Don't forget the opportunity cost. Urban land is extremely valuable, so if you're using it for car parking instead of shop, restaurants, homes, or offices you're missing out on a lot of potential income.

This goes doubly so for all the additional roads you need to get the cars to their parking spots.

▲

motorest 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Don't forget the opportunity cost. Urban land is extremely valuable, so if you're using it for car parking instead of shop, restaurants, homes, or offices you're missing out on a lot of potential income.

Indeed, and to build upon your comment, how entitled can some people be to expect they can just take over random ~10m² spots in a property you do not own and expect that to be ok? It isn't. Those spots ain't yours, and I would love to not have to come across your car.

▲

octo888 4 days ago | parent [-]

Take over as in rent for a fee? Nobody mentioned free.

Are you against renting homes, hotel rooms etc too? Do you object to the vast spaces that hotels occupy?

And if it's public property, well, we all pay taxes and could argue it's collectively owned. Why would it be entitlement?

I could say public transport advocates are entitled expecting taxes to pay for vastly expensive public transport infrastructure projects

	▲	jeromegv 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		They are against free or very cheap parking in an urban environment. If you talk of taxes, then yes, you can argue against tax payers subsiding free parking for people living outside that city

▲

WalterBright 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

In Tokyo there are parking garages that are a multistory cylinder. The car is driven onto a platform in the center, which is an elevator that goes up, and turns like a railroad turntable so the car lines up with a parking spot arranged like spokes on a wheel.

It's one way to put a lot of cars in a small space. Much of the space in a conventional parking garage is lost to the driveways.