Catalogue on Parking Management Solutions

Transcription

1

2 PUSH&PULL - Parking management and incentives as successful and prven strategies fr energy-efficient urban transprt PUSH&PULL is a term that refers t plicies ffering a cmbinatin f rewards / incentives and punishment t induce behaviural change. The PUSH&PULL prject aims t imprve urban mbility by means f parking space management cmbined with mbility management (MM) measures. By intrducing paid parking, increasing parking fees, reducing r restraining parking supply, r implementing ther similar measures, car drivers can be pushed t use mre sustainable transprt mdes. At the same time, the incme generated frm parking space management can be used t invest in and prmte alternatives, thus pulling users twards alternative sustainable mdes. This is the cre-funding mechanism that is at the heart f the PUSH&PULL prject. The main bjectives f PUSH&PULL are t: Save energy thrugh a mdal shift frm car t ther mre sustainable mdes; Help lcal ecnmies by encuraging a mre ratinal and managed apprach t parking and helping cities t save mney by aviding the csts f cnstructin f additinal parking, and; Build the capacity fr fllwers wh want t implement similar measures by prviding the knwledge required t help t alleviate parking prblems, and plitical arguments t supprt parking management strategies. The prject includes implementatin f parking and mbility management in 7 cities and 1 University. All implementers will set up the cre-funding mechanism t use mney gained frm parking t finance sustainable mbility. This catalgue n gd practice n parking management was develped by cllecting infrmatin frm existing studies and publicatins by prject partners and third parties. We kindly invite yu t use and cpy the cntents f this catalgue, and reference the PUSH&PULL prject (push-pull-parking.eu). This catalgue (Deliverable 2.1. f the PUSH&PULL Prject) has been develped by the fllwing authrs: Tm Rye, Giulian Mingard, Martina Hertel, Jörg Thiemann-Linden, Aljaz Plevnik, Tmasz Zwlinski, Simn Dale, Rbert Pressl, Laurence Bannerman, Peter Vansevenant, Jan Gheldf, Juan Carls Escuder, Gerhard Ablasser and Marta Carvalh. Cntact: Rbert PRESSL pressl@fgm.at Frschungsgesellschaft Mbilität FGM Austrian Mbility Research AMOR Cver picture: Harry Schiffer Editin: May 2015 push-pull-parking.eu Page 2 f 136

3 Table f cntents 1. Intrductin Parking Management Cases... 5 Parking management at the University Hspital... 5 Wrkplace parking levy (WPL) Experience f parking management at 11 UK wrkplaces Parking lt cncept Phenix West in the cntext f the mbility management f Drtmund Mbility cncept f the Technical University f Graz fllwing the Push&Pull principles Parking management in Vienna Zurich parking supply cap Fahrtenmdell Trip Cntingent Mdel fr Parking Standards Plicy Extensin f cntrlled n-street parking in Edinburgh - impacts in ne sub-area Parking management in Graz On-street parking Enfrcement with digital parking permits On-street parking enfrcement and management thrugh a sensr system Free Metrshuttle financed by a ring-fenced parking reserve Natinal maximum parking standards as part f natinal gvernment planning guidance t lcal authrities, PPG13 (nw replaced by ne natinal planning guidance dcument) New n-street parking plicy in the city centre after the new Public Transprt Netwrk implementatin Implementatin f new access restrictins and parking management schemes in Krakw Mbility Cmpany City f Ghent as a merger f tw frmer units (Parking Cmpany and Mbility Department) The Master Plan and the rle f parking in Maastricht Extended pedestrian areas and renewed piazzas in Trin The rle f parking management in restructuring the dwntwn area in Lyn Urban renewal and the ratinal use f parking spaces in Barcelna Fast extensin f cntrlled n-street parking in Ljubljana The Amsterdam Mbility Fund push-pull-parking.eu Page 3 f 136

