Comments
-
@BigJohnson86, thats only a valid arguement if you're refering to modern suburbia and rural areas where cars are a necessary need. In urban and old suburbia, cars are not only unnecessary due to public transport but a waste of space as well. A 3 floor apartment can house 3 families and imagine these families have one car each. If an entire street have the same 3 floor buildings with the same people living in them with cars, that street alone will not even be enough for 1/3rd of the cars to park on.
-
@Hoover CAT, but you’d be in a rural area so there would be loads of space or it wouldn’t be a necessary because you’d have public transport
-
@Hoover CAT, Their point is still valid for the picture though. That picture doesn't represent living. It's not like that many people could live there all together. Plus you have to consider all the tailgaters out there that aren't actually in the stadium.
-
@satan of the north, how is it still valid? The original comment argues that picture is false because it doesnt take into account space needed for your house to exist vs the space your car takes up. I argued that way of thinking is limited because once you start adding family members and taller buildings, the ratio will be true. If each family owes let say 2 cars in one street, that street will not be enough for those cars. Meanwhile a 2 bedroom apartment can facilitate 4 people.
-
@Hoover CAT, Their point is that this picture is a stadium. Not a living situation. Both of your points are valid. The picture being of a stadium is a bad representation of people vs cars cause a stadium is people packed in as close as possible with still being at least somewhat comfortable for a few hours. Also the ration of living space, is greater than parking space in every scenario. Nobody has more parking space than living space.
-
@satan of the north, alright I see why the stadium picture is a bad picture to illustrate the problem. A picture of a mall would also be bad too. But I would still argue that cars take more space because of their size. People can live in relatively small space. For example coutries such as Japan, Netherlands, and the Philippines use relatively small living spaces. And multiple family housing exist. Comparing one person and one car will tell you cars take less space, but as you add more people and cars you'll find that cars will take up more space exponentially because people can and will share living spaces because its cheaper or its the cultural norm.
-
@Hoover CAT, That "problem" is only an issue in urban areas though too. Adding people will also prove the point of people take up more space though. A family of 4 (2 parents, 2 kids) can be just fine with 1 car, but that 4 person family could not live in a small studio apartment. A parking spot is about 150 sqft (8.5'x18'), where even a small studio apartment that would only be suitable for maybe 2 people is like 300-500 sqft. You're also talking about building living spaces up, and not out, but not giving that to parking. An apartment building can easily have enough underground parking for the entire complex while not taking up any extra street/land space. Also parking ramps are a thing. Don't have to spread the cars all out on the street. Look at Japan. They have some very innovative ways to park cars in very small places.
-
And an collosseum tells us the opposite.
-
RIP Bob Sagat
-
@Madelin, spoiler alert! Gosh!!
-
@Madelin, Congrats, you were the one to tell me about this.
-
Cemeteries a better. #UrbanThoughts
-
I'd call a taxi to get from my car to the stadium
-
And everyone “needs” their own. The same people trying to take away your guns are also against self driving cars cause “it’s my right to drive!!” Funny enough, it’s not.
It’s really not tho. What is the ratio of space in your house for you vs your car? A stadium is a good measure of how close people will be together for a few hours without killing each other.