3 ms·

This is already the case with some places that provide free customer parking but most city centres still provide free or low cost parking for personal vehicles

• sokoloff 10y ago
  Yes, it's a subsidy to the merchants who, in turn, pay to the city property tax and sales tax. Merchants decide where to locate in part based on traffic counts (vehicle and pedestrian). Places that are more valuable to merchants are more valuable to the city (property taxes and sales taxes are higher). It's economically logical for the city to consider whether to offer this investment/subsidy.
  • narrowrail 10y ago
    I know that in Boulder (CO), the downtown parking spaces that are on the street are owned by the city, and merchants were paying people to feed people's meters b/c they felt parking tickets were driving people away. Edit: I should put this in context: The merchants felt the city (which collects sales tax revenue) would benefit by subsidizing parking, which allows for more traffic and theoretically leads to increased sales (more tax dollars). The city saw parking tickets as a greater source of revenue, and felt increasing enforcement was the better plan. The merchants paid meter-feeders selectively, so as to encourage locals who are a more consistent source of revenue.
• ams6110 10y ago
  > most city centres still provide free or low cost parking Not sure about "most." Even in smaller cities free street parking is getting pretty rare. My town charges $1/hr for meters and it's clearly too cheap because it's still hard to find a spot most times. Certainly in urban centers like downtown Chicago there is no such thing as free parking, even at hotels and office buildings.