Boardwalk at Bricktown / Dream Hotel

[Pete]

At places like Wal-Mart/Target the amount of people who will wait MINUTES to park in a space that looks like it's being vacated is truly astounding.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone driving around looking for a close spot, and I park farther out and am in the store before they've even parked their car.

And then without a handicapped sticker, go jump on a store scooter.

[Plutonic Panda]

I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone driving around looking for a close spot, and I park farther out and am in the store before they've even parked their car.

And then without a handicapped sticker, go jump on a store scooter.

Yes this is another big one. I’ve also had people that will haul ass to a spot they think I’m going to take that’s close and almost cause an accident or be flat out reckless.

But it never ceases to amaze me as you said how many will circle around for a front spot when there’s spaces like 10-15 stalls down.

[ChrisHayes]

At places like Wal-Mart/Target the amount of people who will wait MINUTES to park in a space that looks like it's being vacated is truly astounding.

I'd rather park out in the boonies away from the front of the store than wait for a close in spot. My only exception is when it's really cold out, then I'll try and find a close spot. But yeah, there's been a number of times where I'll see someone waiting for a close spot, I'll park, and they'll still be waiting as I'm walking by. LOL It's so stupid.

[Rover]

At places like Wal-Mart/Target the amount of people who will wait MINUTES to park in a space that looks like it's being vacated is truly astounding.

It's not just Wal-Mart and Target shoppers. This happens at all types of places and events across wide socio-economic strata. It's odd.. I have friends who will go to NYC and walk miles and miles a day while there, but they get back here and drive around and around to get close parking spots. Same people.

[David]

Walking around in a pedestrian friendly environment like NYC is a much different experience than walking through a large, pedestrian unfriendly parking lot dodging cars driven by people who may or may not be paying attention. People want to park close up because it means they spend less time walking through a space that has zero engineering controls that make it safe for people walking through it.

[moxyweez]

Well said, David.

[cappa]

Driving through a crowded parking lot is way worse to me than walking an extra 150 ft. Sign me up for the walk any day.

[Rover]

Walking around in a pedestrian friendly environment like NYC is a much different experience than walking through a large, pedestrian unfriendly parking lot dodging cars driven by people who may or may not be paying attention. People want to park close up because it means they spend less time walking through a space that has zero engineering controls that make it safe for people walking through it.

Of course, and some of it is just laziness.

[GoGators]

Walking around in a pedestrian friendly environment like NYC is a much different experience than walking through a large, pedestrian unfriendly parking lot dodging cars driven by people who may or may not be paying attention. People want to park close up because it means they spend less time walking through a space that has zero engineering controls that make it safe for people walking through it.

Yes, it is pretty easy to understand why massive parking lots suck and yet people will go to war to protect them instead of just making a a pedestrian friendly environment.

[Jersey Boss]

Walking around in a pedestrian friendly environment like NYC is a much different experience than walking through a large, pedestrian unfriendly parking lot dodging cars driven by people who may or may not be paying attention. People want to park close up because it means they spend less time walking through a space that has zero engineering controls that make it safe for people walking through it.

Keep in mind NYC was laid out long before cars were a thing. The culture is way different.

[GoGators]

Keep in mind NYC was laid out long before cars were a thing. The culture is way different.

This is just admitting that cars ruined cities.

[Rover]

This is just admitting that cars ruined cities.

I guess you’ve never been to NYC and seen or been in their car traffic. Yeah, it was probably much better with horses crapping in the streets. Lol

[Plutonic Panda]

I guess you’ve never been to NYC and seen or been in their car traffic. Yeah, it was probably much better with horses crapping in the streets. Lol

Statements like “cars ruined cities”’are hilarious.

[GoGators]

I guess you’ve never been to NYC and seen or been in their car traffic. Yeah, it was probably much better with horses crapping in the streets. Lol

I was talking about how cities were designed pre and post car.look back at the post I was responding to. Its basically saying a city had to be designed before cars to have inviting, safe pedestrian experiences. That would imply that designing for cars caused cities to suck. But thanks for the info about there being cars in New York. Learned something new today.

[dankrutka]

Statements like “cars ruined cities”’are hilarious.

The auto industry is the comedian and we’re all the punchline.

[SagerMichael]

maximum height of 300 feet for this development. For reference Omni hotel is 214 feet, Regency Tower is 288 feet, The Classen is 287 feet. Great opportunity to see some skyline changing buildings added to our downtown

[Rover]

Knowing and ignoring are two different things. There were different kinds of pedestrian obstacles pre cars. There has always been need for transportation, horses, streetcars, buggies, busses. All are pedestrian obstacles. This constant drone of “evil cars” ignores realities and how modern transportation has enabled growth and prosperity, even in the beloved crowded cities. Cheap land and desire to leave the crowd led to many modern cities. Transportation improvements enabled it.

