garages and office buildings. But if you venture a little deeper into the caverns of concrete, you may find yourself spit out into a vinyl lounge/cocktail bar with a bit of a waitlist. Order yourself a yerba buena—pisco, Japanese yuzu vermouth, lemon, pineapple-tahini soda, and togarashi—or something off the "unleaded" menu, perhaps, and take in the music.
Or take Wichita, Kansas. Back in the 1950s, Broadway Autopark was a bona fide parking garage. Now it's been converted into luxury apartments (with all the midcentury modern trappings that both tie it back to that old era and give it high design status today). Or Los Angeles, where some parking garages have been turned into delivery-only ghost kitchens, and where at least one restaurant—Dollar Hits—takes the idea of street food literally, letting you cook skewers of chicken feet and meatballs on little grills in the parking lot. Or La Chapelle, a neighborhood in Paris, where a subterranean hydroponic mushroom farm has popped up in an abandoned underground parking structure.
At least in the U.S., parking minimums are to blame for the overabundance of lots and garages. First mandated in the 1950s, with the intention of alleviating some of the demand for street parking, they forced developers in most municipalities to build preordained numbers of off-street parking spaces. L.A. requires one parking space per five seats in a pew, and two spaces per hospital bed. Even in dense New York City, where I live, and where only 45 percent of households own a car, such things are frequently mandated: "On average, for every 100 new housing units built in the city, 43 off-street spaces are created," reported Bloomberg's Eric Jaffe in 2012, using data from the New York University Furman Center.
"While developers have both the incentive and local knowledge to determine how much parking a project requires—too few spaces and the units won't sell; too many spaces and the developers waste money—minimum parking requirements supersede their judgment with often-arbitrary standards," urbanist M. Nolan Gray recently wrote in The Atlantic. "Minimum parking requirements effectively demand that each resident consumes more land," which in turn makes each new housing or commercial project more expensive than it needs to be.
"Of about 300 housing developments built in the last decade or so, 77 percent created the exact minimum number of parking spaces, or very near it," noted Jaffe. If there were demand for it, developers would seemingly set aside even more spaces, exceeding the minimum; the fact that they don't, generally speaking, is strong evidence for the idea that central planners are mandating they provide more spaces than are actually needed.
Regardless of whether these parking garage sizes were forced, as in many parts of the U.S., or built voluntarily by developers who found them necessary at one time, it's wonderful seeing all the ways they can be transformed as needs change. At some point—if southern Europe ever grows a Protestant work ethic—Mercado da Graça's renovations will be finished, and the vendors will move into the light. But until then, a repurposed parking garage is a wonderful example of how people co-opt urban spaces, no matter how sterile and harsh, as their needs change, breathing new life into them.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Order yourself a yerba buena—pisco, Japanese yuzu vermouth, lemon, pineapple-tahini soda, and togarashi—
Gay.
Hey, that's off the unleaded menu, which implies that certain other offerings come with a bullet.
Every month start earning more than $12,000 by doing very simple Online job from home. i m doing this job in my part time i have earned and received $12429 last Q month .I am now a good Online earner and earns enough cash for my needs. Every person can get this Online job pop
Over Here This Site......>> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com
45 percent of households own a car, such things are frequently mandated: "On average, for every 100 new housing units built in the city, 43 off-street spaces are created,
Sounds like you are two spots short.
Not if New York City mandates EVs; I believe two golf carts could park in one space.
Also, how many of those forty-five percent of households own more than one car?
Or a single jeff mobility scooter.
Or not even. He’d want others to cough up the dough to fund an additional social distancing setback for his Not So Lil Rascal parking as well as a space for a face diaper dispensing machine. Perhaps even a kiosk for a taxpayer funded Ministry of Managing MisInformation truth compliance officer.
With no Trump Tariffs!
I saw that the editor of the Fatlantic sure as hell doesn't take weekends off. Any more rants like he had yesterday, and he might need a pacemaker from the next thread.
“He’d want others to cough up….”
I dunno. Chemjeff selectively nuanced collectivist has a fear of others deliberately coughing in his face while knowingly having the rona.
Weird thing to trip about, but each to his/her own, I suppose.
More like 90 spaces short. Many households have 2 cars.