4 1. Intrductin In Eurpe, parking management as a push measure fr regulating private car use is diversely develped. Initially a list with best practice examples cncerning parking management frm mainly Eurpean cuntries was generated via desktp research. Frm ver 60 examples identified, 24 best practice examples were selected and prepared as case studies using the fllwing criteria: Implementatin status; Innvative apprach; Availability f data r dcumentatin; Relevant fr the implementatin partners in the Push&Pull prject. In additin the take up f best practice examples frm New Member States r Suthern Eurpean cuntries was encuraged in rder t empwer partners t implement similar strategies in thse regins, fcusing n tpics including implementatin prcess, cmmunicatin and parking enfrcement. Case descriptin A template fr the case descriptin was used when infrmatin fr each case was cllected. Each case is therefre presented accrding t the same structure, as fllws: A1) Objectives descriptin f what the measure(s) was/were intended t achieve. A2) Descriptin f the CS descriptin f the Mbility Management measure(s) and ther measures that tgether frm the case B) Infrmatin n csts and wh paid them C) Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results: Objectives are defined abve. The indicatrs measure hw well the bjectives are achieved. Data includes descriptin f data cllected in rder t measure the indicatrs. Impact/results estimated change(s) in the indicatr(s) D) Implementatin prcess D1) Stages descriptin f the different stages/parts f the implementatin prcess D2) Barriers descriptin f the key prblems r difficulties when implementing the CS. When the infrmatin is available activities t vercme the barriers are described and if it was successful. D3) Drivers descriptin f factrs that facilitated r in ne way r anther helped ut when implementing the CS push-pull-parking.eu Page 4 f 136

5 2. Parking Management Cases Parking management at the University Hspital City, Cuntry: Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany Year(s): Cnsulting the prblem since the early 1990ies, Intrductin f parking fees in 2001 A1 Objectives (I) Onging imbalance f parking space supply and demand has becme an increasing prblem fr the hspital, the nearby residential area and the City (II) The staff cuncil f the hspital recgnised the situatin as a prblem fr emplyees and initiated a transprt-envirnment prgramme. A2 Descriptin f the CS The University Hspital f Freiburg is ne f the largest emplyers in the regin and its sites, which treat apprximately patients per annum, generate enrmus traffic. Given its lcatin in the heart f the city, scarce parking facilities caused a push fr the implementatin f a parking management and a mbility cncept fr emplyees. The hspital is lcated next t a residential area, s space is scarce, but accessibility by public transprt as well as by bike is gd. The increasingly prblematic situatin put the intrductin f parking management at the heart f the mbility cncept, which was initiated by the staff cuncil and which is driven by a wrking grup with tgether with the administratin. The fllwing activities were taken n Parking Management: Initiative fr an envirnmental transprt prgram by the Staff Cuncil f the hspital Survey : A survey - befre the parking management was implemented and ne f the first actins - revealed a mdal split with 38% f jurneys taken by car, 24% by public transprt, 31% by bike, and 5% n ft (early 1990ties) Onging prcess f cnverting parking spaces int space fr new hspital buildings: The 8000 emplyees had access t arund 1700 parking places n site; this figure was gradually reduced due t the expansin f hspital buildings. Intrductin f parking fees: The main activity was the intrductin f a parking fee which all car-users have t pay (emplyees, patients, visitrs). 30% f the fees are used t subsidise the jb-ticket (1/5 discunt). push-pull-parking.eu Page 5 f 136

