The i
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 66

Insert the title of your presentation here PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 97 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

The i mpact of parking measures and policies – what is the evidence base?. Insert the title of your presentation here. Presented by Name Here Job Title - Date. Presented by Derek Palmer Head of Sustainable Transport Planning – May 2013. Table of contents.

Download Presentation

Insert the title of your presentation here

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Insert the title of your presentation here

The impact of parking measures and policies – what is the evidence base?

Insert the title of your presentation here

Presented by Name HereJob Title - Date

Presented by Derek PalmerHead of Sustainable Transport Planning – May 2013


Table of contents

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 2


Table of contents1

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 3


Who am i

Who am I?

Derek Palmer

  • Head of Sustainable Transport Planning at TRL

  • Degrees in economics from Liverpool and Birmingham Universities

  • Qualified transport planner and project manager

  • Fellow of the Chartered Institution of Highways & Transportation

  • Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport


Table of contents2

Table of contents

Impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of parking restraint measures upon local economies

8

Results from recent studies

Page 5


Aim of dft project

Aim of DfT project

  • To support DfT’s analytical and modelling capability to improve its understanding of how economic activity is affected by transport investment and interventions such as parking

  • Policies and measures considered included:

    • Pricing (levels, structure and relationship with characteristics of vehicle or user)

    • Changes in the supply and location of on-street and off street parking

    • Park and Ride (P&R)

    • Workplace Parking Levy (WPL)

    • Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs)

    • Illegal and legal parking

    • Controls on parking provision in new developments

    • Parking standards in new residential developments

    • Workplace Travel Plans

    • Congestion Charge and parking

Page 6


M ain area of interest for dft

Main area of interest for DfT

  • Impact of parking policy upon the following factors:

    • Reducing traffic flows and congestion

    • Reducing carbon emissions (CO2)

    • Encouraging use of sustainable transport

    • Improving urban design

    • Enhancing business activity and town centre viability

    • Improving landscapes and townscapes

    • Event planning

    • Role of parking technology

Page 7


Insert the title of your presentation here

Page 8


T ypology of policy instruments

Typology of policy instruments

Page 9


Transport p olicy context at time of project 1

Transport policy context at time of project - 1

  • Support national economic competitiveness and growth, by delivering reliable and efficient transport networks

  • Reduce transport’s emissions of CO2and other greenhouse gases, with the desired outcome of tackling climate change

  • Contribute to better safety, security and health and longer life expectancy by reducing the risk of death, injury or illness arising from transport, and by promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health

  • Promote greater equality of opportunity for all citizens, with the desired outcome of achieving a fairer society

  • Improve quality of life for transport users and non-transport users, and to promote a healthy natural environment

Page 10


Transport policy context at time of project 2

Transport policy context at time of project - 2

Future of Transport White Paper 2004 set out long-term strategy for a modern, efficient and sustainable transport system supported by sustained high levels of investment over 15 years

Effective management of the road network is a key part of this

Traffic Management Act 2004 imposes duty on local authorities to manage their network to reduce congestion & disruption & appoint a traffic manager. It also provides scope to take over the enforcement of parking offences from the police

Parking policies need to be integral to a local authority’s transport strategy

Full Guidance on Local Transport Plans 2004 says local authorities should aim at tackling congestion and changing travel behaviour which could include restricting and/or charging for car parking

Page 11


Transport policy context at time of project 3

Transport policy context at time of project - 3

All local authorities need to develop a strategy for on- and off-street parking linked to local objectives and circumstances

LA’s need Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to put it in place and appropriate traffic signs to show what the restrictions mean

Parking strategy must take account of planning policies & transport powers

Local authorities are responsible for managing all on-street & some off-street parking, either directly or indirectly

Before 1991, police & traffic wardens were responsible for enforcement & income from Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) went to the Exchequer

Road Traffic Act 1991 Act made it mandatory for London Boroughs but optional for other local authorities to take on the civil enforcement of non-endorsable parking contraventions

Page 12


Local authorities with cpe powers

Local Authorities with CPE powers

Page 13


London s zones

London’s zones

Page 14


Methodology for dft project

Methodology for DfT project

  • Review of papers from peer-reviewed journals, and other sources (e.g. Guidance) using TRL KnowledgeBase (175 papers)

  • Coverage of UK and overseas research

  • Consideration of research in progress

  • Evaluation of quality of research

  • Consideration of the utility of the findings for the DfT

Page 15


Table of contents3

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 16


Parking

Parking

  • The infrastructure provided for the storage of vehicles whether on or off-street

  • Parking as an activity forming part of the overall process of car travel

    In the DfT study TRL reviewed research that covers both aspects.

