The document discusses the failings of conventional parking policy and proposes an alternative "adaptive parking" approach. The main points are:
1. Conventional parking policy assumes each site needs its own parking and sets minimum requirements, but this leads to underused parking, traffic from parking searches, and automobile dependence.
2. On-street parking management with clear rules, enforcement, time-based fees, and data collection is an "unglamorous secret to success" that can overcome fears of on-street chaos.
3. "Adaptive parking" makes parking prices, supply, and demand more responsive to local context by sharing parking resources, pricing for occupancy targets, spending revenue locally, relaxing supply requirements, and improving
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Parking policies for avoiding car dependence (presented at Ecomobility 2 sept 2013)
1. Parking Policies for Avoiding Car Dependence
Paul Barter
http://www.reinventingparking.org/
http://www.adb.org/publications/parking-policy-asian-citiesAuckland, New Zealand
2. Summary
Failings of mainstream parking policy
The unglamorous secret to success
A “map” of reform options
A promising, responsive approach
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
3. Most parking policy is
modelled on the USA’s
conventional suburban
approach:
Assumes parking should be
on-site infrastructure
(like the toilets with a building)
So every site needs “enough”
parking for its own demand
Parking standards (minimums)
The median USA parking requirements for
restaurants. Source Seth Goodman
http://graphingparking.wordpress.com/
Failings of mainstream parking policy
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
4. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Conventional suburban:
Fears on-street parking chaos
(‘spillover’)
Any successful alternative must
transcend this fear!
Assumes on-street parking
management is too hard
Assumes private sector will not
supply enough unless forced to
(a self-fulfilling prophecy)
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
5. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Wasteful parking investments
Much off-street parking
is under-used
even when nearby
on-street parking is full
and chaotic
Parking chaos often
remains
Shenzhen, China
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
6. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Parking search traffic
Saturated on-street parking
causes ‘cruising for parking’
Often 30% or more of
traffic volume
Seoul, Korea
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
7. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Conventional parking
policy is a ‘fertility drug for
cars’ and generator of
traffic
Locks us into or pushes us
towards automobile
dependence
Unjust subsidies and
cross-subsidies
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Auckland, New Zealand
A new, heavily
subsidized parking
structure in Delhi,
India, which remains
under-used despite
continued on-street
parking chaos nearby
8. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Harm to housing
affordability
Obstacle to legalization of
extra-legal settlements
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Near Mexico
City
9. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Decline and blight of old
urban districts
Parking regulations hinder
re-use, redevelopment and
infill
Promotes demolitions for
parking Near the center of Houston, USA (via Google Maps)
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
10. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Conventional approach in
South and Southeast Asia
http://www.adb.org/publications/parking-policy-asian-cities
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
11. Failings of mainstream parking policy
Conventional approach in Latin America
Source: Guía Práctica Estacionamiento y Políticas de Reducción de Congestión en
América Latina (Practical guide to parking and policies to reduce congestion in Latin
America) p.84
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Square
metres of
commercial
space per
required
parking
space
Cities in Brazil,
Mexico and Chile
have high parking
requirements
12. Unglamorous secret to success:
on-street management basics
Clear rules
Build enforcement capacity
Trustworthy time-based fees
Parking data collection capacities
Strengthen parking institutions
Good on-street management opens up
other options and frees us from the trap
of the conventional approach
Dhaka
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Photo by Flickr user gregwake
13. Many cities lack trusted pricing
and lack mechanism for
time-based fees
But crucial for fairness
(pay for what you use)
and as key tool of parking management
Makati, Metro Manila,
The Philippines
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Unglamorous secret to success:
on-street management basics
14. Parking inventories
Simple occupancy surveys
At least for problem districts
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Unglamorous secret to success:
on-street management basics
15. Unglamorous secret to success:
on-street management basics
Enforcement needs to be ‘good enough’:
– Prioritize efforts
– Clear rules and signs
– Better as an administrative, not a law
court matter
– Best NOT by the police!
– Better at local level
– Keep revenue very local
– Better outsourced to private contractors
Good models include: UK, Netherlands, Spain,
Japan(since 2006)
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
16. Unglamorous secret to success:
on-street management basics
Strong on-street parking management:
frees us from the trap of the conventional
suburban approach
expands our parking policy options
But what are the options?
