Just a note - the parking minimums that are set themselves don’t necessarily correspond to the number of units built in the best way. So by artificially setting them you can windup with, as often seems the case, an oversupply of parking or in more rare cases an undersupply.

But in addition to pricing street parking more appropriately, and some cities are doing so, shifting the load on to the common spaces is kind of what you want to see as a transit user because if it continues to be set at a minimum you just wind up building more parking lots, highways, and cars. But if “the market” decides the market can actually signal to government entities that we do indeed need and want more options.

Like you actually want to see new apartments in urban cores built without parking garages. Theoretically (and perhaps in practice) these new developments should also be cheaper and less theoretically they give sidewalks and bus routes and tram routes more users and thus more funding and support. That then alleviates pressure on existing highways and everybody wins except the obnoxious highway lobby and the revolving door that it operates with existing state departments of highways.

Or just do what the Japanese do - remove unlimited (and overnight) on-street parking in urban areas and require anyone owning a car to prove they have a private parking spot to house it

> Parking minimums prevent developers from free-loading on a commons, that commons being street parking.

Another way of looking at it: parking minimums require developers to encroach upon a commons, that commons being land that could otherwise be used for more productive things than free parking.

Even if on street parking were metered consistently and priced appropriately that's too divorced from the developer & their incentives to solve this. Parking after the building is sold is the definition of not the developer's problem, which is part of the reason we have parking regulations to begin with.

A better solution might be to mandate parking minimums (to ensure the property is actually useful / not encroaching on the street) but not allowing "open air" spots to count to the minimum, meaning an open lot gets you nothing, a 2 level garage counts for half the spots, etc. Maybe tack on some credits for proximity to public transit while we're at it.

If a developer builds in a way such that the demand for street parking outstrips supply, the street parking still has a cost, that cost is just expressed in time to find a spot, not dollars like you're suggesting. People unwilling to pay that time cost will find paid lots or not have a car (which is basically the dynamic in my building: people either pay $450 a month for a spot or they spend 10-15 minutes looking for a free street spot).

In practice, of course, existing residents feel entitled to "their" street parking and get mad when a new building with new people contending for those spots is built but there's no logical reason to preference residents who have previously lived there. This is where politics rears its head though.

Get rid of street parking so drivers can't free load on the commons either, make parking something that you have to buy (with your rent or on your own) because it actually costs something.

Also, you no longer have to worry about kids appearing into the street between parked cars that obscure their presence even near crosswalks (that cars park way too close to because they can't find parking elsewhere). Win-win.

Expensive parking and higher population density might even make pubic transportation commercially viable. Not having to walk a mile from the nearest stop / station could also make it actually convenient to people of all walks of life.

Make it illegal to use private vehicles in urban areas, except for on specific ingress/egress routes. Bolster public transit.

Most drivers are using their car to scoot around 5-10 miles. Make them walk (yes not everyone can; they have friends and family, care workers, etc). Invest in infrastructure to backfill gaps that make walking onerous.

There was measurable improvement in air pollution during Covid lockdown. We'll hate it now but thank ourselves when we're 70 and a little less anxious about environmental collapse.

Cars are great for road trips but a massive pollution and burden on urban infrastructure.

Rip up superfluous sidewalks then (aka heat storage. Plus concrete is worse for joints) and leave the avenues/streets not designated for ingress and egress for bikes, small delivery vehicles, handicap accessibility.

But I have a bike and use public transit and don’t want parking driving up my cost of housing.

Changing street parking prices is a lot easier than changing buildings built with previous parking requirements.

I'd say change the requirements first, then if there's a surge in street parking demand there will be natural pressure to raise prices.

Distribute the currency appropriately so that pricing won't be abused.