At its June meeting, the Midtown Business Association board discussed parking policy in Midtown Sacramento, and how MBA should address the issue. At the May meeting, City Manager Gus Vina discussed a proposed tax on private parking lots to raise city revenue. Aaron Zeff, owner of Priority Parking, expressed concerns that this would force him to raise prices, and hopes to find other alternatives. MBA discussed hiring a consultant to address parking issues, but instead decided to work with other central city stakeholders, including the Downtown Partnership, neighborhood residents, state offices, hospitals, and the city of Sacramento, to work on a consolidated parking strategy.

As a neighborhood resident, I agree with Mr. Zeff’s assessment. Taxing private parking lots, causing increased parking prices, will make neighborhood parking worse. In order to reduce costs, raise revenue, encourage use of private lots, and make parking more convenient and safer, Midtown must eliminate free parking.

Midtown Parking: A Shortage of Supply

Any product’s price is based on supply and demand. Street parking in Midtown has a very limited supply, and demand to park there is high. Any first-year economics student can tell you what happens when a good with low supply and high demand is underpriced: a shortage occurs. Midtown’s parking shortage is apparent every Second Saturday, every weekend, and more and more, even during weekdays around popular restaurants and nightclubs. Parking until 6 PM is metered or limited through much of the central city, but after 6 PM, and all day Sunday, parking is free. Because the peak hours for restaurants, nightlife, and public events like Second Saturday are all after 6 PM, the free parking results in street congestion.

“Free” parking seems like a good thing, but of course, free parking isn’t really free. Street maintenance, repair, lighting and safety costs money. Neighborhood property owners, both residents and businesses, subsidize “free” parking with property taxes, city fees and costs to repair curbs and public right-of-way. Also, when a parking shortage exists, “free” parking has other problems: Because there is no charge for its use, people take up spaces for longer periods of time. Cars cruise around blocks multiple times looking for a space, adding to traffic congestion and air pollution. Cars park in residential neighborhoods, displacing parking spaces of Midtown residents, many of whom have no off-street parking options. Thus, people do not use garages or lots unless the neighborhood is completely full. If prices at parking lots rise, visitors will cruise for a spot that much longer, and press farther into neighborhoods. This often causes conflicts between neighborhood residents and businesses. And if visitors arriving in cars cannot find parking, sometimes they will just keep driving—right back out of the neighborhood.

Making Parking "Just Right"

The solution to the parking shortage is to eliminate this subsidized “free” parking, and simplify the confusing network of 15 minute, 30 minute, 1 hour, 2 hour, and metered zones with an overall central city parking policy that charges an appropriate amount to visitors. This amount should be low enough to be reasonable, but high enough to discourage people from sitting on a parking space without limit. The objective is a “Goldilocks price”: Not too high, and not too low. Ideally, street parking should be 85% capacity: mostly occupied, but generally a space or two will be available on each block. This means that street parking is convenient, limiting “cruising” for a space, and visitors can find parking close to their destination. People seeking all-day or longer-term parking are best served by private parking lots or garages. Because “free” parking is a private lot’s main competition, its elimination means more business for parking providers. Commuters would have more incentive to use daily parking instead of running to feed meters or re-park in 2-hour zones. Because they occupy all-day spots, they can shop or dine during rush hour and drive home at their leisure. Midtown residents can use current residential parking permits to park without charge in their own neighborhoods, but if they park in business districts away from where they live, they too have to pay for parking. This encourages neighborhood residents to leave their car at home, and walk to visit Midtown businesses, something many residents already do. Using Web-based tools, residents could order one-day parking permits for visiting friends to park on the street; Sacramento’s parking department is already working on a plan to implement this system.

Many Midtown businesses are concerned that their customers complain about the cost of parking. I would suggest this is a good thing: if a customer is in your business complaining about parking, it was obviously cheap enough that they paid for it. They will probably have the same complaint the next time they visit your business, and the time after that, but it’s not high enough to keep them away. Since daytime parking is already metered in much of the city, the rates paid by daytime visitors would probably not change. Evening hours for parking meters also recognizes that Midtown is no longer a place where the streets roll up at 6 PM. Visitors who spend $100 or more on dinner and drinks at Mulvaney’s or L Wine Lounge won’t balk at spending a few dollars to park, especially at a convenient space or clearly marked lot close to their destination.

