Slog
News & ArtsThursday, December 18, 2008
City Free Parking Doesn't Make Sense In Cities
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:39 AM
So says Matthew Yglesias, who notes that "when you set the price of a valuable commodity at zero, you get ... shortages." In D.C., where parking is free on weekends, that's exactly what happens. In that situation, he continues,
The best parking-related thing you can do for downtown businesses is to park pricing rationally. You don’t want the fee to be so high that nobody’s using the spaces. But you want it to be high enough that people can generally find a space where they’re trying to go. This isn’t about discouraging people from driving or parking, it’s about ensuring that parking is done efficiently. That kind of performance parking will reduce traffic on the streets (fewer people searching for parking spots) and be better for business.
Take that, Fremont!
2
doesn't work in jacksonville. in jax, all the parking is pay. you either have to park at a meter, which is limited to one or two hours, or a pay lot. it sucks, and lots of people don't come downtown because of it.
in greenville, SC, where i went to school, downtown was a huge boom. all the parking was free, but limited to two hours. any longer, and you would get a ticket. this seems like a good plan to me
in greenville, SC, where i went to school, downtown was a huge boom. all the parking was free, but limited to two hours. any longer, and you would get a ticket. this seems like a good plan to me
5
I get why government needs to provide police, and fire, and even health insurance. But parking? I can't figure out a role for government in providing parking. Isn't the reason the private lots charge so much is that they lose out to the absurdly underpriced city meters? So if the city charged closer to the real price, then wouldn't the private lots also come down closer to the real price themselves?
9
Meters here are free Sundays only, but I suspect that has more to do with paying parking enforcement on Sundays than anything else.
11
Parking is way too cheap. If a parking space isn't making at least $300-400 per month it isn't paying for the cost of building it.
12
@8
"Isn't the reason the private lots charge so much is that they lose out to the absurdly underpriced city meters? So if the city charged closer to the real price, then wouldn't the private lots also come down closer to the real price themselves?"
No and No.
The price of a product is determined by a balance between production at each price (supply) and the desires of those with purchasing power at each price (demand) along with a consequent increase in price and quantity sold of the product.
To really dumb things down, lets pretend we're in the desert. I'm thirsty. I must have water. You have the only barrel of water in the desert. There is no other water (you control supply). I desire water (I have a demand). now, if you give some of your water away to someone else, or drink it yourself (or even pour some of it out on the ground in front of me because your a sadistic fuck) is that going to influence what I am willing to pay for a drink of water? Or influence what you can or can not expect to get for it?
No.
Price is a function of supply and demand, it has nothing to do with the price of the last unit sold.
This is pretty basic stuff that you should of picked up in Econ 101...
Google "supply and demand" and you might learn a thing or two...
"Isn't the reason the private lots charge so much is that they lose out to the absurdly underpriced city meters? So if the city charged closer to the real price, then wouldn't the private lots also come down closer to the real price themselves?"
No and No.
The price of a product is determined by a balance between production at each price (supply) and the desires of those with purchasing power at each price (demand) along with a consequent increase in price and quantity sold of the product.
To really dumb things down, lets pretend we're in the desert. I'm thirsty. I must have water. You have the only barrel of water in the desert. There is no other water (you control supply). I desire water (I have a demand). now, if you give some of your water away to someone else, or drink it yourself (or even pour some of it out on the ground in front of me because your a sadistic fuck) is that going to influence what I am willing to pay for a drink of water? Or influence what you can or can not expect to get for it?
No.
Price is a function of supply and demand, it has nothing to do with the price of the last unit sold.
This is pretty basic stuff that you should of picked up in Econ 101...
Google "supply and demand" and you might learn a thing or two...
13
@12
You aren't taking into account that the pay lots offer the benefit of a parking spot right now, near your destination. While the cheap city parking requires driving around and around looking for a space, which will probably require walking farther. The current system has the private lots charging a higher price for a superior service. City parking is cheap, but also inferior, unless you're very lucky.
If the city parking were priced higher, there would be more open spaces, and you would me more likely to find one near your destination, so you drive around less and walk less. In other words, the city's parking would be more similar to the private lots. Therefore, the private lots would have to lower their prices to compete, since their service would be that much less superior, they could charge that much less of a premium.
You're water example is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Wrong in kind of a dumb way too. It's sad, really. I feel sorry for you. Just kidding. Nobody feels sorry for your ilk.
Why do you Internet guys always blather about Econ 101? Reading an Ayn Rand book or listening to Rush Limbaugh all day is not an education in economics. It's more of a de-education, really. It's like you think you know more but your ability to answer simple questions degrades. I wonder if you could sue for what they've done to your brain?
