Well, why not?

From today's Globe:

Thanks to the work of UCLA urban planning professor Donald Shoup, we now know that the low meter rates lead to congestion, unnecessary fuel consumption, and additional pollution. It also allows parking entrepreneurs to make 20 bucks (or more) for the same 120 square feet of asphalt that the city is practically giving away.

The solution?

Ten dollar per hour parking meters, apparently.

I mean, $20 per hour parking meters.

In his recent book, "The High Cost of Free Parking," Shoup claims that curbside parking is a valuable resource that cities squander by "renting" for less than market value. The most obvious consequence is the lost revenue. If motorists are willing to pay $20 to park in a lot for a Red Sox game, why shouldn't the city charge the same amount, or at least something closer to the private rate than $1 an hour?

In reality, it makes perfect sense. The city is leaving money on the table by only charging a quarter per quarter hour.

I guess you could argue the point that the city is making up for this by charging parking garages an extra tax, but I don't even know if that's true.

I support this idea, wholeheartedly.

Mr Mayor, the ball's in your court.

Read on: Is parking too cheap? - By Sean Roche, The Boston Globe