YouTube Transcript:
Parking Laws Are Strangling America | Climate Town

I've been standing in this  Staten Island parking lot 
for fifteen minutes, and two  dudes named Sebastian have 
already tried to sell me painkillers. I said no, but the way this video is going, 
I might just take them up on it. You see, it's not a coincidence  
that this parking lot looks identical to almost  
every other parking lot in America. It's because there's a sneaky little  
law in almost every city in the United States that  
forces private businesses and residences to build way more parking than they actually need. 
And when I say way more parking  than they actually need, 
I mean way more parking than they  actually -- that's a dog -- need! 
There are so many parking spaces in America that we literally can't even count them all. 
The best estimate puts it  at around 1 billion spaces, 
which is four spots for every car in America. And that number of empty spaces is only  
getting larger, because any new  
construction or renovation in almost any city in America is being held  
hostage by a bunch of archaic laws from the  
1950s called Minimum Parking Requirements. Which is a big reason why every city in America 
is starting to look like this. [otamatone plays "My Heart Will Go On"] 
And look, I'm aware you didn't have "watch a punishingly long video about parking" 
on your agenda today, but what  parking law lacks in excitement, 
it makes up for in being so  blunt force head trauma stupid 
that once you learn about it, you  won't be able to unsee the damage 
the parked car has done to the land of the free. And you know, if I'm doing a video  
about cars and parking, I'm calling in my guy Jason  
from the YouTube channel Not Just Bikes. [Jason] Oh hey, Rollie. Did you know  
that when they were making the latest SimCity game,  
they plan to accurately model real American cities, but when they  
realized how much space is devoted to parking and how ugly that would  
make the game look, they decided to make the parking lots way  
smaller than they are in real life? Wow, I did not know that until I read it in 
the script for this video. Thanks, Jason from Not Just Bikes. 
He's going to help me get through this hellscape that is parking in America,  
but maybe there's actually something we can do to fix it, maybe? 
Hi, I'm Rollie Williams, a  guy with pretty good balance, 
a climate science and policy degree, and right now I'm about a mile away from three of  
Staten Island's finest eyebrow  
threading salons, and this is a video about how parking laws are strangling America. 
Welcome to Climate Town. [funky intro music] 
Okay, parking was a very different  game before every man, woman, 
and child in the United States  got behind the wheel of a car. 
You remember this kid? [laughs] We do love to drive. 
But back in the 1900s, there  were like 80 cars on the road, 
and they were all owned by rich dicks. They just stopped driving  
whenever they felt like it, and that was the parking spot. 
As for the poors, well, they'd  have to go around, as God intended. 
Then in 1913, Henry Ford  smashed the subscribe button 
on the assembly line and by the  1920s, cars were f*cking everywhere. 
And these aren't modern cars,  these are the first draft 
of a mass-produced car being  driven on streets with very few 
established traffic laws by a  bunch of drunken businessmen 
with a maximum of seven years driving experience. Understandably, it was a full nightmare  
for cities, and nothing made  
that more obvious than the thousands of cars parked all William-nilliam on the sides of  
streets and sidewalks. Fun fact, the term  
"parking" itself used to refer to streets having a delightful grassy park on the side. 
These parks were the street's  parking, like a house's siding, 
or a jacket's lining, or a  river's white water rafting. 
See, parking used to refer  to grass, and then people 
parked their cars there, and then Look at me, look at me, I'm the parking now. 
[Jason] Now, obviously,  having cars piled everywhere 
was bad for business, and  American cities were desperate 
to find some place to put a  never-ending stream of automobiles. 
So, they called in the big  daddy William Phelps Eno, 
the father of traffic  safety. He's the guy credited 
for inventing such traffic classics as stop signs, traffic circles, and even pedestrian islands. 
So, you can thank him when  you're standing in the middle 
of an eight-lane stroad safely  protected from high-speed traffic 
by a small concrete curb. So  in the 1920s, Eno was tasked 
with solving the parking crisis  in cities, and he proposed 
a pretty practical solution: park and rides. See, William Phelps Eno came to the  
conclusion that devoting the most valuable real  
estate in the world to the parked car was an absolutely insane thing to do. 
