Parking Reform Network

Parking Posts

Now you can easily see what cities have (mostly) removed all car parking requirements.

By Leave a Comment

We launched our map of cities that have removed or reduced parking mandates on November 22nd and have received good feedback and over 45 new reports to update or add to the dataset.

We’re working through the reports while working on features to improve the user experience. Over the weekend we published and update and we want to let you know what’s new.

Take me to the map!

Help us improve this map!

You can help improve this map by:

Only show cities that have (mostly) removed all their parking mandates

The biggest new feature is a switch under the search bar that will toggle only the cities which have (mostly) removed all their parking requirements. Some of the cities showed will still have some parking requirements on the books, but have been determined by the Parking Reform Network editorial team to have effectively eliminated mandates citywide for most/all uses.

Use this switch to see cities that have gone “Full Shoup”

New additions and updates* since launch

  • Atlanta, GA*
  • Dunwoody, GA
  • Alameda, CA
  • Jackson, TN
  • Grand Rapids, MI*
  • Brevard, NC
  • Bend, OR*
  • Norfolk, VA
  • Gaithersburg, MD
  • Corvallis, OR
  • Pocatello, ID
  • Norman, OK
  • San Diego, CA*

What Parking Day showed me about the value of public space and what we sacrifice for cars

By 1 Comment

The morning

As we pulled into the three parking spaces we had secured for Parking Day (September 17th) in Washington D.C., a large black SUV pulled into one of the spaces. The driver ignored me as I glared at him, as well as the large “no parking” permit I had taped on the pole next to his car. He also walked past the parking payment machine. Everything around seemed invisible to him. Anyway, though I had the permit to the space and could get him towed, I decided to hold off on calling for a tow truck unless we really needed it.

Despite some light rain, visitors came by to donate and pick clothes from our “clothing swap” (my girlfriend’s idea) throughout the morning. Thanks to donations from the active “Buy Nothing” Adams Morgan Facebook group that we promoted the event on, our pop-up parklet was pre-stocked with a few full clothing racks and about five bags of perfectly wearable and gently used clothes that anyone could swap out with a piece of their own.

One of our first visitors said he was homeless and camped in a nearby park. We allowed him to take anything he wished, so he picked a nice sweater and jacket for himself, and something nice for his lady friend. Boxes and bags of clothes started to pile up with more donors than takers. Since it was raining, we kept most of the clothes dry inside our small U-Haul moving truck and allowed our parklet visitors to rummage through it. A cheerful visitor with a bag of clothes to donate and a handful of clothes taken, thanked us for having the space. I noticed she had picked up my copy of “Parking and the City” by Donald Shoup. So I asked her, ”Oh, is that the parking book you got there?” (I did not plan to give the book). She explained that she was excited to learn more and that Parking Day sparked her curiosity. I decided right then she was keeping the book. Hopefully one day she lets me know what she thought of it. A future Shoupista, perhaps?

The afternoon

By early afternoon, the rain had gone away and the sun was coming out. I wondered about the SUV left in the unpaid parking space and the man who was now gone for more than four hours. Guess he was lucky he didn’t get ticketed. I was again tempted to call for a towing truck, but worried that the potential backlash was not worth it, so I continued holding off on calling one.

Our pop-up space and moving truck continued to receive more donations from the Buy Nothing community and others who heard about us online. By now, there were more than enough items to give away, and curious passerbys who understandably did not have a piece of clothing prepared to swap in, so we encouraged them to take what they wish and donate if they would like to. One excited passerby that took an item came back with a beautiful vase, which we accepted.

I decided to setup a chess board and sat in front of it, eagerly waiting for someone to sit across and play. I challenged a man who had a glimmer in his eye, but unfortunately did not have time to play. I challenged a DC bikeshare rider on the sidewalk who asked if I was any good. When I said “kinda, not really”, she smiled and said she’d be back (she did not return). But soon enough, I had my first challenger. A confident truck driver, who I believe was parked across the street in the bike lane next to a streatery (sorry bicyclists), noticed the chess board, swaggered over and asked to play a game . He stood across from me facing his truck, never sitting down, perhaps with an eye for traffic enforcement, and we played until we each had taken 6 pieces from each other. A burly passerby wearing a bandana approached our game watching our next moves. Soon the truck driver said he had to return to his job, so he asked the passerby to take his place (he also stood up the entire time, and eventually won). The truck driver later yelled from inside his (still) parked truck, “How’d it go?”

