Improperly pricing curb access provides the wrong incentives while forcing maintenance costs onto taxpayers, unfairly making them pay for goods they do not use. Pricing no longer needs to be static. It can rise and fall at different times of the day or in neighborhoods where demand swings up and down. Minneapolis Mobility and Curbside Access Manager Dillon Fried uses data to lower rates in underutilized areas or to raise rates near stadiums and arenas during major sporting events. Lower-income residents in those neighborhoods should not be forced to indirectly subsidize underpriced curbside parking for season-ticket holders.
According to the late Donald Shoup, author of the influential book The High Cost of Free Parking, circling drivers looking for a parking space represent a third of urban traffic. Indeed, many would prefer to pay a little more to spend less time circling. With proper pricing and allocation of curb space organized by demand, delivery trucks aren’t forced to double park; drop-offs of people, bikes and scooters occur in planned areas; and local leaders have new funds available to support transit. Current technologies allow dynamic pricing, special delivery periods, proper allocation of space for valets and cafes, better placement of shared bikes and scooters, and more. In some cities, neighborhood improvement districts share in curb income.
Poor compliance contributes to the lost revenue. Inconsistent enforcement of parking rules and the failure to charge and collect for uses like scooter parking, ride-share or commercial delivery drop-offs encourage violations and congestion. As Mancini Nichols pointed out in a recent call, “because so many parking sessions are short-term, parkers are using any space — no-parking areas, commercial loading zones, in front of driveways and fire hydrants, and crosswalks.” We live in a digital world that still utilizes enforcement procedures associated with coin-operated parking meters.
Elected officials must help the public understand the need for enforcement cameras that produce more fairness while protecting privacy. Cameras can capture license plates, similar to electronic tolling, without including the faces of individuals. That relieves some workload on traffic officers. Several states allow violations to be mailed and not posted on the windshield, reducing confrontations and substantially increasing officers’ productivity. Better management also provides other benefits. The deployment of cameras and sensors will provide real-time information about whether the space is occupied. Redwood City, Calif., for example, collects real-time curb availability data, which the city pushes out through APIs and digital road signs.
Ann Arbor, Mich.’s Curb Management Plan rightly emphasizes that “the significant amount of short-term parking demand is leading to curb violations, safety issues, congestion and preventing business access.” Accurate pricing is a potent tool in addressing these challenges. Alyssa Alt, Denver’s manager of curbside and parking, explained in a recent webinar that their focus shifted from parking to comprehensive transportation planning, with curb digitization, allowing integration of an array of private-sector innovations including, for example, using Cartograph for asset management and a new compliance-oriented effort from Passport. These public-private solutions and the revenue they produce are made possible by their shared use of the Open Mobility Foundation’s curb data standards.
The current system is bad for city finances, harmful to the environment, and unfair to motorists, retailers, taxpayers and transit-dependent populations. Change requires leadership, a straightforward narrative and investment in new digital technologies.
This story originally appeared in the Spring 2025 issue of Government Technology magazine. Click here to view the full digital edition online.
