The Prophet of Parking: A eulogy for the great Donald Shoup

Effects of Removing Parking Minimums

• Oregon’s elimination of parking minimums in many cities is cited as “fine”: builders still add parking where there’s demand, but can omit it for cheaper or more walkable projects.
• Others report “battle royale” street parking where high‑density buildings with no off‑street parking were added without pricing or alternatives.
• Several argue that the real problem isn’t fewer spaces but free curb parking, which undercuts any incentive to build private parking.

Pricing Curb Space & Shoup’s Core Idea

• Strong support for Shoup’s prescription: demand-based pricing so each block always has ~1 free space; meter prices go up or down to hit that target.
• Advocates say this reduces circling, double‑parking, and congestion, and frees land for housing and businesses. SFpark is held up as a successful example.
• Some worry dynamic pricing can become exploitative (e.g., venue lots charging $5–$100 based on demand) and fuel data‑driven price discrimination.

Equity, Class, and “Free Parking”

• Big debate over whether charging for parking harms low‑income drivers or actually helps them.
• One side: car dependence is itself regressive; better to price parking and use revenue or direct transfers to support poor people and transit, rather than subsidize car storage for everyone.
• Others focus on “strivers” on the cusp of the middle class, for whom higher parking/commuting costs feel like another rung removed from the ladder.
• Edge cases like visiting caregivers, tradespeople, and delivery drivers are used both to argue for some guaranteed vehicle access and to warn against one‑size‑fits‑all mandates.

Alternatives to Driving

• Repeated claim: the only real solution to traffic and parking pressure is viable alternatives—good buses, rail, biking, and walkable mixed‑use neighborhoods.
• Many note the chicken‑and‑egg problem: people won’t accept reduced/free‑parking changes without pre‑existing decent transit; others argue you often must remove parking to create bus lanes and bike lanes.
• Comparisons to Europe and select US cities suggest that where transit and cycling are strong, life without a car (or with fewer cars per household) is normal and attractive.

Politics, Culture, and Perception

• Parking requirements are framed as driven less by business needs and more by voters fearful of spillover parking in “their” neighborhoods.
• Commenters describe cultural hostility to transit in some US places, class stigma around buses/trains, and intense resistance when councils try to price or limit parking.

Shoup’s Legacy & Resources

• Multiple commenters credit The High Cost of Free Parking with permanently changing how they view cities.
• His ideas are seen as appealing across ideologies: user‑pays, environmental benefits, market efficiency, and reclaiming public space from car storage.