Jeez, well, there are SO GODDAMN MANY parking lots, I think that we could have a little bit of everything: housing, gardens, small businesses, parks, nature, et cetera. My answer is, then, "whatever the local community currently lacks."
This is what land use planning is in /c/reclamation@slrpnk.net is about. Consultation ins an integral part of deciding what to do with a development after it's finished. Not all land uses necessarily need to support wildlife habitat or ecosystem redevelopment.
Oak, burch and hazel groves. No other reason than those are my favourite trees.
Excellent taste in trees, good sir/lady
I never understood the huge parking lots in the malls near where I grew up. I always thought "why not put in a garage?" It would use a 1/4 of the ground space and keep the same amount of parking and would leave room for more stores. But I like the idea of wildlife sanctuaries/parks replacing parking lots more than stores.
Parking garages are expensive compared to lots.
The mall probably also is in bumfuck nowhwre, meaning Therese bear unlimited space for other shops and their own parking lots
24/7 cybergoth raves
Paradise. Put it back where it was.
The ones in regions of suburban sprawl should be torn up and given back to the Earth. Those in more urban areas should be redeveloped into a mixture of industrial, commercial, and residential spaces.
While that is an enviable end goal, it's not as simple as 'giving it back to nature'. I realize you're probably aware you've oversimplified that statement, but here are somethings that need to be considered to return the land to nature:
- do people even want this reclaimed? You're going to have a shit load of stake holders that all have diffent visions for the land in question What was the pre-disturbance ecosystem?
- Do you have a plan to unify this patch of land with other ecosystems like it?
- There is no topsoil, so what are you going to use for a growth media? Usually it's organic amendments mixed with the subsoil.
- how much will it cost to amend the subsoil with organic amendments (in lieu of topsoil) and where will you get it from?
- what are the application rates of the amendments that ensure plant growth? " parking lots are compacted, so you'll have to get equipment to decompact it. This will require a minimum of two passes with a dozer ripping to 50-100 cm in depth
- What planting or seeding rates are you going to use?
- how will you manage weed ingess? Spraying is relatively easy but it's expensive. Manual pulling sucks
- how will you know when your reclamation and revgetation efforts are successful?
Again, I'm not trying to tee off on you, here, but I think a lot of people oversimplify reclamation. It is so, so much easier to conserve rather than reclaim.
Yes, I was being simple and romantic my lemon. But I'll engage.
do people even want this reclaimed? You’re going to have a shit load of stake holders that all have diffent visions for the land in question What was the pre-disturbance ecosystem?
Yes, I do. OP asked what I would do and my answer is tear up/redevelop based on proximity to urban centers.
Do you have a plan to unify this patch of land with other ecosystems like it?
No. We're going to have a new ecosystem comprised of scarred earth that will suffer from erosion for a decade or so before vegetation takes hold.
There is no topsoil, so what are you going to use for a growth media? Usually it’s organic amendments mixed with the subsoil.
There won't be topsoil until naturally deposited organic matter decomposes and mixes with minerals at the site. This could take awhile.
how much will it cost to amend the subsoil with organic amendments (in lieu of topsoil) and where will you get it from?
Not applicable. We're doing acclerated erosion until natural depostion and decomposition of organic matter can bring vegetation to the site.
what are the application rates of the amendments that ensure plant growth? " parking lots are compacted, so you’ll have to get equipment to decompact it. This will require a minimum of two passes with a dozer ripping to 50-100 cm in depth What planting or seeding rates are you going to use?
Not applicable...
how will you manage weed ingess? Spraying is relatively easy but it’s expensive. Manual pulling sucks
Weeds will be watered when it rains. They will help control site erosion.
how will you know when your reclamation and revgetation efforts are successful?
When clover and dandelions spring up in April and bees forage them.
That was fun, thank you for asking.
Parks. With pedestrian infrastructure and free public restrooms.
Pretty much anything else really - trees, gardens, parks, playgrounds, sports fields, markets, plazas, housing, business space. Hell - even just an overgrown vacant lot would be better than a parking lot.