Btw, the LA Dodgers were the Brooklyn Dodgers. They were given that name for people dodging street cars. Urbanists love street cars. Lol.

[GoGators]

Knowing and ignoring are two different things. There were different kinds of pedestrian obstacles pre cars. There has always been need for transportation, horses, streetcars, buggies, busses. All are pedestrian obstacles. This constant drone of “evil cars” ignores realities and how modern transportation has enabled growth and prosperity, even in the beloved crowded cities. Cheap land and desire to leave the crowd led to many modern cities. Transportation improvements enabled it.

Btw, the LA Dodgers were the Brooklyn Dodgers. They were given that name for people dodging street cars. Urbanists love street cars. Lol.

I'm confused. Are you making the argument that that places like OKC shouldn't want nice areas to live in because we need parking?

[Rover]

I'm confused. Are you making the argument that that places like OKC shouldn't want nice areas to live in because we need parking?

THAT is your response? LOLROF. Schoolyard logic..

[jn1780]

The auto industry is the comedian and we’re all the punchline.

Its more about suburb vs city people. I'm sure people that lived in the suburbs had a different "American Dream" than those that stayed in the city. This was just a continuation of "manifest destiny". The automakers just took advantage of this urge to leave big cities behind.

[Pete]

Its more about suburb vs city people. I'm sure people that lived in the suburbs had a different "American Dream" than those that stayed in the city. This was just a continuation of "manifest destiny". The automakers just took advantage of this urge to leave big cities behind.

That's not true.

The government built mega-highways and provided subsidies and continued bail-outs for both the oil and auto industries.

There are countries that are bigger geographically (like Canada and Australia) that were not developed in the same way simply because their plans weren't driven by the interests of the auto and energy industries. Not coincidentally, those two countries have great public transit where you don't even need a car in most places, and not just the city core.

I stayed with good friends in Sydney who live in what we would consider the suburbs and they didn't own a car at all. The busses, trains and water ferries were awesome; I used them all with no problems. It's the same way in Canadian cities.

In fact, there is no other country on earth where most cities were developed with the automobile as the first priority and it's all due to the pandering to big business in the U.S.

[Rover]

That's not true.

The government built mega-highways and provided subsidies and continued bail-outs for both the oil and auto industries.

There are countries that are bigger geographically (like Canada and Australia) that were not developed in the same way simply because their plans weren't driven by the interests of the auto and energy industries. Not coincidentally, those two countries have great public transit where you don't even need a car in most places, and not just the city core.

I stayed with good friends in Sydney who live in what we would consider the suburbs and they didn't own a car at all. The busses, trains and water ferries were awesome; I used them all with no problems. It's the same way in Canadian cities.

In fact, there is no other country on earth where most cities were developed with the automobile as the first priority and it's all due to the pandering to big business in the U.S.

Sydney is more like NYC. However, I spent a fair amount of time in Melbourne and it is much more like OKC. Overall, Australia relies on the car and truck pretty heavily, though no one does as much as the US. The free movement and individualistic nature of Americans has driven the US economy like no other in the world.

It wasn't just the auto and fossil fuel industry that was boosted, but the steel industry, rubber and plastics industry, hospitality industry (inns and restaurants), construction (millions of workers building roads, bridges, and businesses that followed), etc., etc. Ignoring what the combustion engine and cars did for the economic development of our country is blind. That said, I do believe our infrastructure in public transportation needs to be rebalanced and invested in for the economies of scale and public service they create.

[Pete]

Sydney is more like NYC. However, I spent a fair amount of time in Melbourne and it is much more like OKC. Overall, Australia relies on the car and truck pretty heavily, though no one does as much as the US. The free movement and individualistic nature of Americans has driven the US economy like no other in the world.

I visited friends in Melbourne as well who never owned a car. It's nothing like OKC. Way, way more dense.

I just looked it up: Melbourne 8,648 people per square mile; OKC 1,104.

[Plutonic Panda]

Melbourne is embarking on same MASSIVE freeway projects as well as a huge LRT orbital line which I think would be useful in OKC.

Sydney also just completed a large segment of their underground tollway network with more routes planned, IIRC. There are speed cameras that not just take your speed but track your car and determine your speed based on the amount of time it takes you to go from one camera to the next.

[Pete]

Melbourne is embarking on same MASSIVE freeway projects as well as a huge LRT orbital line which I think would be useful in OKC.

Sydney also just completed a large segment of their underground tollway network with more routes planned, IIRC. There are speed cameras that not just take your speed but track your car and determine your speed based on the amount of time it takes you to go from one camera to the next.

Still, neither has even a small fraction of the highway system when compared to OKC, and are much larger cities; both have populations over 5 million.