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
17. A “map” of reform options
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
Every site should
have its own
parking
Parking facilities
serve whole
neighbourhoods
Parking is
“infrastructure”
1. conventional
2. parking
management
Parking is a
“real-estate
based service”
3. Responsive
With sub-types distinguished by parking policy goals (especially regarding parking supply)
18. A “map” of reform options
1. Moderate the conventional suburban approach
Same assumptions but a moderated goal: Avoid excessive
wasteful parking supply, not just shortage
For example, King County, Washington, USA: “Right-sizing” of parking requirements
to better match local conditions and actual demand
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
http://www.rightsizeparking.org/
19. A “map” of reform options
2. “Parking management”
Parking is still ‘infrastructure’
but now for whole area
Active management (prices,
eligibility, time-limits, sharing, supply, etc.)
Various goals
Management often favours residents
and retailers
Many cities limit parking
supply in city centres
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
20. A “map” of reform options
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
3. Responsive
Parking is a real-estate based
service (like meeting rooms) serving
each area
Make on-street prices
responsive (occupancy target)
Make off-street supply choices
responsive to context
Involve very local stakeholders
Source: Shoup, D. The High Cost of Free Parking
21. A “map” of reform options
Responsive: Donald Shoup’s proposals
i. Price on-street parking for 85%
occupancy
ii. Use revenue as desired by local
stakeholders
iii. Abolish minimum parking
requirements
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
22. A “map” of reform options
Responsive (de facto) in Japan
Almost no on-street parking
Parking minimums are low
and exempt small buildings
Proof of parking law
In inner areas of Japanese cities, most
parking is commercial and supply and
prices depend primarily on market
conditions in each area
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
23. Adaptive Parking
A variation on, and extension of,
Donald Shoup’s proposals
Nudge policies along these five reform
directions to make your parking system
more responsive to local context
Share! (make most parking
shared or open to the public)
Price! (price to prevent queues
and cruising for parking)
Sweeten! (make
stakeholders happy)
Relax! (about supply)
Choice! (improve options
and ensure competition in
parking)
For more information see
www.reinventingparking.org
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
24. Adaptive Parking
Share! (make most
parking shared or open
to the public)
Foster ‘park-once districts’
Discourage
this
Australia
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
Various cities have incentives for parking with buildings to be open to the public
Shared parking, like shared seating
at food courts, is much more efficient
25. Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
San Francisco has an ambitious
version (SFPark) but many cities do
this to some extent. This is Central
Seattle for example.
Adaptive Parking
Price! (price with the aim of
preventing queues and
cruising for parking)
For example, have an on-street
OCCUPANCY TARGET
If >>85% full THEN ↑ price
If <<85% full THEN ↓ price
Otherwise no change
See http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/parking/paidparking.htm
26. Adaptive Parking Sweeten! (make
stakeholders happy)
For example, spend local parking
revenue very locally
Parking Benefit Districts are one
possible mechanism
Singapore
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
27. Adaptive Parking
Despite high car ownership, Japan has
very low parking requirements and
exempts small buildings
Relax! (about supply)
Many jurisdictions have
abolished parking
requirements, with little
evidence of ill-effects:
For example, England, Berlin,
central parts of San Francisco, New
York, Boston, Portland and Seattle
and city centres in Australia.
http://beta.adb.org/publications/parking-policy-asian-cities
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
28. Adaptive Parking
Parking options
Alternatives to
driving a private car
Counter “my car is
necessary” pleas
Choice! (improve options and
ensure competition in parking)
Tokyo
Ahmedabad
Sydney
Vienna
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
A promising responsive approach
29. Adaptive Parking
The five reforms directions WORK
TOGETHER to make parking
systems more responsive
Share! (make most parking
shared or open to the public)
Price! (price to prevent queues
and cruising for parking)
Sweeten! (make
stakeholders happy)
Relax! (about supply)
Choice! (improve options
and ensure competition)
For more information see
www.reinventingparking.org
A promising responsive approach
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
30. A promising responsive approach
1. Build/improve on-street management basics
(necessary for all parking policy progress!)
2. Adaptive Parking: make parking prices, supply and
demand more responsive to local context and to each other
3. Then many places can also use parking policy for
demand management (where relevant and politically possible,
primarily by constraining supply in transit-rich city centers and sub-centers)
Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking
For more on my parking views see www.reinventingparking.org