Why on Earth should wealthy  car owners be entitled to 
unlimited free use of taxpayer-subsidized land to store their personal property? 
A car parked downtown clogs  delivery lanes, it congests traffic, 
it impedes pedestrians. So obviously, no to that. It made way more sense to have  
designated parking lots on the outskirts of town,  
and then a robust system of public transportation to ferry people into city centers. 
[vintage video voiceover] Many  city planners believe that 
really good public transportation is the only way to keep our cities from being choked  
to death by the automobile. It seems like a pretty great plan,  
as long as the auto industry doesn't completely take over the American psyche 
while colluding with the oil  industry to have front companies 
buy up bus and streetcar  lines only to shut them down 
to clear the road for cars, so that cars become the only method of transportation. 
And as all of that did happen, parking went from a regular tight bummer to a f*cking crisis. 
In 1947, New York City Police  Commissioner Arthur Wallander stated, 
This was the police commissioner  of a city that just had 
a race riot, saying that parking  was one of their core problems. 
Automobiles had America by the  balls, and a whole generation 
of politicians and public  officials decided to make 
parking and cars their whole deal. [vintage video voiceover] County,  
city, and state tax money is matching federal funds to pave the way. 
[another voice] Pittsburgh is  digging a four-million-dollar hole 
in the heart of the city to provide underground storage for thousands of cars. 
[another voice] A forward-looking  city is conscious of the automobile; 
it is responding by providing adequate, well-located parking facilities. 
But it turns out all this  incentivizing car ownership 
had the unintended consequence  of more people buying cars. 
As millions of new cars were  added to the streets every year, 
cities quickly realized that their  current system was not going to work. 
In small towns and suburbs,  the situation is the same: 
all snarled up. Every day it gets worse shopping. It's not just a matter of  
getting through the congestion; it's impossible to find a place to park. 
[distorted, slowed repetition] It's  impossible to find a place to park. 
And to quote Michael Caine, "In their desperation, 
they turned to a man they  didn't fully understand." 
Is that pretty close? [off camera] Uhhh, yeah, the accent i-is... 
I told you to blow the bloody doors off! [off camera] ...yeah, uhh.. 
That man was Mr. Minimum Parking Law. See, instead of cities  
building all the parking spaces, they could just make the private sector do it. 
And at first, it seemed like a  pretty slick little solution. 
See, American entrepreneurs,  developers, and small business owners 
want to build shops, or residences,  or whatever an amazing city 
superstore is, so why not have them  each tack on parking onto their 
establishments and solve the  parking crisis once and for all? 
Cities would still have to manage their meters and on-street parking,  
but if we could make parking lots the responsibility of store owners and developers, 
surely we can fix this  problem with no repercussions. 
[Jason] These minimum parking  requirements seemed like 
the perfect cure for the parking problem, and they spread through America like 
[in Canadian accent] the smoke  from Canadian wildfires, eh. 
In 1946, about 17% of cities  had parking requirements 
in their zoning ordinances, but by 1951, that number had shot up to around 71% of cities. 
And if you're dyslexic, that  might not seem like a big deal, 
but trust me, it's a huge jump. And if you find yourself wondering  
exactly how many parking spots an aspiring malt shop owner has to  
build before they're allowed to open their business,  
you're asking the right questions. What were minimum parking requirements based on? 
Let's go to the board. [bell dings] Oh no,  
bullsh*t!?!? You gotta be joking me! You gotta be kidding me! I'm ruined! 
I thought it was based on something good. I need a win, baby, I need one win! 
Oh noooo-- like that, yeah. The minimum parking requirements  
that each city readily adopted left the actual number of spaces  
up to city planners and town committees.  
The typical instruction they were given was to have enough parking for maximum  
possible building usage rather than normal usage,  
which would ensure that small businesses and private developers would be forced to  
buy and pave land that would go to  
waste anytime the maximum conceivable number of people were not at the store. 