You aren't taking into account that the pay lots offer the benefit of a parking spot right now, near your destination. While the cheap city parking requires driving around and around looking for a space, which will probably require walking farther. The current system has the private lots charging a higher price for a superior service. City parking is cheap, but also inferior, unless you're very lucky.
If the city parking were priced higher, there would be more open spaces, and you would me more likely to find one near your destination, so you drive around less and walk less. In other words, the city's parking would be more similar to the private lots. Therefore, the private lots would have to lower their prices to compete, since their service would be that much less superior, they could charge that much less of a premium.
You're water example is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Wrong in kind of a dumb way too. It's sad, really. I feel sorry for you. Just kidding. Nobody feels sorry for your ilk.
Why do you Internet guys always blather about Econ 101? Reading an Ayn Rand book or listening to Rush Limbaugh all day is not an education in economics. It's more of a de-education, really. It's like you think you know more but your ability to answer simple questions degrades. I wonder if you could sue for what they've done to your brain?
14
Elenchos.
Your a total shit head. Your wrong about supply, demand and pricing. Where ever did you matriculate at? Its sad that the public school system cranks out idiots like you.
In order for street parking to compete with private lots for the same demand, they would have to be equivalent. Pricing them the same is not going to make them equivalent anymore than pricing a VW and a BMW the same is going to make them equivalent. (Show me a meter in Seattle that will let you park for longer than 2 hours. Show me a private lot that limits me to 2 hours. Private parking is frequently more secure and/or under cover. The parking lot I use has valet service and will wash the car and change the oil while I'm at work.) How, exactly, do you propose to make street parking equivalent to, and thus competitive with, private parking?
You clearly can't understand basic economic theory. Its probably not your fault. I assume its beyond your ability to grasp simple concepts.
Do you flip burgers? Or clean things for a living? Or are you a ward of the State?
Your a total shit head. Your wrong about supply, demand and pricing. Where ever did you matriculate at? Its sad that the public school system cranks out idiots like you.
In order for street parking to compete with private lots for the same demand, they would have to be equivalent. Pricing them the same is not going to make them equivalent anymore than pricing a VW and a BMW the same is going to make them equivalent. (Show me a meter in Seattle that will let you park for longer than 2 hours. Show me a private lot that limits me to 2 hours. Private parking is frequently more secure and/or under cover. The parking lot I use has valet service and will wash the car and change the oil while I'm at work.) How, exactly, do you propose to make street parking equivalent to, and thus competitive with, private parking?
You clearly can't understand basic economic theory. Its probably not your fault. I assume its beyond your ability to grasp simple concepts.
Do you flip burgers? Or clean things for a living? Or are you a ward of the State?
15
Those arguments make no sense. I didn't say they would be priced equally. I said increasing the meter price would lower the private price. And bringing in covered parking and security and valets just confuses things with irrelevant nonsense. Some private lots charge steeper rates for stays over 20 minutes (one outside a courthouse in NYC, for example), and there is no law of nature that the city can't set meters for longer times than 2 hours. You don't even grasp the problem we're talking about, let alone the solution.
One thing I know about you is that you have nothing better to do at 1:31 AM than blow smoke about economic theory. Fraud.
One thing I know about you is that you have nothing better to do at 1:31 AM than blow smoke about economic theory. Fraud.
16
Hi guys,
In part your both right and wrong. Having on-street parking too cheap encourages drivers to cruise looking for a cheap park - even if it cost them five bucks in fuel!. There is a delicate balance in pricing required to ensure that demand for on-street parking is tempered by price to the point that these types of drivers will think to themseleves " There is no point driving around for half an hour, I will just go into that garage and pay the fee" (which in-itself has to be set at a rasonable level).
Part of the balance is also to ensure that you do not drive clientele away from the area and to another which is cheaper which will have a knock-on effect to local businesses.
Basically, long term and all day parkers should be encouraged off the street in favour of short term parkers, which is why most cities will restrict on-street parking to a max. of two hours. Wether they have the charges right it the point in question.
In part your both right and wrong. Having on-street parking too cheap encourages drivers to cruise looking for a cheap park - even if it cost them five bucks in fuel!. There is a delicate balance in pricing required to ensure that demand for on-street parking is tempered by price to the point that these types of drivers will think to themseleves " There is no point driving around for half an hour, I will just go into that garage and pay the fee" (which in-itself has to be set at a rasonable level).
Part of the balance is also to ensure that you do not drive clientele away from the area and to another which is cheaper which will have a knock-on effect to local businesses.
Basically, long term and all day parkers should be encouraged off the street in favour of short term parkers, which is why most cities will restrict on-street parking to a max. of two hours. Wether they have the charges right it the point in question.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (16) RSS