People keep posting about "dockless cars" when these situations come up, some how ignoreing that vehicles are parked in designated areas as you said, and that it's people's personal vehicles and not companies private fleets that they are charging use for.
I think that modern cities have way too much space allocated to car parking but it is in no way equivalent to a company pushing off one of their major costs onto society
it's people's personal vehicles and not companies private fleets that they are charging use for.
Isn't that worse? If they were car share cars, then at least local residents would be able to use them, but instead, all of those cars parked on city streets are usable by only a single person each.
For example, the city street I used to live on had around 250 housing units and about 40 street parking spaces. It would have been nicer if those 40 cars were car-share cars rather than being tied up by the 40 residents that got there first.
No I don't believe that at all. Part of the money you pay for share cars would be going into someone's pockets. It's literally a negative externality that they are pushing onto society. Sometimes those negative externalities are worth the benefits that a business brings around but that's not a garunteed or even common occurrence and it shouldn't just be assumed to be a positive
Part of the money that I pay for my own car goes in someone's pockets, so I don't understand why that matters.
But when I lived in that city, I'd have paid far less overall if I used car-share instead of owning my own car. When I park my own car on the public street, that space is dedicated 100% to me. When a car-share car is parked there, then several people benefit from that space.
I think that modern cities have way too much space allocated to car parking but it is in no way equivalent to a company pushing off one of their major costs onto society