Page 17


Research information sources

Research information sources

  • Cross sectional – comparing travel responses of different individuals or groups at a single point in time to make inferences about behaviour

  • Time-series – using direct observations of such behaviour over a period of time

Page 18


Parking issues

Parking issues

  • Parking supply (how much parking is provided in an area)

  • Parking prices (whether users are charged directly for parking, and the price structure used)

  • Travel patterns (the amount of vehicle traffic generated and use of alternative modes)

Page 19


R oles for parking management policy

Roles for parking management policy

  • To meet specific parking system objectives (e.g. balancing supply and demand, generating revenues to cover costs etc)

  • To meet other policy area objectives (e.g. traffic management goals, accessibility for business and shoppers etc)

Page 20


Parking management measures

Parking management measures

  • Changing the supply of parking spaces

  • Changing the level or structure of parking charges

  • Motorists can respond by:

    • Changing the location of where they park

    • Changing the start time for the trip

    • Changing their destination

    • Changing the mode used

    • Abandoning the trip

Page 21


Table of contents4

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 22


Destination parking locations

Destination parking - locations

  • General town centres (including public/private car parks, P&R, controlled (paid) on-street parking, plus free parking)

  • Workplaces - Private Non-Residential (PNR) parking

  • Railway stations

  • Shopping centres

  • Stadia

  • Airports

  • Etc

Page 23


Ppg 13 transport 1

PPG 13: Transport - 1

  • Objectives of PPG13 were to integrate planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local level to:

    • promote sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight

    • promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling

    • reduce the need to travel, especially by car

Page 24


Ppg 13 transport 2

PPG 13: Transport - 2

Local authorities should “Use parking policies, alongside other planning and transport measures, to promote sustainable transport choices and reduce reliance on the car for work and other journeys”.

Local planning authorities should "examine critically the standards they apply to new development, particularly with regard to roads, layouts and car parking, to avoid the profligate use of land“.

Local authorities "should revise their parking standards to allow for significantly lower levels of off-street parking provision, particularly for developments in locations, such as town centres, where services are readily accessible by walking, cycling or public transport”.

Page 25


Ppg 13 transport 3

PPG 13: Transport - 3

  • Local authorities should:

    • ensure that levels of parking provided with development will promote sustainable transport choices;

    • not require developers to provide more spaces than they themselves wish;

    • encourage shared use of parking, particularly in town centres;

    • be cautious in prescribing different levels of parking between town centres and peripheral locations, unless they are confident that the town centre will remain a favoured location for developers;

    • where appropriate, introduce on-street parking controls in areas adjacent to major travel generating development to minimise the potential displacement of parking where on-site parking is being limited.

Page 26


Ppg13 maximum parking standards

PPG13: Maximum Parking Standards

Page 27


Review of ppg13 implementation atkins 185 local authorities

Review of PPG13 implementation (Atkins - 185 local authorities)

29% fully compliant with PPG13 maximum parking standards

23% had maximum parking standards more restrictive

6% had maximum parking standards less restrictive

17% had a combination of standards which are both more / less restrictive depending on use class

13% were mainly compliant but their standards were limited, as they may not have standards for some use classes

8% were more restrictive on the standards which they have set but standards are limited, and may not have standards for some use classes in PPG 13

3% were less restrictive on standards which they have set but may not have set standards for some use classes in PPG 13

Page 28


North american approach litman

North American approach - Litman

Conventional parking standards in USA are intended to ensure that parking is abundant and cheap; reflecting a subsidy of driving and a stimulation of urban sprawl

Conventional parking standards are often based on the 85th percentile (resulting in a situation whereby 15 out of 100 spaces will never fill even during peak periods)

Most parking management strategies have modest individual impacts, typically reducing parking requirements by 5-15%, but their impacts are cumulative and synergistic

An appropriate combination of cost-effective strategies can usually reduce the amount of parking required at a destination by 20-40%, while providing additional social and economic benefits. Shared parking reduces the parking requirements by 10%-90% of the original level

Page 29


Parking availability at destinations

Parking availability at destinations

  • Three particular parking-related features affect the destination of a car journey:

    • The availability of parking spaces

    • The cost of parking

    • The location of parking spaces in relation to the desired final destination

  • Results of DfT survey:

    • 31% of car drivers and passengers said they had no problems with the availability of parking

