Most cities suck at parking management. Usually they have plenty where nobody wants it and little where everyone does, which is why we spend hours circling a block to find some.
Newton is no exception.
Fortunately for us, there are new tools and better ideas about how to provide parking where it’s most in demand while also making more of it desirable.
One of the most interesting of these ideas is capitalism. Instead of tinkering endlessly with time restrictions and meter rates, let the market distribute high-demand spaces by charging more. Charge less for the out-of-the-way ones.
This has already been tried, successfully, in Pasadena, Medford, Salem & beyond. Examples are at the League of Women Voters, Newton, web page on transportation. A decent video explanation is here.
The result of better management is less traffic, more walking, and busier retail areas.
The Transportation Advisory Group , which I chair, has been working with aldermen and citizens to draft an overarching vision of parking management for the city. The state of that document will be aired for the first time in public before the Zoning & Planning subcommittee by its main author, Director of Planning Candace Havens.
It should be a good show.
Other items that preoccupy the Aldermen this week: financial policies, protecting whistleblowers, sidewalk cafe furniture permitting, trees, sidewalks, snow, and the Angier project. Plenty to talk about.
Which meeting will you attend?
So, “instead of tinkering endlessly with time restrictions and meter rates,” you’re suggesting we just tinker with meter rates by “charging more” for the “high-demand spaces,” and “less for the out-of-the-way ones.” Sounds like a bad idea to me, and I’ll give you an example why…
There’s no charge for parking at malls, yet we’ve all seen those people who cruise around endlessly trying to find a “closer” or “better” space. In that case price is irrelevant. And when it comes to metered parking, the price differential between a “high-demand” space and an “out-of-the-way space” is going to be nearly as irrelevant, unless you’re talking about a price differential in dollars rather than pennies. If you’re suggesting $3 an hour for “high demand” spaces vs. $1 an hour for “out-of-the-way” spaces, then this idea might have some validity. Of course the minute you start charging that much money for the “high demand” spaces, the merchants are going to burn down City Hall.
If you’re looking to create more turnover in parking, the way to do that is increase ALL metered parking rates, and maintain time limits.
The problem we have in some of our village centers is that parking is too cheap. Adding to that problem, we only charge for metered parking sometimes, rather than all the time. Raise all meter rates. Limit parking times. Charge for metered parking 24/7. I mean seriously, how ridiculous is it that we don’t charge for parking at night or on Sunday?
This aint rocket science. It doesn’t require a major revamping of the way we currently do things.
Mike, you have the idea, just not all it’s subtleties. In fact, the charge for a high-demand space may be just 25c more–am not sure WHY it works that way, but in several of the cities that have tried it, it does.
The point is to always have a space available on any one block. If few people park there, you make it free. If it’s always full, you keep raising the price until you get about 15% vacancy most of the time.
Merchants benefit by having parking available near their stores all the time–the problem with free or too cheap parking, as you note, is that it gets filled up long term, when what you really want are short-term parkers.
And under the model that Shoup is talking about, you create a business improvement district that gets the extra funds from the higher-priced parking (assuming there is some), to use to improve the streetscape–in Newton Centre, for instance, this could be spent making the crosswalks more visible (bump-outs to discourage illegal parking & decrease the space to cross), so that parking on either side of the street is more equally attractive.
Have a look at some of the links and see what you think–this is not a one-size-fits all tool, but one that can be tailored to the geography of each village–with the maximum input from the merchant community (who should be the biggest beneficiaries), and minimum delay for governmental processes.
Probably one reason we don’t charge for parking on Sundays is that then we’d need some parking enforcement officers to work on Sundays (at overtime rates?), which would either mean less coverage on other days, or more officers needed. Of course, if they pay for themselves on other days, it should be worthwhile on Sundays also, unless any pay premium negated the extra ticket and meter revenue.
Or we could switch to a system where more parking spots can be monitored with fewer people.
@Julia: I’ve seen Candace Havens’ study of parking enforcement officers & management–and even before wireless technology was employed in some parking meters (not Newton’s-yet), each parking enforcement officer (PEO)’s salary was more than covered by the revenue generated. A parking manager, just by tweaking parking rules to maximize the best use of space (parking space), also was revenue neutral. Candace didn’t look at Sundays, but it would be worth exploring with the unions & the financial folks–once we have data on where people park once the parking is free.
@Andrea– A 25c differential in parking rates may leave bargain hunters in Medford looking for cheaper spaces, but it would have next to 0% impact in Newton. In my opinion, it would take a 3-1 pricing differential for your type of proposal to work here.
@Julia– Parking revenue is one of very few profitable, business oriented, municipal ventures. Enforcement costs, while not insignificant, are negligible. The reason we don’t charge for parking on Sunday has nothing to do with the expense of enforcement. It’s a religious based, holy day holdover from the “Blue Laws.”
Mike Striar
I just assumed it was because parking wasn’t generally a scarce resource in most places with meters on Sundays.
@Mike: Perhaps 25c would have zero impact–which would be wonderful for the village centers that could charge more and use the extra revenue for better sidewalks, beautification, or other benefits. I suspect, however, that a lot of prime parking (even meters) is taken by employees (they get there first) and at 75c it’s still a bargain–even all day. A little more may induce them to look around for slightly cheaper parking (8 hours x 25c is another $2…might be worth a little walk). At any rate, Aldermen willing, I’m willing to run the experiment to find out.
@Jerry– There may very well be less demand on Sundays, but free Sunday parking is a holdover from the days of the “Blue Laws.” Also, demand is not particularly relevant to whether or not we should charge for metered parking on Sunday. It just means perhaps a little less revenue than weekdays. Private, pay-to-park lots don’t let folks park free on Sunday, even if they’re less busy than weekdays. What I find even more ridiculous than free Sunday parking, is allowing people to park free at night. Take a cruise through Newton Centre after 6pm, and you can see all the revenue we’re losing. It’s an unfortunate reality that government in general lacks any business sense.
@Andreae– Sure, let’s test the theory and se if it works. I suggest we start in Waban Square. But first you’ll need to get them to install parking meters.
@Mike: Touche! I’m waiting for a Waban Neighborhood Association on that one.
@Mike Striar –
I think that’s a philosophical question. Is the purpose of the city’s parking meters’ to allocate a scarce public resource (prime parking spots) for optimal public benefit or is their primary purpose as a revenue source. If they’re simply intended as a revenue source for the city, then you’re right.
@Jerry: I think the consensus in the planning community is that meters are there to manage parking. An unused meter is a useless one. The revenue is a nice bonus.
@Mike: here’s a West-Coast fight about Sunday meter enforcement that I think you’ll find interesting. Looks like it might be even fiercer than the Waban meter haters: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/01/should-cities-make-drivers-pay-sunday-parking-too/4532/