More than 2 spots short. 45% of households own a car. A lot of those own more than one. There are about 2 1/4 million cars registered in NYC.
"
Even in dense New York City, where I live, and where only 45 percent of households own a car, such things are frequently mandated: "On average, for every 100 new housing units built in the city, 43 off-street spaces are created," reported Bloomberg's Eric Jaffe in 2012, using data from the New York University Furman Center.
"
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/09/nyregion/nyc-parking-cars.html
Phbbbbt! With self-driving vehicles, the other 2 or 47 or whatever cars can just roam about not taking up any space. Duh.
The Scatlantic has an M. Nolan Gray.
Reason has an E. Nolan Brown.
Where is W. Nolan Green working and can you find him hidden in this cartoon?
I had the opportunity to use Lyft Transport and I must say, it was an exceptional experience. From the moment I requested a ride, the process was seamless and efficient. The app itself is user-friendly, allowing me to easily input my destination and track the arrival of my driver in real-time. Once my driver arrived, I was greeted with a warm smile and a clean, comfortable vehicle, for more information visit and read https://help-center.pissedconsumer.com/how-to-contact-lyft-customer-service-get-issues-resolved// . The driver was not only professional but also knowledgeable about the area, providing me with helpful tips and recommendations during the ride. The entire journey was smooth and safe, with the driver adhering to all traffic rules and ensuring my utmost comfort. What truly impressed me about Lyft Transport was the level of convenience it offered. The ability to pay directly through the app eliminated the hassle of fumbling for cash or worrying about having exact change. Additionally, the option to share the ride with others through Lyft Line not only reduced costs but also allowed for interesting conversations and connections with fellow passengers.
And when you get to your destination, no need to park, so the space can be used for a food truck remounted on blocks.
You understand you just replied to ad written by a bot right?
I've done that before, in full knowledge. What, you're afraid I'll encourage them?
In general, I'm replying "to" everyone who reads here, now or ever. I don't usually expect personal interaction with a poster unless I've asked them a question.
As long as we have plenty of parking for food trucks I'm cool.
Parking space minimums are typically dictated by the local zoning code, and they also usually have not been updated for decades.
Parking spaces are downstream from COVID. Now that no one is driving into the orifice any more, they'll adjust them way down. Then Google's and Amazon's return-to-office will fully kick in and then everyone will be back to parking on the street...
That is, of course, depending on how their "bring your true self to work" policies play out. But then again, even Reason is starting to notice that ESG isn't quite as popular as it once was...
...
Whoa! Unprovoked snark!
Hey, I've seen the future in sci-fi movies, and parking garages are all rustic homesteads and ethnic knife fighting theaters. And all net zero carbon (and net zero energy).
Except for the trash fires in burning barrels to keep warm.
Like they're doing in Moscow right now?
Any Roundup today, or is Reason on a federal holiday?
They don't run the DC Metrolink on Federal holidays, so the entire staff is stuck at home . . .
Ah, so they can't get the hamsters (or is it gerbils) back downtown to run the servers.
I don't care to speculate as to the current location of the gerbils.
They're at home fasting and contemplating the wisdom of Dr. King.
We will also see them "decommissioned" as the % of EV's increases. EV's weigh much more than gas vehicles - many garages weren't designed to handle the additional weight.
We will also see them “decommissioned” as the % of EV’s increases.
Hertz is unloading 20,000 on the used market!
Fuck, I hadn’t considered that for my next development project. TBF, I technically started the design phase back in 2019 so EV’s weren’t quite as ubiquitous as today. Luckily the owner put the project on hold so i have time to go in and add that extra weight to my calculations.
Well as long as it's not a University-managed footbridge designed to hold precisely 0 EVs, we should be good.
The Azores are smack dab in the middle of the Atlantic.
Is it just me, or do The Azores sound like some icky skin condition.
"The Doctors said I have The Azores! It's worse than 'The Heartbreak of Psoriasis'!"
🙂
😉
I think it might just be you.
Overabundance of parking? Where?
In California they build a 128-unit condo complex, with 144 parking spaces, to encourage people to take the train. But people who can't afford a car can't afford to live in the condos anyway.