And how did the committees  determine the maximum occupancy? 
Well, they had two main methods:  number one, they'd guess, 
but number two, they'd ask a neighboring town, who almost certainly also just guessed. 
Not surprisingly, this led  to a lot of inconsistent 
and nonsensical minimum parking laws. Like Detroit's one space per  
hundred square feet in a beauty shop, but one space per 150 square feet in a courthouse, 
but also one space per two  hundred square feet in a bank. 
There were also parking  laws based on physical items 
in the establishment, like one  space per pool table in a pool hall 
or one space per tumbling  apparatus at a tumbling center. 
Some cities required a minimum of  one space per 10 nuns in a nunnery 
and an absolutely diabolical one  parking space for each employee 
and employer at a bowling alley,  plus five spaces for each lane. 
[vintage video voiceover] Everyone  can enjoy the rich satisfactions 
that bowling offers. 10 big  fat pins just asking for it. 
I've been bowling with four  people before. It sucks, okay? 
No one remembers whose turn it  is, everyone uses nicknames, 
and you're like, "Whose ball, man?  Is that Corey? Is that Grace?" 
It's terrible. The only one they  got right was adult entertainment. 
You want that nice and spaced out;  there's no carpooling involved. 
It was a cornucopia of guesswork,  brimming at the wicker with 
speculation and conjecture, and no  one was even keeping track of it. 
The Planning Advisory Service  even admits, "the underlying 
assumptions used in drafting  parking requirements are unknown." 
[Jason] Believe it or not, this  wasn't some kind of shadowy cabal 
of pro-parking lobbyists;  it was city council members 
with approximately zero parking  expertise taking their best shot 
at ensuring that their city  would always have enough parking. 
Eventually, a group called the  Institute of Transportation Engineers 
decided to try to standardize  the minimum parking numbers 
with some cold, hard science. Now, the ITE was no stranger to the car game. 
They formed in 1930 with a goal of reducing the absolute bonanza of car crashes and traffic that 
the United States was experiencing,  and they were ready to bring 
their engineering and science  to the minimum parking game. 
[Rollie] Unfortunately, the  Institute of Transportation Engineers 
soon discovered that minimum  parking requirements were 
a bunch of bullsh*t, and you just  know I got some fun examples, 
so let's get right into it. To  the edit ba--to the edit bay! 
Now, I did earmark my entire  props budget on getting 
my eyebrows threaded later on, so  I couldn't afford an actual copy 
of ITE's Parking Generation Manual,  but they will graciously sell it 
to city planners for the rock-bottom  price of $495 for non-members, 
and the screaming deal of $345 for members. And at that price,  
you'd be an idiot not to buy one. I mean, this thing must have so much  
good parking science in it. Man, I really want one.  
Curse these big, bushy eyebrows! Luckily, a couple of completely  
anonymous friends sent me some absolutely gorgeous  
PDFs of actual graphs from "Parking Generation", so let's take a look here. 
The ITE surveyed a series  of fast-food restaurants, 
measured the square footage of the restaurants, and found that each one thousand square  
feet of restaurant needed exactly 3.55 or  
15.92 parking spaces, or somewhere in the middle, or possibly some  
other number completely. Yeah, here's the graph. 
Here's the trend line and  the R-squared value is .038. 
And if we go back in time to  when you were in math class, 
you might remember that an  R-squared value of .038 means 
the square footage of the  store is about 3.8% responsible 
for why that particular number  of cars is parked there. 
The remaining 96% of the  responsibility is probably 
something else entirely. The ITE  acknowledges that square footage 
is a horsesh*t way to  determine parking requirements. 
It's simply not a useful variable.  They even admit it right on the graph: 
Oh my god, he admit it! And "used carefully" is  
doing some heavy lifting here. 
