It is important to note that parking management systems do not merely serve the purpose of generating revenue, but are first and foremost an essential traffic control tool, helping to shape the motoring patterns of a city. However, municipalities must provide all manner of services related to housing, education, healthcare, transport and community, among others, and all of these services need significant resources in order to function at their best. Fortunately, a well-configured and operated, modern parking management system can serve both of the above purposes at the same time.

 

Firstly, we need to dispense with the delusion that parking spaces (whether on- or off street) are simply a given, irrespective of whether revenue is actually generated from them. If we only consider how much space parking spots take (and thus bar from alternative uses), or how much it costs to paint, sign, clean and maintain them, we can begin to imagine the hefty sum someone ultimately has to pay for these costs. In the case of 'free' parking spots, this can be none other than taxpayers, property, apartment or business owners, tenants and, of course, consumers and buyers. This is especially true in the case of new developments (shopping centers, office buildings), where the establishment and construction of a more than adequate amount of new parking spaces is mandated.

 

So, it's easy to see that 'free' parking is a myth. The only question remains whether cities collect the direct or indirect cost from those who use these parking spaces, or from the population at large: taxpayers, establishments, shops and, through them, patrons and customers. One thing is clear: it would be most fair to everyone if the person who uses a service would be the one to pay for it, as it is socially unethical to impose such costs on others, even indirectly.

 

The practical solution to this is to charge for as many parking spaces as possible, while maintaining the appropriate exceptions, of course, i.e. ensuring that the population can park for free near their places of residence, and that those in need (disabled and other eligible persons) can park for free according to necessity.

 

The reason for the limitation on the expansion of paid parking zones is to be found in the costs involved in it. The two most significant costs of operating paid public parking are:

- the cost of installing, maintaining, cleaning, emptying and replacing parking meters, and 

- the technical and personnel costs of parking enforcement.

 

By reorganizing, expanding and streamlining paid parking zones with a modern and automated parking enforcement system based on big data, the number of staff can ultimately be reduced significantly. For this, it is absolutely necessary to separate all other tasks (not related to parking control) from parking enforcement personnel. It should be noted that an effective, efficient enforcement system is crucial for the success of any paid parking system.

 

According to various studies and observations, in many major cities it is possible to park in a paid space for extended periods without being fined. This undermines the effectiveness of the system, as the average motorist only spends about an hour in a parking space. In well-managed cities, enforcement happens within 15 minutes at most - any motorist who parks at a paid spot without paying will be fined within this timeframe.

 

Fortunately, even the technical costs of parking enforcement can be reduced very effectively. Smart devices and their peripherals necessary for the inspectors' work (printers for tickets, for instance) are available at very low price, and their operations- and maintenance costs are a fraction of what they were years ago.

 

The other, even more cost-intensive issue is the one of parking meters. Many cities still use outdated, inefficient and uneconomical parking meters. There are very few modern cities left in the world where meters are installed one per parking space. The idea that the creation of each new parking space requires a new meter is antiquated, and a costly misconception that prevents progress.

 

The system which current meters use is also entirely contrary to the ideals of social justice. In many cities in 2024, motorists do not pay based on time parked. Is it fair that meters do not return money, whether users pay with coins or cards? Today, motorists do not pay for parking based on the period they actually use, but either:

more, if they pay for 2 hours of parking and leave in half an hour, having overpaid for 1.5 hours, or

less, if they find a parking space with 1.5 hours still on the meter and just use that

 

Card or coin-operated meters are not just a waste of money for users, however: for municipalities, the business of collecting and processing coins from parking meters entails unimaginably high costs, not to mention the fact that wherever there is cash (even coins), corruption cannot be ruled out, either on the side of enforcement or on the side of the coin collectors themselves.

 

Attempts to address some of these issues can be observed through pilot programs which aim to place pay-stations on every street corner rather than every space. However, such hybrid systems cannot be operated well, and the maintenance of these more complicated, and thus fragile, machines is even more expensive than the outdated, but at least homogeneous and comparatively simple meters commonly found in cities. This is why ultimately, many pay-station pilot programs have either failed or are paused indefinitely.

 

Unfortunately, application-based mobile payment systems that do not replace the previous coin and bank card payment solutions, but only supplement them, cannot be considered a solution, either. In the case of these systems, questions of privacy and security are raised by the fact that their use requires the download of an application and a registration, which also necessitates the proper, secure handling of a significant amount of sensitive personal data and payment information — something many users are justly concerned about. It is simply not a scaleable idea to oblige motorists to provide sensitive personal and payment data, and to disregard those members of society who face barriers of entry to downloading and using applications.

 

Cities therefore need a system that makes outdated and expensive parking meters redundant altogether, or at least in large part replaceable, with a system that is cheaper, more convenient, and easier to use by everyone who operates a motor vehicle today.

 

All while keeping in mind that paying for parking based on actual use is the only truly ethical option, and a system in which each motorist pays as much as they themselves use is the most beneficial to both users and municipalities.

 

It would be ideal if any new system to replace the old could also solve one of the most frequent complaints of urban drivers: namely, that the system of prohibiting, permitting and limiting signs and signals related to parking is not easily understood, and often causes unwitting motorists to slip into illegal parking despite their best intentions.

 

These are all very complex and sensitive matters, and this is a summation of the key issues related to the entire parking operation and payment system of any major metropolis. However, if there is a central issue, it is finding a solution that renders the biggest cost item of this list obsolete: parking meters.