By Ryan Ford

It is time to realize our parks are not free and Oakland residents already pay for them in one form or another. Lake Merritt is no exception. In 2020, the city spent $25,000 week of taxpayer money to maintain Lake Merritt (Devries 2021). It turns out littering has a cost and residents are already picking up the tab. Understandably, there was strong public resistance to installing paid parking along the eastern side of Lake Merritt. No one likes paying for what used to be free. Even though 70% of respondents disapproved of the policy, it is the best compromise for Oakland.

With the current cost of maintaining Lake Merritt at over $1 million annually, the potential value of existing free parking spaces along the lake is too high an opportunity cost. Under the new policy, parking prices will match demand. Weekends will be more expensive to park than weekdays. In the first year, projected revenue from the meters will provide nearly $1.5 million. Paying for parking is an apparent cost for drivers, but the cost of free parking is more nuanced and important to spell out.

Donald Shoup, a professor of urban planning at UCLA, has been railing against the high cost of free parking for decades. Essentially, Shoup points out, cities are arbitrarily giving away valuable real estate in the form of parking with traffic and congestion as a return on investment (Steiner 2013). Since we live in a car-dominated society, Oakland residents see free parking as a mobility right rather than wasted opportunity. Opposition to paid parking is understandable, but the revenue is necessary to use the already scarce parking in a more effective manner.

Intersection adjacent to Lake Merritt, Source: Creative Commons

The Lake Merritt Parking Management plan will change transportation behavior through the framework of Travel Demand Management (TDM). TDM is a set of policies designed to expand the functionality of existing transportation infrastructure rather than relying on increasing the supply of infrastructure to meet changing needs of the community. Multiple commercial centers surrounding Lake Merritt draw large amounts of travel, so it is incredibly ineffective to have a single car carrying a single person occupy a spot for hours on end. For residents wary of the new parking policy, they only need look across the bay at San Francisco for a success story.

In 2017, San Francisco used federal funding to pilot SFpark. The program proved the efficacy of the same variable demand-based parking Oakland recently implemented. In some cases, the cost of parking decreased, and more importantly, parking availability increased (SFMTA). San Francisco is not known for its affordability, so the results are encouraging.

I recommend that Oakland take additional measures for protection against gentrification. For low-income residents, there should be a permitting process to guarantee a discounted parking cost. Additionally, residents with existing parking permits local to Lake Merritt should receive free-parking one weekend per month during the first year of the policy.

Despite the practicality of the policy, not everyone is happy with the results. A comment from a months-long community engagement campaign reads: “To put meters around the lakeshore side of the lake would be a direct act against working class people like myself who would be unable to continue to enjoy our beautiful lake if it meant paying every time that I wanted to walk or hang out there.” (Attachment B: Lake Merritt Parking Management Plan May 17, 2022) This resident has a right to be concerned. A prohibitively high cost for parking limits access to the lake and parking priced too low also limits access by not encouraging enough turnover. Market-based pricing is critical to reach enough turnover so one or two spots are open for each block.

Parking alongside Lake Merritt, Source: Creative Commons

So, it is important to reiterate the new parking policy will increase access to Lake Merritt in the long-term rather than be a barrier. It is also worth noting that there is already an extensive network of paid parking surrounding the lake. Driving is not the only option. Lake Merritt is transit-rich with bus and train stops connecting the park to surrounding neighborhoods. And even walking is an option.  

I do think residents are right to hold Oakland accountable. There city needs to be transparent about how it spends revenue from the new parking meters. Oakland should create an easily accessible digital dashboard to show how each dollar is spent. The dashboard would also show the cost of maintenance for Lake Merritt and hopefully dissuade residents from littering. Making spending data public will create a sense of trust in the community. Even though this parking policy is the best compromise for Oakland, there is an inherent cost of political good will for moving ahead with a publicly unpopular policy.  

At the end of the day, the maintenance costs of Lake Merritt alone justify the new parking policy. Though the benefits will be indirect, residents will also appreciate less time spent circling the block looking for a spot. Instead, they can pull up and enjoy Lake Merritt.


 Works Cited

Joe DeVries. Agenda Report: Lake Merritt Working Group. City of Oakland Memorandum. Mar 11, 2021. 

Oakland Department of Transportation. Attachment B: Lake Merritt Parking Management Plan May 17, 2022. p. 9.

Ruth L. Steiner (2013) A Review of “The High Cost of Free Parking, Updated Edition”, Journal of the American Planning Association, 79:2, 174-175, DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2013.772038

SFMTA. SFpark Pilot Project Evaluation Summary. Project Evaluation, June 2014, p. 11.


Ryan Ford is a Master’s student in the Department of City and Regional Planning at UNC Chapel Hill. He is interested in the intersection of urban design and transportation, specifically around active mobility. Outside of classes, you can find Ryan playing tennis or catching a movie at Varsity Theater.


Edited by Kathryn Cunningham

Featured image courtesy of Creative Commons