rethinking parking

Rethinking Parking

Paul Barter http://www.reinventingparking.org/

http://www.adb.org/publications/parking-policy-asian-cities

http://www.reinventingparking.org/










Is parking like toilets?

Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking What is parking?

Infrastructure needed on every site

Is parking like the local streets?


Infrastructure serving multiple sites within each local area

Is parking like restaurants?


A real-estate service serving an area

Photo: Matthew Roth

Conventional approach

Worldwide, cities model parking efforts on the USA’s conventional suburban approach:

Parking is on-site infrastructure

Every site needs enough parking for its own demand

(Like toilets with buildings)

Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking

Source Seth Goodman http://graphingparking.wordpress.com/ 2013/02/06/parking-requirements-for-restaurants/

Do high parking norms help?

http://graphingparking.wordpress.com/2013/02/06/parking-requirements-for-restaurants/









Conventional approach efforts in South and Southeast Asia



The conventional approach in Asia









Increasing off-street supply is not as useful as you may think

It is common for off-street parking to be under-used

even when nearby on-street parking is chaotic

ESPECIALLY when on-street parking is chaotic

Shenzhen, China

Paul Barter, Reinventing Parking Do high parking norms help?

Dhaka

Indonesia



Daoli district,

Harbin, China

Photos from Nelson\Nygaard and ITDP’s study



No amount of off-street parking will magically attract vehicles if it is easier and cheaper to park in the streets

Dhaka


Only on-street management can solve on-street problems

Efficient pricing increases perceived capacity of on-street parking How? Mostly NOT by shifts to public transport! Primarily by nudging long-duration parking away from busiest places


Makati, Metro Manila

On-street management helps with off-street supply too

Improves willingness to pay for off-street parking


Seoul, Korea

1. Obstruction

Usual lesson taken?

Remove parking from streets

More off-street parking


THREE ways parking can cause congestion

Palembang, Indonesia


2. Parking search traffic

FULL on-street parking causes ‘cruising for parking’, double parking, and waiting

Even if the parking itself is orderly and no obstruction

Seoul, Korea




3. Traffic generation

In dense cities, parking supply efforts can quickly create more parking than surrounding road network can cope with



Bangkok


High parking minimums are a ‘fertility drug for cars’

Auckland, New Zealand


High parking minimums are an obstacle to transit-oriented development


High parking minimums harm housing affordability

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia


High parking minimums (and government-built parking) involve regressive subsidies and unjust cross-subsidies towards motorists A new, heavily subsidized

parking structure in Delhi


Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia


High (and rigid) parking norms hasten blight of old urban districts

Near the center of Houston, USA (via Google Maps)


A “map” of reform options


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)

So what else can we do?

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


http://www.rightsizeparking.org/


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 So what else can we do?

Conventional approach works badly in old areas

Initially tried building public parking facilities

Found they still had no choice but to manage on-street more vigorously

Prompts the “parking management” MINDSET

Parking is infrastructure (like streets and bus stops)

Mostly planned district by district, not site by site


Inner cities in the West (especially Europe)


‘Parking management’

Many tools

Various goals

Manages conflict

Tools: pricing, restricted eligibility, time-limits, design, sharing, public parking not private, parking taxes, supply adjustments


Inner cities in the West


City Centre parking supply restriction

To limit traffic

And for public realm improvements

See also Seoul in Korea


Nyhavn in Copenhagen – before and after 1980

Source: Kristian Skovbakke Villadsen, May 2012

Inner cities in the West



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


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


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


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


Adaptive Parking

Share! (make most parking shared or open to the public)

Foster ‘park-once districts’ Discourage

this

Australia


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



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


Adaptive Parking Sweeten! (make stakeholders happy)

For example, spend local parking revenue very locally

Parking Benefit Districts are one possible mechanism

Singapore


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









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


A “map” of reform options


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





rethinking parking

Automotive

parking management parking

parking parking facilities

ways parking

double parking

neighbourhoods parking

duration parking

high parking norms

reinventing parking