Inspiration Pakistan: How Can We Support Displaced Pakistanis

Parking subsidies a waste of resources?

Oak Leaves (Oak Park, IL) December 7, 2005 | JOHN HUSTON AND CHERI BENTRUP If Donald Shoup had his way, the only “free parking” you could find would be on a Monopoly board.

Shoup, a professor of urban planning at the University of California Los Angeles, blames municipalities that provide free — or cheap — parking not only for missed revenue opportunities, but for the far-ranging social effects it causes.

Publicly subsidized parking, he argues, slows down travel, harms the environment, degrades urban design, raises housing costs, impedes the reuse of older buildings and limits home ownership possibilities.

Parking in Oak Park’s municipal garages and lots isn’t free, but it is cheaper than market rate. website best parking nyc

“It’s not unusual for villages to subsidize parking. Actually, it’s fairly common in one way or another,” said Mike Fox, a board member of the Downtown Oak Park Business District.

Fox said retailers don’t look at parking from an environmental standpoint, but rather as something they need in order to survive.

“We look at what is best for shoppers and what do we need to do to compete against other shopping areas such as Forest Park, River Forest and the new Brickyard Mall,” Fox said.

“We need to make things competitive and parking is one of those things retailers need and shoppers want,” he said.

Fox has gone before the Oak Park Village Board numerous times to request additional parking for Downtown shoppers.

One village trustee, Geoff Baker, is a firm believer that available parking brings more vehicles to an area, raising congestion and environmental concers. But at a Nov. 17 meeting about Downtown Oak Park, Baker said the village needs to move forward with a new parking garage on North Boulevard.

“If you want to put people in stores, you need parking management,” Baker said. “There really is not enough space.” Baker said building a new parking garage on North Boulevard would allow the village to maximize what is now a parking lot by adding not only parking, but retail and residential to the site.

He does admit, though, that the village’s subsidized parking “encourages people to use their cars more than they might already. I’d like to start to look for us to encourage public transportation more, including getting people from the Loop out here” to shop.

In Shoup’s recent book, “The High Cost of Free Parking,” he makes three recommendations: Charge market prices for the cost of parking, return the meter revenue to the neighborhoods that generate it and eliminate required parking ordinances.

Shoup spoke last month at the University Club in Chicago, hosted by Congress for New Urbanism, Chicago Metropolis 2000, Center for Neighborhood Technology and Metropolitan Planning Council.

“Parking is only free to us in our role as drivers,” Shoup said. “The cost of parking doesn’t disappear just because the driver doesn’t pay for it.

“We pay for parking in higher costs for meals or movie tickets. It’s in almost every transaction we make. Even those without cars have to pay for free parking.” Driving costs Municipal zoning requirements, such as those that dictate a new restaurant must have a certain number of parking spots per table, are more destructive than helpful, Shoup said. They drive construction costs up.

Parking requirements are normally aimed at the peak occupancy for whatever building it serves, Shoup said, leaving large areas unused at other times.

The costs of parking is higher than most people realize, he said.

In 2002, the subsidy for off-street parking nationwide totaled between $127 billion and $374 billion, which rivals what the United States spent for Medicare ($231 billion) and for national defense ($349 billion) that same year.

Parking costs therefore equated to between 1.2 percent and 3.6 percent of the total national income in 2002, Shoup said. The cost for parking cars is not associated with the transportation sector, he said, noting that in contrast, the airline and rail industries are responsible for storing their own vehicles.

That’s why parking should cost money, and that the prices should be dictated by the market — i.e. the principle of supply and demand.

Shoup recommends aiming for an 85 percent occupancy rate, meaning one or two out of every 10 parking spots should be empty. If more than that are empty, lower the price. If the lot is full, charge more.

Motorists’ choice In this model, “If anyone sets the price for parking, drivers do,” Shoup said. “And a parking shortage will never occur because the market prices will prevent it.” An 85 percent occupancy rate also eliminates cruising for parking spots, making travel times shorter while cutting down on environmental waste. this web site best parking nyc

Parking revenue should be put back into the community that it comes from in order to provide enhancement projects, such as keeping the sidewalks clean, erecting attractive lighting or signage as well as landscaping needs, Shoup said. This model was used to revitalize Old Pasadena, that California city’s downtown district.

But getting people to change their views on parking is like getting smokers to kick the habit. Shoup made that analogy in a June interview published in Governing Magazine.

“Automobile dependency resembles addiction to smoking, and free parking is like free cigarettes. . . it will take decades for cities to recover from the damage,” he said.

One of Shoup’s supporters is Peter Skosey, vice president external relations for the Chicago region’s Metropolitan Planning Council, who said the recommendations would work in suburbs as well as in Chicago.

A thriving business district cannot be built on parking alone, he said. “The market has to be there to begin with.” At the end of Shoup’s Chicago presentation, he showed an aerial view of a shopping mall, with a sprawling, mostly empty parking lot.

JOHN HUSTON AND CHERI BENTRUP