September 23, 2025 • 33 mins
What happens when cities eliminate parking requirements? When curbside parking is priced at market rates? When parking revenue stays in the neighborhood instead of disappearing into general funds? These questions form the core of Donald Shoup's revolutionary approach to urban parking policy, explored in depth through Daniel Baldwin Hess's new book "The Shoup Doctrine."
Bringing together 37 contributors across 33 chapters, this festschrift celebrates the man who transformed parking from a mundane topic into one of urban planning's most dynamic areas of reform. As Hess explains, Shoup's background as an economist led him to view every parking instance as an economic transaction with hidden costs that profoundly shape our cities.
Show Notes:
- Further Reading:
- Sandrush: The Rival of the Beach in 20th Century Los Angeles by Elsa Devienne
- Get a copy of the book from the publisher: https://www.routledge.com/The-Shoup-Doctrine-Essays-Celebrating-Donald-Shoup-and-Parking-Reforms/Hess/p/book/9781032733920?srsltid=AfmBOor_oOVeYjVfiRDJhUR961ekHH5bzYi6Ug7GvS1gf_6n8CFpvqwE
- Check out our episode where we interviewed Donald Shoup on The High Cost of Free Parking back in year 1: https://www.bookedonplanning.com/podcast/episode/79419c03/the-high-cost-of-free-parking
- To view the show transcripts, click on the episode at https://bookedonplanning.buzzsprout.com/
Follow us on social media for more content related to each episode:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/booked-on-planning/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/BookedPlanning
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/bookedonplanning
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bookedonplanning/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Stephanie Rouse (00:12):
you're listening to the booked on
planning podcast, a project ofthe nebraska chapter of the
american planning association.
In each episode we dive intohow cities function by talking
with authors on housing,transportation and everything in
between.
Join us as we get Booked onPlanning.
(00:37):
Welcome back, Bookworms, toanother episode of Booked on
Planning.
In this episode we talk withauthor Daniel Baldwin Hess on
his book the Shoop DoctrineEssay Celebrating Donald Shoop
and Parking Reforms.
This book is a compilation ofessays from over three dozen
authors around the topic ofDonald Shoop's life's work
parking reform.
The book, edited by Shoophimself, was meant as a
(00:57):
compilation of the field ofparking reform today, but also
is a great celebration of hisimpact on the field.
Jennifer Hiatt (01:08):
I have to admit, if you had asked me in graduate
school how much I would thinkabout parking in my career, I
really would not have believedyou.
But I'm actually certain beinga Shoopista sealed my job offer.
I listened to our season oneepisode with Donald Shoop before
the interview, since I knew oururban development department
oversaw parking, so Shoop'sinfluence in planning and
parking is so widespread.
I think you'd be hard-pressedto find someone who hasn't been
impacted by his work at thispoint.
Stephanie Rouse (01:27):
That's actually a topic we get into with Daniel
during the episode.
So many planners graduate withlittle or no training in parking
, despite it having an outsizedimpact on community development
and function.
He has some good insights intochanging this in the future and
with so much recent momentumaround parking, I can see the
change on the horizon.
Jennifer Hiatt (01:46):
I sure hope so.
It hopefully, as theconversation around parking
grows, it makes it to electedofficials and we can advance
Shoop's policy and make ourcommunities better.
So let's get into ourconversation with author Daniel
Baldwin Hess on his book theShoop Doctrine Essays
Celebrating Donald Shoop andParking Reform.
Stephanie Rouse (02:04):
Daniel, thank you for joining us on Booked on
Planning to talk about your book, the Shoup Doctrine, a
compilation of essays, many ofthem by Shoup's former students,
including yourself, but Shoupis actually pretty involved in
the editing of this as well.
Can you talk about the ideabehind this book and the process
to get it to publication?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (02:22):
This book had been on my mind for some
time and then I finally clearedtime to work on it when my
sabbatical was approaching.
This was about two years agoand it was on my mind because
Donald Shoup's research was wellknown to me.
But then I thought and I sawthat he was really having a
moment, as they say, and as Itraveled around and met
(02:42):
different planners and went toconferences people would say to
me hey, didn't you work withDonald Shoup when you were a
student?
Wow, his research is reallyhaving an impact these days.
So that's what I would hearfrom my colleagues.
So it made me really latch onto this idea of Donald Shoup's
impact on our profession.
So there was sort of thisrecognition that no other urban
(03:04):
planning academic was reallygetting their work out there
like he was for wide consumptionand having an impact on
practice.
So I took a trip to Los Angelesand I visited Donald at his home
.
He was at that point, of course, in retirement from his
position as professor of urbanplanning at UCLA, and I
explained my aim with a book tocelebrate him, who many consider
(03:28):
the world's foremost urbanplanning researcher of parking,
and he liked the idea about awork that furthered parking
research.
But he wasn't too excited abouta book that celebrated him.
He was too modest for that.
But I pressed on anyway.
I told him about my vision forthe book and he and I began to
list some scholars who I couldinvite to contribute.
(03:50):
I devised a work plan and I gotstarted and he eventually came
around to the idea that the bookwould also be a tribute to him,
and so I'm introducing thisbook to you as a festschrift so
that's the German word for acollection of writings published
in honor of a scholar.
Festschrift actually means feastof writing if we translate it
(04:11):
literally.
And so, yes, the chapters werewritten by the contributing
authors, and Donald Shoup lovedediting.
He loved editing his ownwriting and other people's
writing.
So I did invite him to edit thechapters.
So he read and commented on thechapters, so the people who
have contributed to the book gotsome feedback from our top
(04:34):
scholar and he really loved theprocess.
Now the book really assembles adistinguished group of planning
academics and practitioners andadvocates to examine all of
Shoup's scholarly contributionsand then really where we are in
the world of parking reform andresearch about parking today.
So there are 33 chapterswritten by 37 contributing
(04:58):
authors and, as you pointed out,10 of these authors, including
me, are Donald Shoup's formerstudents of urban planning at
UCLA.
Jennifer Hiatt (05:07):
And, of course, we did lose Donald Shoup at the
beginning of this year, and youhave a beautiful memoriam to him
at the start of the book.
How did his passing actuallyreally impact the legacy of this
book for you, the last thingthat he was probably really able
to work on?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (05:22):
Donald Shoup passed away in February of
this year at age 86.
He was healthy and active andengaged up until a very short
illness.
As I mentioned, we had beenworking closely as I sought his
advice on editing the book andlooking at the chapters that the
author submitted, and he toldme the book brought him much joy
(05:44):
.
So that is an important impactof the book for me personally.
Looking a little bit widerbeyond that, though, my hopes
for the book are that it extendsand enriches Shoup's research
about parking policies andparking reform, that a reader
gets to know a little bit aboutDonald Shoup as a better way of
understanding his research, andthat we get to learn more
(06:07):
on-the-ground impacts ofresearch about parking how Shoup
was inspired practitioners toundertake specific parking
reforms.
How he energized a group offollowers who came to call
themselves the Shoupistas andare very active advocates around
the country.
How he sparked a movement inplanning reform.
He gave us some really goodtools to carry forward.
(06:30):
And with every success inparking reform we can see how
new approaches to parking canhelp make cities more livable,
more sustainable and more just.
So we can actually see that onthe ground with our eyes.
Stephanie Rouse (06:42):
And on the lines of sparking influence with
practitioners.
One of the articles said thatShoop could be seen as this
ivory tower Brahmin type, but inactuality he really had a
really good influence in thepracticing field as well as the
academic field and was a veryapproachable person.
