Learning from Parking Policies in Asia

Paul BarterLee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

National University of Singaporepaulbarter@nus.edu.sg

http://www.reinventingparking.org/Photo: Zaitun Kasim

Based on a Study commissioned by ADB under RETA 6416: A Development Framework for

Sustainable Urban Transport - Parking Policy in Asia: Status, Comparisons and Potential

Summary

1. Parking policy: big choices

2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to different contexts

3. Striking contrasts among Asian city parking policy approaches

4. Lessons

1. Parking policy: big choices

Should each building site have its own dedicated parking?

OR

Should most parking serve its whole vicinity?

Parking policy: big choices

a. ‘Conventional’ approaches

– parking as ancillary infrastructure for each building (like toilets)

b. ‘Parking management’ approaches

– Parking as infrastructure for whole neighborhoods (like streets)

– Parking as a tool for wider policy goals

c. Market-oriented approaches

– parking as a real-estate based service locality by locality (like hot food outlets)

Parking policy: big choices

Approaches to

parking policy

Central goals

ConventionalAvoid parking scarcity/spillover (via

minimum parking requirements)

Parking

management

Serve wider urban & transport policy

goals (via wide range of policy tools). For example, constrain car travel to certain

locations by limiting parking supply

Market-basedEnsure demand, supply and

prices are responsive to each other

1. Parking policy: big choices

2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to different contexts

3. Striking contrasts among Asian city parking policy approaches

4. Lessons

2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to different contexts (at least in the West)

Autocentric conventional approach dominates auto-oriented suburban areas

Parking management approaches

are common in inner urban areas

Constraint-focused parking management

(for TDM) in transit-oriented city centres

City centres often have market parking as

a by-product of parking-scarce context

Conventional parking policy tends to

promote automobile dependenceLos Angeles

Conventional parking policy can blight

older, dense areasNear Houston’s city centre

The conventional approach is a response to

fear of on-street chaos. But in dense, mixed-use areas, getting good control of on-street

parking is essential no matter what parking policy approach you adopt

Dhaka

Market-oriented approach relatively untested

• Professor Donald Shoup (‘The High Cost of Free Parking’) suggests:

– Performance pricing for on-street parking

– Abolish minimum parking requirements (since now we don’t

need to worry about spillover)

• Trials of performance pricing (eg see www.SFPark.org)

• Accidental examples in many city centers?

11

Source: Source: ShoupShoup, D. The High Cost of Free Parking, D. The High Cost of Free Parking

Parking management works! It is tried and tested in many cities but can be

challenging to implement unless the need is very clear

• Can be complex

• Can involve conflict

• Parking management for TDM especially needs political will …

– Strong green movement

– Acute congestion

– Acute parking problems, and

– Adequate alternatives

In Sydney

‘Park-once neighbourhoods’

• Parking management and market-oriented approaches are best suited to ‘Park-once neighborhoods’

• This means that most parking is in shared parking that is open to the public and is usually priced (even parking

within buildings)

1. Parking policy: big choices

2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to different contexts

3. Striking contrasts among Asian city parking policy approaches

4. Lessons

3. There are striking contrasts among Asian city parking policy approaches

ADB-sponsored 14-city study of parking policy in Asia

I expected parking management to be common:

Because most Asian city areas have ideal conditions for park-once neighborhoods -- High urban densities; mixed-use urban fabric; High use of non-car modes; Acute problems arising from rapid motorization

Surprise! All of the cities use minimum parking requirements

Only Seoul had vigorous parking management approach (in its business districts)

Contrasting Asian responses to their emerging parking problems

• As motorization arrived, ALL of the Asian cities sought ways to increase parking SUPPLY

– Some focused mainly on raising their minimum parking requirements

– Several cities focused also on public-sector parking supply

• But a few learned to NOT WORRY about parking supply!

Minimum parking requirements at comparable commercial buildings

versus approximate car ownership

Tokyo (and Japan generally)

• Minimum parking requirements

but very low rates and exempt small buildings

• Very limited on-street parking with improved control (and not allowed overnight!)