It should say, "Caution, do not use this," but you can't really sell a book that says 
"all the information in this  book is bullsh*t and we know it", 
so "used carefully" was going to have to suffice. And despite knowing that their information was  
useless as a predictive tool, they had the audacity to  
include the exact precise average of 9.95 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, 
which is a lot like saying, "We have no idea when  
humans first gained consciousness, but we think it might have been at 9:51 AM 
on a Thursday in the year 300,006 BC." But maybe city planners did use caution? 
I mean, obviously, they didn't  just take the graph at face value, 
round up, and then force a  ton of fast-food restaurants 
all around the country to build 10 parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of restaurant, right? 
And it just goes on like that. An analysis of over a hundred  
other ITE parking graphs revealed that about half of them are based  
on just four or fewer data points, and about a quarter were based  
on a single data point. Let's take a look at the ITE  
graph of sporting goods stores, like Dick's Sporting Goods. 
Remember when "Dick" was a  guy's name and that was it? 
Dick's Sporting Goods remembers. Here's the graph of parked  
vehicles versus number of employees. The line of best fit should be here, not here. 
And if we're going by just  the information we're given 
in this graph of number of  employees versus parked vehicles, 
as the number of employees goes  up, parked vehicles goes down, 
which means according to their  own data, with enough employees, 
you'd have a negative number of parked cars. Which means a logical interpretation of this graph 
is that you could solve parking  everywhere forever by having 
sufficiently overstaffed sporting  goods stores in every city in America. 
And since that's not really  something the ITE can sell, 
they made up this line, which  I think is what you get when 
you add up all the parked  vehicles and you divide by 
all the employees, which is, uh,  
not how f*cking statistics works! [Jason] So effectively, American  
city governments tried to get everyone to build  
the maximum possible amount of parking using the time-tested method of pulling  
data out of their *sses. And those non-scientific  
guesses became the bedrock of US parking legislation. 
But when the Institute of Transportation Engineers tried to back up those guesses with science, 
they poked and prodded the  numbers until they could prove 
that we needed maximum parking everywhere, which was then turned into  
literal laws requiring it. I did not believe that this could possibly be true 
the first time I read about it. It's just that stupid to  
think that we overbuilt parking basically everywhere because of feelings. 
And overbuild parking we did.  Virtually every municipality 
in the United States has had 75 years to develop under the toxic influence of  
minimum parking requirements, and you can see the problem from space. 
Not space in the classic sense, but high up. [vintage video voiceover] The automobile, 
that no one would think of giving up, is doing this to our central  
cities. In Los Angeles, nearly two-thirds of the  
downtown area is taken up by the automobile. Parking lots, garages, streets, and freeways. 
And town after town has  expanded and sprawled under 
the metastasizing drum beat  of parking over people, 
and it's easy to fixate on the  parking part of parking space, 
but the space is the real killer. You build a restaurant in Houston,  
another restaurant's worth of land is permanently flattened. 
You build Dodger Stadium in  Los Angeles, an additional ten 
Dodger Stadiums' worth of  perfectly good land is sacrificed 
for parking. Minimum parking guarantees sprawl, and it's easy to see why virtually every  
city in the United States  
keeps developing into the same stretches of low-to-the-ground boxy structures with minimal 
multi-story buildings and lots  of blank spaces for parking. 
We get a lot of fast food  restaurants, chain stores, 
and single-family housing,  because they can accommodate 
parking laws by simply paving  part of the surrounding property. 
The other kind of structures we keep making are expensive larger buildings,  
like luxury apartments, office buildings, hotels, that kind of thing. 
The parking requirement is  costly. Developers have to build 
underground garages or huge parking  structures, or buy the building 
across the street and knock it down for parking. [vintage video voiceover] Increasingly,  
we are seeing large-scale demolition as the  
first step in building modern cities. Here, for example is the tallest  
building in America to be demolished to  
start over. Surely we shall not demolish all our large buildings, but the lesson is clear: 
we live in a day of bold planning. They then pass that cost along  
to their tenants in the form of rent. Apartment developer Peyton Chung calls this the 
"Valley of High Parking  Requirements," with these two kinds 
of developments on the sides and  a missing middle of mixed-use, 
mid-rise buildings and  low-cost apartments that can't 
afford to buy sufficient land  and build the parking minimums. 
