Fear of traffic congestion and overcrowded street parking has led many cities to establish minimum parking requirements calling for developments to provide often excessive amounts of off-street parking. Aside from creating excess parking and adding to congestion by encouraging automobile usage, parking requirements have a tremendous negative impact on development of all kinds, especially affordable housing.
Transit-oriented development (TOD) has attracted interest as a tool for promoting smart growth, leveraging economic development, and catering to shifting market demands and lifestyle preferences. This study, based on a combination of stakeholder survey responses, interviews, and in-depth case studies, paints a national portrait of contemporary TOD practice in the United States. TOD is viewed and defined differently throughout the country, with its most common traits being compact, mixeduse development near transit facilities and high-quality walking environments. Joint development is a form of TOD that is often project specific, taking place on, above, or adjacent to transit-agency property. The results of a national survey suggest that the principal aim of TOD and joint development is to boost ridership and, thereby, boost revenue income. Community economic development and broader smart-growth agendas are secondary objectives.
This special report is intended to provide information to local jurisdictions, transit agencies, developers, financial institutions, and others as they develop and implement parking standards and programs for transit-oriented developments (TODs) in California. It provides an overview of available information regarding the extent to which parking for various types of land uses may be reduced in the vicinity of major transit stations1. It is one of a series of reports produced for the California Department of Transportation, Division of Mass Transportation’s Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study. This report is not intended to be an exhaustive source of information on TOD parking issues; rather, it is meant as a starting point upon which additional information can and should be added. For some topics (e.g., shared parking, parking planning), guidebooks currently exist which can be referenced for more detailed information (see Sources section).
The paper reports on the implementation of parking cash-out in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Region in 1999 and 2000. Since parking costs in a downtown setting are typically a substantial portion of commuting costs, cashing-out parking subsidies can provide a strong incentive for commuters to choice an alternative to driving alone.
Shared parking is when two or more land uses share the same parking spaces. By taking into account different peak parking demands, shared parking areas reduce the total number of parking spaces required compared with simply adding together the parking requirements of each individual land use. The major benefit of shared parking is a reduction in the land devoted to parking, especially in the amount of paved surface, which preserves more land for green space or development density.
Metro authorized a study to identify the status of shared parking in the Portland metropolitan area. The study is designed to be a region specific resource for businesses, neighborhoods, developers, and jurisdictions to promote greater understanding and use of shared parking. Finally, the study creates model ordinance provisions and a shared use agreement that local governments can use when implementing shared parking as a growth management tool.
The study was comprised of several tasks:…
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) are both examples of recent federal legislation requiring improvements in air quality and congestion through more efficient transportation and an integration of multiple modes. Increasing public transit ridership has emerged as a primary goal of policy makers seeking to comply with legislation such as CAAA and ISTEA. Several policies are being examined for their potential to persuade automobile drivers to use transit. This report focuses on parking strategies as a means of increasing transit patronage for the work trip. For comparison purposes, this report also briefly considers some nonparking strategies, such as road pricing, to assess their effect on single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) use and transit ridership.