[Vision2020] Re: Parking Downtown Moscow

[Nils Peterson]

Philip
Thanks for an interesting pointer, the book is available at the APA website,
and the first chapter is there as PDF.

http://www.planning.org/bookservice/pdf/FreeParkingChapter1.pdf

I found this quote (the kicker is in the last sentence).

Although urban planners have not ignored the commons problem cre-
ated by free curb parking, they have misdiagnosed it. Planners have iden-
tified the source of the problem not as the city¹s failure to charge market
prices for curb parking, but as the market¹s failure to supply enough off-
street parking. Cities therefore require ample on-site parking for all new
buildings. The logic behind this policy is simple: development may
increase the demand for parking, but cities can require developers to pro-
vide enough on-site spaces to satisfy this new demand. If a new building
increases the demand for parking by 100 spaces, for example, cities can
require it to provide 100 new spaces so that competition for the scarce
curb parking doesn¹t increase. Curb parking remains a commons, and
cities require enough off-street parking to satisfy the increased demand.
Amajor flaw in this solution, however, is the way planners estimate
demand: they do not estimate it as a function of price. Instead, they make
the unstated (perhaps even unconscious) assumption that all parking is
free. They estimate the demand for freeparking and then require enough
spaces to meet this demand. In effect, urban planners treat free parking as
an entitlement, and they consider the resulting demand for free parking a
³need² that must be met. Off-street parking requirements create an abun-
dance of parking spaces, driving the market price of parking to zero,
which explains why drivers can park free for 99 percent of their trips. Off-
street parking requirements are a fertility drug for cars.
Most markets depend on prices to allocate resources‹so much so that
it¹s hard to imagine they could operate in any other way. Nevertheless,
cities have tried to manage parking almost entirely without prices. To see
the absurdity of this policy, look at it from a new perspective. Cities
require off-street parking because the market supposedly fails to provide
enough of it. But the market fails to provide many things at a price every-
one can afford. For instance, it fails to provide affordable housing for
many families. Advocates for affordable housing usually find themselves
in an uphill battle, but without a second thought cities have imposed
requirements to ensure affordable parking. Rather than charge fair-market
prices for on-street parking, cities insist on ample off-street parking for
every land use. As a result, most of us drive almost everywhere we go.