“You WON,” I yelled back.

Another memorable visitor was an older woman with broken English who said she was picking up clothes for children and immigrants from Haiti. After helping her fill up a few bags, she asked if we were planning to stay. After hearing we were, she returned later with another large bag, and filled it up too.

By mid-afternoon, the inside of the moving truck was a bit of a mess, so I decided to organize it a bit. While in the truck, I felt something large bump into the back of the truck with enough force for me to stagger to the side. It was the SUV (still unticketed) that was parked behind me. Without so much as an apology or eye contact, the driver of the SUV quickly backed up, turned and drove away.

“Rude!” I thought, but grateful that I could now extend the pop-up, which we used to place more donation boxes and finally setup our cornhole boards. More visitors walked by and asked us about the space as the weather got better and as we neared the end of the work day. One man who asked about the Parking Reform Network seemed confused that I was advocating for less parking when he believed there wasn’t enough parking in D.C. I explained we also advocate for adjusting parking prices when appropriate, so cars wouldn’t leave their cars parked unnecessarily or all day, which would open up more spaces. He agreed with that!

The end

Was it worth it? While it was more work and a little more costly than anticipated to secure the right permit, insurance, supplies and rentals for the event, I felt great about what we accomplished, had fun, raised awareness about the value of parking reform and spoke with a range of people in the neighborhood, even some familiar faces and friends who helped us out. I talked to the staff from adjacent businesses (including a CBD store and bodega), some of whom looked a bit confused initially, but they mostly smiled and observed the activity outside their buildings after we explained what was happening. We created a safe and accessible space in a very diverse neighborhood, that unintentionally directed a large number of donated clothes to grateful passerbys, who were largely minorities and older adults, and probably less active online or on Facebook.

It was also nice to meet the staff behind the Adams Morgan Business Improvement District, which was invaluable in providing us the required insurance policies (both liability and non-automotive owners insurance, which would’ve been very costly otherwise) while sharing our pop-up on social media. As we winded down for the day, we packed up the remaining bags of clothes for a volunteer with Food Justice DMV, which directs donations and resources for the local immigrant community. Finally, as soon as our traffic cone barricade was removed from the parking spaces at 4:00pm, two cars almost immediately began backing up into the space. Just goes to show how dynamic or demand-based parking in Adams Morgan could’ve helped them to find a parking space somewhere else. Well, it was nice while it lasted.

Later I wondered what could happen if we could maintain the space, forever? How many more spontaneous chess games would we have? How many conversations would we have about the value of parking reform? How many more copies of “Parking and the City” would be given away, and what would changes would that lead to? What if our clothing swap never-ended and nobody in our neighborhood had to buy a new piece of clothing ever again? We may never know…

By the way, did someone take my umbrella?

Mike Kwan is a board member of the Parking Reform Network

Tenant seeks snakes to settle score over selfish neighbor’s parking practice.

By Leave a Comment

When Donald Shoup quipped that most “thinking about parking seems to take place in the reptilian cortex,” it’s doubtful he could have imagined this Craigslist request for 10-25 one inch wide snakes that a frustrated tenant in Durham, NC is seeking to put inside a van taking up a prime parking space.

Picture of 1970s van with two large snakes photoshopped on it.
Artist’s conception of snake-based parking management.

When a common resource isn’t properly managed, some people are going to take advantage. Unbundling parking from the rent might convince this van owner to park elsewhere, or get rid of an unused vehicle. Allowing people to choose to pay more for a premium reserved space could save the snake handler from the extra walking, maybe some of that revenue could discount rent for people who don’t mind walking? Whatever the case, there’s a lot of ways to do parking better, a den of snakes probably isn’t one of them.

Screenshot of Craigslist Post: Hello all, I'm hoping someone in the area can help me. One of my neighbors in my apartment complex has left their van with the window cracked in the best spot possible of the entire complex. About 2 months ago management reached out that cars needed to be moved from one section of the parking lot for maintenance and some asshole took an A class parking spot to leave their dilapidated van to just sit there. Now I have to park over 300 feet from my door so this van can just sit dormant. Heres the plan: They left their window cracked about an inch and i'm looking for 10-25 snakes of that size to feed through the crack into the van to give them a "surprise" when they finally get this piece of shit out of my yard. I promise to also send mice and other critters through the window so the snakes can stay well feed and hopefully grow. I swear to god this is not a joke, Im so fucking irritated. I will do anything to make these peoples lives HELL Thanks
Craigslist ad seeking snakes for van.

