Paid Parking: A Case to be Made

Kirkwood has struggled with parking for as long as it has excelled at attracting people. The mindset amongst Kirkwood’s recent political leadership seems to be that if you tear enough buildings down and reserve enough surface area for parking, parking will no longer be an issue. This is true. It true, not because the supply of parking will finally equal demand, but rather that no one has any interest in visiting a collection of parking lots.  Create enough lots at the sacrifice of buildings and there will be no reason to come to Kirkwood in the first place. This is exactly the mindset that led to the replacement of Mel Bay Music store in Downtown with thirty two parking spots back in 2011. This NextSTL article outlines that case perfectly and I highly encourage you to read it. While a lot can change in six years, three members of the Council that approved that action still hold a seat there: Bob Sears, Paul Ward and current mayor, Tim Griffin and thus it is important to rehash the issue, once more, with feeling.

What the NextSTL article doesn’t mention however is an idea that I have been increasingly intrigued by: the implementation of paid parking in Downtown Kirkwood. I get that this idea might not sound nearly as exciting to you… nobody wants to pay for something they were getting for free, but let me explain to you why it should.

First of all, supply and demand, baby. If the largest constraint to driving to, and parking in, Downtown Kirkwood is a lack of parking spots, as that constraint is lifted more people will demand parking and thus the problem of “not enough parking” will persist under a law known as “induced demand.” In reality, however, there is an equilibrium for parking in Kirkwood that we can achieve. That is, there is a price and quantity at which supply equals demand and all are satisfied to the greatest extent possible. The only problem is that to find that equilibrium, that sweet spot, you need a price in the first place. At a price of zero there in no incentive to supply parking and there is unlimited incentive to use it. Why would anyone be inclined to ride their bike to downtown if parking is free? To carpool? To live close to downtown Kirkwood or in Kirkwood in the first place?

Secondly, while a counter argument might be that paid parking reduces the number of visitors coming downtown as the cost of a trip downtown (at least one made by car) increases, I urge you to think about the economic implications of that logic. Sure those on the lower end of the disposable income spectrum would perhaps be less likely to visit but that leaves more parking for those with more disposable income and thus those more likely to make purchases, eat and drink more and tip better. Where as before whoever was lucky enough to find a parking spot benefited, with the implementation of paid parking, those most likely to contribute economically to Kirkwood benefit instead.

Thirdly, think of the behavior that free parking encourages and incentivizes versus what paid parking does: While free parking sets no parameters on how long people linger at restaurants after meals or how long people take to shop, paid parking encourages people to “get on with their business” so to speak. The quicker people eat their meal or conclude their shopping, the quicker parking for new patrons becomes available, the quicker restaurants can turn over tables and the more sales retail shops can make. The data supports it: Paid parking raises the bottom line.

Fourthly, Paid parking means less traffic in Downtown Kirkwood. according to Walkable City approximately 30% of all traffic congestions in a typical downtown is traffic generated by those in search of parking. While Kirkwood may not be considered a “typical” downtown in comparison to those of much larger cities, I would also argue save for the few true destination downtowns (New-York, Chicago, etc.) Kirkwood’s propensity to be a restaurant and retail mecca, rather than a large-scale place of employment means that the majority of people that come to Kirkwood come for shorter periods of time than a full work day and thus an even larger percentage of its congestion attributable to those looking for parking. By setting a high enough price we can ensure that parking will be available and the long search for that parking, as well as the congestion generated by that search, will be mitigated.

Fifthly, despite all the auxiliary benefits, the most direct and obvious positive effect of paid parking is the revenue to be gained from the parking itself. Revenue raised from meters and the enforcement of parking tickets should not leave the downtown but instead be re-invested in the area it is garnered from. Investments in improvements such as benches, brick paver-crosswalks, burying visible power lines, improvements to Ken Connor Park (see Kirkwood Road Re-Imagined), street-side trees, bicycle racks or other “wants” in the business district. This re-investment in the beautification/amenities of Downtown will in turn attract more customers and further increase the positive impact paid parking has on local businesses.

How:

Fee

So you’re convinced; glad to hear it! The question now becomes “what would paid parking look like and how would it be implemented?” Glad ya asked. Paid parking doesn’t work if lots are free and on-street parking is paid, or the other way around, each would undermine the positive effects of the other. Both should charge at a price that ensures approximately 80% of spots are occupied on average. This ensures that spots should be available with minimal searching but also that prices don’t rise to such an extent that it becomes a disincentive for people to come downtown in the first place.  The nice thing about paid parking as opposed to unpaid parking is that its availability is very easily adjusted through the price mechanism. We can start conservatively with low prices, say a dollar an hour, and raise them until we meet our goal occupancy. Prices must also be dynamic in order to achieve our 80% target capacity Demand is not equivalent at 11am on a Monday and 5pm on a Friday, and as a result prices must be lower at the former and higher at the latter. Currently we are forced to tear down a building every-time we deem more parking necessary for peak hours even if that additional parking isn’t being used the other 90% of the time.

Enforcement

As far as meters, there is a full spectrum in terms of features and size of investment willing to be made. Everything from coin operated classic machines to ones that accept credit cards and allow for time to be added via apps to even machines that utilize sensors in

the parking lane to communicate to the public via an app where available locations are, and to parking attendants where spots are occupied for which the meter hasn’t been paid. I would also suggest assigning an officer or even the creation of a new position of parking attendant to write tickets in order to enforce the use of meters. Not only are tickets necessary to convince people

people to pay the meter but they also act as an additional stream of revenue generated by the city at the hands of paid parking. The establishment of a new position in charge of enforcement could also serve as a junior internship, at least during evening hours or in the summer, for those interested in law enforcement, or as a  position for the retired and elderly looking to remain active and involved in the community.

Big Picture

Kirkwood is not only a great place to live but a great place to visit. We know this to be true but we lack the confidence or maybe the brashness to carry this belief to its logical conclusion.  People will pay to come to Kirkwood. In fact they already do. They pay in gas, they pay in traffic, and they pay in long waits at Dewy’s and Billy G’s. They’ll pay a dollar an hour, especially if it means their experience will be all the better for it. Trust me, trust economics, trust supply and demand, trust the stats, trust the eye test, trust whatever you want: We are Kirkwood and we are good enough. We are Kirkwood and we are worth the price of admission.