Apartment complexes with 2-bedroom apartments give you one assigned parking space, and everyone else competes for the few spots on the street. And rent is so high most of the 2-bedroom apartments have 2 couples living there, with 4 cars.
When we design a hotel, the rule is usually that you need to have at least 1 space per 'key' (room / unit) plus a certain number over that to cover employee parking and any public spaces that might be attached to the hotel, like a restaurant or meeting room, etc.
Most local zoning ordinances for parking at apartment buildings require off-street parking, and they usually fall under 1 of two types of rules: Parking spaces per unit (1 or 2), or Parking spaces per bedroom (1).
One of the things that Reason seems to overlook about their mandated parking space rant is that yes, parking mandates raise the cost of commercial and high density development, but imagine a world where everyone parked on the street. For those of us that live in actual-for-real urban areas, we already know how difficult it can be to find street parking when no cheap or public parking is available. In addition, cities do have things like street sweeping and what not take place. If every inch of curb space is filled with parked cars, that can produce its own set of problems.
And the idea that we're just a few wonky utopian urban design changes away from getting everyone to not own a car and use trains and buses to get everywhere is so laughable as to be dismissed out of hand.
I live in an urban area and live within walking distance of my grocery store. Now ask me if I walk there, and then ask me why I don't.
I do tend to agree with them that the need for parking spaces will most likely decrease in the future, with electric self-driving cars, and things will pop up like ridesharing subscription services that people will choose to employ. And at offices and the like, the parking needs may end up being less.
There's probably some reasonable middle ground between having no parking requirements or standards whatsoever, and some of the very rigid ones you find today, that have been in use for the past several decades. Currently, your only options for getting around those rules is to either apply for a variance with your local P&Z commissioner / board, or write a proposal for a special Planned Development District. Both of which require time and effort on the part of the applicant, and still need approval.
It might be better to have some parking 'suggestions' or 'guidelines' written into the zoning code instead, with the actual law simply stating that the parking must be addressed 'adequately' for the size and type of construction. With the understanding that each individual project could deviate from the guidelines as much or as little as is needed, depending on the situation & explanation.
See my comment below.
I believe that the market should decide how property owners build parking spaces, but everyone needs to think about what that world would look like, especially where housing is expensive, and transportation and getting around gets more complex.
"How much is the rent?"
"$3,200 a month"
"Ouch, ok, well, where do I park?"
"This is Climate Justice Estates, By Blackrock, we don't have parking spaces."
"Oh... ok, well, I noticed that the city removed all the street parking because they put in bike lanes and bike-share docking stations."
"Yes, well, we do want to save the planet."
"Ok, so what are my parking options?"
"There's a lot three blocks away that charges $300 a month for a parking space, first come, first serve."
"How much is the rent on this place again?"
There are only tradeoffs.
I should add, that when you don't have parking spaces (market-driven or not) that means you're parking on city property. Pray the City doesn't alter the deal on how much parking will remain on that city property.
The free city parking lot near me used to always have spaces free, even when the farmer's market was in town.
The city decided to allow a small complex of offices adjacent to the lot to be torn down and developed into a sort of food court with restaurants, a coffee shop, and a tourist knickknack store and now the lot is perpetually full. All very much against the city plan, BTW, but, you know, tourists come before locals and maybe you grease the right palm.
The long-standing business next to the city lot are definitely suffering during lunchtime and weekends. Especially the restaurant with their own parking lot. Everyone thinks it's part of the free city lot, or of the food court.
He who giveth can taketh away.
Also, and I'm bending a friendly ear here rather than aggressively pounding another retard into the dirt about this issue, there is a kinda-literal, kinda-delusional placing the cart before the horse taking place.
Using someone else's car doesn't make the car take up any less of a footprint. Even if the car goes to pick someone else up after it drops you off, you've just turned the roadway into a 40 mph parking garage and the roads will have to get wider to accommodate all the ride sharing. The "technology" can nibble around the margins, potentially getting some people who wouldn't otherwise carpool to carpool, but absent actions like forcing people to carpool the technology doesn't itself solve the problem.
The declining birth rate, remote work (COVID), and cities pricing themselves out of the human habitation market are going to do and have already done more for parking than EVs and ride sharing.