6 Parking restrictin: The adjacent area (neighburhd) was almst entirely restricted t resident parking Survey in 2002: A survey after the intrductin f the parking management amngst emplyees revealed a mdal split with 22 % f jurneys taken by (wn) car, 14% by public transprt, 16% by bike, and 3% n ft (2002). The remaining 37% use a cmbinatin f varius means f transprtatin Establishment f a wrking grup fr the whle prject. These attendant activities were taken befre r at the same time: B Imprved accessibility by public transprt: Public transprt services have been imprved ver time; mst imprtant was a new stp f the cmmuter rail-line next t the site (instead f changing at central statin, which made trips 20 min. lnger) Cycling cncept: Imprving cycling facilities and rganising cycling days => Cncept fr bicycle parking, new parking facilities with weather prtectin and creatin f a bicycle brchure; implementatin f changing rms and shwers Establishment f an envirnment-friendly-traffic-prgram in the internal public relatins. Overall mbility infrmatin: Mbility infrmatin when hiring new persnal by the staff cuncil Crdinatin: Individual wrking time mdels and flexible wrking hurs; crdinatin with public transprt timetables Csts and where the mney came frm Implementatin There was n external financial supprt fr plans r measures. The financing f measures were taken by the hspital. Details abut the csts and the number f ticket machines are being asked The new statin at the University Hspital was just like the bicycle cncept was funded by the budget f the hspital: In 1997 abut DM 70,000 (tday abut Eurs) were invested in the cycling cncept. Mre than DM 1 Mi. (tday abut Eurs) have already been invested in the statin frm the cnstructin budget f the hspital. There is a budget, where measures can be implemented with, by the cnstructin administratin fr the internal AG envirnment and transprt. The amunt in 2006 was abut 20,000 Eurs. The prvided mney in that year was used e.g. fr the ptimizatin and the cnstructin f new bicycle parking facilities. push-pull-parking.eu Page 6 f 136

7 Fees fr Parking Fr patients/visitrs the parking fee is 0.50 Eur per 30 Minutes. There are several parking lts available; at ne lcatin (Elsässerstraße) special lng term rates n a weekly basis exist. Lng term patients have t cntact the hspital authrities. Fr emplyees the parking fee was 0.50 Eur per day until Frm June 2013 the parking fee is 1 Eur per day, because 1 Mi. Eurs were spent t build new parking decks (nw 425 instead f the previus 252 parking spaces). The number f parking spaces at anther lcatin parking (Breisacher Straße ) were reduced by 142 in favr f a new hspital building. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS (I) Onging imbalance f parking space supply and demand has becme an increasing prblem fr the hspital, the nearby residential area and the City (II) The staff cuncil f the hspital recgnised the situatin as a prblem fr emplyees and initiated a transprtenvirnment prgramme. The accessibility f the hspital fr all emplyees withut their (wn) car Cmparing numbers f available parking spaces (befre and after) survey amngst emplyees the number f parking spaces has been decreased by 300 at the hspital 400 emplyees switched t ther mdes f transprt and dn't use their car any mre t cmmute. D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 1990: A plitical discussin in the summer f 1990 abut air pllutin and increase in zne levels due t the increase f the MIV => internal discussin f the tpic envirnmentally friendly way t wrk => Initiative fr an envirnmental transprt prgram f the University Hspital in 1990 thrugh the initiative f the Staff Cuncil f the hspital push-pull-parking.eu Page 7 f 136

8 Stage 2: 1992: Opening f a nearby new train statin Stage 3: 1994: The steering grup Envirnment was funded at the University Hspital. In this grup all envirnmental issues f the hspital are wrked n and new appraches fr envirnmental issues (including transprtatin) were discussed. Stage 4: 2001: Intrductin f parking fees, escrted by a system f incentives nt t cme t wrk by car Stage 5: 2002: A survey amngst emplyees revealed a mdal split with 22 % f jurneys taken by (wn) car, 14% by public transprt, 16% by bike, and 3% n ft (2002). The remaining 37% use a cmbinatin f varius means f transprtatin D2 Barriers Barrier 1 There was great resistance t the implementatin f parking management n the part f car drivers (emplyees), as parking spaces were remved n the grunds f the University Hspital frm the emplyees t the benefit f patients and visitrs parking. Overcme: System f incentives prvided by the hspital t mve emplyees t use envirnmentally friendly means f transprtatin instead f their car - and the anchring f the mbility management in the perating agreement agenda. The incentives are: Emplyees wh are ntify in a written frm at the hspital ffice that they refrain frm using the parking lt can chse between three ptins (service agreement Universitätsklinikum Freiburg): D3 1. Bnus Plicy: The bnus scheme cvers thse wh cme by bike r walk t wrk. Depending n the distance f the residence they will get an annual salary bnus fr their envirnmentally friendly behavir: 50 in fare zne A, 55 in fare zne B, 60 in fare zne C r beynd. 2. Reginal mnthly pass fr public transprt: It is ffered as a subsidized ticket frm the University Hspital Regi-mnthly ticket fr (instead f 41.50). It is transferable, which means it can be used privately by tw adults with up t fur children. 3. Annual Regi-Card: The emplyees get a subsidy frm the emplyer fr the annual card f the Freiburg Transprt Assciatin fr abut 80. The annual amunt can be paid by the emplyees in tw rates f The transferable reginal annual pass can be purchased fr 335 instead f 415. Drivers Tw main drivers can be identified: Driver 1 The high imbalance f parking space supply and demand has becme an increasing prblem fr the hspital, the nearby residential area and the municipality, s a slutin has t be fund, nt nly by the hspital, but fr the municipality as well. push-pull-parking.eu Page 8 f 136

