What If Atlanta Taxed Parking to Keep Housing Affordable?

Atlanta has nine parking spaces (nine!) for every car. A tax on parking could fund both transit and below-market housing. Image via ThreadATL
Atlanta has nine parking spaces (nine!) for every car. A tax on parking could fund both transit and below-market housing. Image via ThreadATL

Last week we wrote about a proposal in Atlanta to set aside a fraction of funds from a recent transit ballot measure to keep housing affordable near new lines and stations. Advocates want to ensure that current residents benefit from those transit investments and don’t get forced out by rising rents.

The idea is sparking discussion in Atlanta. There’s broad agreement that more public support for affordable housing is needed, but where the money should come from is a matter of debate.

Tom Weyandt, a former policy advisor to Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, argues that the transit funding should all directly pay for transit. He has another idea for a revenue stream to support housing: a parking tax. He made the case for taxing parking to support housing and transit in a comment published by ThreadATL:

So, my modest proposal is the obvious: to impose a parking tax the way at least 49 other major cities in the nation have. These taxes range from a high of 40% of gross revenue to a low of 3% — with most in the 18-20% range. Assuming we hit the average it would yield about $30 million per year at minimum.

Now we take that revenue and split it. Half goes to the creation of an affordable housing trust fund (remember the MARTA increment will be in place for over 40 years, so that is an on-going revenue source — something on the order of $600 million). That trust fund would yield substantially more than the proposal to take the money from the new MARTA increment. The other half of the revenue — another $15 million per year at minimum — would go to a fare subsidy for every transit trip that begins and ends in the City of Atlanta.

New fare technology makes this easy to accomplish. So the result of the above is that MARTA keeps the revenue the citizens approved, commuters who drive have an incentive to shift to transit (improve congestion anybody?), we get more efficient land use, a housing trust fund is put in place with substantial resources and transit users who travel within the City get a better deal — probably helping folks who are transit dependent especially — and may live in those new affordable units.”

There’s a lot to like about the idea, but it’s not clear that Atlanta can muster the political will to see it through.

More recommended reading today: Yonah Freemark at the Transport Politic posts an essay about how American political dysfunction has squandered opportunities to invest in high-speed rail, leading the U.S. to fall further behind its global peers. And Bike Delaware reports that the state legislature just passed a package of bike safety measures, including one that allows cyclists to treat stop signs as yields.

  • This is a horrendous idea if people actually believe that TaaS is going to grow in the near future. When that happens, the use of parking lots will plummet and then the plan would be in an even worse position.

  • Shaun H

    This is a great idea. Parking contributes extremely little to the tax base relative to the amount of resources (ie. land) it takes up in Atlanta. Let’s tap that for funds rather than take from the already underfunded (and much needed) transit money.

  • Shaun H

    By “TaaS” i’m assuming you’re referring to Uber & the like? Those have been growing in popularity for some time but we’re still seeing parking demand rise & new parking lots being built continuously. I don’t think “plummeting” parking lot use is something we’re going to see for a long time, but a weaning off of parking demand would be very welcome.

  • Reggie

    Great idea! And if taxes don’t produce the revenue or if people stop parking, then they can take public transportation or car pool. In the meantime, for the parking lot owners, decrease in revenue probably would force them into selling to a developer who may do something beneficial with the property.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

The Garnett MARTA station in downtown Atlanta, surrounded by parking

A Fixation on Parking Threatens Transit Progress in Atlanta

|
Darin Givens is frustrated with how Atlanta is planning for the future. “We don’t feel like the city is building transit that fits needs, or places that fit transit,” says the founder of local advocacy site Thread ATL. “You see nodes of density nowhere near transit, located nowhere near a MARTA station or a regular MARTA bus. We’re not matching development and transit.”

Might Atlanta Tax Parking to Fund Transit?

|
Last summer, voters from a 10-county region in and around Atlanta shot down a large package of transportation projects, including some major urban transit projects. But almost immediately after, plucky Atlanta leaders were searching for other ways to move the work forward. The city of Atlanta hasn’t set aside ambitions for things like the Beltline, an innovative […]

Residential Parking Reforms Should Benefit All of Minneapolis

|
In June Streets.mn reported that Minneapolis might drop parking minimums for residential developments near transit stations. By doing so, the city would promote walkable development and reduce housing costs. However, City Council President Barb Johnson wants to exclude neighborhoods in north Minneapolis from the parking reforms. Writing at Streets.mn, affordable housing expert Kris Brogan says […]

Will Massachusetts Tax Parking Lots to Fund Transit?

|
Here’s a transportation funding idea that aligns incentives nicely: taxing parking lots to pay for transit. That’s what one former high-ranking state official is proposing for Massachusetts, ahead of a big announcement by the state Department of Transportation. Earlier this week Governing Magazine looked at the parking lot tax plan, part of a series of […]