[Jason] And to be crystal clear  here, parking is absolutely not free. 
That's like saying the bathroom  is free in your hotel room. 
It may not be a line item on the  bill, but you're paying for it 
whether you use the bathroom or  just piss off of the balcony. 
When a store or developer is forced  to buy twice the necessary land, 
that extra cost is just rolled  into everything you buy. 
And the worst part is, if you don't  drive, you're still paying for 
that disgusting sea of  asphalt that you need to cross 
every time you go shopping.  Plus, your city needs to extend 
every road, every pipe, and  every wire that extra distance 
for a bunch of parking spots that  stay empty almost all of the time. 
And that cost is f*ckin' high.  Each individual parking space costs 
between eight thousand and  eighty thousand dollars, 
depending on if it's just a  paved surface or a multi-level 
or subterranean parking structure.  The Walt Disney Concert Hall 
cost 274 million dollars to build,  and a hundred million dollars 
of that was building the  underground parking structure. 
That's not free; that's a hundred million dollars, and you bet your *ss concertgoers are paying 
for that in their ticket prices. The godfather of parking reform, Donald Shoup, 
whose actual website is shoupdog.com, is the man. We talked to him for this video; he's awesome. 
And he estimates that the cost  of building a mall increases by 
sixty-seven percent if you  build above-ground parking 
and by ninety-three percent if  you build below-ground parking. 
It's also almost gotten to the  point where you can't even build 
affordable housing. A Seattle-based study by the Sightline Institute found that  
the mandated parking increased the monthly  
rent by $246. Well, can I just have my $246 a month back and not own a  
car? I don't think so, Jack, because you live in America,  
the land of the free market, unless we're talking about parking,  
which is a cost the government forces its citizens to collectivize,  
for the good of the motherland. [rousing Soviet anthem] 
And not to put too fine a point on it, 
but making parking free is a  textbook subsidy to car owners. 
Every time the government forces  a business to build parking, 
that is the government  incentivizing car ownership, 
and people who don't own cars  are getting absolutely f*cked 
every time they have to pay extra for toothbrushes or rent to fulfill a subsidy that they  
do not benefit from. Hoooooo, almost died. 
And since wealthier people  are more likely to own cars, 
this is a subsidy that the  poor tends to pay to the rich. 
It's also a great example  of big government overreach 
that continuously reinforces itself. [Jason] The worst part is that  
these parking requirements have and are actively preventing  
downtowns from being successful. Older buildings were  
grandfathered in, but if you wanted to renovate one of these downtown buildings for 
your avocado toast bar, you'd need  to buy the building next to it 
and bulldoze it in order to  meet the off-street parking 
requirements. This is why downtown  in my hometown looks like this. 
This is insane, right? Like, legitimately insane. Literally bulldozing historic  
buildings to meet arbitrary parking minimums, and this is still  
preventing people from opening businesses in traditional  
walkable downtowns to this day. In the case of a bank in Sandpoint,  
Idaho, they were required to buy up nearby buildings,  
evict the tenants, and demolish everything to make enough surface  
parking spaces to legally operate. In Dallas, Texas, a couple  
wanted to open a hotel in the ailing downtown area,  
but fulfilling the parking requirement would have cost them two to three million dollars. 
In Fayetteville, Arkansas, a  whole gaggle of downtown buildings 
sat vacant for decades because  minimum parking laws made it too 
expensive for small business owners to move in. Parking laws are a boot,  
but not like a fun, cute boot that you might wear to the movies, 
they're a boot on the neck  of cities and towns that have 
fallen on hard times and are just  trying to revitalize themselves. 
They have the effect of  driving would-be city dwellers 
to just say f*ck it and sprawl  out to the burbs, where the 
cost of buying land for parking  isn't prohibitively expensive. 
And we haven't even talked about  the climate implications yet. 
My God, urban sprawl and minimum parking laws are crazy destructive to the environment. 