A lot of the articlesreferenced how he was really had
a good sense of humor and wasengaging with his presentations.
(07:05):
How do you think Shoup was ableto accomplish this crossover
between being influential inboth the academic as well as the
practicing field?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (07:13):
Yeah, Well, donald Shoup did wear tweed
suit jackets and he spoke like aprofessor and he published
prolifically.
So I see the ivory towerBrahmin reference fits.
But I think translating hisresearch into practical uses for
practitioners and theprofession was really in his DNA
.
He talked to everyone andanyone about parking, for
(07:38):
example at parties and at socialevents.
When he would meet people hewould usually ask the question
where did you park?
Now, remember this was manyevents in LA where I saw this
happen.
So this would lead to aconversation about people's
personal experiences withparking.
But then Donald would try toshift that conversation into a
wider discussion about parkingpolicies.
(07:58):
He was always hoping to make aconvert and help educate someone
about how distorted parkingpolicies and parking prices are
hurting US cities.
So he was really not afraid toconnect with people residents,
activists, advocates and also heknew that he must connect with
people in order to disseminateinformation about his
(08:21):
recommended reforms.
After the publication of hisbook the High Cost of Free
Parking this was in about 2005,he received many written
messages from people all overthe country Community advocates
or practicing planners orarchitects or real estate
developers.
They would read the book andthen they wanted to share with
(08:41):
him a story or ask a question,and this is what always amazed
me.
He answered everyone.
And I meet people now and theysay I read the book.
And I looked up his emailaddress and I wrote him a
message and I got a response.
It's this continual energy forconnection You've mentioned in
the question.
He was funny.
So he was funny and witty andapproached it all in a very
(09:05):
lighthearted way.
But really, when we drill downthough, he was ahead of his time
in exploring our parkingsystems.
Really, even before the wordslike sustainability and equity
and justice were really part ofthe discourse of planning and
urbanism, and then I think theworld finally caught up to him
in recognizing that we need todo something about excessive
(09:25):
automobility in our cities.
Stephanie Rouse (09:27):
You know you mentioned how he was more than
willing to talk with anyone andeveryone in our first year of
our podcast.
I found his email somehow andreached out to him to see if he
would be willing to talk abouthis book, which would have been
20 years old or 15 years old bythat point and you know a lot of
authors are like, no, I'm goingto be on that and he was more
than happy to come on and talkabout his book in our fledgling
(09:49):
year of the podcast.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (09:51):
That's excellent.
That's excellent.
It does not surprise me.
That was his way of connecting.
Jennifer Hiatt (09:59):
In one of my favorite articles.
Doreena Pujani describes theconcept of Robin Hood parking in
her article.
I had never heard of this term,so can you give our listeners
an overview of it?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (10:08):
I like this term too when it came up.
Okay so the Robin Hood conceptof taking from the rich and
giving to the poor really refersto the redistribution of wealth
, so taking resources typicallymoney or land from wealthy
individuals or institutions andthen reallocating them to those
who are less fortunate.
Okay so our contributing authorhere this is Doreena Pojani,
(10:31):
and she is now working inAustralia, and when she was a
doctoral student she did onestudy year at UCLA.
So she also worked under DonaldShoup and had the good fortune
to get to know him.
What she tells us in thechapter in the book that you're
referring to is that some citiesare rich in their parking
(10:52):
supply but poor in their spacefor micromobility.
Micromobility I mean lanes forbicycles, scooters and walking.
So we can take parking lanes orcurbside parking or other
examples of parking in citieswhere it appears, and then
reallocate this space to what wehave less of lanes for
(11:12):
non-motorized travel biking,scootering, walking.
So this is never as easy as Ijust described it, since any
time that we take something awayfrom citizens curb parking
spaces in this case there willbe a political struggle, but
really I think it's the job ofcity planners to explain to
people and increase publicacceptability that while one
(11:32):
element of the urbantransportation system might be
reduced, other elements will beadded or increased and this
makes the entire system workbetter for everyone.
And Doreena points out theexcellent micro-mobility
planning that we see in theNetherlands and Northern Europe
and other parts of Europe thatcan really give us a vision of
her idea of Robin Hood planningand reducing parking to increase
(11:55):
other types of transportationmodes, especially non-motorized.
But also, I would say there aresome examples in the USA, so
especially the reconception ofstreet space that happened in
New York City about 15 years ago, led by Janet Sadek Khan, that
took travel and parking lanesout of operating street space
and they were made intopedestrian space, parklets,
(12:19):
places with cafe tables and soforth.
That became so popular amongNew Yorkers and visitors as a
way to enjoy the city.
Stephanie Rouse (12:27):
Yeah, we had a project here recently.
It was just completed earlierthis spring, I believe.
It was a bike lane project onone of our streets that leads
right into downtown, and when wedid our public engagement, we
said you can either keep theparking lanes or an extra
vehicle lane, but we are puttingthe bike lanes in.
So we allowed the community toweigh in and say what was more
important to them, and parkingended up being more important.
(12:48):
So we preserved the on-streetparking and took out one lane in
order to be able to install abuffered bike lane.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (12:55):
Well, you ask the question and then you
get the answer, and then youwork with the best way of
getting a solution in there thatworks.
Stephanie Rouse (13:02):
So we talked a little bit about how Shoup was
really great at changingperspective around.
What he said was a boring topicthat most people wouldn't
really engage with.
What do you think are some ofthe key approaches or his style
that worked really well aroundchanging perspectives that
others can change in their ownrespective fields?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (13:21):
Yes, donald Shoup often did admit that
parking was a boring topic forresearch or policy or for
implementation or for anythingelse.
But he made it much less thanboring in everything that he did
in writing and speaking andconvincing others.
So he did a really nice job ofproblem identification.
So he started out telling usthe problems of an oversupply of
(13:44):
parking, distorted prices forparking.
If we move from parking toautomobiles and automobility
then we have too many cars inour cities and too much
dependency on them and where dowe store the cars and they
create pollution and congestionand noise.
So he really identified for theproblem for us in a nice way.
He then used sound research toexplore those problems and
(14:07):
potential solutions.
Remember, he was an economist.
He was an economist by trainingand he once told me that he
maybe became interested inparking because he considered
every instance of parking.
Anytime a car is parked in acity it is an economic
negotiation between the personwho wants to park and where
(14:27):
they're parking if there's acost for it.
If there's not a direct costthen there's an indirect cost.
So we have sort of an economicunderpinning to his work.
Then I think his outreach.
So when he had research resultsand recommendations and
suggestions to share.
He was so good at the outreachthat he conducted, talking to
concerned people, helping themto think about how to devise and
(14:48):
implement change.
A few of the authors in thebook have referred to Donald
Shoup as being tenacious, so hehad a lot of energy and he stuck
with an idea.
In fact, he worked on thisproblem of misaligned parking
policies and prices for decadeseven when no one was listening,
and he continued to work on theproblem even in locations where
(15:11):
talking about changing parkingpolicies was very unpopular.
He lived and worked in LosAngeles, where the automobile
culture reigned, so he reallystuck with his topic and really
gave us some nice ways ofcarrying this through a career.
Jennifer Hiatt (15:24):
So one of the articles points out that nearly
30 years after Shoup's 1997article on parking reform, most
students still come out ofplanning programs really only
learning about.
You know parking requirementsare bad, but not learning about
how to solve the actual parkingproblems.
