Hacker News Reader

Comment by rootusrootus | Hacker News Reader

The law has to plan for generalities, not specific renters, and parking spots are not created ad hoc. And the law also has to allow for people who might elect not to pay for a parking spot but then want to use street parking, which is a negative externality for the surrounding neighborhood.

View on HN

Then you charge for street parking permits, which you should if the street parking has value.

A lot of places do this, where they charge a few thousand a year to park on the street.

A lot of people don't need parking. And we are forcing them to pay for it. That's bad policy. My old condo had like $80,000 worth of parking attached to it with two spaces. I only needed one of the space.

Your very last sentence counters the rest of your point. A lot of people don't need parking... but you did. But only half of what was provided. How to plan for this in advance? The parking spots have to be planned in from the beginning, not created ad hoc, so requiring a certain number of spots per X building units is sensible. Ideally you get just to 100% utilization but no more. But that will vary depending on the mix of tenants at any given time.

The parking was deeded to my unit. I didn’t intentionally pay for 2 parking spots. I was forced to buy two.

Then you should have sublet the space to someone who needed it, no?

Why is street parking free? I think there is the root of your problem: street parking isn't properly charged.

on point: Japan doesn't allow street parking (or at least, it's very rare), but even the densest cities have parking available off street - charging market rates, sometimes using car-elevators, many solutions that more efficiently avoid the issues with using government-paved roads as free parking

They could have a permit system.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com