    • 38% said parking availability caused problems when visiting a hospital

    • 30% said it was a problem when going shopping

    • 21% said it was a problem when they made trips for personal reasons (e.g. going to the bank or the doctor)

Page 30


Workplaces

Workplaces

  • Workplaces

    • The provision of, usually free, PNR parking spaces is very important in determining travel behaviour

  • Workplace (Company) Travel Plans

    • Workplace parking regulation, pricing and cash-back schemes are likely to influence commuters‘ travel choices

  • Workplace Parking Levies (WPLs)

    • A workplace parking levy could potentially be an effective tool for changing behaviour, but is inevitably controversial

    • Much would depend upon the extent to which employers absorbed the costs rather than passing them onto their employees

Page 31


Destination parking results

Destination parking - results

Availability of parking at destinations appears to be an important factor affecting car use and longer-term decisions about land use

High levels of parking provision can lead to an inappropriate use of valuable land and contribute to car dependency

Focus of parking restraint has been on city centres (Central Business Districts) where (peak period) traffic congestion has been highest and a viable transport alternative (mostly public transport) is generally available

Parking restraint has focused on commuters as this group make up the majority of peak period travelers

Page 32


Availability of parking spaces

Availability of parking spaces

Parking policy is viewed as both an economic and a regulatory instrument

Availability of parking — and hence both ownership and frequency of car use — is the most significant influence on car mileage (e.g. US household survey)

Economic approaches are seen as being effective complements to regulatory instruments

Halving parking spaces in central areas of cities would be even more effective than doubling charges in reducing car use (Acuttand Dodgson)

The more time needed using public transport, the more people are inclined to use the car to travel to work. By contrast, the more time spent parking near workplace, the lower the probability of travelling by car to work (Lois and Lopes-Saez)

Page 33


Railway stations and park ride p r

Railway stations and Park & Ride (P&R)

Parking is potentially needed at railway stations as well as at appropriate drop off areas for kiss and ride commuters

Parking provision may extract demand from other stations, create congestion around stations, undermine pedestrian and cycle access and use land otherwise available for sustainable development

Much research has been undertaken into impact of P&R

P&R is a popular policy for local authorities

Research on benefits of P&R appears unclear: while it may extract traffic from town centres it may also encourage longer car journeys to access the facility

Page 34


Town centres

Town centres

Data on PNR parking is non-existent in most areas or, at best, incomplete

Controlled parking zones (CPZs) in city centres are a potentially important policy measure, although problems of enforcement arise, together with the potentially undermining factor of PNR parking.

Page 35


Other destinations

Other destinations

  • Shopping centres

    • It is not just parking charges that influence shoppers‘ behaviour– the retail offer is very important

  • Stadia

    • Despite their importance as movement generators little independent research has been published into the impact of parking policies at stadia

  • Airports

    • Those with higher values of time, such as business passengers, tend to park closer to airport terminals; leisure travelers are prepared to park farther away

Page 36


Watford match day parking zones 1

Watford match day parking zones - 1

Page 37


Watford match day parking zones 2

Watford match day parking zones - 2

  • Prior to the scheme‘s introduction four surveys on match days showed that about half of the streets within the area were at least 50% parked and that some were consistently over-capacity.

  • Follow-up surveys showed:

    • nearly ¾ of respondents in the area were satisfied or very satisfied with the SPA scheme;

    • 2/3 considered enforcement to be adequate;

    • over ¾ did not want changes to the rules.

  • Review in 2001 indicated that the scheme had benefits on wider transportation, environmental and quality-of-life issues.

Page 38


Table of contents5

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 39


Origin parking

Origin parking

  • Private off-street parking (including PNR)

  • Public off-street parking (short stay, long-stay, contract)

  • Controlled (paid) on-street parking (e.g. parking meters, phone payment)

  • Uncontrolled (free) on-street parking

Page 40


Ppg3 housing

PPG3: Housing

  • Local authorities should revise their parking standards to allow for significantly lower levels of off-street parking provision, particularly for developments:

    • in locations, such as town centres, where services are readily accessible by walking, cycling or public transport; and

    • involving the conversion of housing or non-residential buildings where off-street parking is less likely to be successfully designed into the scheme.