We have 30 years of Shoup'sresearch.
Why do you think mostuniversities haven't picked up
(15:45):
this topic yet?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (15:46):
I really hope we can change this this
with my book, which we'retalking about today, with
Shoop's publications and otherpublications.
You know it takes a long timeto change people's patterns and
thoughts and Shoop was soconsistent in his work.
And, as I said in my opening,we have been seeing more
movement in changing parkingpolicies around the country, so
(16:08):
that's a good thing.
I think it's helpful for us tosee example projects where
parking reform has occurred andwhere we can measure the
outcomes.
So if we can show that tostudents, if we can have example
projects that professors arewilling to present to students
in courses, it can do someconvincing.
Besides instructors anduniversities, as you pointed out
(16:29):
, we're also seeing the urbanplanning and transportation
planning professions slow on theuptake of parking reforms and
it's often the work of advocacygroups that gets parking reform
started in particular cities.
So the grassroots activists andthe bottom-up approach has
really made some movement inparking reform.
They are having to convince theurban planners, who are
(16:52):
actually the ones that areresponsible for setting policy
and implementing policy inparking.
So we would like to seeprofessional planners have the
courage to not accept the statusquo, begin embracing parking
reform and especially trying toremove minimum parking
requirements from zoningregulations to take these large
(17:12):
parking lots away from therequired part of what cities do
and let the market decide howbig parking lots should be.
Stephanie Rouse (17:20):
There are numerous examples now of
reducing and, in a lot of cases,removing parking minimums
altogether, but a bunch of thesecommunities have also added in
parking maximums.
When they remove the minimums,some of them will just change
the minimum to become a maximum,but it seemed like there was a
little bit of disagreementwithin the book on different
authors whether maximums were agood approach.
(17:41):
What is your thought on thetopic?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (17:43):
Well, donald Shoup used to tell a
funny story true story.
But this goes back to the late1990s, early 2000s, when Los
Angeles was building a newconcert hall downtown adjacent
to the Music Center and thiseventually became Disney Hall,
which opened in 2003.
But in the years before thatLA's zoning policy required
(18:05):
off-street parking for thefacility.
So the first thing that wasbuilt was an underground parking
garage.
It was six stories underground,over 2,000 parking spaces.
That parking lot wasconstructed before the concert
hall itself.
That parking garage cost, Ithink, about $110 million to
build.
And then, with the parkinggarage underground, when the
(18:27):
concert hall was built, theyparked below ground, they came
above ground and they were rightthere at the concert hall where
they needed to be, but notnecessarily engaging with street
life.
Now, at the same time, therewas a concert hall being built
in San Francisco, the Dave EastSymphony Hall.
But in San Francisco it wasbuilt with no off-street parking
because San Francisco didn'tmandate minimum parking for such
(18:50):
venues.
San Francisco did have parkingmaximums around that time or
maybe a little bit later, butthose were mostly for housing.
So, as you say, there are acouple chapters in the book that
mention parking maximums.
These would tell propertyowners and developers the
maximum number of parking spaceswhich can be built.
But for decades before thiswe're actually used to the
(19:15):
terminology and the practice ofminimum parking requirements.
So with these maximums, adeveloper or property owner
cannot exceed a parking lot sizeset forth in the zoning.
But you know, it might be harderto get people to wrap their
head around the idea of aparking maximum, and that is, as
you say, bandied about in someof the chapters in the book.
But I like to think that itmight be easier to start in the
(19:38):
area of deregulation, whichmeans simply removing minimum
parking requirements from zoningcodes.
So it's a simple act ofstriking something out of the
zoning code and then you let themarket decide how much parking
is needed, although in congestedcities that are experiencing
development there is a risk thatyou could, you know of course,
(19:58):
have more parking come alongthan the previous minimum
parking requirements said had tobe in place.
But I think it's a nice idea tosimply approach parking reform
as deregulation, where you takeaway the minimum parking
requirements that are in zoningcodes.
Jennifer Hiatt (20:13):
When you were working on this book, you
brought together some of thebest minds in parking and
dedicated an entire chapter tothe challenges and successes of
implementing parking reform.
As we've been talking about,what do you think are some of
the biggest challenges toparking reform and also what is
your favorite success story?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (20:30):
So I'm happy to say there are more and
more examples of parking reformand large-scale parking reform
that we can look at.
I'll give an example right now,but I'm lucky that I'm living
and teaching now in Buffalo, newYork.
I teach at the University ofBuffalo, and Buffalo removed its
minimum parking requirementsfrom its zoning code in 2017.
(20:51):
It was the largest city to doso at the time, so it sort of
made some splashy news aboutparking, but it didn't take long
for other cities, larger cities, to jump on the bandwagon
Hartford, san Jose, birmingham,raleigh, sacramento, mexico City
but you know, buffalo was thebig one to do it at the time and
(21:12):
Buffalo might be an unlikelycandidate for progressive
parking reform, but the minimumparking requirements were
removed as part of a wholesalezoning revision and Buffalo then
had a zoning code dating fromthe 1950s, so it was like a
50-something-year-old zoningcode and the whole zoning code
was rewritten.
Buffalo, of course, has had, orhas, reputation as a slow-growth
(21:35):
city.
There was a lot of populationloss and economic decline since
the 1970s, so the parkingrequirements were completely
removed in 2017.
So that means any developer orproperty owner can build or
convert anything on their landand they're not required to have
an off-street parking lot.
They may provide an off-streetparking lot, but they're not
required to, and any existingparking lot for a business or
(22:01):
building does not have to bethere, so land can be converted
to something else.
So I jumped on with someresearch soon after that
happened else.
So I jumped on with someresearch soon after that
happened and I did a beforeanalysis with development data
for several years after thezoning reform, and what I found
is that about half of newdevelopments reduced the size of
their parking lot after thereform and then on average the
(22:22):
parking lots were cut in half.
There were examples ofapartment buildings built in
Buffalo with no off-streetparking, so this would not have
been possible before the zoningreform.
So no parking lots off-street,and the biggest effect was for
mixed-use buildings.
So these were generallyapartment buildings with other
commercial uses on the first andsecond floors and then also
(22:44):
along transit-rich corridors.
Buffalo has Light Rail, metroRail, going through the center
of the city.
So I've written about parkingreform in Buffalo previously,
but also in the current book.
But, linking my answer here tothe question that you asked,
there's another chapter by anauthor who works as a consultant
in Los Angeles.
This is Stefan Turov and hereminds us that removing minimum
(23:08):
parking requirements is reallya form of deregulation, and he
said that most urban planningprojects that we bring through
City Hall, that we bring througha government, require a new
program, a new budget, new staffmembers, a new website to
oversee them.
If we're thinking of a newprogram, it requires new
(23:28):
resources, but we don't alwayshave those resources.
On the other hand, removingminimum parking requirements
takes away a requirement.
It is cost-free for cities.
It's a zoning change and thenit's cost-free and, as some of
the authors write about in thechapters, it can even streamline
the development process.
It can make developmentsmoother.
Sometimes there are no longerparking studies needed, fewer or
(23:50):
no zoning variants requestedwhen it comes to parking, so it
can, in some ways, make theproperty development process go
even better.
Stephanie Rouse (23:59):
I imagine, for all of the development review.
Planners in those communitiesthat have gotten rid of minimum
parking requirements are prettyhappy that they're not counting
parking stalls anymore andtrying to find that the
developments are in compliance.
