Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was in Lake Havasu city a while back, the difference between there and most cities in California/rest of country is that most front yards are gravel or earth and flat and you can park anywhere in the lot and I doubt this cost the developer anything, its actually cheaper this way as the lots have minimal landscaping aside from desert plants. Its not uncommon to see as many as 8 cars, a motorhome, and a boat on the same 1/4-1/2 acre lot most houses in neighboring CA and communities across the country sit on. In much of California and other parts of the country there is more than enough space on the lot but for some reason 90% is unusable space or is forbidden to park on. So money for the developers not the only issue. Thus is it due to codes?
In other words while you could physically park 8-10 side by side in that lot no problem if you don't have landscaping/terrain in the way but "legally" you can only park 4 and in tandom.
Apparently there was a time when wide garages and wider concrete driveways were popular in CA but that fad seem to have passed.
Interesting how CA requires so much vegetation and lawns on each residential lot either single family or multi family that requires so much water. I know residential water use is miniscule compared to other types of water use but why force people to spend so much money on watering, while other parts of desert southwest do well without such water hungry land?
Landscaping costs developers money, and often wasted money as buyers would often just bulldoze it and start all over.
I had stayed for a year in a super large complex in west LA, parking was ridiculous though despite them having so much land like almost a mile long and 1/4 a mile wide. They only planned for one car per family unit of 2 bedrooms. This is LA and every one of driving age were car dependent.
Last edited by citizensadvocate; 11-06-2021 at 07:52 AM..
But those developers know they can make much more money out of an apartment or condo on that lot than letting somebody park another car. As usual, the dollar comes first.
But those developers know they can make much more money out of an apartment or condo on that lot than letting somebody park another car. As usual, the dollar comes first.
Thats true, but ironically much of the space around single family homes as well as apartments or condos I mentioned are not used as living space either. In fact much of the lot of 65% of the lot surrounding such buildings are often unusable vacant terrain that may or may not have landscaping or vegetation on them. And against local ordinances to park on. And they often uses a lot of water. In commercial lots most of the lot that is not built over are used for parking even though there is some vegetation and landscaping but they don't take up so much valuable space.
Its beyond me why builders use the space in front of homes for useless landscaping/obstacles that the buyer is often going to tear out anyways to build their own landscaping as opposed to a circular drive way that can accommodate four more cars of residents or visitors that doesn't require watering. I am sure that is less expensive than the useless landscaping they now put in front of every new home or apartment/condo illegal to park on. I be curious whether its a code requirement to put all that useless and obstructive landscaping in front of every residential development but not commercial ones? Like 65% of the land is of them.
In some parts of the south west home lots are level and pretty much all unbuilt portions are accessible by car/parking.
Permeable pavment is a scam. To maintain their permeability they require maintenance. As part of a 'Streetscape' program our town was replacing all the sidewalks as well as rebuilding the street and permeable pavement for the sidewalks and some parking lots was proposed by State Highways who was in charge of the project. They would not consider it for the street (a state thru road that they are responsible for maintaining) because 'it was not suitable for the heavy traffic load' When the town looked into it they found that for the sidewalks to retain the permeability it would have to be vacuumed on a regular basis (at least every six months or more often if anything but a few specified de-icers were used in the winter). Use in a parking lot was even worse they would have to be 'cleaned' every other month at least and had an expected effective life of 15-20 years if properly maintained.
The problem is salt and even dirt clogs the pores that allow water to find its way through the pavement. Of the pores clog up it becomes no different than normal concrete in permeability but because water can get trapped in the pores during freeze thaw cycles it will break up sooner than normal concrete. The break up isn't the traditional cracking which road departments are used to fighting with sealant but in very small fissures which can lower the weight bearing ability of the pavement causing the surface to crumble.
So permeable pavement MAY have some use in sunbelt areas (but blowing sand will also clog the pores) but I doubt that most owners will properly maintain them.
I was in Lake Havasu city a while back, the difference between there and most cities in California/rest of country is that most front yards are gravel or earth and flat and you can park anywhere in the lot and I doubt this cost the developer anything, its actually cheaper this way as the lots have minimal landscaping aside from desert plants. Its not uncommon to see as many as 8 cars, a motorhome, and a boat on the same 1/4-1/2 acre lot most houses in neighboring CA and communities across the country sit on. In much of California and other parts of the country there is more than enough space on the lot but for some reason 90% is unusable space or is forbidden to park on. So money for the developers not the only issue. Thus is it due to codes?