• Some government supply was built in the past but it is now market priced

• Ubiquitous commercial parking

• Proof-of-parking rule(prove access to a near-home parking place before registering any car)

• Throughout Japan, very low parking requirements but no parking shortage problem

• Park-once neighborhoods are the norm

Exempting small buildings from requiring parking

Floor area threshold below which there are no parking requirements

Tokyo Yes (1,500 m2 or 2,000 m2). Above the threshold, parking requirements phase in

gradually according to a formula . At full force only from 6,000 m2 floor area.

Guangzhou Yes (500 m2)

Taipei city Yes (300 m2 or 500 m2)

Bangkok Yes (commercial, office, shopping malls: 300 m2; condominiums: 60 m2 per unit;

hotels: 30 rooms; restaurants: 300 m2; entertainment buildings: 500 seats)

Hong Kong Small, street-side retail serving local residents is generally exempt

Ahmedabad Yes (60 m2)

Hanoi Low-rise residential buildings exempt

Beijing Yes?

Seoul No?

Jakarta No?

Singapore No

Kuala Lumpur No

Manila No

Dhaka No

Tokyo has local parking markets in many areas

In Tokyo

Tokyo has local parking markets in many areas

In Tokyo

Bangkok, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, and ManilaBangkok, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, and Manila

• Fear of on-street parking chaos

• Regular increases in minimum parking requirements seen as the answer

• Little government-provided parking

• Low parking prices (even though pricing is common)

Ahmedabad, Dhaka, HanoiAhmedabad, Dhaka, Hanoi

• Weak on-street parking management = on-street parking chaos

• Policy efforts (so far) focus on BOTH minimum parking requirements AND local government-provided parking

Hong Kong, Seoul, and Singapore Hong Kong, Seoul, and Singapore

• Increasingly effective on-street parking management

• Shifting away from supply focus

• Parking requirements but with effort to make them realistic (Singapore and

Hong Kong lowered their minimum requirements when found to have been too high!)

• Parking maximums in Seoul’s CBDs

• Pricing widespread

Beijing, Guangzhou, and Taipei Beijing, Guangzhou, and Taipei

• Modest parking standards

• Keen on government-provided supply (but Taipei has abandoned supply focus)

• Increasingly effective on-street parking management with pricing

• Off-street pricing widespread But problem: mainland Chinese cities have parking price controls

• In Taipei, government parking now close to market priced

• Possibly tending towards Japan model?

1. Parking policy: big choices

2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to different contexts

3. Striking contrasts among Asian city parking policy approaches

4. Lessons

5. Lessons

• Apply parking management strongly if you can

• But if that is not politically possible don’t just follow USA-style conventional parking policy that points towards automobile-dependence!

• Experience in eastern Asia suggests that fears of parking shortage crises are exaggerated

• There are pragmatic middle ways

Lessons

• Several eastern Asian cities have what we might call a ‘relaxed pragmatic’ version of the conventional approach to parking policy

• They don’t worry about shortages since their ‘park-once neighborhoods’ seem to cope (especially when prices are

left to market forces)

• They didn’t bother increasing parking requirements as car ownership and use increased (they seem to see on-site

parking as just a contribution to neighborhood supply)

More detailed and refined policy approach categories

Approaches to

parking policy

Central goals

Conventional

Autocentric Avoid parking scarcity

Demand-realisticAvoid both scarcity and

wasteful surplus

Relaxed/

Pragmatic

Require (large) buildings to merely

contribute to local parking supply

Parking

management

Multi-objectiveServe wider urban &

transport policy goals

Constraint-focusedConstraint of car travel

(to certain locations)

Market-basedEnsure demand, supply and

prices are responsive to each other

Lessons

• Get adequate control of on-street parking

• Foster ‘park-once neighborhoods’ with most parking open to the public, not restricted to customers or tenants only, and with market prices

• If you can’t lower or abolish minimum parking requirements, at least don’t increase them

Thank you!

To download the full study go to http://ssrn.com/abstract=1780012

For more on parking policy see http://www.reinventingparking.org/