-----Original Message-----
From: John R Elliott [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 14 February 2005 11:55
To: Wetzel Dave
Subject: RE: [LandCafe] market-clearing pricing for on-street parking
Dave
I think London has some very interesting experiences of pricing parking
land rents. I remember a Mr Wetzel and a Mrs Porter going off arm in arm
to the minister supplied with information by Geoff Havers from GLC and
John Elliott from WCC.
Then (late 70s early 80s) all parking spaces on street were full at 30p
per hour for meters and half a pence per hour (average cost of fine and
chance of getting one) on yellow lines. I don't know what charges are
now but probably about £3-4 per hour plus £5 congestion charge and there
are quite a lot of spare spaces. Yellow lines are relatively clear with
an average charge of up to £40 per hour - I would guess you would
normally get a ticket once an hour that would be chased?
Regards
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 10 February 2005 16:49
To: 'Ed Dodson'; 'LandCafeGroup'
Subject: RE: [LandCafe] market-clearing pricing for on-street parking
Ed,
Shoup began his paper with the following quote:
"The mode of taxation is, in fact, quite as important as the amount. As
a small burden badly placed may distress a horse that could carry with
ease a much larger one properly adjusted, so a people may be impoverished
and
their power of producing wealth destroyed by taxation, which, if levied in
another way, could be borne with ease."
Henry George
Harry
****************************************
Henry George School of Social Science
of Los Angeles
Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042
(818) 352-4141
****************************************
_____
From: Ed Dodson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 10:40 AM
To: LandCafeGroup
Subject: [LandCafe] market-clearing pricing for on-street parking
Along with the core effort to show elected officials and other community
leaders the wisdom of raising revenue by "land value taxation" rather
than the taxation of property improvements, there are several important
peripheral issues that need to receive greater attention. These involve
the utilization of public places for private benefit.
The construction of our cities has long accommodated the presence
of private automobiles. Larger cities have created parking authorities to
manage parking garages, surface parking lots and curbside parking along
city streets. Most cities impose fairly taxes on top of base parking fees
charged by private garage and lot owners. And yet, remarkably, demand
continues
to outstrip supply. Many commuters, even when there is a significant
financial benefit to using public transportation, continue to choose the
daily use
of their private automobile. A consistent result is congestion on the
streets, particularly at peak times of arrival and departure.
These dynamics have not gone unnoticed by researchers. An
important study[] on the subject by University of California Professor of
Urban Planning,
Donald Shoup, is available on-line at http://www.sciencedirect.com.
<http://www.sciencedirect.com.>
Professor Shoup's paper, "The ideal source of local public revenue,"
provides very common sense advice to city officials seeking to raise
revenue and at the same time reduce congestion on city streets. His abstract
succinctly states the case:
"Free or underpriced parking creates a classic commons problem.
Studies have found that between 8% and 74% of cars in congested traffic were
cruising in search of curb parking, and that the average time to find a
curb space ranged between 3 and 14 min. Cities can eliminate the economic
incentive to cruise by charging market-clearing prices for curb parking
spaces. Market-priced curb parking can yield between 5% and 8% of the
total and rent in a city, and in some neighborhoods can yield more revenue
than the property tax."
Congestion is only one problem that can be greatly mitigated by
market-clearing prices for curb parking spaces. Huge savings in reduced
consumption of gasoline as well as its addition to air pollution can be
achieved. In most cities today, the driver chooses between "sav[ing]
money by parking on-street, or sav[ing] time by parking off-street."
Short-term on-street parking is most often priced far less than in lots or
garages.
In New York City, for example, one hour of parking on the street costs
$1.50 but over $14 off-street. "If a city charges prices that are just high
enough to keep a few spaces open on every block," writes Prof. Shoup,
"drivers
can always find an available place to park near their destination." The
failure in understanding, he notes, is a failure "to manage a scarce
resource."
Admirers of the economic writings of Henry George will be pleased
by the credit Professor Shoup's gives to George for pioneering the advocacy
for
public collection of rent associated with resource scarcity, curb
parking being one form thereof:
"Curb parking spaces are bare land in fixed supply, so the revenue
derived from them is rent. Demand determines the rental value of curb
spaces,
the revenue comes from public land, and the city can use it to pay for
public services. Charging for curb parking fits well with Henry George's
proposal, and is actually far simpler than taxation as a way to collect land
rent."
The case for market-clearing pricing for automobile parking on
public streets is clearly made by Professor Shoup. We can think of other
public
spaces that should be allocated similarly. The one that occurs to me
most readily is that of sidewalk locations taken by food vendors each day.
They drive into the central business districts each morning, set up their
food carts to serve breakfast and lunch, then close up shop, hook up their
cart to an automobile and drive away. Cities issue vendors' licenses to the
owners but the vendor association works out the distribution of
locations.
The city government gets a flat license fee, and the location rents are
privatized. When a vendor decides to retire and "sell out," the informal
claim the vendor has to the location carries a price. Cities need to
take a close look at this system and create a process for awarding locations
based on competitive bidding by the vendors, so that the location rent comes
backto the community. This is only one additional example. Can you think of
others?
***********************************************************************************
The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email in error please notify [log in to unmask]
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
***********************************************************************************
|