I’m hoping someone in the area can help me. One of my neighbors in my apartment complex has left their van with the window cracked in the best spot possible of the entire complex. About 2 months ago management reached out that cars needed to be moved from one section of the parking lot for maintenance and some asshole took an A class parking spot to leave their dilapidated van to just sit there. Now I have to park over 300 feet from my door so this van can just sit dormant.

Heres the plan:

They left their window cracked about an inch and i’m looking for 10-25 snakes of that size to feed through the crack into the van to give them a “surprise” when they finally get this piece of shit out of my yard.

I promise to also send mice and other critters through the window so the snakes can stay well feed and hopefully grow.

I swear to god this is not a joke, Im so fucking irritated. I will do anything to make these peoples lives HELL

Thanks

https://raleigh.craigslist.org/pet/d/durham-looking-for-snakes/7351217310.html

You can support this podcast and a parking reform movement. Join the network or donate today.

Portland equitable mobility plan: Tax parking lots, require equal commute benefits

By 1 Comment

  • The Pricing Options for Equitable Mobility (POEM) Task Force recommended a citywide flexible commuter benefit program (parking cash-out), a tax on privately-owned off street parking, and accelerated implementation and expansion of performance-based curb pricing.
  • Fees for urban delivery and transportation network carrier/for-hire (TNC) services recommended to reduce congestion and pollution.
  • The Task Force also recommended a “unified financial assistance system,” potentially in the form of cash payments, to mitigate impacts of pricing strategies on low income households.

After meeting for eighteen months, Portland, Oregon’s Pricing Options for Equitable Mobility (POEM) Task Force issued it’s final recommendations which include: flexible commuter benefits (parking cash-out), increased on-street parking metering and permitting, development of a fee on privately-owned off-street parking lots, and accelerated implementation of the city’s existing performance-based meter pricing policy. The proposal also recommends the city develop a “unified financial assistance system for households living on low incomes that could be applied across pricing programs and transportation services to reduce burdens on these households and administrative complexity.”

The Task Force was asked to consider “if and how new pricing strategies could potentially be used more intentionally to improve mobility, address the climate crisis and advance equity for people historically underserved by the transportation system in Portland, including, but not limited to, low-income Portlanders and communities of color.” The group heard from subject matter experts regarding parking pricing, tolling, congestion pricing, cordons, and many other traffic demand strategies and discussed and debated the merits of each strategy given Portland’s geographic and political particulars and while centering equitable outcomes and transportation justice.

It will take several years to implement the Task Force’s recommendations, assuming they are accepted by Portland’s City Council, but there are many innovative solutions proposed which should be explored in other cities.

A Parking Based Alternative to Congestion Pricing and Cordons

The POEM Task Force did consider road usage charges, highway tolling, and London-style cordons, but Oregon’s Constitution mandates that road, gas, and vehicle registration revenues be used “exclusively for the construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, maintenance, operation and use of public highways, roads, streets and roadside rest areas in this state.” Furthermore, the city lacks sufficient jurisdiction to toll the highways that run through the city and the bridges that cross the Willamette River. Because of this, the Task Force felt that tolling and cordons would be less likely to manage congestion while advancing the goal of equitable mobility for all Portlanders. Instead, if implemented, the recommendations would seek a similar effect as a cordon by using fees on parking, urban delivery, and TNCs.

  • By accelerating performance-based parking for the central city, drivers would pay the market rate for on-street and publicly-owned off-street parking.
  • A tax on privately-owned parking lots could be implemented as a peak-hour entry/exit surcharge for commuters parking all-day in central city lots and garages.
  • Congestion-based surcharges for urban deliveries and TNCs would discourage peak-hour deliveries and encourage passengers to use other modes, such as transit or e-bike share to enter or exit the central city.
Private garages, like this one in Downtown PDX, would be subject to some form of tax or fees under the recommendations.

Such a system would be more porous than a cordon, but designed properly, could be quite effective with less technological investment and fewer jurisdictional and privacy concerns. In addition, the revenues from parking and TNC/delivery fees are not restricted by the Oregon Constitution and could be spent on transit subsidies and other multi-modal improvements and incentives.