In a survey conducted by MBA, a business owner and resident called for free parking because, “The only party that benefits from parking fees is the city. It drives people away from doing business in Midtown especially in this economy.” But there is a solution, used in cities like Pasadena, CA (see article link below). Instead of going to the city, parking revenue can be diverted to the neighborhood by creating a joint powers authority. In Pasadena, street parking funds pay for streetlights, repaving, trash cans, signage, tree trimming, benches, and other amenities. Parking funds go directly to improve the neighborhood. This means businesses, visitors and residents all benefit from a cleaner, safer, more beautiful neighborhood. Pasadena’s parking meters announce how the funds are used (see photo), but the results are obvious on their business streets, where parking is available and business is flourishing.

By contrast, the Westwood Village district of Los Angeles tried to address their parking issues by reducing prices at meters and encouraging free parking. Their business district has suffered, due to parking congestion that discourages visitors, and they have limited funds to maintain or beautify the district. Parking garages in Westwood Village have less business because they cannot compete with free parking.

While residents and businesses don’t mind taking parking funds out of the city’s hands, the city of Sacramento, eager to cut costs and raise revenues, may disagree. But there are benefits for the city, too. By extending evening and weekend enforcement, those who park illegally will be subject to fines. Fines from parking violators become added city revenue. Because the parking meter funds improve the neighborhood, the city’s economic burden is reduced; instead of using city funds to subsidize “free” parking for visitors and provide neighborhood amenities, street parking pays for it. Beautified business districts with correctly priced parking attract more customers and do better business, increasing sales tax and business occupancy tax revenue. Clean, safe, comfortable residential neighborhoods result in more investment, higher property value and increased equity, raising property tax revenue. That’s the kind of “tax increase” businesses and residents can live with—the kind that results from greater economic prosperity.

Urban Thinking for an Urban Place

Residents of suburban neighborhoods, used to large, free parking lots, may be uncomfortable with the idea of paying for parking. But, to quote MBA board member Michael Heller, who commented on the issue at Wednesday’s meeting, this is “suburban thinking in an urban place.” The only way to make Midtown’s parking as plentiful a suburban district is to demolish Midtown entirely and rebuild it into a copy of Arden Way, Fulton Avenue, Florin Road or other car-centric suburban business street. Those streets have their own strengths, but none compare to Midtown as a center of culture, nightlife, walkability and mixed use. Yes, there would be more parking, but Midtown’s unique character, its walkable streets, its shade trees, its historic architecture, its culture, its businesses, and its lively urbanity would be utterly destroyed. Nobody visits America’s great walking cities and comes home with stories about how easy it was to find parking!

Midtown is a unique neighborhood that draws regional visitors and national attention. Like the suburban residents of other great cities, Midtown Sacramento’s visitors are welcome, but they must learn that parking is not free. If they see clearly that parking fees can beautify and improve a neighborhood they already like to visit, while making parking safer and more convenient, they won’t mind paying. A comprehensive central city parking district, designed by and for business, residents and government, can solve many of Midtown’s parking problems. A tax on parking lots already struggling to compete with “free” (taxpayer-funded) parking is the wrong answer. It will make parking worse, not better, because it does not address the real problem of supply and demand.

Thanks to Aaron Zeff of Priority Parking for providing the article on Pasadena’s solution to the problem of free parking. The article is available online here:
“Turning Small Change Into Big Changes”
shoup.bol.ucla.edu/SmallChange.pdf

Midtown Business Association website:
www.mbasac.com
MBA Board agendas and minutes:
docs.mbasac.org/BoardAgendas/

Recent “Streetsblog” post on the cost of “free” parking in San Francisco:
sf.streetsblog.org/2010/06/17/san-franciscos-own-oil-spill-the-wasteful-hunt-for-free-parking/#more-237841

Pasadena parking meter photo from "Turning Small Change Into Big Changes" article referenced above. Street photos by author.