If this is a blue-sky scenario, I'm going with: space dedicated to growing food or producing power (like with solar pv between rows of crops that need some shade). This will call for minimal pathways to access some of the spaces, probably also water lines for irrigation, plus strategically placed keystone trees like oak and some fruit-producers as well
Agrivoltaics and multistrata agroforestry are super cool. I know this sub is primarily about sustainable urbanism, but I love me some sustainable pastoralism as well. I want a world with denser cities so we can make way for more nature and sustainable agriculture instead of endless sterile suburbs.
Edible Gardens
Flea markets?
If it were up to me? I'd talk to local ecologists/climate scientists along with the local community who would be exposed to and/or utilizing that space and see what they felt was best for their area.
I’d rather delete them than replace them. Move everything closer together again. But you can’t reverse time, so homes and parks are probably the best options. Businesses, museums… schools if feasible.
God I would love to see a network of tiny walkable neighborhoods connected by reliable public transit in place of the fields of asphalt we have now
Wind or solar farms if practical.
In the middle of the neighborhood? Can you imagine having to walk to the grocery store across a solar farm? Or having the noise of a wind turbine next to your local cafe?
If something needs to be there, I would choose parks or community gardens.
Well, hence "if practical". Obviously, a wind turbine surrounded by existing multi-story buildings isn't going to be useful anyway - so this wouldn't be a good idea for inner city parking lots. But not every parking lot is in a city like that, so it really depends on the specific location. If the building near the parking lot is also defunct (like a lot of shopping malls in the US) then maybe tearing all of it down and putting turbines in the space would make sense.
For long-term society support we should be adding more power generation where we can, especially low-carbon options. Our need for energy isn't going down and probably never will. Fortunately, solar and wind have both reached the point where they are the lowest cost/MWh option for power generation (even without government subsidies) so they are often the best choice, and probably more people would be comfortable living near a solar or wind farm than a fission plant.
Really cool stores, parks, things like that.
I currently live in a place that doesn't have that many people parking, yet we still have a bajillion parking spaces. They tear down a perfectly good building and build a parking space, then proceed to make it seem like some great thing for the community when in reality it will be used by no one but drug dealers (in cars)
If you're in the US or Canada (or maybe some other places as well), that's likely a result if parking minimums. Climate Town has a really good and comprehensive video on them here. Essentially, the developers are legally required to build a certain minimum number of spots, based on the use of the building and the floor space. But these numbers are completely arbitrary, based on pseudoscience, and based on expectated max (as opposed to typical) usage. Buildings that existed before the laws were enacted in the mid 1900s were grandfathered in, but any substantial renovations or new developments require the developers to acquire neighboring properties and demolish them to satisfy the mandatory parking minimums.
The whole thing is truly insane and results in so much needless waste.
Makes sense, though in my case a lot of these parking lots are straight up built in the middle of nowhere, knowing that they serve no purpose.
Some are just way oversized as well, for instance, the capacity of grocery store parking lots far exceed the maximum number of inhabitants even if you have a single person per car. Absolutely insane.
A lot of empty lots in Denver get absolutely filled with prairie dogs already. They're cute but also reproduce like mad with no natural predators in suburbia. We need more ferrets to eat them, they're even more cute imo.
Gorgeous opulent tombs full of the ruling class, that everyone can enjoy for hundreds of years.
Parks, urban forests, community gardens, libraries, local shops, communal spaces, HOUSES.
Parks and sports areas covered with solar panels if in one of the hotter places. Maybe event areas for concerts, markets, whatevahs
Public parks with vegitation that people could freely exist in
Permanently Deleted
A sea of cat cafes.
People would replace them with new buildings, one way or the other
Once there were parking lots, now it’s a peaceful oasis. https://youtu.be/tIvc-1J5Qmc
Honestly, I'm okay with parking lots if we can do away with street parking.
Prairie dogs are literal vermin, they destroy roots and they're infested with bubonic plague.
If vermin, why so cute?
Airports because we would then have to get to places faster since there are no cars.
