Market-Rate On-Street Parking: Sign Me Up
Meg Muckenhoupt wrote a great article for the June 2008 issue of Boston magazine in which she discussed the craziness of one-dollar-per-hour on-street parking. Sean Roche posted a shockingly similar article in the Boston Globe back in August 2007 (thanks to John K at Boston Real Estate Blog).
These articles point out the absurdity of city parking meters charging a token fee for renting the most valuable real estate in the city, while garages charge twenty times as much.
It seems increasing meter rates benefits everybody:
- Fewer drivers looking for the perfect spot means less traffic, fuel consumption, and exhaust
- Higher turnover means fewer long-term “squatters” hogging up all the good spots
- Parking garages will be forced to lower rates to remain competitive
- More customers and increased revenue for local businesses
- Increased revenue for the city
I’m all for charging market rate for parking, whatever it may be. I paid for my parking in the city; everyone else should do the same.
And while we’re making some changes, let’s get rid of the stupid resident-only neighborhood parking permits. Residents with cars need to get their own parking spots and let those visitors who choose on-street parking pay the market-rate all day every day. I see no good reason for the city to subsidize their parking. I might even take things a step further; shorten on-street spaces from eighteen feet to fifteen feet to encourage the use of smaller cars and increase city revenue.
OT: At the bottom of the Boston Magazine article (page 22) Lisa Przystup posted a terribly misleading graph showing the fluctuating median single-family home sale prices. The graph she chose shows the market bottomed out; however, this graph bottoms out at $300K, not zero. In sixth grade, we all learned graphs need to be zeroed to maintain accurate perspective. I’m disappointed a reputable magazine, one of my favorites, allowed this to be published.
Dine and Dash: Looking for Brunch Near Bay Village