The idea that EVs/self-driving will solve parking is the same, stupid magical "out of sight, out of mind" thinking that bred parking garages in the first place.
I'm of the opinion that there should be no 'mandated minimums' here - developers will be able to figure out their real needs and put that many spaces in - but there's really not a lot of evidence the minimums are excessive (except maybe in a few outliers).
So maybe NYC has 'too many' spaces because of local zoning requirements but no one would ever say LA has an excess of parking but both cities are used here as examples of the heavy hand of local government.
Wonky design changes can make a huge difference in people's interest or need in owning a car. The purpose of residents, if they want to walk, is to have a ton of stuff within walking distance. Do errands, have the kids walk to school(s), get take out, go see a band or a play, walk your dog to the park, etc. The more you can/want to do in a close walk, the more hassle it will be to find parking and drive to each of those places. The more parking lots within that walking radius, the fewer places you'll have any interest in walking to - because no one wants to walk to a parking lot.
Commuting has a different dynamic but easy/wonky changes to public transit enable that. Nor do changes require a bureaucrat or big greenfield developer. Complexity is what free markets do and enabling free markets is what wonky urban design changes can do.
15 minute city is about as wonky hipster as you can get. I can bet that everyone here who lives in a place where a 15 min city is doable around their own house can see how small changes make a big difference. Those who live in a suburb/ghetto where there's nothing within a 15 min walk, see a commie prison conspiracy.
I don't know how old you are, but for most of America's history, the goal of city planners was to create spaces that allowed people to get to their destination as quickly and efficiently as possible. Then, starting in the 1990s, that focus changed, and their goal became focused on getting people out of their cars using wonky design changes.
Seattle has had nothing but wonky design change urban planners, doing everything they could to get people out of their cars for over 30 years now and it simply hasn't worked. I understand, that like Marxism, the refrain is always, "That's because real get-people-out-of-their-car wonky urban design change hasn't been tried yet".
"Seattle has had nothing but wonky design change urban planners, doing everything they could to get people out of their cars for over 30 years "
That's not exactly true. People have always spent most of their time out of their cars. Over 90% of the car's life time is spent not moving, but sitting idle and empty. As far as I know, that's always been the case. A moving car will more often than not, get people to their destination quickly as you say. But cars are usually idle and empty, and the problems arise with them.
It’s almost like people WANT to have the freedom a car brings to their individual lives.
for most of America’s history, the goal of city planners was to create spaces that allowed people to get to their destination as quickly and efficiently as possible.
No that wasn’t ever the goal. The goal of city planners since the 1930’s/postWW2 has been to:
Destroy entire neighborhoods of cities in the name of ‘urban renewal’
To either widen/build highways or force BIG development projects with federal funding and bond issuance
Force the sprawl of new development/growth outwards into greenfield areas by zoning single-family for most of a city – eg Seattle 65%
And expand the footprint of cities by annexing outwards. (na for Seattle because of geographic constraints).
They have achieved those goals pretty much everywhere. That has not improved commute times from the suburbs to the central cities because widening highways doesn’t work. It has not improved transport time for city residents because the grid system was broken by both cars and ‘urban renewal’. And the above do suck as goals for a city’s future.
Seattle has had nothing but wonky design change urban planners, doing everything they could to get people out of their cars for over 30 years now and it simply hasn’t worked.
If ‘everything they could to get people out of their cars’ is the goal in Seattle, then that is because your city planners are idiots who think that ’15 minute city’ is merely an alternative to ‘expanding highways’ which didn’t work. More likely what you’re really talking about is ‘bike lanes’ which does focus entirely on street planning and won’t work either. I’m assuming ‘streets’ is what gets the budget in Seattle.
Even people who live in walkable neighborhoods with grocery stores and parks and restaurants and bars still want a car, so they can take weekend trips or go to other parts of the city. You get tired of the same few places every week.
Sure. There's nothing wrong with that. You'll probably have to pay to park it. Someone who chooses not to have a car won't have to pay for parking. Parking mandates and street parking are forcing everyone to pay.
My favorite are the cities with fractional parking for condos/apartments like 1.75 per 2 bed unit.