First of all, parking lots require  a lot of asphalt and concrete. 
Those two substances are responsible for, like, ten percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. 
When you build parking lots,  you have to displace something, 
and historically that something has been wildlife, including paving over tens of millions of  
acres of American wetlands and hundreds of millions of  
acres of other ecosystems. Parking also contributes  
to the urban heat island effect, which honestly should be its own video, 
but the TL;DR is that it ain't  great for climate change. 
And speaking of urban areas, all that pavement prevents water from absorbing,  
which leads to floods and exacerbates the effects  
of storms and hurricanes. It also pollutes the  
ever-living sh*t out of our water, when dirty, dusty, heavy metal and  
pesticide-infused water runoff sluices off the pavement  
and into the lakes and rivers. And of course, parking creates more parking by 
pushing buildings further and  further apart, making a short, 
tolerable walk into one that  sucks and takes forever, 
and also about a million  more environmental problems 
that I don't want to get into  because we're already however long 
this video is, and honestly, I  can't believe you're still watching. 
But thank you so much for  sticking with it, because oooh, 
we finally got into the "what we can do about it" section of the video,  
and I'm extremely happy to say, this part is actually very promising. 
Now, you know my guy Donald  Shoup has been calling out 
bad parking laws for decades,  and it seems like people are 
finally starting to listen to him. Remember those vacant  
buildings in Fayetteville, Arkansas? Well, in 2015, Fayetteville became quite possibly 
the first city in the country  to completely eliminate 
commercial parking minimums  and let businesses decide 
how much parking they need. Really,  they were probably the first, 
but I don't want to get sued by the residents of New Bicklesburg, Virginia, or whatever small town 
thinks they were the first,  so I used the legal term 
"quite possibly" to protect myself.  Try it out for yourself sometime. 
And you guessed it, without minimum  parking laws in Fayetteville, 
a new restaurant opened up in a building that had been vacant for twenty years. 
Another restaurant opened  up in a historic building 
that would have required  forty-one new parking spaces. 
And once other towns heard  about this, they followed suit. 
I'm talking about the King  of Wings, the Drake of Lakes, 
just don't slip in Niagara  Faaaaalls, Buffalo, New York! 
Coming in at 120,000 people, it's the Widow of the Whalers, Hartford, Connecticuuuuut! 
I really have to stop, because here's a map of all the cities and towns that have changed 
their minimum parking requirements in some way. 
That would take hours, days  if I really got into it, 
but don't think I won't do  it. You think I won't do it? 
Coming in at six foot eight,  450 million tons of raw steel, 
it's Pittsburgh, Pennsylvaaaaaaan-- Now, I will say that while there  
are a ton of great success stories, getting rid of parking minimums is just one step 
in a long road of reforming our  ridiculously car-centric culture. 
It's going to take a lot of  time to deworm our collective 
car brains, and that means  some of the steps are probably 
going to feel a little anticlimactic. Which is a great word -- "anticlimactic". 
Firm. Sounds like what it means. Like brussels sprouts, that's exactly  
what those little f*ckers are. [Jason] So clearly, some  
cities are finally fixing their sh*t. If you're interested in learning more,  
I can strongly recommend Strong Towns, a non-profit  
organization that is committed to undoing the car-centric  
mistakes of the twentieth century and repairing North American cities. 
They've done a lot of great work on making cities more resilient and financially sustainable, 
and ditching parking minimums  is a big part of their MO. 
They actually made a great video about  Fayetteville here on the YouTubes. 
And on their website, they even have guides on best practices for eliminating parking minimums. 
Our friends at Climate Change  Makers have put together 
a playbook that draws on the  many successful strategies 
that other towns and cities have used to delete minimum parking requirements from their zoning. 
And if you want to be a part  of getting your city to delete 
some of this weird, archaic  government-overreach-meets-pseudoscience 
legislation that is currently  turning your prime city 
real estate into undevelopable  land, you can do that 
by clicking the link in the description. Honestly, it'll take you five minutes. 
