Thursday, November 20, 2008

San Francisco's Differential Parking Fee Structure: Efficiency or Price Gouging?

Cruising for free parking exacerbates urban congestion and creates local and global pollution. When demand exceeds supply prices usually rise but in the case of urban parking spots, this hasn't been the case. The good news is that a city not known for its free market adherence, San Francisco, is showing the good sense to take a step toward Milton Friedman. Milton Friedman lived in San Francisco for many years and perhaps his thoughts diffused through his adopted hometown.

I am fascinated by guinea pigs and policy experimentation. The rest of the nation can free ride here and watch San Francisco's experience with this idea. If it works, judged by increased government tax revenue and less street congestion and pollution, then other cities will jump in and mimic SF. Just as buildings of the same size cost different amounts to purchase depending on their "location, location, location" within the city, parking (a 100 square foot (?) piece of vacant land) should differ in price across the city.

My colleague Don Shoup is a consistent man who can stay on message. See his quote below.

Will there be a back-lash against this policy? Behavioral economists would say yes. This is price-gouging given our reference point of "free parking". We will see.

New York Times
November 20, 2008
A Costly City Tries Pricing Its Parking by Popularity

SAN FRANCISCO — In a city known for its pricey property, and terrible parking, some of the most valuable real estate may soon be curbside.

Under a trial plan passed Tuesday by the board of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, 6,000 of the city’s precious parking spots will be priced on a sliding scale depending on how popular they are. And while the worst locales will go cheaply — as little as a quarter — a handful of premium parking spots will be worth $18 an hour, or nearly a pound of quarters.

Other cities have dabbled in such pricing, but Nathaniel P. Ford Sr., executive director of the transportation agency, said San Francisco’s plan — due to start in the spring with the aid of new meters, sensors and $18.4 million in federal financing — would place the city at the forefront of parking technology. Mr. Ford cited the various benefits it would reap, including reducing congestion and carbon emissions from circling cars and ensuring pedestrians are not sideswiped by parking-obsessed drivers.

“It’s an exciting time,” said Mr. Ford, who also pointed to advances in payment technology, including the ability to buy parking time with a cellphone.

Under the 18-month pilot plan, meters in six of the city’s most trafficked neighborhoods will be remotely monitored for “occupancy,” transit officials said. Mr. Ford will then have the prerogative of lowering or raising rates on four-to-six-week cycles as supply and demand requires. While most meters would be capped at $6 an hour, rates during big events like concerts or a game could enter the $18 range.

Not everyone shared Mr. Ford’s enthusiasm for the plan. “That’s outrageous,” said Louis Issac, a San Francisco resident who works for a towing company and was feeding a meter at City Hall on Wednesday. “With things right now, the economy, people losing jobs? It’s a lack of consideration.”

Donald Shoup, a parking expert at the University of California, Los Angeles, said San Francisco’s plan would provide incentive for using mass transit and discourage those searching for the perfect — and cheap — spot.

“I think when we look back on this period 20 to 30 years from now,” said Mr. Shoup, who consulted on the plan, “We’ll say, ‘My God, what were these people thinking having free parking?’ ”


Mike said...

Anonymous said...

Diamond heart necklaces blue diamond rings
gemstone jewelry

ross j miller said...

anyone think about the socio-spacial allocations inherent here.
That wealthy neighborhoods will spiral into super wealthy zones that not only could the lower income groups previously not afford to live in can no longer shop in, visit, walk the parks of, etc...
I thinkthis is the problem with any free market pricing of scarce resources though, the assumption that needs are spread evenly with choices for higher prices, not just excessive disposable wealth.

Anonymous said...

"I think this is the problem with any free market pricing of scarce resources though, the assumption that needs are spread evenly with choices for higher prices, not just excessive disposable wealth."

It is not free market pricing unless there is a readly available source of competition.

Suppose there is a marginal business in one of the high parking cost areas. He may decide he is better off to clse his business and put up a parking garage.

What do you suppose his chance of getting a permit to compete with the city's expensive curbside parking is?

If you have a problem with people cruing for parking spaces, then you need more parking spaces (which would lead to LOWER prices) and fewer attractions.

What you DON'T need is higher prices for parking spaces, with no option for incresed competition.


Anonymous said...

^^ nice blog!! ^@^

徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇

徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,

徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,

徵信社,外遇, 離婚, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信,外遇, 抓姦, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社,徵信,徵信,