The one sensible parking space rule I find in a lot of places is that if a bank and a church (or synagogue or mosque) are adjacent to each other, they can use each other’s parking spots in their counts. Because the bank isn’t open when the church is having services, and vice versa.
That’s one reason you often see banks and churches on adjoining lots, or across the street from each other.
Shared parking is great for any kind of mixed use where the uses have disparate hours of operation.
Where in California is this?
Silicon Valley. They want everyone to take the train, which doesn't go everywhere.
Typical... Ask the Gov-Gods how much parking one needs because of course they know far better what you need than you do. /s
Another thing that is overlooked is how you get squeezed from both ends on this deal.
Seattle:
Now, from a purely libertarian standpoint, this sounds great. Developers built as many parking spaces as they wanted. Freedom!
However, those young urban hipsters discovered this:
Sorry, but your "15 minute cities" are primarily designed around young people who don't own anything and are happy.
So again, when everything is upzoned, it feels all libertarian-ey and stuff, but then you realize that the upzoners don't want you to own a home, or own a car... at all. Then suddenly those libertarian-friendly sounding ideas start looking less so.
My favorite response to the question above was this:
"are primarily designed around young people who don’t own anything and are happy."
Maybe they own bicycles. It seems sensible to reserve precious road space for moving bicycles rather than stationary cars.
To quote commenter mad.casual:
I shower 40 times a year to support my microbiome
I shower 40 times a year because that's the only time I can find running water
Showers are designed for showering. Roads are designed for conveyance. If you decide to shower on the road, you are interfering with the intended purpose of the road, which is to allow people to get from A to B. Not to shower, not to act as a storage area for large pieces of equipment.
Some roads (and almost all city streets) are also designed for parking.
And they all favor bike lanes that 2% of the people use, and no one uses when it's cold or rainy outside, or too hot.
When drivers bear the full cost of parking their cars, rather than having the public, whether they drive or not, pay the costs, then perhaps bicycles will become more popular. Parking doesn't appear to be nearly as problematic when it comes to bikes that are not in use.
>Blame local government parking minimums for the overabundance of parking in the U.S.
I have to wonder about the life of someone who thinks there's an *overabundance* of parking.
Like, I'm against parking space minimums - especially disabled spots, 90% of which are empty all the time - but I'm not seeing a lot of wasted space, out here in flyover country where we all have cars.
The places I go, at the times I go, tend to have juuuuuust enough parking spaces that finding a spot is mildly inconvenient (and you get happy when you find a spot open close up) but never requires you to wait.
Parking garages, while space efficient, are *time inefficient*. You have to drive slower in them, you can't see where clear spots are easily so you're stuck driving down the path through them, spots are smaller so its harder (and slower) to get in and out. And god help you if several people want to find a spot at the same time - one long, slow, queue through the structure.
Parking garages have their place, but they're still trade-offs.
I park as far away in the lot as possible. Probably get a few extra miles of walking per week. None of that queuing that the fatties do waiting for someone to load their car, then backing out half blindly while the eager vehicle creeps in (cos retards don’t back in), even more of a backup when another wants to get by, then their cart is left on the spot so the people have to squeeze in.
Used to live in a blue area where a megamall opened. There was an outdoors store there on an island but overflow parking from the busy mall went into that lot too. The last year before defection, around Christmas, it was reported that some people drove around for over an hour before getting a parking spot. Anyhow, when it was busy, while walking back to the truck parked far away, cars would creep behind you thinking you were about to get in your vehicle. I’d often get my keys out and change direction making look like that was my car.
How am I going to put groceries in the back of my car if I back into the parking spot?
Are you backing up against a wall? I put groceries in the front passenger seat but could put them in rear passenger seats or the back.
I always figure it's about a wash anyway. You either hold things up backing in or you hold things up backing out. I guess I live in the land of abundant parking because I almost never have any of these problems.
You essentially have defensible space when backing in. When backing up, you can’t see other cars as well in either direction or other folks walking to and from their vehicles.
It is a similar concept to the fatty families at the store that block the entire aisle and intersecting aisle.
it was reported that some people drove around for over an hour before getting a parking spot.
By the way, for the pro-market libertarians at Reason, that’s what’s known as “congestion pricing”. No mass surveillance state, license plate scanners, no geofenced and border controlled public areas or five-year spot price markets set by government bureaucrats required.