So you've kind of touched onthis a little bit throughout the
episode, but without Don Shouphere as our leader in the field
of parking reform, I mean, itseems like there's very few
(24:21):
individuals that can besynonymous with a certain aspect
of city planning in the waythat Don has been.
What do you think's next forthe field, don?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (24:28):
Shoup.
I think I'm about to find thatout for myself.
In the coming weeks I will besetting out to deliver a number
of presentations about this bookin cities throughout the USA
and even abroad.
But I do always remember totell myself that parking reform
is mostly a local activity inthe US, so it's happening
locally at the municipalitylevel, except where we've seen
(24:51):
the beginnings of widergeographical reform attempts and
even statewide reform.
In Oregon, in California, therehas been legislation to
restrict parking requirements inareas served by public transit.
But I expect, as I move aroundand talk to people now that this
book is finished and out there,I expect to hear from advocates
(25:13):
and shoopistas what they havebeen able to accomplish using
Shoop's insights.
So I'm excited to hear thosemovements forward in practice
and what they have on theiragendas for their next
activities.
Donald Shoop left us with areally useful roadmap for three
parking reforms.
Number one remove minimumparking requirements from city
(25:35):
zoning codes.
Number two charge market ratesfor curb parking.
So whenever we have curbparking we know it's often
underpriced if we compare it tothe price of nearby parking lots
.
In many cases those parkingmeters need to be raised so
they're at market rates and thatdiscourages people from
consuming too much curbsideparking.
And then, number three,establish local parking
(25:56):
districts, so this could be incommercial districts or even in
residential neighborhoods, andthen allocate the revenue toward
local improvements.
These could be streetscapeimprovements, improving bike
lanes and sidewalks andlandscaping, so that people can
see with their own eyes thebenefits of paying into a system
(26:16):
for parking and not have theparking fees that they pay go
into the general revenue of thecity.
So he gave us those threeparking reforms that people are
taking forward and implementing.
So we will take a look at howthose are being implemented and
what are the outcomes.
Jennifer Hiatt (26:32):
So the city of Lincoln that Stephanie and I
work for, we like to think we'redoing pretty well in parking,
but the one thing that stilljust really irritates me is all
of our parking funding stillgoes into general fund.
Working on it, but it's veryirritating.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (26:46):
Yeah, you know, people are actually paying
their fee to park at the curband they think, ah, I'm just
supporting the city governmentand I don't know where this
money goes and maybe there'scorruption or something wrong
with the funding and I don'tknow what I'm paying for.
But if we can actually haveparking revenue, pay for
improvements that people can see, they can change their attitude
(27:08):
about paying for parking andeven if we have to raise the
parking fee, that they'll seesome benefit for what they're
paying for Exactly.
Jennifer Hiatt (27:15):
Obviously, shoop's name will forever be
tied to parking, and that's themajority of the concepts that
you guys talk about in your book.
But he was a prolific academic,really.
So what is one of his otherwild ideas that you wish
researchers would pick up andrun with?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (27:30):
So outside the world of parking.
Actually, back when I was agraduate student, he and I
worked on research about prepaidtransit passes as an incentive
for not driving and consumingparking spaces, so people,
through a university or anemployer or a neighborhood
organization, could purchasetransit passes for everybody and
then reduce automobiledependence.
(27:51):
So that's one thing we workedon, but maybe the one that I'll
mention that relates to yourquestion is a project that he
was working on in more recentyears called Broken Sidewalks.
Donald Shoup was looking atdeteriorating sidewalks in Los
Angeles.
Los Angeles is a large city.
It's over 500 square miles.
It's not the largest city inthe US, but it's one of the
(28:12):
larger ones and there are almost11,000 miles of sidewalk.
So you can imagine there aresidewalks along both sides of
almost every street in LosAngeles.
And what he found was thatabout 45% of those sidewalks are
damaged or inaccessible.
It's concrete, so there's wearand tear, there's damage to
those sidewalks, and theestimated repair cost of all
(28:32):
those sidewalks and theestimated repair cost of all
those sidewalks was somethinglike $1.5 billion.
So these broken sidewalksthey're really unsightly but
they're dangerous, especiallyfor people with disabilities,
and then they increasinglybecome a legal liability and
there was a court ruling about20 years ago that affirmed that
the ADA, the Americans withDisabilities Act, applies to
(28:55):
sidewalks.
So Donald Shoup found that thecity of Los Angeles pays tens of
millions of dollars each yearin maintenance and construction
of sidewalks, and it also paysout money in injury or damage
lawsuits, and then in realitythe city can only afford to
repair a tiny fraction of whatis needed.
So most of these brokensidewalks go unrepaired for
(29:17):
quite some time.
Okay, so now we get to DonaldShoup's idea To repair these
sidewalks.
He proposed shifting the costto property owners.
Now you might say what?
You're going to ask people whoown property or houses or other
types of buildings that theyhave to pay to repair the
sidewalks.
But he devised a pay-on-exitstrategy.
(29:39):
So what that means is when aproperty owner sells a property
that the sidewalk would beinspected, and if it's
determined at that time thesidewalk is broken, then the
owner is required to pay therepair costs.
But because it's at the momentthat they're selling the
property, they would have theliquidity to do so.
So they would have funds fromthe sale of the property to pay
(30:01):
then.
So Donald Shoup wrote a fewarticles about this, he wrote
some op-eds and he did get someinterest from the city.
The idea is that there would bea pay on exit strategy here
that would speed up repairs andavoid a broad based tax increase
.
So we were just talking aboutthese fees that you pay to the
city in the question before this, and nobody wants to see a tax
(30:23):
increase to fix the brokensidewalks.
But if we could shift that tothat, owners would pay it, but
only when they sold the property.
It could help us incrementallyimprove sidewalks and make our
cities more livable and safer.
So it's sort of an excitingvision about something that
could happen in Los Angeles orother cities.
Stephanie Rouse (30:42):
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if that
catches on.
And our last question, alwaysfor the podcast, as this is
Booked on Planning in additionto your book, which we recommend
everyone get a copy of, whatother books would you recommend
our readers check out?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (30:56):
There are so many good books that relate
to urban planning and even booksthat are planning adjacent,
that planners can learn so muchabout, and for me I'm always
going to gravitate toward a bookthat has something to do with
urban history.
I'm sort of a history nut inthat way, and I like to learn
about the history of cities andplaces to understand why they
look the way they do now, basedon historical events of the past
(31:19):
, and what that might mean forthe future.
So with that context, I wouldpick a book called Sand Rush the
Revival of the Beach in 20thCentury Los Angeles.
This was published last year,2024, by an author called Elsa
Devine, last year, 2024, by anauthor called Elsa Devine.
So we're set here in Los Angelesand the author is looking at
(31:42):
the historical development ofcoastlines in Southern
California and Los Angeles goingback to the early 1900s when
there were amusement parks, andthen through the many decades of
various approaches to beachesand recreation and fun at the
shore, and then moving to theenvironmental movements of the
1960s.
So it does a really good job ofweaving together culture and
increasing environmentalconcerns, urban development and
city planning history.
(32:02):
I always like to learn moreabout Los Angeles.
I lived there for many yearswhen I was a graduate student,
because it's so interesting tothink about how it moved from
the small settlements that oncedefined the region to the
complex metropolitan area it istoday, and so this book helps us
think about, in that complexregion, access to water and
beaches and the coastline, andthen how we can protect the land
(32:25):
and sea for people, for animalsand for our natural ecosystems.