You know what, don't even  do it. Just click the link 
and see what there is to  see, and then if you're there 
and you feel like doing it, more power to you. And if you really want to get crazy with it, 
you can drop by your local city council meeting where you can be the voice of reason in a room 
full of people who would really  like to speak to your manager. 
But above all, whatever you  do, just consider getting 
more educated about the climate crisis, because 
if we're not careful, we might  find ourselves in the middle of a 
copyrighted song about paving  paradise and putting up a parking lot, 
which I would love to play for you underneath this sort of closing monologue right here,  
but obviously I can't. So I am singing it in my head right now. 
Man, that's a great song. Wish  I could play it right now. 
Okay, you made it to the end.  Thank you so much for watching, 
and thank you to Jason from Not Just Bikes. Go ahead and like and subscribe,  
and even leave a comment about what a nice guy Jason is. 
Now, I do have a special, super  secret announcement coming up 
at the end of this video, but first,  uh... ad! Oh yeah, here it is. 
Okay, let's just say you  spent the last nine hours on 
blazing hot asphalt in the  sun. You're sweating bullets, 
but suddenly you're struck  by a fierce desire to learn. 
In the past, you would have been absolutely hosed, but not anymore, thanks to our sponsor, Brilliant. 
Brilliant offers thousands of  lessons in a hot little app 
you can access from anywhere.  And to answer your question, yes, 
even wherever you are right  now, you can dive brain-first 
into the bright blue waters of  advanced math, or programming, 
or statistics. And honestly,  they got a ton of stuff on there, 
and they add new lessons every month, which seems like overkill to me, but it's their company. 
I go straight for the data science lessons; they come in really handy  
when some flim-flam artist is trying to slide some funky numbers past me. 
And to make it even better,  we got a special link for you 
that gives you a thirty-day  free trial to Brilliant, 
and the first two hundred  subscribers get twenty percent off. 
Am I reading that right?  Come on, Brilliant, come on. 
And that's the end of the ad.  Thanks for sticking around this far. 
Feel free to like and subscribe  to Climate Town if you like. 
If you really want to help us  out, you can join our Patreon page 
where you get behind-the-scenes  content, bonus features, cut tape, 
you know, all the stuff that  wasn't good enough to be free. 
We also have a newsletter you can  sign up for in the description. 
That's all the extra research  and the interesting tidbits 
and stuff that didn't make the final draft. 
And if you're thinking, "I  can't believe you cut stuff, 
this video is long as hell,"  we did cut stuff, okay? 
We did a lot of research, we  read three books on this subject, 
and talked to like four experts.  We got a lot of extra stuff, 
and you can find that extra  stuff in the newsletter. 
And finally, the after-the-credits  Marvel movie secret scene. 
I'm starting a podcast. "Oh,  whaaat? A guy with a podcast?" 
yeah, everybody else has one. I've got one too. It's called "The Climate Denier's Playbook." 
You can get it on Spotify, Stitcher, Pocket, whatever you get your podcasts on. 
I'm co-hosting it with my friend Nicole Conlon, who is a writer on The Daily Show and also 
one of the writers here at Climate Town. Every episode, we look at a different piece 
of climate disinformation or misinformation. We look at the myth and where it came from, 
who benefits from it, and how  you can spot it in the wild. 
It's a lot of fun, okay? I think  you're really gonna like it. 
For real. But seriously,  for real, it's really fun. 
So you can check it out, find it  in the description of the video. 
That wa--that was bad. Finally,  rhank you very much to Donald Shoup 
and Henry Grabar, two consummate  experts in parking policy 
and two people who were incredibly  helpful on making this episode. 
We got to talk to Donald Shoup  a couple of times; he's awesome. 
I got their bios and their  websites in the description. 
Check them out, buy their books, follow them, they're very interesting and smart people. 
Alright, that's actually the  end. Thanks for watching. 
Now, if you don't mind, I have an appointment to get my eyebrows threaded for real. So, bye! 
I have not tried marijuana, I  have never used it at any time. 
[outro music]