[sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Contracting out parking & Making the Same Mistakes

Chris Bradshaw c_bradshaw at rogers.com
Tue May 22 01:05:50 JST 2007


> On Behalf Of Lee Schipper

> The point of street parking is that the value of the street is usual
MUCH more than is charged per hour for parking.

Donald Shoup, in _The High Cost of Free Parking_ (2005), makes the point
that free and under-charged parking represents a much higher subsidy than
all the other subsidies the oil and car industries receive.  That provided
by the city is 'public,' while the bulk of off-street parking (which is
mostly free) is 'private,' being paid as a markup on the sales/salaries of
all patrons/employees.  Also, the capital value of the parking spaces in the
U.S. exceeds the capital value of the vehicles that use those spaces, partly
because there is a need for so many more parking spaces than for vehicles.

He also makes the point that sharing cars greatly reduces the demand for
parking, especially at residential areas that usually are designed for 1-2
parking spots to 'belong' to each residential unit.  Almost all residential
parking and employment parking is essentially 'private' in the sense that
only one person can use it; while at other destinations (which constitute
about 60% of all parking spaces, are 'shared.'  But even in the latter
category, the number of these spaces is determined, not by the total demand,
but the peak demand, which itself is determined by the overall car
population, not by the # of drivers.

The Paris move to put 20,000 bikes on their streets will be well-received
because a) they will be shared, and b) they will be paid for by the users.
This same principle could be used to gradually replace private cars with
shared one.  I hope this analogy becomes apparent to Parisiens.

Simon Norton:

> In the spirit of John Adams' "3 questions", I suggest that if we started
> by
asking what an appropriate transport system would be for an major urban
area,
cars would barely figure. (My personal opinion is that we'd be better off if
we
tried to minimise their use in smaller urban and even some rural areas, but
I
dare say this would be more controversial.)

I agree with Adams, since the car's attraction is not its ideal use for any
one kind of travel, but it strong second-choice status.  Also, using the
'alternative' modes requires using them 'in tandem,' one with the other
(bicycling doesn't work well in tandem unless a good folding bike is used,
or shared bikes are ubiquitous).

Again, the 'controversy' would related to how the cars are taken away.  With
a shared fleet in existance, not only is the solution equitable (all treated
alike), but no one has to do completely without one.   And, like shared
bikes, one doesn't need to take a car around all the time in order to have
one available; the widespread common fleet is always available when needed,
even for 'legs' of a trip (if one-way trips are allowed, which is not the
case now).

Walter Hook:

> Well, yes, this is the idea, to bring the price up to market rate.  But
there is also a question in my mind about bringing parking under the control
of the state, and into a proper regulatory regime, and of using the money
for street improvements and maintenance.  After all, you can theoretically
get at congestion charging through properly regulated parking.


That is one of Shoup's conclusions: bring up street-parking rates to the
market, and use the revenue to improve the walking environment.  Ironically,
the places where there is no market rate for parking (it now free, a most
certain challenge to reformers like us), the walking environment is already
inferior to that of main streets and environs.  The revenue will make the
latter better, leaving those in suburbia living with the dangers and lack of
amenities of much larger parking areas -- but also leaving the non-car
patron with a totally barren environment in just about every way.

I am not sure why Shoup's book isn't cited here more often.  For those of
you who would like to 'taste' a bit of the 700-page tome, I have my
extensive excerpts that I am willing to share (about 100 pages worth), in
either *wpd or *.doc (send requests off list to: hearth at ties.ottawa.on.ca).

Chris Bradshaw
Ottawa





More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list