Stephanie Rouse (32:29):
It would be a great book to add to our
ever-growing list of recommendedreadings from our authors.
But, daniel, thank you so muchfor joining us on the podcast
today to talk about the ShoopDoctrine.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (32:40):
Thank you, it was very fun to talk to you.
Jennifer Hiatt (32:42):
We hope you enjoyed this conversation with
author Daniel Baldwin Hess onhis book the Shoop Doctrine
Essays Celebrating Donald Shoopand Parking Reforms.
You can get your own copythrough the publisher at
Rutledge support your localbookstore or online from
bookshoporg.
Remember to subscribe to theshow wherever you listen to
podcasts and please rate, reviewand share the show.
Thank you for listening andwe'll talk to you next time on
(33:02):
Booked on Planning.
Thank you.
you're listening to the booked on
planning podcast, a project ofthe nebraska chapter of the
american planning association.
In each episode we dive intohow cities function by talking
with authors on housing,transportation and everything in
between.
Join us as we get Booked onPlanning.
(00:37):
Welcome back, Bookworms, toanother episode of Booked on
Planning.
In this episode we talk withauthor Daniel Baldwin Hess on
his book the Shoop DoctrineEssay Celebrating Donald Shoop
and Parking Reforms.
This book is a compilation ofessays from over three dozen
authors around the topic ofDonald Shoop's life's work
parking reform.
The book, edited by Shoophimself, was meant as a
(00:57):
compilation of the field ofparking reform today, but also
is a great celebration of hisimpact on the field.
Jennifer Hiatt (01:08):
I have to admit, if you had asked me in graduate
school how much I would thinkabout parking in my career, I
really would not have believedyou.
But I'm actually certain beinga Shoopista sealed my job offer.
I listened to our season oneepisode with Donald Shoop before
the interview, since I knew oururban development department
oversaw parking, so Shoop'sinfluence in planning and
parking is so widespread.
I think you'd be hard-pressedto find someone who hasn't been
impacted by his work at thispoint.
Stephanie Rouse (01:27):
That's actually a topic we get into with Daniel
during the episode.
So many planners graduate withlittle or no training in parking
, despite it having an outsizedimpact on community development
and function.
He has some good insights intochanging this in the future and
with so much recent momentumaround parking, I can see the
change on the horizon.
Jennifer Hiatt (01:46):
I sure hope so.
It hopefully, as theconversation around parking
grows, it makes it to electedofficials and we can advance
Shoop's policy and make ourcommunities better.
So let's get into ourconversation with author Daniel
Baldwin Hess on his book theShoop Doctrine Essays
Celebrating Donald Shoop andParking Reform.
Stephanie Rouse (02:04):
Daniel, thank you for joining us on Booked on
Planning to talk about your book, the Shoup Doctrine, a
compilation of essays, many ofthem by Shoup's former students,
including yourself, but Shoupis actually pretty involved in
the editing of this as well.
Can you talk about the ideabehind this book and the process
to get it to publication?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (02:22):
This book had been on my mind for some
time and then I finally clearedtime to work on it when my
sabbatical was approaching.
This was about two years agoand it was on my mind because
Donald Shoup's research was wellknown to me.
But then I thought and I sawthat he was really having a
moment, as they say, and as Itraveled around and met
(02:42):
different planners and went toconferences people would say to
me hey, didn't you work withDonald Shoup when you were a
student?
Wow, his research is reallyhaving an impact these days.
So that's what I would hearfrom my colleagues.
So it made me really latch onto this idea of Donald Shoup's
impact on our profession.
So there was sort of thisrecognition that no other urban
(03:04):
planning academic was reallygetting their work out there
like he was for wide consumptionand having an impact on
practice.
So I took a trip to Los Angelesand I visited Donald at his home
.
He was at that point, of course, in retirement from his
position as professor of urbanplanning at UCLA, and I
explained my aim with a book tocelebrate him, who many consider
(03:28):
the world's foremost urbanplanning researcher of parking,
and he liked the idea about awork that furthered parking
research.
But he wasn't too excited abouta book that celebrated him.
He was too modest for that.
But I pressed on anyway.
I told him about my vision forthe book and he and I began to
list some scholars who I couldinvite to contribute.
(03:50):
I devised a work plan and I gotstarted and he eventually came
around to the idea that the bookwould also be a tribute to him,
and so I'm introducing thisbook to you as a festschrift so
that's the German word for acollection of writings published
in honor of a scholar.
Festschrift actually means feastof writing if we translate it
(04:11):
literally.
And so, yes, the chapters werewritten by the contributing
authors, and Donald Shoup lovedediting.
He loved editing his ownwriting and other people's
writing.
So I did invite him to edit thechapters.
So he read and commented on thechapters, so the people who
have contributed to the book gotsome feedback from our top
(04:34):
scholar and he really loved theprocess.
Now the book really assembles adistinguished group of planning
academics and practitioners andadvocates to examine all of
Shoup's scholarly contributionsand then really where we are in
the world of parking reform andresearch about parking today.
So there are 33 chapterswritten by 37 contributing
(04:58):
authors and, as you pointed out,10 of these authors, including
me, are Donald Shoup's formerstudents of urban planning at
UCLA.
Jennifer Hiatt (05:07):
And, of course, we did lose Donald Shoup at the
beginning of this year, and youhave a beautiful memoriam to him
at the start of the book.
How did his passing actuallyreally impact the legacy of this
book for you, the last thingthat he was probably really able
to work on?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (05:22):
Donald Shoup passed away in February of
this year at age 86.
He was healthy and active andengaged up until a very short
illness.
As I mentioned, we had beenworking closely as I sought his
advice on editing the book andlooking at the chapters that the
author submitted, and he toldme the book brought him much joy
(05:44):
.
So that is an important impactof the book for me personally.
Looking a little bit widerbeyond that, though, my hopes
for the book are that it extendsand enriches Shoup's research
about parking policies andparking reform, that a reader
gets to know a little bit aboutDonald Shoup as a better way of
understanding his research, andthat we get to learn more
(06:07):
on-the-ground impacts ofresearch about parking how Shoup
was inspired practitioners toundertake specific parking
reforms.
How he energized a group offollowers who came to call
themselves the Shoupistas andare very active advocates around
the country.
How he sparked a movement inplanning reform.
He gave us some really goodtools to carry forward.
(06:30):
And with every success inparking reform we can see how
new approaches to parking canhelp make cities more livable,
more sustainable and more just.
So we can actually see that onthe ground with our eyes.
Stephanie Rouse (06:42):
And on the lines of sparking influence with
practitioners.
One of the articles said thatShoop could be seen as this
ivory tower Brahmin type, but inactuality he really had a
really good influence in thepracticing field as well as the
academic field and was a veryapproachable person.
A lot of the articlesreferenced how he was really had
a good sense of humor and wasengaging with his presentations.
(07:05):
How do you think Shoup was ableto accomplish this crossover
between being influential inboth the academic as well as the
practicing field?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (07:13):
Yeah, Well, donald Shoup did wear tweed
suit jackets and he spoke like aprofessor and he published
prolifically.
So I see the ivory towerBrahmin reference fits.
But I think translating hisresearch into practical uses for
practitioners and theprofession was really in his DNA
.
He talked to everyone andanyone about parking, for
(07:38):
example at parties and at socialevents.
When he would meet people hewould usually ask the question
where did you park?
Now, remember this was manyevents in LA where I saw this
happen.
So this would lead to aconversation about people's
personal experiences withparking.