9 Driver 2 The Staff Cuncil f the hspital was very innvative in the 1990ies years and preparing the hspital fr the upcming years with an Initiative fr an envirnmental transprt prgram. The descriptin was based n the reprt Management_Freiburg_geaen.pdf html push-pull-parking.eu Page 9 f 136

10 Wrkplace parking levy (WPL) City, Cuntry: Nttingham, UK (England) Year(s): 1998 up t 2014, implementatin started in 2011 (with payment in April 2012) A1 (I) (II) (III) Objectives Cnstrain cngestin in peak perids and t limit it t relative t ther areas against which it can be benchmarked 1. Enhance attractiveness f Nttingham as place t d business. Funding f ther transprt measures (especially Nttingham s tramlines 2 and 3) is a sub-bjective f bth f the abve. A2 Descriptin f the CS The WPL scheme levies a charge n ccupied private nn dmestic ff street parking places i.e. thse ccupied by vehicles used by emplyees, regular business visitrs r pupils/students. These are referred t as Wrkplace Parking Places (WPP). The scheme cvers the entire Nttingham City Cuncil area. Currently the charge per WPP is 362 (April 2014 t March 2015) per year althugh this is set t rise abve the rate f inflatin up t This escalatr aims t cincide with the cmpletin f the public transprt imprvements which the levy part-funds. Emplyers apply fr a licence fr each f their premises; this states the number f WPP they wish t use and they then pay the apprpriate Levy. Frntline health and emergency services premises receive a 100% discunt frm the charge, as d emplyers with 10 WPP r fewer. Target grups are Emplyers with mre than 10 staff; and these staff themselves, when cmmuting by car t wrk. The scheme has been implemented successfully and withut systematic nn-payment r ther prtest frm emplyers affected by it. The scheme is very cheap t run (abut 5% f revenue is used t perate it). In terms f impacts, the scheme is very recent, s cngestin mnitring shws little change s far in traffic levels. The lcal ecnmy has fared similarly t that in ther similar cities in the UK since scheme implementatin. 1 Cngestin is primarilly a Peak Perid (07:00-10:00 and 15:00-18:00) prblem in Nttingham and ne f the bjectives f the WPL package is t cnstrain this relative t ther UK Cities. The WPL scheme perates 24 hurs a day and thus is likely t have sme impact t travel patterns thrughut the day. push-pull-parking.eu Page 10 f 136

11 B Csts and wh paid them Scheme develpment csts were estimated in 2001 at 1.7 millin (2001 prices). The actual utturn cst is unknwn. Operating csts are mdest, at under 400,000 per year, and are financed entirely frm the WPL incme, f which they make up abut 5%. 1. The WPL was chsen instead f a rad user charging scheme in part because it was cheaper and simpler t implement and perate. It als directly impacts n cmmuting by car, cnsidered t be the key driver f cngestin in Nttingham. 2. It is estimated by staff invlved that the implementatin csts were in the regin f 4 millin ( 4.8 millin), spread ver a rughly 10 year perid. Operating csts are financed frm the levy incme and require abut 5% f that, which is highly favurable cmpared t rad pricing schemes such as that in Lndn. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS (I) Cnstrain cngestin in peak perids and t limit it t relative t ther areas against which it can be benchmarked. (II) Enhance attractiveness f Nttingham as place t d business. (III) Funding f ther transprt measures (especially Nttingham s tramlines 2 and 3) is a sub-bjective f bth f the abve althugh this became mre f a key bjective in the run-up t implementatin in Octber Remarkable: Scheme develpment csts were estimated in 2001 at 1.7 millin (2001 prices). The actual utturn cst is unknwn. Operating csts are mdest, at under 400,000 per year, and are financed entirely frm the WPL incme, f which they make up abut 5%. cngestin mnitring In terms f impacts, the scheme is very recent, s cngestin mnitring shws little change s far in traffic levels. The lcal ecnmy has fared similarly t that in ther similar cities in the UK since scheme implementatin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 11 f 136

