you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -18 points 1 month ago (10 children)

It absolutely was a necessity, without parking spaces cars would have clogged the streets.

Now, I don't mean to defend the cars in this case, living in a European city and buying a car is and was dumb.

However we have been better att hiding parking spaces in underground or integrated building that are less bad than wasting that space for parking.

At the time the solution was needed, but times change and now there are far far better solutions.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago

    Park & ride is a very popular thing back then, people from out of town with less access to public transport can just leave their car outside the city and ride a train in, it definitely isn't a necessity and it never was.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 21 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Trains and bicycles existed in 1976. No it wasnt a necessit

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You misunderstand me, it was needed to create a parking space where people lived, else people would just create their own spots all over.

    I don't disagree with you, there absolutely were alternatives to the car even back then, but people kept buying cars, and it became a problem for the city government to deal with.

    So they did what was needed.

    Remember, France was and still is a democracy, and they had to solve the issue with a pressure of reelection looming.

    Your argument ignores human nature, and selfishness is part of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    People do not park in pedestrian zones. They usually get towed if they do. People usually take the fastest form of transport. When you have to search for parking, they usually mentally think of that and use other forms of transport instead. Even in car brained places like the US, it is not like Central Park in New York City is a giant parking lot even though there is clearly massive demand for parking in that area.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Not really. Different cities handked that question very differently. Some tore down large parts to make soace for cars (moving and parking), others were very cobservative about it. The latter did just as fine as the former in general, shiwing that it wasn't a necessity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    do you think cars just grow like mold? without parking spaces people wouldn't have anywhere to park their cars, thus owning a car would be effectively impossible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Nope, they would just park their car on sidewalks and other bad places.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Which.. is illegal..
    you don't just destroy cities because people are gonna do illegal things otherwise, you prevent people from doing the illegal thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago

    You do understand that it costs money to police illegal things right?

    The city government looked at the price tags and one was cheaper.

    Look, the decision to use that park as a parking lot is more than 50 years old, at the time it was needed.

    I am extremely glad that it isn't needed any more.

  • source
  • parent