8 ms·
Excuse me, how are people supposed to get there? Parking should be provided for 100% of the occupancy.
by manoweb 2y ago
Excuse me, how are people supposed to get there? Parking should be provided for 100% of the occupancy.
- shermozle 2y agoHilarious illustration of carbrain thinking.
- peepeepoopoo107 2y agoWhat if you ever want to leave the city limits? You're trapped and you're pretending that you're not.
- defrost 2y agoRent a car from outlying rental places? That negates the need for central urban high rise dwellers to own cars. Car owners could (say) use outlying parking towers. To travel there are buses, trains, aircraft, boats, etc. Not owning a car is common in many parts of the world.
- rdlw 2y agoYou take a bus or a train or a subway or a plane or a bike or you rent a car or you roadtrip with your friends
- peepeepoopoo107 2y agoJust take a bus to go hiking in the mountains. Get real.
- defrost 2y agoThat's exactly right. A good many people have done that kind of thing many times.
- rdlw 2y agoYou didn't ask how to go hiking in the mountains, you asked how to "leave city limits". but you could still bike, go with friends, or rent a car for a day if no buses go where you want. Hiking locations tend to have lots of tourists so there would likely be bus routes, however.
- marssaxman 2y agoHere in Seattle we have a special bus service specifically for that purpose, called "Trailhead Direct".
- peepeepoopoo107 2y agoBullshit, I'm from the Puget Sound and it hardly covers any of the good trails in the Cascades, nor could it do so practically if service were ever expanded.
- defrost 2y agoThat's a lovely area with a rich history of human occupation and exploration that predates the invention of the car by several thousand years.
- peepeepoopoo107 2y agoYeah, and when my grandpa was a kid, instead of a 20 minute drive to the neighboring town, it literally took them three days on foot because of all the hills, sloughs, and rivers. Cars and their associated infrastructure are a modern miracle, and the luddites opposed them are extremely foolish.
- defrost 2y agoWhat, exactly are you arguing for? Are you claiming that an occasional need for a car dictates that every person needs their own dedicated full time car and that all dwellings need associated parking? That would be extremely foolish. You appear to be flopping about in circles here.
- peepeepoopoo109 2y ago[flagged]
- marssaxman 2y ago
- FrontierProject 2y agoThis is incredibly commonplace in Alpine Europe. I regularly see people on the train in ski boots.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> What if you ever want to leave the city limits? In case you're being serious, you rent a car or take an Uber. A metropolis might as well be defined by its lack of car ownership. Even when you're renting or being driven, you go as far as you can via train. (The Metro-North goes to an Appalachian trailhead [1].) It's safer, simpler, cheaper and nobody has the deadweight loss of being unpaid chauffeur. [1] https://www.mta.info/stations/appalachian-trail https://www.mta.info/stations/appalachian-trail
- peepeepoopoo107 2y agoHrmm, so you do need a car after all. It's really amusing listening to people from the Bay Area pass down edicts for how everyone else should use transportation, given that their decrees are a complete non-starter in well over 99% of the United States. Calling it "out of touch" would be a bit generous.
- defrost 2y ago> Hrmm, so you do need a car after all. Not a car that's exclusive to one person though. You're delibrately overlooking that part and that doesn't reflect well on you.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> you do need a car after all Straw man. We were debating dedicated parking. > so you do need a car after all. It's really amusing listening to people from the Bay Area The Bay Area is car centric--most people have a driver's license. I live in Wyoming and lived in New York. You need a car in Wyoming. You don't in Manhattan. High rises make sense in the latter. They'd be stupid here. If you're dense enough to make high rises necessary, you're too dense for cars to make sense. Parking for high rises is a dead giveaway the project is being pursued for appearances. (San Francisco's skyscrapers are dominated by commercial buildings that double as advertising.)
- jamiek88 2y agoWhy did you create an account just for this argument? Seems odd.
- shermozle 2y agoTell me that you've never visited a city outside North America (and Australia) without telling me...
- manoweb 2y agoMost people have great pleasure in owning and driving a nice car. The ones that do not are a minority. There are many reasons why cars (and trucks) are desirable and sought after possessions. It would be a logical fallacy that because you currently do not want one, people should build major projects with no regard to car parking.
- mixmastamyk 2y agoSuch folks don't tend to live in skyscrapers.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> ones that do not are a minority Most Americans don't live in a skyrise. If you love your car and only have one, buy a place in Brooklyn with a garage: city living is not for you.
- dghughes 2y agoToo many people though love cars. Some cities are banning cars. Of course buses, trains, delivery vehicles still exist. Wide open places like US and Canada sure but many places are super crowded. Southern China, Lagos Nigeria, Tokyo, Mexico City. They're all implementing trains for a reason. There is just no way for cars to move if packed into a small area with hundreds of thousands of people.
- DidYaWipe 2y agoLaughable whine from delusional faux car-haters.