Convince nothing, price them out. The state is not obligated to pay for permanent storage for your private property on public land. If you want a car, you need to pay for its permanent storage.
Convince nothing, price them out. The state is not obligated to pay for permanent storage for your private property on public land. If you want a car, you need to pay for its permanent storage.
Consider the street closures during the pandemic for outdoors eating. The parking crowd has screeched endlessly about the traffic and parking issues caused by this, but the majority of the populace love these areas now. A bunch of them are actually becoming permanent.
Similarly, the cute, street car suburbs with high walkability and insufficient parking are absurdly expensive everywhere I’ve ever lived. Turns out people like living places that are nice, and that sufficient parking is a relatively minor deciding factor.
Building a new walkable neighborhood is fine. Trying to drastically alter an existing neighborhood is nearly impossible.
Of course, the counter argument is “but Paris has a good metro system”, to which I say maybe we should fix that.
Also, cars are literally the least space efficient means of transit ever devised. Depending on cars for transit means everyone has to live further apart in order to make roads and parking big enough to accommodate all the cars[0], making commutes worse.
Cars are also time inefficient over longer distances, trains (if we bothered to make them) and airplanes trivially beat cars.
0 - Underground parking solves the storage issue at a ludicrous cost. In many modern buildings the cost of the underground parking structure is often more than the cost of the apartment building above it.