But then Donald would try toshift that conversation into a
wider discussion about parkingpolicies.
(07:58):
He was always hoping to make aconvert and help educate someone
about how distorted parkingpolicies and parking prices are
hurting US cities.
So he was really not afraid toconnect with people residents,
activists, advocates and also heknew that he must connect with
people in order to disseminateinformation about his
(08:21):
recommended reforms.
After the publication of hisbook the High Cost of Free
Parking this was in about 2005,he received many written
messages from people all overthe country Community advocates
or practicing planners orarchitects or real estate
developers.
They would read the book andthen they wanted to share with
(08:41):
him a story or ask a question,and this is what always amazed
me.
He answered everyone.
And I meet people now and theysay I read the book.
And I looked up his emailaddress and I wrote him a
message and I got a response.
It's this continual energy forconnection You've mentioned in
the question.
He was funny.
So he was funny and witty andapproached it all in a very
(09:05):
lighthearted way.
But really, when we drill downthough, he was ahead of his time
in exploring our parkingsystems.
Really, even before the wordslike sustainability and equity
and justice were really part ofthe discourse of planning and
urbanism, and then I think theworld finally caught up to him
in recognizing that we need todo something about excessive
(09:25):
automobility in our cities.
Stephanie Rouse (09:27):
You know you mentioned how he was more than
willing to talk with anyone andeveryone in our first year of
our podcast.
I found his email somehow andreached out to him to see if he
would be willing to talk abouthis book, which would have been
20 years old or 15 years old bythat point and you know a lot of
authors are like, no, I'm goingto be on that and he was more
than happy to come on and talkabout his book in our fledgling
(09:49):
year of the podcast.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (09:51):
That's excellent.
That's excellent.
It does not surprise me.
That was his way of connecting.
Jennifer Hiatt (09:59):
In one of my favorite articles.
Doreena Pujani describes theconcept of Robin Hood parking in
her article.
I had never heard of this term,so can you give our listeners
an overview of it?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (10:08):
I like this term too when it came up.
Okay so the Robin Hood conceptof taking from the rich and
giving to the poor really refersto the redistribution of wealth
, so taking resources typicallymoney or land from wealthy
individuals or institutions andthen reallocating them to those
who are less fortunate.
Okay so our contributing authorhere this is Doreena Pojani,
(10:31):
and she is now working inAustralia, and when she was a
doctoral student she did onestudy year at UCLA.
So she also worked under DonaldShoup and had the good fortune
to get to know him.
What she tells us in thechapter in the book that you're
referring to is that some citiesare rich in their parking
(10:52):
supply but poor in their spacefor micromobility.
Micromobility I mean lanes forbicycles, scooters and walking.
So we can take parking lanes orcurbside parking or other
examples of parking in citieswhere it appears, and then
reallocate this space to what wehave less of lanes for
(11:12):
non-motorized travel biking,scootering, walking.
So this is never as easy as Ijust described it, since any
time that we take something awayfrom citizens curb parking
spaces in this case there willbe a political struggle, but
really I think it's the job ofcity planners to explain to
people and increase publicacceptability that while one
(11:32):
element of the urbantransportation system might be
reduced, other elements will beadded or increased and this
makes the entire system workbetter for everyone.
And Doreena points out theexcellent micro-mobility
planning that we see in theNetherlands and Northern Europe
and other parts of Europe thatcan really give us a vision of
her idea of Robin Hood planningand reducing parking to increase
(11:55):
other types of transportationmodes, especially non-motorized.
But also, I would say there aresome examples in the USA, so
especially the reconception ofstreet space that happened in
New York City about 15 years ago, led by Janet Sadek Khan, that
took travel and parking lanesout of operating street space
and they were made intopedestrian space, parklets,
(12:19):
places with cafe tables and soforth.
That became so popular amongNew Yorkers and visitors as a
way to enjoy the city.
Stephanie Rouse (12:27):
Yeah, we had a project here recently.
It was just completed earlierthis spring, I believe.
It was a bike lane project onone of our streets that leads
right into downtown, and when wedid our public engagement, we
said you can either keep theparking lanes or an extra
vehicle lane, but we are puttingthe bike lanes in.
So we allowed the community toweigh in and say what was more
important to them, and parkingended up being more important.
(12:48):
So we preserved the on-streetparking and took out one lane in
order to be able to install abuffered bike lane.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (12:55):
Well, you ask the question and then you
get the answer, and then youwork with the best way of
getting a solution in there thatworks.
Stephanie Rouse (13:02):
So we talked a little bit about how Shoup was
really great at changingperspective around.
What he said was a boring topicthat most people wouldn't
really engage with.
What do you think are some ofthe key approaches or his style
that worked really well aroundchanging perspectives that
others can change in their ownrespective fields?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (13:21):
Yes, donald Shoup often did admit that
parking was a boring topic forresearch or policy or for
implementation or for anythingelse.
But he made it much less thanboring in everything that he did
in writing and speaking andconvincing others.
So he did a really nice job ofproblem identification.
So he started out telling usthe problems of an oversupply of
(13:44):
parking, distorted prices forparking.
If we move from parking toautomobiles and automobility
then we have too many cars inour cities and too much
dependency on them and where dowe store the cars and they
create pollution and congestionand noise.
So he really identified for theproblem for us in a nice way.
He then used sound research toexplore those problems and
(14:07):
potential solutions.
Remember, he was an economist.
He was an economist by trainingand he once told me that he
maybe became interested inparking because he considered
every instance of parking.
Anytime a car is parked in acity it is an economic
negotiation between the personwho wants to park and where
(14:27):
they're parking if there's acost for it.
If there's not a direct costthen there's an indirect cost.
So we have sort of an economicunderpinning to his work.
Then I think his outreach.
So when he had research resultsand recommendations and
suggestions to share.
He was so good at the outreachthat he conducted, talking to
concerned people, helping themto think about how to devise and
(14:48):
implement change.
A few of the authors in thebook have referred to Donald
Shoup as being tenacious, so hehad a lot of energy and he stuck
with an idea.
In fact, he worked on thisproblem of misaligned parking
policies and prices for decadeseven when no one was listening,
and he continued to work on theproblem even in locations where
(15:11):
talking about changing parkingpolicies was very unpopular.
He lived and worked in LosAngeles, where the automobile
culture reigned, so he reallystuck with his topic and really
gave us some nice ways ofcarrying this through a career.
Jennifer Hiatt (15:24):
So one of the articles points out that nearly
30 years after Shoup's 1997article on parking reform, most
students still come out ofplanning programs really only
learning about.
You know parking requirementsare bad, but not learning about
how to solve the actual parkingproblems.
We have 30 years of Shoup'sresearch.
Why do you think mostuniversities haven't picked up
(15:45):
this topic yet?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (15:46):
I really hope we can change this this
with my book, which we'retalking about today, with
Shoop's publications and otherpublications.
You know it takes a long timeto change people's patterns and
thoughts and Shoop was soconsistent in his work.
And, as I said in my opening,we have been seeing more
movement in changing parkingpolicies around the country, so
(16:08):
that's a good thing.
I think it's helpful for us tosee example projects where
parking reform has occurred andwhere we can measure the
outcomes.
So if we can show that tostudents, if we can have example
projects that professors arewilling to present to students
in courses, it can do someconvincing.
Besides instructors anduniversities, as you pointed out
(16:29):
, we're also seeing the urbanplanning and transportation
planning professions slow on theuptake of parking reforms and
it's often the work of advocacygroups that gets parking reform
started in particular cities.
