Rethinking the City: The Cost of Parking Lots
Julietta Gramigni, BSc Environmental Policy with Economics
Image: Kelly, Pexels / CC
PARKING LOTS AND CONGESTION
Must growth come at the cost of the health of the city? An increasing population and GDP has led to a rise in the number of cars congesting roads and taking up vast swathes of space. In response, cities have had to put the needs of drivers first: bulldozing buildings, limiting green spaces, and distorting architecture, culminating in skyrocketing housing prices. In the US, for example, surface car parks take up land roughly the size of Puerto Rico, 3,459 square miles. Prioritising the driver and creating parking lots means a significant opportunity cost, as valuable land for public use or housing is forfeited. Indeed, many cities are aware of this conflict, having realised that increasing livability requires shifting away from car dependence.
There is an important correlation between the provision of parking lots and the persistence of congestion on cities’ roads. David Mepham, an urban planning researcher whose work focuses on integrated transport planning, notes how the normalised expectation of available parking spots contributes to ‘choking the roads’. For instance, the pollutants released from car engines can mix to form ozone, a key component in the creation of smog. Many metropolises with a high level of car usage, usually facilitated by parking lots are affected by this chemical process. In New Delhi, the pollution has grown so bad that schools are closed, while in Beijing, pollution remains at levels that are six times higher than WHO guidelines. In Sarajevo, people must wear masks to keep safe from an intermittent toxic fog. Parking lots encourage excessive driving and should be seen as a threat to alternative, greener modes of transportation.
Image: LA Metro Transportation Research Library & Archive / reproduced with permission
THE COMPLEX IMPLICATIONS FOR CITIZENS
In populous cities such as LA, the crisis of air pollution is undoubtedly linked to an abundance of cars. LA has an estimated 25.4 square miles dedicated to parking: more land than all of Manhattan. Combined with the geography of the landscape, the city’s dependence on cars has led to high levels of ozone. This photochemical smog brings detrimental effects on the city’s most vulnerable and, often, poorest residents. Exposure to air pollutants can exacerbate and cause respiratory conditions as well as increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases. The county undeniably needs more parks and vegetation, and less infrastructure accommodating polluting vehicles.
The necessity of cheap parking in the city often emerges as a surprisingly key factor in the changing of property values. Minimum parking requirements - where under zoning regulations new builds have to provide a set number of space - can threaten to drive up the price of what is meant to be affordable housing. For instance, in states like California, these regulations can add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of each low-income housing unit built, leading to housing costs being double compared to the rest of the United States. To effectively tackle the housing crises of cities, the investigation of how land is being used, and what modes of transportation are being prioritised, is crucial.
RETHINKING THE CITY AND RECLAIMING THE SPACE
Questioning minimum parking spot requirements and the large amounts of land being wasted is undoubtedly the way forward. Rethinking urban space can be seen as a form of innovation where new values and careful considerations become possible. It is an opportunity for reflection on the sustainability of infrastructure and people’s interactions with the city
However, it should be noted that in cities like LA where urban planning has already been heavily defined around the car, radical solutions are perhaps less feasible where a large budget is not available. So, while it may be tempting for cities to turn their attention towards building their way out of a parking shortage, the efficient way forward always means exploring alternative transport options that don’t threaten the health of the city. The solution to congestion may involve increasing the price of parking to help with investments in and subsidies for the wider transport infrastructure, ensuring that the poorest in society don’t carry the burden of policy changes. Thinking car-free helps to refocus attention on the issues of LA’s wider transport networks. Car dependency signifies broken critical infrastructure.
Image: LA Metro Transportation Research Library & Archive / reproduced with permission
There is potential for transforming the parking space to an area where the community can gather and all members can benefit. An increase in public green spaces, for example, carries numerous advantages with studies showing that nature is a cost-effective mental health support tool. Visits to protected areas have been linked to reduced healthcare expenditures. Additionally, parking is space that could instead boost the health of the population by limiting air pollution and rendering the intense summer heat more bearable. Policy initiatives and movements are springing up in cities that have traditionally been designed in favour of cars, challenging the space and how it is used with strategies such as temporarily occupying parking lots so that other purposes can flourish. For example, the ‘PARK(ing) Day movement’ that started in San Francisco, encouraged people to pay for parking spots and use them for activities like games or the creation of art installations. This year, the City of Birmingham, Alabama passed the ‘Right Size Parking Initiative’ to eliminate minimum parking requirements for new developments. The reform has meant the city is on track to be more walkable and bike-friendly, provide more affordable housing, and increase flood resilience. These kinds of policies go to the root of the structures promoting car use. The default of fixed parking thinking is questioned: the result is a city built for everyone.
When the mindset of parking as a fixed requirement for the city is put aside, new possibilities and ideas can take centre stage. Increased investment in green transport, which groups the individual with the community, should be the priority of policy and urban management. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has run three successful campaigns promising a greener city that accounts for the externalities cars are responsible for. In 2018, Khan set a goal for 80% of trips in the city to be by foot, bike or public transport by 2041, a target that will require immense amounts of work but also help push for innovations in the way we move around the city. Superloop express bus networks, launched in 2023, are already helping connect key boroughs, with use ensured through a system of public consultations.
Fundamentally, this is an issue of urban planning and its heavy consequences. Where cities struggle with congestion, poor public transport, limited affordable housing and green spaces, a serious consideration of the allocation of space is key to advancement. Our choice over how to manage urban space is ultimately a choice over the kind of society we choose to live in and value, and a move away from cars and parking is a prioritisation of the wellbeing and health of its citizens.