Do parking requirements significantly increase the area dedicated to parking? A test of the effect of parking requirements values in Los Angeles County

Minimum parking requirements (MPRs) are the norm for urban and suburban development in the United States (Davidson et al., 2002). The justification for MPRs is that overflow parking will occupy nearby street or off-street parking. Shoup (1999a) and Willson (1995) provide cases where there is reason to believe that parking space requirements have forced parcel developers to place more parking than they would in the absence of parking requirements. However, to our knowledge the existing literature does not test the effect of parking minimums on the amount of lot space devoted to parking beyond a few case studies. This paper tests the hypothesis that MPRs bind for most land uses using data on suburban office, commercial, industrial and retail property sales from Los Angeles County using both direct and indirect approaches. Our indirect test of the effects of parking requirements is similar to the one used by Glaeser and Gyourko (2003). A simple theoretical model shows that the marginal value of additional parking to the sale price of a building should be equal to the cost of land plus the cost of parking construction. We estimate the marginal values of parking and lot area with spatial methods using a large data set from the Los Angeles area non-residential property sales and find that for most of the property types the marginal value of parking is significantly below that of the parcel area. In addition, we directly examine required and supplied parking and find that on average parking supplied is quite close to the required amount.