Parking pricing and management Tom Rye, Napier University, Edinburgh, UK t.rye@napier.ac.uk

1. Parking pricing and managementTom Rye, Napier University, Edinburgh, UK t.rye@napier.ac.uk

2. Parking policy • Problems – negative impacts • Typical policy development • Policy conflicts • What do local authorities control? • Regulating and enforcing on-street parking • Off-street parking • Effect of parking on economic vitality • Park and ride • Gaining acceptance for parking policy • Some conclusions

3. Structure of seminar • At the end of today’s class you should have an understanding of: • Some definitions • Parking – positive and negative impacts • Typical policy development, and policy conflicts • What do local authorities control? • Regulating and enforcing on-street parking • Off-street parking – types, costs, control, uses • Effect of parking on economic vitality • Park and ride • Gaining public acceptance for parking policy • How to develop parking policy and set up controlled parking zones • Lecture and tutorials to get you working with the material

4. Some definitions On-street Private non-residential (PNR) Pay anddisplay parking meter Public off-street (can be in parking structures) Public off-street

5. Positive impacts of parking policy • Has an impact on mode share • Can support local economic development • Major revenue earner • Improves road safety • Influences car ownership

6. Negative impacts of parking • Effect of on street parking (and parking search) on: • congestion, • road safety • environment • blocking bus lanes and stops; footways and crossings • Off-street: • Construction costs and space used • Surface - €3k/space • Structure – €15-20k/space • Underground - €25k/space upwards • Peak car journeys induced – esp. by PNR

7. Parking management – what is it? • Managing use and amounts of on- or off-street parking to bring about objectives such as: • Safety and pedestrian accessibility • Economic vitality – e.g. turnover of spaces • Reduced local congestion (search traffic) • Reduced visual impact • Revenue raising • Keeping particular user groups happy! • Reduced car use, increased public transport use – reduced general congestion • Achieved through restrictions, rationing and pricing of existing spaces; and controls on new ones

8. Effective parking management – what control is required? • Public authorities might wish to have: • Control of parking spaces • Most European countries municipalities control on-street parking • Wide variety of control of public off-street • No control of existing PNR (except Austria, UK, Sweden (tax)) • Some control of new PNR through building permits • Control of enforcement and related matters • Most countries – police/judiciary have some role • Exceptions – NL, UK? • Thus public management of parking – incomplete at best

9. Some on-street parking prices • Fee per hour (€) (2002) Vienna 0.87 Brussels 0.50 Paris 1.00 – 3.00 Lyon 1.50 – 5.00 Bremen 0.60 – 1.50 Cologne 1.00 – 2.00 Stuttgart 0.20 – 2.00 Munich 2.00 – 2.50 Dublin 1.00 – 1.90 Amsterdam 1.60 - 2.50 Maastricht 1.40 Lisbon 0.50 Madrid 0.60 – 1.20 Barcelona 0.90 – 1.20 Edinburgh 1.20 – 3.00 Central London 7.00

10. Parking’s effect on car and public transport use – 1 • Clear relationship – some examples:

11. Cities/regions where parking management known to have helped increase PT use and/or mode share: Munich Freiburg Zurich York Brighton (UK) Nottingham Edinburgh Strasbourg Empirical studies (Young, 1991, Paris; Topp, 1991, Munich) show mode shift in response to parking management Modelling e.g. Dasgupta et al (1994) shows parking much more effective than PT fares cuts as TDM tool Parking’s effect on car and public transport use - 2

12. Parking’s effect on car and public transport use - 3 • (From COST 342 – latest European research) • Wiener Neustadt – new parking zone caused 25% of employees who had previously parked in area to switch to walking and cycling • Vienna Districts 5-9 – new parking zone caused: • 30% decrease in traffic volumes • 30% of visitors and workers in the area who previously came by car switched mode • 7% visitors switched destination • (COST report does not state when these changes were introduced!)

13. Parking’s effect on car and public transport use - Edinburgh • All have limited on-site parking • % non-car travellers 35% - bank HQ 30% - business park 40% - hospital • 2000-2006 total bus use in Edinburgh up 25%

14. Task • For your town or city, what are the key problems and issues related to parking? • Take 10 minutes working with your neighbour to think about this. • Then we will discuss this, to look for commonalities – and differences.