So the grassroots activists andthe bottom-up approach has
really made some movement inparking reform.
They are having to convince theurban planners, who are
(16:52):
actually the ones that areresponsible for setting policy
and implementing policy inparking.
So we would like to seeprofessional planners have the
courage to not accept the statusquo, begin embracing parking
reform and especially trying toremove minimum parking
requirements from zoningregulations to take these large
(17:12):
parking lots away from therequired part of what cities do
and let the market decide howbig parking lots should be.
Stephanie Rouse (17:20):
There are numerous examples now of
reducing and, in a lot of cases,removing parking minimums
altogether, but a bunch of thesecommunities have also added in
parking maximums.
When they remove the minimums,some of them will just change
the minimum to become a maximum,but it seemed like there was a
little bit of disagreementwithin the book on different
authors whether maximums were agood approach.
(17:41):
What is your thought on thetopic?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (17:43):
Well, donald Shoup used to tell a
funny story true story.
But this goes back to the late1990s, early 2000s, when Los
Angeles was building a newconcert hall downtown adjacent
to the Music Center and thiseventually became Disney Hall,
which opened in 2003.
But in the years before thatLA's zoning policy required
(18:05):
off-street parking for thefacility.
So the first thing that wasbuilt was an underground parking
garage.
It was six stories underground,over 2,000 parking spaces.
That parking lot wasconstructed before the concert
hall itself.
That parking garage cost, Ithink, about $110 million to
build.
And then, with the parkinggarage underground, when the
(18:27):
concert hall was built, theyparked below ground, they came
above ground and they were rightthere at the concert hall where
they needed to be, but notnecessarily engaging with street
life.
Now, at the same time, therewas a concert hall being built
in San Francisco, the Dave EastSymphony Hall.
But in San Francisco it wasbuilt with no off-street parking
because San Francisco didn'tmandate minimum parking for such
(18:50):
venues.
San Francisco did have parkingmaximums around that time or
maybe a little bit later, butthose were mostly for housing.
So, as you say, there are acouple chapters in the book that
mention parking maximums.
These would tell propertyowners and developers the
maximum number of parking spaceswhich can be built.
But for decades before thiswe're actually used to the
(19:15):
terminology and the practice ofminimum parking requirements.
So with these maximums, adeveloper or property owner
cannot exceed a parking lot sizeset forth in the zoning.
But you know, it might be harderto get people to wrap their
head around the idea of aparking maximum, and that is, as
you say, bandied about in someof the chapters in the book.
But I like to think that itmight be easier to start in the
(19:38):
area of deregulation, whichmeans simply removing minimum
parking requirements from zoningcodes.
So it's a simple act ofstriking something out of the
zoning code and then you let themarket decide how much parking
is needed, although in congestedcities that are experiencing
development there is a risk thatyou could, you know of course,
(19:58):
have more parking come alongthan the previous minimum
parking requirements said had tobe in place.
But I think it's a nice idea tosimply approach parking reform
as deregulation, where you takeaway the minimum parking
requirements that are in zoningcodes.
Jennifer Hiatt (20:13):
When you were working on this book, you
brought together some of thebest minds in parking and
dedicated an entire chapter tothe challenges and successes of
implementing parking reform.
As we've been talking about,what do you think are some of
the biggest challenges toparking reform and also what is
your favorite success story?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (20:30):
So I'm happy to say there are more and
more examples of parking reformand large-scale parking reform
that we can look at.
I'll give an example right now,but I'm lucky that I'm living
and teaching now in Buffalo, newYork.
I teach at the University ofBuffalo, and Buffalo removed its
minimum parking requirementsfrom its zoning code in 2017.
(20:51):
It was the largest city to doso at the time, so it sort of
made some splashy news aboutparking, but it didn't take long
for other cities, larger cities, to jump on the bandwagon
Hartford, san Jose, birmingham,raleigh, sacramento, mexico City
but you know, buffalo was thebig one to do it at the time and
(21:12):
Buffalo might be an unlikelycandidate for progressive
parking reform, but the minimumparking requirements were
removed as part of a wholesalezoning revision and Buffalo then
had a zoning code dating fromthe 1950s, so it was like a
50-something-year-old zoningcode and the whole zoning code
was rewritten.
Buffalo, of course, has had, orhas, reputation as a slow-growth
(21:35):
city.
There was a lot of populationloss and economic decline since
the 1970s, so the parkingrequirements were completely
removed in 2017.
So that means any developer orproperty owner can build or
convert anything on their landand they're not required to have
an off-street parking lot.
They may provide an off-streetparking lot, but they're not
required to, and any existingparking lot for a business or
(22:01):
building does not have to bethere, so land can be converted
to something else.
So I jumped on with someresearch soon after that
happened else.
So I jumped on with someresearch soon after that
happened and I did a beforeanalysis with development data
for several years after thezoning reform, and what I found
is that about half of newdevelopments reduced the size of
their parking lot after thereform and then on average the
(22:22):
parking lots were cut in half.
There were examples ofapartment buildings built in
Buffalo with no off-streetparking, so this would not have
been possible before the zoningreform.
So no parking lots off-street,and the biggest effect was for
mixed-use buildings.
So these were generallyapartment buildings with other
commercial uses on the first andsecond floors and then also
(22:44):
along transit-rich corridors.
Buffalo has Light Rail, metroRail, going through the center
of the city.
So I've written about parkingreform in Buffalo previously,
but also in the current book.
But, linking my answer here tothe question that you asked,
there's another chapter by anauthor who works as a consultant
in Los Angeles.
This is Stefan Turov and hereminds us that removing minimum
(23:08):
parking requirements is reallya form of deregulation, and he
said that most urban planningprojects that we bring through
City Hall, that we bring througha government, require a new
program, a new budget, new staffmembers, a new website to
oversee them.
If we're thinking of a newprogram, it requires new
(23:28):
resources, but we don't alwayshave those resources.
On the other hand, removingminimum parking requirements
takes away a requirement.
It is cost-free for cities.
It's a zoning change and thenit's cost-free and, as some of
the authors write about in thechapters, it can even streamline
the development process.
It can make developmentsmoother.
Sometimes there are no longerparking studies needed, fewer or
(23:50):
no zoning variants requestedwhen it comes to parking, so it
can, in some ways, make theproperty development process go
even better.
Stephanie Rouse (23:59):
I imagine, for all of the development review.
Planners in those communitiesthat have gotten rid of minimum
parking requirements are prettyhappy that they're not counting
parking stalls anymore andtrying to find that the
developments are in compliance.
So you've kind of touched onthis a little bit throughout the
episode, but without Don Shouphere as our leader in the field
of parking reform, I mean, itseems like there's very few
(24:21):
individuals that can besynonymous with a certain aspect
of city planning in the waythat Don has been.
What do you think's next forthe field, don?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (24:28):
Shoup.
I think I'm about to find thatout for myself.
In the coming weeks I will besetting out to deliver a number
of presentations about this bookin cities throughout the USA
and even abroad.
But I do always remember totell myself that parking reform
is mostly a local activity inthe US, so it's happening
locally at the municipalitylevel, except where we've seen
(24:51):
the beginnings of widergeographical reform attempts and
even statewide reform.
In Oregon, in California, therehas been legislation to
restrict parking requirements inareas served by public transit.