Level The Playing Field For Commuters

The first near-term recommendation from the POEM Task Force isn’t actually a pricing strategy nor a new idea, in fact it’s one of the first ideas Donald Shoup proposed for parking reform: parking cash-out.

A “flexible commuter benefits program” (h/t Cheryl Cort and the Coalition for Smarter Growth) would require employers who pay for or subsidize parking for their commuting employees to provide an equivalent taxable cash benefit to employees who do not drive and park. Many employers provide a transit pass to employees who don’t drive to work, but the cost of a monthly transit pass in Portland is less than 1/2 the cost of a monthly parking space in Downtown and people who commute by bike or on foot may prefer a cash benefit to a transit pass they don’t use often.

Cities should seize upon the opportunity provided by the disruption of the last year to encourage mode shifts for commuters as people return to the office. A citywide (or regional) flexible commuter benefit program is a great way to do that.

Rethinking Exemptions and Discounts

Higher parking meter rates, delivery fees, and surcharges will have a bigger impact on lower income households even though they are likely to incur fewer charges due to lower overall consumption. One of the tougher challenges faced by any government looking to use pricing to reduce single occupancy trips and congestion is figuring out how to provide protective relief for low income households without making the programs ineffective. Low income drivers, and particularly low income drivers who are BIPOC face institutional hurdles to accessing rebate and discount programs, which often require providing the same documentation to multiple agencies or taking precious time to go to an office or fill out forms. On top of that, the individual needs to know that the program exists in the first place.

The POEM Task Force grappled with this issue at nearly every meeting and came up with some innovative solutions that would provide more flexible and equitable transportation subsidies for low income households and reduce bureaucratic and administrative overhead and complexity.

Foremost, the Task Force urged the city to develop “one set of income-based policy standards” for rebate and exemption programs, to apply to current and future programs. Portland is already piggybacking other programs like the “Golden Transportation Wallet” onto the low income transit pass verification of TriMet, the regional transit agency.

But exemptions and discounts for parking permits and tolls only benefit low income households which own and operate cars. The recommendation acknowledges this by suggesting that “cash rebates or payments” are preferred as they allow individuals to make their own choices about transportation. Furthermore, the Task Force recommends the city explore “a unified financial assistance system for households living on low incomes.” Such a system could operate like a universal basic income (UBI), providing a cash subsidy or perhaps a credit for city services that could be used to pay parking fees, transit, water bills, etc.

A program (statewide or regional would be best) to provide a cash rebate or dividend from climate related tolls, taxes, and fees would be a simple, equitable, redistributive, and effective way to mitigate the regressive impacts of economic strategies to reduce driving and GHG emissions. Such a program would deprive wealthy opponents to pricing of the ability to use low income households as a prop to defend their desire to maintain their own subsidies to drive and park cars cheaply.

Anything worth doing is worth doing well…

Opponents to paid parking and demand-based parking pricing often claim the city is gouging or just seeking revenue through pricing. As a result, many cities set prices too low to impact demand or to even meet the true costs of administering the pricing program. POEM’s report acknowledges that “pricing policy is only effective if it reduces traffic demand and/or raises enough revenue to fund effective demand management or multimodal improvements” and “[s]etting rates or surcharges too low to affect demand or fund improvements is inequitable.“

This is a critical point to make when advocating for paid parking, congestion pricing, or any other similar program. If your city is charging $2 per hour to park in the restaurant district and all the spaces are full, then the fee isn’t solving the problem and the city isn’t providing any value for the cost. If the market clearing price for parking in that area is $5 per hour, then increasing the price to $3-4 dollars IS gouging. The consumer will remain frustrated, the streets will remain congested, businesses will not have supportive turnover, but the city will collect more money just because it can.

A pricing program should deliver value to the community, either in the form of funding effective programs or actually providing a less congested road or curbside. No one wants to pay for parking, but an effective program will likely have much more support.

Now For The Hard Part

This recommendation is a very strong output from a large and diverse group of stakeholders. There were 18 voting members of the Task Force present at the final meeting on July 12th and all of the recommendations passed with at least 16 votes in favor. In the Fall, the recommendations will go to City Council where, hopefully, they will be accepted and adopted as city policy, with direction to the relevant bureaus to get busy developing implementation plans.

