Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In

Today on the Streetsblog Network, Austin Contrarian counts the ways that too much parking can damage a downtown:

2559723208_231dc14e64.jpg(Photo: Amber Rhea via Flickr)
  1. Parking raises the cost of new development, which means less of it. This may be no big deal  for a city with a built-out downtown, but it is a big deal for Austin, which devotes so many downtown blocks to surface parking or stand-alone garages.
  2. Parking not only raises the cost of new development, but it limits their size and density. An on-site garage can only be so big to be practical.  A developer who wants to provide enough on-site parking to cover peak demand must first figure out how much parking he can build; only then will he know how much he can build of whatever it is he wants to build.
  3. Parking garages and surface lots blight the streetscape, triggering a negative feedback loop:   the surface lots and garages make streets less attractive to pedestrians, which drives the pedestrians away, which reduces demand for pedesestrian-oriented retail, which makes the streetscape even less attractive for pedestrians, etc.
  4. Subsidized parking -- i.e., parking provided below cost -- distorts the market, encouraging an inefficient mix of driving and transit use.
  5. Plopping ever more parking downtown increases congestion. The amount of land devoted to streets is fixed. The amount of parking is not. Increasing the number of parking spots but not the amount of street space means more cars per square meter of street, which in turn means more congestion. (This very interesting paper (pdf) by Michael Manville and Donald Shoup explores this argument in depth.)
  6. Parking garages and surface lots are butt-ugly.

Elsewhere around the network: St. Louis Urban Workshop notes an apparent disconnect in the thinking of  Christopher Dodd (D-CT), chair of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

The Overhead Wire asks why the U.S. can't match India's commitment to funding new Metro systems.

And Human Transit wonders whether we should ride mediocre transit systems just because they need the "vote" we cast when we hop aboard.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Friday’s Headlines Drink From the Firehose

A key DOT nominee's role in Project 2025, more dubious executive orders, climate change accelerates and more headlines.

February 7, 2025

Friday Video: It’s Been a Week! Take A Breath And Watch People Bike In Utrecht

Take a break, regulate yourself, and get back to fighting for a better future for transportation in America.

February 7, 2025

Commentary: It’s Time for Newsom to Bring it Home on High Speed Rail

Oil-funded, Trumpian Republicans long-ago decided to turn California's HSR project into a political football. If they want to play games, then it's long past time for California Democrats to stop jerking around and play to win.

February 6, 2025

Talking Headway Podcast: 20 is Plenty in Wales

Welsh MP Lee Waters and the University of Sydney's Dr. Jennifer Kent on how Wales passed a national 20 mph speed limit.

February 6, 2025

Who is Trump’s FTA Pick Marc Molinaro — And Will He Kill Congestion Pricing?

If confirmed, Trump FTA pick Marc Molinaro can do a lot to gum up funding for mass transit across the country. Here's a look at his record.

February 6, 2025
See all posts