But I expect, as I move aroundand talk to people now that this
book is finished and out there,I expect to hear from advocates
(25:13):
and shoopistas what they havebeen able to accomplish using
Shoop's insights.
So I'm excited to hear thosemovements forward in practice
and what they have on theiragendas for their next
activities.
Donald Shoop left us with areally useful roadmap for three
parking reforms.
Number one remove minimumparking requirements from city
(25:35):
zoning codes.
Number two charge market ratesfor curb parking.
So whenever we have curbparking we know it's often
underpriced if we compare it tothe price of nearby parking lots
.
In many cases those parkingmeters need to be raised so
they're at market rates and thatdiscourages people from
consuming too much curbsideparking.
And then, number three,establish local parking
(25:56):
districts, so this could be incommercial districts or even in
residential neighborhoods, andthen allocate the revenue toward
local improvements.
These could be streetscapeimprovements, improving bike
lanes and sidewalks andlandscaping, so that people can
see with their own eyes thebenefits of paying into a system
(26:16):
for parking and not have theparking fees that they pay go
into the general revenue of thecity.
So he gave us those threeparking reforms that people are
taking forward and implementing.
So we will take a look at howthose are being implemented and
what are the outcomes.
Jennifer Hiatt (26:32):
So the city of Lincoln that Stephanie and I
work for, we like to think we'redoing pretty well in parking,
but the one thing that stilljust really irritates me is all
of our parking funding stillgoes into general fund.
Working on it, but it's veryirritating.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (26:46):
Yeah, you know, people are actually paying
their fee to park at the curband they think, ah, I'm just
supporting the city governmentand I don't know where this
money goes and maybe there'scorruption or something wrong
with the funding and I don'tknow what I'm paying for.
But if we can actually haveparking revenue, pay for
improvements that people can see, they can change their attitude
(27:08):
about paying for parking andeven if we have to raise the
parking fee, that they'll seesome benefit for what they're
paying for Exactly.
Jennifer Hiatt (27:15):
Obviously, shoop's name will forever be
tied to parking, and that's themajority of the concepts that
you guys talk about in your book.
But he was a prolific academic,really.
So what is one of his otherwild ideas that you wish
researchers would pick up andrun with?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (27:30):
So outside the world of parking.
Actually, back when I was agraduate student, he and I
worked on research about prepaidtransit passes as an incentive
for not driving and consumingparking spaces, so people,
through a university or anemployer or a neighborhood
organization, could purchasetransit passes for everybody and
then reduce automobiledependence.
(27:51):
So that's one thing we workedon, but maybe the one that I'll
mention that relates to yourquestion is a project that he
was working on in more recentyears called Broken Sidewalks.
Donald Shoup was looking atdeteriorating sidewalks in Los
Angeles.
Los Angeles is a large city.
It's over 500 square miles.
It's not the largest city inthe US, but it's one of the
(28:12):
larger ones and there are almost11,000 miles of sidewalk.
So you can imagine there aresidewalks along both sides of
almost every street in LosAngeles.
And what he found was thatabout 45% of those sidewalks are
damaged or inaccessible.
It's concrete, so there's wearand tear, there's damage to
those sidewalks, and theestimated repair cost of all
(28:32):
those sidewalks and theestimated repair cost of all
those sidewalks was somethinglike $1.5 billion.
So these broken sidewalksthey're really unsightly but
they're dangerous, especiallyfor people with disabilities,
and then they increasinglybecome a legal liability and
there was a court ruling about20 years ago that affirmed that
the ADA, the Americans withDisabilities Act, applies to
(28:55):
sidewalks.
So Donald Shoup found that thecity of Los Angeles pays tens of
millions of dollars each yearin maintenance and construction
of sidewalks, and it also paysout money in injury or damage
lawsuits, and then in realitythe city can only afford to
repair a tiny fraction of whatis needed.
So most of these brokensidewalks go unrepaired for
(29:17):
quite some time.
Okay, so now we get to DonaldShoup's idea To repair these
sidewalks.
He proposed shifting the costto property owners.
Now you might say what?
You're going to ask people whoown property or houses or other
types of buildings that theyhave to pay to repair the
sidewalks.
But he devised a pay-on-exitstrategy.
(29:39):
So what that means is when aproperty owner sells a property
that the sidewalk would beinspected, and if it's
determined at that time thesidewalk is broken, then the
owner is required to pay therepair costs.
But because it's at the momentthat they're selling the
property, they would have theliquidity to do so.
So they would have funds fromthe sale of the property to pay
(30:01):
then.
So Donald Shoup wrote a fewarticles about this, he wrote
some op-eds and he did get someinterest from the city.
The idea is that there would bea pay on exit strategy here
that would speed up repairs andavoid a broad based tax increase
.
So we were just talking aboutthese fees that you pay to the
city in the question before this, and nobody wants to see a tax
(30:23):
increase to fix the brokensidewalks.
But if we could shift that tothat, owners would pay it, but
only when they sold the property.
It could help us incrementallyimprove sidewalks and make our
cities more livable and safer.
So it's sort of an excitingvision about something that
could happen in Los Angeles orother cities.
Stephanie Rouse (30:42):
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if that
catches on.
And our last question, alwaysfor the podcast, as this is
Booked on Planning in additionto your book, which we recommend
everyone get a copy of, whatother books would you recommend
our readers check out?
Daniel Baldwin Hess (30:56):
There are so many good books that relate
to urban planning and even booksthat are planning adjacent,
that planners can learn so muchabout, and for me I'm always
going to gravitate toward a bookthat has something to do with
urban history.
I'm sort of a history nut inthat way, and I like to learn
about the history of cities andplaces to understand why they
look the way they do now, basedon historical events of the past
(31:19):
, and what that might mean forthe future.
So with that context, I wouldpick a book called Sand Rush the
Revival of the Beach in 20thCentury Los Angeles.
This was published last year,2024, by an author called Elsa
Devine, last year, 2024, by anauthor called Elsa Devine.
So we're set here in Los Angelesand the author is looking at
(31:42):
the historical development ofcoastlines in Southern
California and Los Angeles goingback to the early 1900s when
there were amusement parks, andthen through the many decades of
various approaches to beachesand recreation and fun at the
shore, and then moving to theenvironmental movements of the
1960s.
So it does a really good job ofweaving together culture and
increasing environmentalconcerns, urban development and
city planning history.
(32:02):
I always like to learn moreabout Los Angeles.
I lived there for many yearswhen I was a graduate student,
because it's so interesting tothink about how it moved from
the small settlements that oncedefined the region to the
complex metropolitan area it istoday, and so this book helps us
think about, in that complexregion, access to water and
beaches and the coastline, andthen how we can protect the land
(32:25):
and sea for people, for animalsand for our natural ecosystems.
Stephanie Rouse (32:29):
It would be a great book to add to our
ever-growing list of recommendedreadings from our authors.
But, daniel, thank you so muchfor joining us on the podcast
today to talk about the ShoopDoctrine.
Daniel Baldwin Hess (32:40):
Thank you, it was very fun to talk to you.
Jennifer Hiatt (32:42):
We hope you enjoyed this conversation with
author Daniel Baldwin Hess onhis book the Shoop Doctrine
Essays Celebrating Donald Shoopand Parking Reforms.
You can get your own copythrough the publisher at
Rutledge support your localbookstore or online from
bookshoporg.
Remember to subscribe to theshow wherever you listen to
podcasts and please rate, reviewand share the show.
Thank you for listening andwe'll talk to you next time on
(33:02):
Booked on Planning.
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.