The recommendations are necessarily vague on program design. How effective and innovative the city’s flexible commuter benefits program, private parking tax, and low income mitigation policies end up will depend on the leadership of Portland’s elected officials and grassroots advocacy community. But other cities don’t need to wait to review this document and apply the concepts to their own climate action and transportation plans. Hopefully, Portland won’t be alone, or will even be beaten to the punch, in implementing such a comprehensive suite of transportation demand management.

Note: The author of this post was a member of the Pricing Options for Equitable Mobility Task Force.

You can support this podcast and a parking reform movement. Join the network or donate today.

CC BY-SA

This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.

We Sorted Through Parking Codes So You Don’t Have To

By Leave a Comment

Written by University of Illinois at Chicago students Maggie Kochman, Zane Jacobson, and Bobby Siemiaszko.

From January through May 2021, three students at the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Urban Studies program (UIC) performed work on their end of year project with the Parking Reform Network. This project involved updating the Strong Town’s map of cities that have reduced or eliminated parking minimums; the students worked with Tony Jordan, Jane Wilberding and other PRN members to review, update, and more clearly synthesize the data into a new database.

The widely cited map hosted by Strongtowns is a great resource, but lacks direct code citations and detailed verified information.

The crowdsourced map on the Strong Town’s website was provided to the Parking Reform Network with over 180 cities, districts, or policies related to eliminating or reducing minimum parking requirements. All inputs were entered into a database using Google Tables and were systematically verified and reformatted by the UIC students. The general method for verification was to start with a city in the database without a report search “city name” and “parking requirements” or “city code.” Then find the parking requirements section of the city code to identify if there are exceptions to parking requirements, parking maximums, or notable reductions in minimums. The documentation process was to create a report for the city and fill in what kind of progress was made and then to create a citation with a link to the city code and a screenshot of the referenced section.

The improved dataset uses tags to provide granular information about the scope and magnitude of parking reforms.

The database had four main tables: (1) City, which stored general information about the City itself (2) Citation, which details the sources used, (3) Contact, information to connect with the individual who reported or researched the policy, and (4) Report, which the details of the policy were stored. Within the Report tab, several categories were created to better understand and delineate where each City stands in their parking reform process:

  • The status of the policy: (implemented, passed, planned or unverified
  • How aggressive the city’s policy is: reduced  minimums, eliminated minimums, implemented  maximums
  • Applicable land uses: residential, commercial, etc.
  • The magnitude of the policy: applied only to the city center, along a main street, adjacent to transit oriented development, or citywide
  • Specified requirements: was the policy implemented by right of the city, in lieu of fees, an affordable housing requirement, or something else

Each student worked with PRN members and then independently to fill out one line of information for each city. Oftentimes, multiple choices were applicable for the same city. For example, cities are more willing to reduce or eliminate parking requirements for a downtown district than for residential zones citywide. There were 58 verified reports of “City Center/Business District) reductions or exemptions, versus 29 citywide. 

As we went along, we realized it was not just a simple look up and fill in the data project.  Each city was and is its own entity and has its own way of doing things. There is no one cookie cutter way that cities are eliminating or reducing excessive parking requirements. Meaning that recording each entry was tedious, complex, and sometimes very difficult to find information. If you could find the City Code for the city, it was then a challenge to find the parking requirements. Some cities had comprehensive charts, others had detailed paragraphs, whereas others were very vague or sometimes too specific. To actually be able to choose the correct tags for each city was generally not an intuitive process. Looking at a city like New York with five boroughs and many different neighborhoods and associated requirements within it makes the process of assigning a uniform label  difficult, if not impossible. However, one thing is clear:  parking reform is gaining momentum–cities are lowering or eliminating requirements  where maybe 10 years ago were much higher.

This database was developed to  make it easiest for cities to adapt and improve upon their parking codes through the power of example and precedent. For instance, having a platform to search and identify r cities with downtowns that have eliminated residential parking could be an effective resource when presenting to a city council or the public.    This could then make a much easier argument if city X wants to become more like city Y, finding relevant information at a fast pace that is easy to compare between cities.  The more cities that have parking reform, the more the map can fill up and can pave a way for the future change of reducing and eliminating excess parking requirements. 

Editor’s Note: Since the UIC students completed their coursework, the Parking Reform Network has continued work on verifying these records. Henry Vorosmarti, a Research Intern from Case Western University is currently working with Ryan Johnson, a student at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design on the project. We’re planning to release the dataset and a new map later this year.