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 Video: Are We All Living in a ‘Carspiracy’?

How does "car-brain" shape the way we think about the world — even in relatively bike-friendly countries like the U.K.?

July 26, 2024

Friday’s Headlines Share and Share Alike

Bikeshares, and e-bikes and scooters generally, are becoming more popular. That's led to more injuries, highlighting the need for better infrastructure.

July 26, 2024

What the Heck is Going on With the California E-Bike Incentive Program?

The program's launch has been delayed for two years, and currently "there is no specific timeline" for it. Plus the administrator, Pedal Ahead, is getting dragged, but details are vague.

July 26, 2024

Talking Headways Podcast: Have Cities Run Out of Land?

Chris Redfearn of USC and Anthony Orlando of Cal Poly Pomona on why "pro-business" Texas housing markets are catching up to "pro-regulation" California and what it might mean for future city growth.

July 25, 2024

The Paris Plan for Olympic Traffic? Build More Bike Lanes

A push to make Paris fully bikable for the Olympics is already paying dividends long before the opening ceremonies.

July 25, 2024
See all posts