12 The scheme has been implemented against an ecnmic backgrund whereby the UK ecnmy is rebunding frm a recessin, this has been reflected by an increase demand fr travel. D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: Nttingham City Cuncil began t cnsider such a scheme but culd nly cmmence planning nce the enabling legislatin was passed in the UK Parliament (Transprt Act, 2000). Stage 2: The initial plan in the 2001 Lcal Transprt Plan fr the city was t have the WPL in place by December 2003 r shrtly thereafter. The key stages within this plan were data cllectin and mdelling during 2000 and 2001; cnsultatin and scheme develpment frm 2000 t 2002; publicatin f the legal definitin f the scheme in summer 2002; thereafter a public inquiry (hearing) n the plans; a decisin by natinal gvernment t apprve the scheme, in spring 2003; and the scheme s actual implementatin in summer Stage 3: The WPL scheme and assciated package f public transprt investment has been designed t directly r indirectly tackle cngestin. The prpsed WPL scheme and its supprting draft WPL business case (July 2007) underwent a public cnsultatin prcess including a public examinatin during the summer and autumn f An Equality Impact Assessment, included in the Business Case, was undertaken as part f the scheme develpment prcess. In December 2007, the City Cuncil s Executive Bard, having cnsidered the findings f the public cnsultatin, agreed in principle t prceed with develping the scheme and submitted an updated WPL Business Case (April 2008) alng with the apprved WPL Order t the Department fr Transprt in May 2008 fr cnfirmatin by the Secretary f State fr Transprt. It is intended t implement a fully peratinal scheme by the prpsed start date f April 2010 in line with the assumed start f cnstructin n NET Phase Tw (tram lines 2 and 3). Stage 4: scheme started withut charging in Octber 2011 and charges have been paid since April D2 Barriers Barrier 1 lack f plitical acceptability - businesses and thers criticise the scheme, fr three main reasns. They see it as: an additinal burden n business and thus damaging t a city s ecnmy. ineffective as a tl t cmbat cngestin. unfair n the mtrist wh already carries a high tax burden. push-pull-parking.eu Page 12 f 136

13 Hw barrier was vercme: The municipality gathered mre and strnger arguments and cntinued the cmmunicatin. It was vital t cnvince pliticians first in rder t gain wide plitical supprt during the implementatin f the scheme. Barrier 2 n ther municipality in Britain r the rest f Eurpe had ever befre tried t implement a WPL s it was difficult t knw hw t d it, especially as the legislatin des nt specify exactly hw such a scheme shuld be implemented and perated. Hw barrier was vercme: The municipality secured high level legal advice and assembled a multidisciplinary prject team t wrk thrugh the practical prblems and issues. This was achieved by develping plicies t prvide a detailed scheme which fllwed the spirit f the underpinning legislatin where that legislatin was nt sufficiently specific. Barrier 3 -in rder fr a scheme t be apprved by Gvernment, the City Cuncil had t be able t demnstrate (taken frm GNLTP2, ch 12): The impact f the levy itself in tackling cngestin, That sme imprvements in transprt prvisin have been made befre charges were intrduced, That there has been full cnsultatin n the scheme, and That plans fr spending the prceeds are ring fenced fr imprvements t lcal transprt and cnsistent with the bjectives f the LTP. Hw barrier was vercme: The municipality asked fr help frm researchers and experts in rder t demnstrate the psitive effects f the scheme n the pints abve. This was then synthesized int the 2008 WPL Buinsess Plan (Full ref needed as this is a key dcument: Nttingham City Cuncil (NCC), Wrkplace Parking Levy Business Case [nline], Nttingham: Nttingham City Cuncil, April 2008, nline,: [accessed 03/01/2013].) Technlgy was nt a barrier, as the scheme was designed t be simple t implement and perate (indeed this was a reasn fr chsing it). Envirnmental aspects were nt a majr driver, and the pssible cmmercialisatin f the WPL cncept has nly becme imprtant since the scheme was implemented. The regulatry authrities were bradly supprtive. D3 Drivers Driver 1 plitical stability. City f Nttingham is slidly Labur plitically s pliticians are unlikely t be vted ut f pwer n the basis f ne scheme r measure. This allws these pliticians t take mre risks and a mre strategic lng term view than may be the case fr pliticians in mre plitically vlatile cities. Driver 2 a strng team f cuncil fficers (civil servants) wrking n the scheme at the Cuncil, frm 2000 nwards, has been an imprtant factr in its success. Supprtive central gvernment civil servants, especially in the first part f the 2000s, were als imprtant. Driver 3 availability f sme additinal financing frm UK Department f Transprt thrugh the LTP system, at least between ,t fund the develpment f the WPL. push-pull-parking.eu Page 13 f 136