It was a congested shithole of over 3,000 people per square mile but yeah, government didn’t need to attempt to fix that.
I think half the people just went there to be there and so they could say had been there.
Seven people per square mile is much nicer…except for the people living in sub and regular urbia. They should stay there because it is much nicer.
Me too. Everyone is lined up waiting in the first couple of rows at Costco. I just park at the edge of the lot and get in the store before they do.
"
I park as far away in the lot as possible. Probably get a few extra miles of walking per week.
"
Chumby, a few extra miles in a week??!???!?? Please share whatever you're smoking.
https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=2A7D79F34B96E8F26BBADA39AA77E04E
Interesting book. Paved Paradise: How Parking Explains the World.
Parking, quite literally, has a death grip on America: each year a handful of Americans are tragically killed by their fellow citizens over parking spots. But even when we don’t resort to violence, we routinely do ridiculous things for parking, contorting our professional, social, and financial lives to get a spot. Indeed, in the century since the advent of the car, we have deformed—and in some cases demolished—our homes and our cities in a Sisyphean quest for cheap and convenient car storage. As a result, much of the nation’s most valuable real estate is now devoted exclusively to empty and idle vehicles, even as so many Americans struggle to find affordable housing. Parking determines the design of new buildings and the fate of old ones, patterns of traffic and the viability of transit, neighborhood politics and municipal finance, the quality of public space, and even the course of floodwaters. Can this really be the best use of our finite resources and space? Why have we done this to the places we love? Is parking really more important than anything else?
These are the questions Slate staff writer Henry Grabar sets out to answer, telling a mesmerizing story about the strange and wonderful superorganism that is the modern American city. In a beguiling and often absurdly hilarious mix of history, politics, and reportage, Grabar brilliantly surveys the pain points of the nation’s parking crisis, from Los Angeles to Disney World to New York, stopping at every major American city in between. He reveals how the pathological compulsion for car storage has exacerbated some of our most acute problems—from housing affordability to the accelerating global climate disaster—ultimately, lighting the way for us to free our cities from parking’s cruel yoke.
The ideal is that a parking spot is available, free and convenient. Tragically, you only get two of the above.
We need the vehicles of Norse myth: lightweight and able to be folded up and carried. They didn't provide instructions, so we need to work on them.
And teleportation, which will make a lot of our problems go away.
"We need the vehicles of Norse myth"
The vehicles we have are fine. The problem is how we use them. Cars are sitting idle, empty and taking up precious space for more than 90% of the time. But their primary intended use is not to sit still but move people from A to B. Check it out in the book I linked to earlier. It's free to download and only takes a few seconds, less time than it took for you to come up with your Norse myth making.
Cars are worth it. Take the bus if you disagree.
Curbside pickup is the biggest waste of parking spaces.
When I go to the store at peak hours the only available spots are ev only and handicap only. Those are usually mostly empty.
I don't think I have ever seen all or even most handicap spots full anywhere. They are definitely over allocated. And now some places have silly things like new mother parking or veteran parking spots. But at least it isn't a crime to park in those.
Way over allocated.
Interesting article but unsure why the author had to take an unnecessary religious tangent.
She didn't. She made a comment about differing cultures.
Government's shouldn't be so foolish as to pretend they know how much parking is needed.
Same goes for the rest of us. Without a free market, we just don't know.
If you do not like so many parking garages, you should have lobbied for a lot more mass transit back then...
In places that have earthquakes, parking structures routinely collapse in them. "Reimagining" them into places where people will spend time (rather than just park and walk away until they want to leave) is going to result in many deaths next time they have a quake.
Those who wrote this article have never encountered a real shortage of parking spaces. Believe me, this is much worse than too much space. Most often, there is a problem with parking spaces in large cities and small historical towns (like European capitals). Australia is solving the problem by building multi-storey car parks. It easily fits into urban design if you use aluminium composite panel sydney - https://glamourdecor.com.au/services/ I've never had the feeling that industrial design is overloaded. Composite panels look very appropriate. I cannot understand why those who manage the city infrastructure of New York did not take note of this option. Many buildings further than Manhattan should be improved.