Seattle Forward

Parking Perspective . . . Again

"I can never find a parking spot when I go downtown or to Pioneer Square."

"It's so frustrating to try and park on Capitol Hill at night, there is no street parking."

"As a small business owner, I watch my customers drive by and just keep going.  They can't find spots on the street."

The above complaints are heard all around Seattle.  That's why Councilmember Mike O'Brien and I started asking questions and challenging assumptions when the Council began consideration of Mayor McGinn's proposed 2011 budget this past September.  How does the City manage on-street parking? What are our specific goals with regard to on-street parking? What drives our decisions about parking meter rates? 

Managing Parking with Facts

It's interesting how people react to change.  Some consider the options and make a decision based on personal preference.  Others reject change outright. "No way," they say.  Some look at the facts and try to make a reasoned decision.

Take on-street parking meter rates.  Yikes!  Talk about opinions. 

There's a front page story in today's Seattle Times on the city's switch to data-driven parking strategies.  Reporter Mike Lindblom does a good job covering the policy decision the Council made in November when we adopted next year's budget.  I've written a lot on this topic and you can read my thoughts here, including much more discussion of the underlying public policy implications of parking strategies.

The Value of Outcome Based Parking Policies

(This post was first published at Publicola.) 

By Tim Burgess and Mike O’Brien

If you’re like us, when you’re not on your scooter or bike you’re often frustrated trying to find on-street parking when running errands, shopping or dining out, particularly on Capitol Hill or downtown in the late afternoon and evening. Like us, you probably also want to pay as little as possible for parking.  Available and cheap parking would seem to be the answer, but unfortunately in Seattle there is often more demand than there is supply. When it comes to on-street parking, we have to choose between available and cheap.

Historically, Seattle has done what most cities do: focus on providing cheap on-street parking. 

Benefit for All: Market-Driven Parking Costs

Two proposals in this year's budget recommendations from Mayor Mike McGinn have generated the most controversy—reducing hours at neighborhood community centers and higher fees for on-street parking. With the city's annual budget approaching $4 billion these two items represent a tiny fraction of total spending, but they prove Tip O'Neill's famous quip, "All politics is local." 

Municipal government is closest to the people.  It's the form of government people see every day and use the most.  So when local government proposes a change, reaction can be quick and sometimes fierce.

The outcry over increased parking rates has indeed been quick and fierce.  My office has heard it loud and clear—you're just grabbing for more money, you'll hurt local businesses, you'll drive shoppers to Bellevue or the malls, don't you realize we're hurting out here.

But, what if the higher on-street parking rates are actually a benefit, a change that will help retail businesses, improve the flow of traffic, lower carbon emissions and help pay for pedestrian improvements, better lighting and more frequent cleaning?

A Pro Business Parking Strategy

Mayor McGinn's proposed 2011 budget calls for raising on-street parking prices to as much as $4 per hour in the downtown core and smaller increases in other city neighborhoods. (The Mayor's budget legislation actually sets a $5 top limit per hour on meter rates.) The Mayor is on the right track, but we should go even further and introduce demand-sensitive variable pricing as quickly as possible.

Demand-sensitive or performance-based on-street parking rates are pro business.  Here's why as explained by Donald Shoup, professor of urban planning at UCLA and the author of The High Cost of Free Parking.

"Prices that produce an occupancy rate of about 85% can be called 'performance-based' for three reasons.  First, curb parking will perform efficiently.  The spaces will be well used but readily available.  Second, the transportation system will perform efficiently.  Cruising for underpriced curb parking will not congest traffic, waste fuel, and pollute the air.  Third, the economy will perform efficiently.  The price of parking will be higher when demand is higher, and this higher price will encourage rapid parking turnover.  Drivers will park, buy something, and leave quickly so that other drivers can use the spaces.  Cities can achieve all these goals by setting curb parking prices to yield about an 85% occupancy rate." ("The Price of Parking on a Great Street," Parking Today magazine, February 2009.)

Shoup also recommends that parking meter revenue above the current base rate be dedicated to neighborhood-specific street improvement projects, including more frequent street and sidewalk cleaning, enhanced lighting, more police, litter and grafitti cleanup, and pedestrian improvements.  Shoup calls this revenue dedication "parking increment financing." 

San Francisco will soon launch a very sophisticated experiment in on-street parking management.  This three-minute video provides the essence of their program. Many of the core elements of the San Francisco program could be introduced here fairly quickly.  For example, we could adjust meter parking rates electronically by neighborhood on a quarterly or monthly basis to achieve the desired 85% occupancy rate.

And here's a New York Times opinion piece by Shoup that explains the most effective pricing model for on-street parking. 

The Council should adopt specific outcomes related to on-street parking, such as the 85% occupancy standard and then allow variable demand-sensitive meter rates.  When demand is low, for example on weekends and late at night, meter rates would be low or free.  When demand is high, primarily during the day or early evening hours, meter rates would also be high.  This approach to public policy is objective, is outcome-driven, and removes the political squabbles and conflicts of the traditional approach to setting meter rates.