15. Policy conflicts • Economic vitality • Demand/congestion management • ? • Safety/ accessibility • Revenue raising

16. Typical development of a parking policy • From COST 342 (especially relevant to on-street policy) • Stage 1 – no problems, • Stage 2 – as demand > supply, regulations introduced – NB what increases demand? Commuting; but also increased population as well as car ownership • Stage 3 - demand further increases – time limits introduced to favour short stay shoppers, visitors • Stage 4 – commuters pushed further out – conflict with residents – residents’ zones introduced • Stage 5 – more and more differentiation of parking tariffs • Stage 6 – park and ride. • Stage 7 – inclusion of parking in mobility management

17. Off-street parking • Public off-street vs private off-street (PNR) • Major industry – who controls it? • Prices – should be • < on-street? • Higher per hour for longer stays • Who builds off-street public parking? Who pays for it? How much does it cost? • Off-street parking for residents? • e.g. Lyon

18. Parking and economic vitality • Does more parking lead to a better economy? • Does less parking lead to a worse economy? • What role does parking play in: • Where shoppers choose to shop? • Where companies choose to locate? • Are certain traders more dependent on parking than others?

19. Park and ride 1 • Why build park and ride? • 1970-1990 220% growth in P+R sites and 337% increase in P+R spaces in “Europe” (COST 342) • Successful P+R needs: • Frequent fast (cheap) public transport to centre • Lack of parking in centre • Easy road access to car park • High quality secure facilities • % of demand will come from trips previously made completely by PT • Unofficial P+R?

20. Park and ride 2 • Effects of P+R on traffic (COST 342) • Vienna – P+R takes 12% of city centre-bound traffic • Chester – 20% • Madrid – 20,000 users per day; Barcelona, 12,000; Hanover, 10,000. • Strasbourg – P+R key element in success of tram line. 43% of motorised trips now made by public transport. • Oxford, UK – 3-9% reduction in city-centre bound traffic.

21. Parking standards for new development • = amount of parking provided with new buildings • Catering for demand or controlling demand? • Relating parking provision to public transport accessibility • Catering for specific users e.g. disabled, parents, cyclists • Should there be central government guidance on parking standards? • Response of developers to constraints on parking provision

22. PPG13 Parking standards (UK) • These are maximum standards • Food retail 1 space per 14m2 • Non food retail 1 space per 20m2 • Cinemas and conference facilities 1 space per 5 seats • B1 including offices 1 space per 30m2 = 1 space per 2-3 staff • Higher and further education - 1 space per 2 staff + 1 space per 15 students • Stadia 1 space per 15 seats • Residential (PPG3) max 1.5 spaces/house

23. Parking standards elsewhere • Europe moving towards maximum standards…

24. Parking and mobility management • Mobility management – use of “soft” measures to get more out of transport system • Parking – manages mobility • Mobility management should include: • Parking/park and ride information • Parking management at large employers and at events • Links between parking pricing/payment and public transport pricing/payment

25. Implementing workplace parking management • When parking charging or rationing implemented as part of site-based mobility management, need to take into account: • Need for clear objectives and recognition of a problem • Process of implementing charge • Levels of charge, exemption from them • Enforcement • Employees’ contracts • Administration • Use of charge • Overspill

26. Gaining acceptance for parking policy • Communication of changes and reasons for them • Public know and understand the measures. • Perceived benefit fees and other regulations related to size of problem. • Alternative transport exists to a good standard. • Revenue used fairly and transparently • Parking regulations enforced consistently and fairly, • Fines not excessive and related to seriousness of the offence

27. Conclusions • Parking - key determinant of mode choice • Parking - key feature of urban transport policy • Parking provision - should be controlled and related to accessibility by other modes? • Link between parking and economic vitality – complex and unclear • PNR can be addressed with political will • Controlled zones can bring big local benefits • Park and ride needs careful evaluation

28. Task • Read the summary of the conclusions from COST 342. • Think – ready to discuss: • Are these conclusions relevant to your town and city? • Are there conclusions missing? • How would you go about implementing the recommendations? • What barriers would you face in implementing the recommendations?

29. Task • Work individually. • You are responsible for the parking policy of your own town or city. • For your city/town, you have to develop an outline of a parking strategy. You have 45 minutes to do this. In it, you must consider: • What are the most problematic issues? • What policies will you choose to implement, and why? • What will be the biggest barriers to implementing policy – and how might you try to overcome these? • Are there any problems/issues that you won’t be able to address effectively? • What further information do you need to be able to make effective decisions?