14 Extremely careful planning f the scheme has been key t its successful implementatin. Factrs such as implementatin f cntrlled parking znes n streets arund majr emplyers, effective methds t cunt wrkplace parking places, effective but simple registratin methds fr emplyers and s n had t be develped t functin perfectly, and in detail, in rder fr the scheme t be a success. This is all the mre the case when the scheme is a cntrversial ne like this because there is much public and media attentin fcused n trying t find prblems with the way in which the scheme is designed and perated. Surces based n an interview with Simn Dale Nttingham City Cuncil and Steve Isn Lughbrugh University plus n a paper written by Simn and n varius transprt plicy dcuments frm the City Cuncil. See als: Dale, S. J., Frst M.W., Gding J., Isn S. G. and Warren, P., 2013, Wrkplace Parking Levies: the answer t funding large scale lcal transprt imprvements in the UK? 13 th Internatinal Cnference n Cmpetitin and Ownership in Land Passenger Transprt, Oxfrd. push-pull-parking.eu Page 14 f 136

15 Experience f parking management at 11 UK wrkplaces Cuntry: UK City: Varius A1 Objectives This case is actually a number f cases frm large UK wrkplaces that implemented parking management. The bjective was t shw hw they did s and the impacts that resulted. A2 Descriptin The case study is based n empirical research (surveys and interviews) carried ut at 11 UK wrkplaces that already charge staff t park and it cnsiders the prcess that was adpted t implement the charge; the barriers faced; the schemes ultimately implemented; and their effects. B Csts and wh paid them In all cases the implementatin csts f parking management n site were paid by the rganisatins themselves using existing resurces. The parking charges intrduced then generated an incme stream that in the main was used t cver perating csts and t imprve the quality and security f the car parks and assciated traffic management, althugh in sme cases als t fund alternative transprt. In a few cases, the csts f nstreet parking management arund the site were paid by the lcal authrity (municipality). C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results All the cases reviewed had a prblem with parking, and paid parking at their site(s) was intrduced in rder t slve this prblem. Typical prblems were a shrtage f parking fr certain user grups, and cngestin and safety prblems n site caused by t many vehicles lking fr a parking space, and/r vehicles parked incnsiderately. In terms f the actual impacts f the measures after implementatin, very few measured changes in travel patterns. Their main cncern was whether their prblem had been slved. The table belw summarises which rganisatins did what. The cases date frm s the csts and charges shuld be cnsidered in the light f this. The term big bang implementatin in the table refers t the parking management scheme being intrduced in ne g, within a very shrt perid. Whilst the implementatin perid may have been shrt, this was in many cases preceded by a lng perid f planning and cnsultatin. It can als be seen that, in a minrity f cases, schemes were mdified after implementatin. The term verspill refers t parking that shifts frm the site befre charges are intrduced t streets arund the site nce charging starts. push-pull-parking.eu Page 15 f 136

