The hidden costs of ‘free’ parking

Here in the U.S., it’s not uncommon to think of parking as something that should be free and widely available. Thus, most cities require builders to have a minimum number of parking spots, depending on building use. 

The problem, as Donald Shoup argues in The High Cost of Free Parking, is that parking is never truly free. The costs of parking are merely passed down to a city’s residents in the form of higher rents and more expensive goods and services. Not to mention the environmental harms — such as heat island effect and increased flooding — caused by all that asphalt.

The solution, according to Shoup? Let builders decide how much parking is actually needed rather than forcing them to build an arbitrary amount. 

The City of Asheville took steps in that direction March 11, when City Council voted unanimously to remove minimum parking requirements along key transit and commercial corridors, such as Patton Avenue, Hendersonville Road, Merrimon Avenue and Tunnel Road.

Minimum parking requirements, also known as parking mandates, require owners of new buildings to create a minimum number of off-street parking spaces. This minimum number varies widely depending on the expected use and size of the building.  

The hidden costs of free parking

When Andrew Paul first moved to Asheville in 2014, he didn’t have a car. Luckily, he was able to find a quadplex – an old building that had been subdivided into four apartments – within walking distance of his job downtown. 

The fact that the apartment only came with two parking spots for four tenants didn’t bother him. In fact, it was part of the draw. Because he didn’t have a car, he could save $50 per month it would cost to claim one of the parking spots. For Paul, fresh out of grad school and low on cash, this was ideal.

“Policy experts call this unbundling,” Paul says, “when the cost and the amenity of parking is unbundled from rent.” 

Paul is now the lead organizer for the grassroots group Asheville for All, whereby he advocates for policies to bring about housing abundance in Asheville. One of those policies is eliminating mandatory parking minimums. 

According to the city’s “Close the Gap Plan,” roughly 8% of households in Asheville have no vehicle available to them. Paul says they’re likely paying for parking anyway because parking is built into housing costs because of mandatory parking minimums, which require landowners to provide a set amount of parking regardless of actual demand. 

According to the Sightline Institute, a Pacific Northwest think tank, the cost of building a single parking space can range from $5,000 to $60,000 depending on the cost of land and the type of parking structure. Thus, every extra space a developer is required to build adds thousands of dollars to the overall cost of construction.  

That’s why housing advocates like Paul believe that getting rid of parking mandates will make it easier to build more affordable housing in Asheville while simultaneously reducing climate impacts and boosting the city’s financial sustainability. “The less parking, the more density, the more walkability, the more money that lot makes for the city from property taxes.”  

More housing, but still plenty of parking

Much of Asheville’s downtown or central business district doesn’t have parking minimums, but they are required in residential neighborhoods.

Curbing parking requirements is a trend nationwide. According to Portland, Ore.-based Parking Reform Network, over 1,000 U.S. cities have reduced parking minimums, while 82 U.S. cities have eliminated them altogether. The list includes cities as diverse as Rogers, Ark.; Austin, Texas; and San Francisco. 

Studies show these reforms have led to more housing being built. A 2022 study by the Regional Plan Association found that neighborhoods in New York City that removed parking minimums saw an increase in both affordable housing and overall housing production compared with those where mandates remain in place. 

That doesn’t mean that developers stop building parking. “People still build parking when there are no parking mandates because you still have to sell the building,” Paul explains.  

City staff agrees. At a recent info session, Will Palmquist, the city’s principal planner, assured members of the public. “We still fully expect that projects are going to build parking,” he said. According to a staff analysis, 35% of projects in areas of Asheville with no minimum parking requirement provide less parking than the minimum, but they still provide parking.

“The hope is we gain some flexibility about how many parking spaces you may need,” Palmquist added. 

Will it help curb housing costs?

While the latest change addresses some areas of Asheville, earlier proposals would have eliminated almost all parking minimums. 

“Last year, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to get rid of parking mandates in all residential neighborhoods as well as commercial corridors. They voted for that twice,” Paul says.

The plan was scaled back because of residents’ concerns.  

“The residential neighborhoods themselves have shown a great deal of apprehension to removing those parking minimums,” says Jared Wheatley, Planning and Zoning commissioner. 

To address those concerns, staff is studying what changes these measures might have on residential neighborhoods and working on accompanying antidisplacement measures. 

“Until we have strong antidisplacement strategies in place, we didn’t necessarily want to try to direct a lot of development into those areas but instead direct them into our commercial corridors and mixed-use centers where development is more appropriate to happen,” Palmquist explained. 

In light of these concerns, City Council decided to move forward with a more targeted approach that focuses on promoting housing in areas the city has already identified as ripe for more density and where public transit is most accessible. 

Wheatley calls the latest amendment a thoughtful and iterative approach: “I’m in support of making policy changes more frequently and with less intensity, because when we make drastic changes, that’s when there’s the greatest tendency to leave marginalized communities at a disadvantaged point.” 

But some advocates, like Paul, think the current amendment leaves too much on the table. “We know that simply allowing more housing on commercial corridors is not going to be enough to solve the city’s serious housing crisis. Asheville for All believes that parking minimums should be abolished entirely.” 

Other housing advocates strike a middle stance. Susan Bean, director of housing and transportation for MountainTrue, also would like to see the elimination of parking minimums expanded beyond transit corridors but wants to make sure measures are in place first to protect legacy neighborhoods, specifically those identified by the City’s Missing Middle Housing Study as being vulnerable to gentrification. “I’m very sensitive to the concerns of legacy neighborhoods,” she says.

Bean points out that focusing on the commercial corridors has economic and environmental benefits: “When we build homes located near things like grocery stores, schools, restaurants, and bus routes, people have more options for how they get around and are able to spend less money and less time driving.”

And there are more changes on the way, according to city staff at a recent public input session. 

To learn more and engage on future amendments, visit the UDO Text Change Engagement Hub at avl.mx/emw