IBJOpinion

EDITORIAL: Raising parking fees is wise step

IBJ Staff
August 14, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Editorial

It isn’t difficult to grasp the reasoning behind Mayor Greg Ballard’s proposal to privatize the city’s parking operations. The $4 million to $8 million a year in additional revenue an outside operator would pour into the city’s depleted coffers would certainly come in handy for improving streets, sidewalks and alleys in the targeted areas of Broad Ripple and downtown.

But that extra revenue would be squeezed out of drivers by doubling or tripling parking fees, and the steep increases might trigger the unintended consequence of eroding hard-fought gains in downtown redevelopment.

Given the pressures the city is under to find revenue, it would be too much to ask Ballard to reconsider the proposal altogether. But phasing in steep fee increases should be on the table.

The city unveiled the proposals last week after issuing a request for qualifications in February. Indianapolis wants a private operator to take over all 3,600 metered parking spaces in downtown and Broad Ripple and several downtown garages.

City leaders this week expect to recommend one of seven finalists chosen from an initial list of 16. The City-County Council could take up the proposal as soon as Aug. 23.

Hourly parking rates at meters would climb from 75 cents to $1.50, and downtown metered parking would end at 9 p.m. instead of 6 p.m.

The city points out that parking fees haven’t been raised since 1975. That’s a legitimate argument, one running along the lines of Gov. Mitch Daniels’ contention when he leased the Indiana Toll Road four years ago that tolls hadn’t been raised in two decades.

The proposal also has merit because parking rates are cheap here compared to other cities.

But the prospect of shelling out more quarters could drive away paying customers. Swiping a credit card in one of the new proposed electronic meters might be an easier psychological leap than digging deeper into pockets for more change, but there’s no guarantee that $1.50 for just one hour will find acceptance.

Simon Property Group Inc. understood this dynamic when it opened Circle Centre mall in 1995. The downtown mall offered the first three hours of parking for just $1. The price is now $1.50 for the first three hours, but it’s still a bargain and continues to blunt some of the hesitation shoppers harbor about making the trek.

A phase-in would give both consumers and businesses time to absorb the mental shock of the increases and delay the greatest impacts until the economy improves.

Meters could still be fed later in the day, as the city proposes, which should help the city and retailers accomplish the goal of creating more turnover in the parking spaces. More customers means more revenue for shopkeepers.

As it is, too many people hog spaces for hours at a time instead of using a garage or parking lot.

Whatever Ballard decides, maintaining downtown’s appeal should be the primary goal. Shiny appearances to the contrary, downtown still needs coddling.•

__________

To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • There is Already No Such Thing As Free Parking
    So-called "free parking" is already very costly. On street "free parking" is really subsidized parking paid for by all taxpayers to provide and maintain parking meters and parking enforcement, and by developers through extra costs created by parking requirements imposed by zoning regulations, and these costs are passed on to residential and commercial tenants and homebuyers.

    Street parking rates have been the same for the past 30 years or so, and it is about time they were increased to more closely reflect the actual cost of providing so-called "free parking." It is time for more transparency in government services and government mandates imposed on private parties, such as developers. Costs should be fully transparent, directly funded and FULLY funded.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
ADVERTISEMENT