  • Car parking standards that result, on average, in development with more than 1.5off-street car parking spaces per dwelling are unlikely to reflect the Government's emphasis on securing sustainable residential environments

Page 41


Parking standards

Parking standards

Research on impact of parking standards is limited

Surveys about the flexibility of current behaviour will produce very different results to those which look at longer term trends, or revealed behaviour based on where people are living

Travel plans could encourage the car-free concept making it more attractive to both developers and potential residents with benefits of reduced parking needs

In car-free developments, improvements in other modes of transport have not always reached the levels which are seen as necessary to make such developments successful

Little research exists on the effectiveness of types of demand management measures in residential areas, particularly with regard to longer terms impacts

Car Clubs potentially offer an opportunity to reduce car ownership in densely populated areas

Page 42


Origin parking results

Origin parking - results

Parking requirements alone do not create car dependency (Manville and Shoup)

Parking requirements have often generated land use patterns that might otherwise not have arisen, and they have channeled significant funding and land toward providing for the car

Page 43


Atkins review of existing research 1

Atkins review of existing research - 1

Restricting parking leads to a reduction in demand

Parking is a more effective demand management tool than public transport fare reductions

Travel Plans, linked with restrictive parking policy, can achieve significant modal shift

Restrictive parking measures influence mode choice

There is a clear link between parking availability and car use

Travel Plans can reduce the number of cars travelling to a site by 14%

Limiting parking availability is the most effective way to limit the number of cars arriving on site

Page 44


Atkins review of existing research 2

Atkins review of existing research - 2

Parking restraint is a hallmark of high achieving travel plans

Developers seek to maximise parking as they consider that it adds value to their assets

Maximum parking standards have encouraged the uptake of sustainable transport modes and travel plans

Maximum parking standards should take the form of national guidance which incorporates the flexibility to adapt to regional variations and local conditions

Page 45


Atkins review of existing research 3

Atkins review of existing research - 3

Restrictive parking policy over a long time has had no effect upon economic development

Maximum parking standards do not deter inward investment

Developers see parking as key to being able to let offices

There is no evidence that relaxing parking standards improves economic performance

There is little or no evidence to suggest that maximum parking standards have a detrimental effect on inward investment

There is no evidence that parking standards have a significant negative impact on economic development

Restrictive parking policies will support business and the economy

There is no evidence to suggest that parking standards have a significant negative impact on economic development in the existing economic structure within an urban context

Page 46


Table of contents6

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of parking restraint measures upon local economies

8

Results from recent studies

Page 47


Parking costs and fees

Parking costs and fees

Much research has demonstrated the importance of parking costs to travel choices although the extent of the impact may vary

A combination of parking charges and reducing or restricting parking availability is likely to be most effective in encouraging behaviouralchange

Page 48


Elasticities and pricing

Elasticities and pricing

Parking fees do not reflect the full externalities of car usage

Elasticity ranges vary greatly – time, location etc - and must be interpreted within the context they are reported

Elasticities provide an insight into the social and political acceptability of a range of parking policy measures

Information on long-run elasticities is lacking as few time-series analyses have been undertaken; this is important since parking charges probably lag behind rises in income

Further research is needed into the cross-price elasticities of parking demand with respect to public transport improvements

Page 49


Workplace parking levies wpls

Workplace Parking Levies (WPLs)

Free or cheap parking a major influence on decision to drive to work

Private Non Residential (PNR) typically 40-60% of UK town centre spaces

3 million spaces at UK commercial premises (1996)

WPL only applied in Nottingham in UK, rejected in Bristol

Nottinghamis third least car dependent city in the UK; it was Transport Local Authority of the Year & is first East Midlands city to use a fleet of electric buses

WPL applied in Australia: Sydney, Melbourne, Perth

Page 50


Nottingham wpl

Nottingham WPL

Scheme introduced 2011

Charge per space 2012 - £288 (£1 = €1.24); rises with inflation est. £381 by 2015

Paid by employers within city boundary with 11 or more workplace parking spaces

Expected to raise £14m a year over 23 years

All to be invested in public transport improvements

Charge levied on employers with 11 or more employee car parking spaces in City Council area

3,500 employers hold WPL licenses

45,000 parking spaces licensed

500 employers pay WPL charge

Firms decide whether to recoup from staff

Exemptions: disabled, customers, fleets, un/loading, emergency services, NHS front-line

Page 51


Table of contents7

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 52


Town centre study 2011 transport for london 1

Town centre study 2011 – Transport for London - 1

Car drivers were satisfied with the ease of access to town centre by car and the number of parking spaces provided

Page 53


Town centre study 2011 transport for london 2

Town centre study 2011 – Transport for London - 2

Page 54


The relevance of parking in the success of urban centres london councils 2012

The relevance of parking in the success of urban centres – London Councils (2012)

Lack of research means that there is a lack of accurate data on parking supply even in London.

