The Wiki Man

Wednesday, 14th May 2008

Rory Sutherland's fortnightly column on technology and the web

Those of you who saw his article a few weeks back will be pleased to hear Kelvin MacKenzie took a remarkable second place in his local council elections. Already the climbdown over parking charges has begun: the cost of a day’s parking at Weybridge Station is suddenly not £5 but £4. It’s the same story in my birthplace of Usk, where rebellious townsfolk recently rejected the idea of paying for parking at all — with the result that the car park is invariably full and hence totally useless.

One thing the denizens of Usk and Weybridge clearly share is an unfamiliarity with the work of UCLA Professor Donald Shoup and his masterwork The High Cost of Free Parking. Shoup, an economist and urban planner, attacks not expensive parking but free or cheap parking, claiming it is a hidden subsidy to the motorist which costs the US economy over $200 billion annually — more than is spent on Medicare. As well as squandering road-space, free parking creates demand far in excess of supply, causing motorists to waste time and fuel in the search for elusive vacant bays. A 1980s study showed that in one year alone motorists in a 15-block area of Los Angeles drove the equivalent of two round-trips to the moon in the search for a space, wasting 100,000 hours and 47,000 gallons of petrol in the process. In some areas, 30 per cent of all moving cars are simply looking for somewhere to park.

It is possible both environmentalists and car-lovers might benefit from higher charges for parking, provided other non-behaviour-changing costs (road tax, say) are reduced in step. Certainly it seems ridiculous that Londoners who might pay £75,000 more for a house with an extra 10ft x 9ft bedroom stump up just £115 a year to park a 15ft x 6ft car on the street. A brave government might also follow Shoup’s advice and tackle the urban sprawl created by large supermarket car parks. The Tories were pilloried for the idea of making out-of-town stores charge for parking, though it was far milder than my own remedy for retail overcrowding — all retired people caught shopping at the weekend would be deported.

1 | 2 Next page

More articles from: Rory Sutherland | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (2)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Rory Williams

May 18th, 2008 12:47am Report this comment

You may be interested to read about one Hans Monderman (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,448747,00.html), a civil engineer from the Netherlands, who has also suggested removing all traffic signs. A few places have even tried it. His motivation is not so much aesthetic as practical: he believes that drivers will drive more safely if they are given full responsibility for their decisions, instead of relying on engineers to tell them what to do. Efficient social self-regulation.

I have also just written a post on the parking theme, with some thoughts on how the recently developed concept of "New Mobility" might improve the efficiency of how we use cars and transport infrastructure. (http://www.carbonsmart.com/carboncopy/2008/05/paving-paradise.html)

Rory Sutherland

May 21st, 2008 12:32am Report this comment

I have read a little about Monderman: from what I hear the removal of signs causes people to drive with far greater consideration and courtesy than before.

It has always struck me as odd that the free-market US is so disdainful of roundabouts (which are a self-regulating solution) preferring the far more dirigiste, interventionist traffic light.

Post comment