[lhc-]

But the article doesn't argue for NO parking lots; it argues that FREE parking lots are the issue. The stores could stay open with paid parking, and could lower costs for non-drivers because they no longer needed to subsidize that free parking by charging everyone more.

[ars]

Any store that tried to make people pay for parking would go out of business equally as fast as one without parking. (i.e. in some places that would fly, in most it would not.)

Your store or entertainment or whatever better be something absolutely unique and special for me to be willing to pay for parking.

The reasons cities require stores to build free parking is otherwise people park in residential areas and annoy the residents with extra traffic.

[tertius]

"NO parking lots" is, in this case, analogous to "NO paying for parking lots."