Mary Portas in the future of high streets review recommended that “Local areas should implement free controlled parking schemes that work for their town centres”.

‘Free’ parking may not increase visitors or shoppers – it leads to a reduction in turnover, i.e. longer parking stays mean less visitors, benefiting commuters so retail sales reduce.

In London those who don’t come by car spend more. Car drivers may spend more in a single trip, those that come by bus spend more per week and per month. Biggest spenders in London are those that walk.

Factors other than parking may be much more influential in the choice of shopping location.

Page 55


How and why people travel to town centres the mall corporation

How and Why People Travel to Town Centres - The Mall Corporation

Centre in north-west London, with nearby tube station in zone 6.

Centre can be accessed via 2 car parks, both owned and managed by the local authority.

Page 56


Table of contents8

Table of contents

The impact of parking measures & policies – what is the evidence base?

1

Introduction

2

Background to DfT project

3

Key parking issues

4

Parking Availability at Destinations and Parking Charges

5

Parking provisions at Origins (min/max standards)

6

Workplace Parking Levies, Parking and Congestion Charges

7

Impact of Parking Restraint Measures upon Local Economies

8

Results from Recent Studies

Page 57


Local authority approaches

Local authority approaches

Parking is a politically emotive subject – many letters to local newspapers

Parking is seen as a revenue stream, especially for small local authorities

Parking not always viewed as a traffic management tool

Parking controls generally focussed on town centres

CPE becoming almost universal

Page 58


Birmingham parking strategy

Birmingham parking strategy

Page 59


What the press say

What the press say

Page 60


Overview of results 1

Overview of Results - 1

Much parking research, albeit often indirectly or as part of a wider study

Little research covering DfT interests

Few before and after studies

Several papers are theoretical studies

Studies are almost exclusively concerned with city and town centres, with little consideration given to rural areas

A few papers focus on special needs e.g. airport parking, or match-day parking restrictions around stadia

Many papers are old – published during 1990s

Lack of statistics on parking availability, especially Private Non-Residential (PNR) parking – over which local authorities have limited controls

Page 61


Overview of results 2

Overview of Results - 2

Level of parking charges set is often relatively arbitrary - parking charges do not necessarily reflect the cost of provision, especially of multi-storey car parks

Parking charges tend to reflect what users would be prepared to pay

Parking is expensive to provide in new developments, but the basis for these costs is not researched

Stated preference techniques are used rather than investigating behavioural change a result of new parking arrangements.

Few robust evaluation studies identified

Parking has undergone a paradigm shift, a fundamental change in how a problem is perceived and solutions evaluated

Page 62


Impact of parking policies 1

Impact of parking policies - 1

  • Parking and Congestion

    • There is a lack of evidence to demonstrate that parking restraint or charging reduces congestion, though there is a logic that they should do so given the evidence that they potentially impact upon car use

  • Parking and Congestion Charges

    • There is a tendency for higher price elasticities for congestion charges than for parking fees

  • Carbon emissions and pollutants

    • Few studies reported on the impact of parking upon traffic reductions, congestion, modal shift or contributions to reductions in carbon emissions

  • Sustainable transport

    • More research is needed into the interaction between sustainable transport measures and parking availability

Page 63


Impact of parking policies 2

Impact of parking policies - 2

  • Business activity and town centre viability

    • Parking pricing provides both economic benefits and costs

    • Parking pricing increases turnover of parking spaces which makes finding a space easier, reduces the number of parking spaces required which can provide financial savings, and can reduce traffic problems such as congestion

    • Levels of parking provision may affect access modes, impacting on the quality of the shopping environment

    • The precise impact of parking restraint measure upon local economies is difficult to identify

Page 64


Potential topics for future research

Potential topics for future research

  • Investigation of time series analysis of price elasticities and cross-price elasticities of parking charges with respect to public transport use, and compare these to cross-sectional data

  • Survey work with local authorities to determine how parking policy is being adopted into new developments in conjunction with residential travel plans and alternative mobility measures, such as priority bus access, car clubs, and provision for NMT

  • Study parking regimes applied in different areas and their impacts on car ownership levels

  • Investigate impact of car-free settlements upon car ownership and parking behaviour

  • Study relationship between provision of car parking at railway stations and impact on travel patterns

Page 65


Insert the title of your presentation here

Thank youOslo Parking Conference

Presented by Derek PalmerHead of Sustainable Transport Planning – May 2012

Tel: + 44 (0)1344 770432Email: [email protected]

Page 66


  • Login