[HN Gopher] Paris to hold referendum on higher parking fees for ...
___________________________________________________________________
Paris to hold referendum on higher parking fees for heavy SUVs
Author : geox
Score : 68 points
Date : 2023-11-17 17:50 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.brusselstimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.brusselstimes.com)
| rowyourboat wrote:
| Shouldn't parking fees be dependent on area and not weight?
| n4r9 wrote:
| This is one way to discourage pollution in the city.
| lowkeyoptimist wrote:
| And discourage EVs since they are heavier than ICVs.
| footy wrote:
| And thus more dangerous when they hit pedestrians in a
| city.
| creer wrote:
| It's not about safety or parking. Parking spaces are mostly a
| fixed size - you fit or not - and where they are not it's
| vehicle length that should matter. It's a cute strategy by an
| insanely opinionated and activist mayor (to use a majority
| against an easy-pickings minority). The use of referendums is
| an interesting twist in her track record.
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| It is about safety. Larger cars on the streets are more
| dangerous for the people living in the city.
|
| Cars have been getting ridiculously large over the past
| decades because the only force acting upon carmakers is the
| desire of the car buyer.
|
| If I'm buying a car, I obviously want the largest car I can
| afford and semi-reasonably fit where I'm going to be. This
| has many benefits for me, but a lot of negative externalites
| for everyone around me.
|
| That is why policies need to discourage larger cars in many
| ways, to keep the average size in check, so to speak.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > If I'm buying a car, I obviously want the largest car I
| can afford
|
| Is that obvious? I guess I'm weird, as I always want the
| smallest car I can get that gives me the features I want.
| I'm constantly annoyed that I end up in larger cars than I
| ideally want because that's basically the choice I'm given.
| shakow wrote:
| > Is that obvious?
|
| The best-selling cars in the US are (and from afar) the
| F150 and the Dodge RAM, so empirically it seems correct.
| salamandersss wrote:
| I mean the US effectively outlawed an arguably most
| versatile of all vehicles for vast spaces of US, the
| compact truck, which fits somewhere in the middle of
| vehicle sizes. I suspect most of those people had to move
| to another class, perhaps to these larger trucks.
| salamandersss wrote:
| >decades because the only force acting upon carmakers is
| the desire of the car buyer.
|
| Trucks, and perhaps some cars also got bigger also because
| of fuel efficiency regulations (CAFE) that require a larger
| footprint if gas mileage is worse. They had to make for
| instance the Tacoma much larger to match a barely changed
| engine. And foreign small import trucks were stifled with
| the chicken tax, pushing consumers towards Americas
| McGigantic brands.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Road wear scales with weight^2 so if you want to refinance road
| maintenance off the parking fees, this seems reasonable.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| It's worse than that, more roughly weight^4
|
| https://pavementinteractive.org/reference-
| desk/design/design...
| redwall_hp wrote:
| Fourth power of axle weight, apparently. So (weight/2)^4 for
| a car or SUV.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
|
| Also, squishy humans really prefer to not be hit by heavier
| objects travelling at similar speeds.
| salamandersss wrote:
| Privatizing all roads would ironically probably be the
| fastest way to cut down on oversized vehicles. Nobody wants
| to pay a quadratic weighted toll on the GVWR of a bunch of
| extra SUV, but when they have to pay it all in taxes non-
| quadratically anyway it's a fuck it go big moment.
| janosdebugs wrote:
| Let's see... If we privatize roads and every owner (pinky
| promise) only makes everyone pay basod on vehicle
| weight... That almost sounds like a tax based on car
| weight.
| salamandersss wrote:
| The only reason why an SUV is economical for me is I'm
| pillaging sedan and small car owners by making them pay
| my share.
| MandieD wrote:
| All other things being equal, taller front bumpers and
| hoods make for worse pedestrian outcomes, as well.
| 6c696e7578 wrote:
| What irks me most is that most children are invisible in
| the blind spots around SUVs, which typically are seen
| around school drop off/pickup.
| cbg0 wrote:
| This is what road/vehicle taxes are for.
| tmnvix wrote:
| Some combination of both would be best in my opinion. Weight
| due to wear on roads and size due to the safety implications
| (some personal vehicles are now almost 2m tall and impossible
| to see over for pedestrians and cyclists - creating a much more
| dangerous environment).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-17 23:02 UTC)