In other words while you could physically park 8-10 side by side in that lot no problem if you don't have landscaping/terrain in the way but "legally" you can only park 4 and in tandom.
Apparently there was a time when wide garages and wider concrete driveways were popular in CA but that fad seem to have passed.
Interesting how CA requires so much vegetation and lawns on each residential lot either single family or multi family that requires so much water. I know residential water use is miniscule compared to other types of water use but why force people to spend so much money on watering, while other parts of desert southwest do well without such water hungry land?
Landscaping costs developers money, and often wasted money as buyers would often just bulldoze it and start all over.
I had stayed for a year in a super large complex in west LA, parking was ridiculous though despite them having so much land like almost a mile long and 1/4 a mile wide. They only planned for one car per family unit of 2 bedrooms. This is LA and every one of driving age were car dependent.
The issue is that not all neighborhoods are designed this way. I live in a neighborhood where people typically take commuter transport if they want to go to the city. I can basically walk/bike to all of the essentials (grocery store, public schools, train station, other small stores) if I want to. Even the largest homes tend to have only 3-car garages. There is no real need for people to have 5 cars. The downtown area doesn’t have nearly enough parking (or didn’t pre-covid) for everyone who wants to go downtown to drive. It’s expected that most people within a reasonable walking/biking distance will do so. In contrast, this is a tree city with parkways that the city owns. It puts lots of trees there and it is not really your land. It makes the neighborhood much more desirable than having gigantic parking lots all over the place. Even business parking lots are relatively small.
The issue is that not all neighborhoods are designed this way. I live in a neighborhood where people typically take commuter transport if they want to go to the city. I can basically walk/bike to all of the essentials (grocery store, public schools, train station, other small stores) if I want to. Even the largest homes tend to have only 3-car garages. There is no real need for people to have 5 cars. The downtown area doesn’t have nearly enough parking (or didn’t pre-covid) for everyone who wants to go downtown to drive. It’s expected that most people within a reasonable walking/biking distance will do so. In contrast, this is a tree city with parkways that the city owns. It puts lots of trees there and it is not really your land. It makes the neighborhood much more desirable than having gigantic parking lots all over the place. Even business parking lots are relatively small.
I'm curious where you are located. Here in the mid Atlantic region with very hot humid summers and cold wet windy winters walking or biking (especially with groceries) is somewhat limited by the weather. Schools generally draw from fairly large areas and require buses to transport students (If they live beyond 2 miles from the school) and parents who live in the area between 1/2 to 3/4 mile and the 2 mile circle feel they have to drive their k-8 grade students to school (causing long lines in the pickup/dropoff area and the streets around it) In one recently built neighborhood residents are VERY upset because they cannot park on most of the streets because the streets were made narrower than older neighborhoods to meet the more stringent storm water management requirements the state put in just before this neighborhood was laid out. Each house has at least a 2 car garage and a parking apron with space for 2 cars. the residents say that is not enough for visitors, family gatherings, etc. I can't wait to see what happens as the neighborhood matures and the young children become teenagers and 'need' cars of their own. The neighborhood is primarily 4 bedroom homes with about 20% having a possible 5th bedroom.
There should be less parking, because places should be designed for humans and not for cars. It's impossible to have both together. Cars take up plenty of space, both parking and road space. In a place with limited space, this makes housing more expensive. It also increases the distances between places, which decreases walkability and increases energy use and emissions. Cars are unsafe for pedestrians and cyclists. Cars are bad for the environment, create pollution and are loud. Which means cars reduce the quality of life of a place. Since cars take up so much space, there also needs to be more infrastructure per capita, which means higher construction and maintenance costs, which means less money for other things or just bad infrastructure (i.e. bad roads). There is a reason why roads in America are in worse shape than in Europe or Japan, because there is simply too much road and parking space per capita in the US. It's economical nonsense. But for me the most important argument for less parking is, because it makes places ugly.
The evidence =>
Parking in Downtown Houston, TX
What could be there instead =>
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Parking deserts =>
Mall in Sugar Land, TX
Avon High School in Avon, IN
What could be there instead =>
Buffalo, NY
Even better =>
Vauban, Freiburg, Germany
Less cars mean more space for nature and thus recreational activity =>
Suburb in Dortmund, Germany
In contrast =>
Sprawling landscape caused by car oriented spatial planning in Long Island, NY
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