16 Case study summaries Midlands Cuncil Eastern Hspital East Mids. Hspital East Mids. Hspital Nrthern University Grampian NHS Trust Midlands University Rbert Grdn University Scttish University Scttish Hspital Sheffield University Years in place Reasns Speed f intrductin Length f intr Install. Csts Staff charge Visitr charge Incme related charge Exemptins? Part f wider TP? Mdificatins? Overspill? 4 n/k Big bang 1 yr Lw 16/mth n/a FT/PT Disabled N Y Slight n/k 10 Cngestin n site 6 Cngestin n site 6 Cngestin n site Use f funds? Incremental 1 yr n/k 40p/day 60p/hr Disabled; vls. Y Y Y Parking; TP Big bang 6 mths n/k 55/yr 1/hr FT/PT Disabled; vls. Y Y YY Parking; TP Big bang 1 yr n/k 60p/day 60p/hr N Disabled; vls. Y N YY Parking; patients 3 Lack f parking Big bang 1 yr n/k 135/yr 2/day N Disabled N N Slight Parking; security 2 Lack f parking; planning N/k Parking cngestin 0.15 Lack f parking; planning Incremental 1 yr 300k 70p/day 70p/day Y Disabled N Y YY Parking; security Big bang 18 mnths N/k 50p/day 50p/day N Cleaners N N N Parking; security Big bang 2 yrs 160k 1.50/day 1.50/day N Disabled; carsharers; essential users Y N YY Parking; TP 3 "Wild" parking Big bang 18 mths 280k 80/yr n/a N Disabled N N N Parking; security 3 Raise funds Big bang 1 yr 300k 80/yr 1/day Y Disabled; vls N N N Parking; patients 5 Cngestin n site; lack f parking Big bang 2 yrs Significant 6-30 per mnth 2/day Y Disabled Y Pss. YY TP; Parking; security N/k = nt knwn Vls. = vlunteers TP = travel plan push-pull-parking.eu Page 16 f 136

17 D Implementatin prcess Sme respndents said that they had extremely lengthy cnsultatin and a parking charge tk several years t implement. Others managed it in little ver 9 mnths but the average appears t have been tw years. Grampian NHS Trust was nt unusual when it cmmented that its cnsultatin prcess was Very lengthy and cmplex. Charges were discussed and agreed thrugh a strategy grup which included representatives frm all interested parties n site, including patient/public representatives (via the Lcal Health Cuncil). Cnsultatin tk different frms mst ntably: surveys, cnsultatin meetings, fcus grups and in the case f certain respndents, frmal negtiatins with Unins. All interviewees stressed the imprtance f cnsultatin t the prcess but als recgnised that it wuld nt reslve all ppsitin befre the scheme was implemented. Whilst tw sites intrduced their charges incrementally (ne frm a very lw rate f 20p per day initially 2 ), the majrity had implemented charges in ne g. This did nt mean that charges culd nt rise further. Rbert Grdn University, fr example, ntes explicitly in its guidance t staff n parking charging that it reserves the right t increase charges. In sme cases, charges were intrduced at different times at different sites, r fr different car parks, but at the same level f charge as in ther areas. As nted abve, in the majrity f the case studies, the parking charge was intrduced in respnse t a prblem, where there had been n parking charge befre. Thus any intrductin f charges and majr re-rganisatin f parking management was likely t be perceived as a "big bang" apprach; but it can als be argued that a nn-incremental apprach was necessary t slve majr parking and cngestin prblems. Nnetheless, several respndents made the pint that they were likely t increase parking charges further. Key lessns that can be drawn frm the implementatin prcess were as fllws: Manage cnsultatin meetings must be carefully managed. Gd cmmunicatin at the planning, implementatin and peratinal stages is crucial. Thse implementing the charge shuld be ready fr ppsitin and have prepared cunter arguments t key bjectins. Staff shuld be treated equally with regard t having t pay fr parking. Wrking in partnership with the lcal authrity can help t avid difficulties, such as parking verspill, befre they arise. Use cmmn sense nt least in terms f nt trying t achieve t much in the first instance since it will cause a knee-jerk reactin and yu need t make sure yu get the supprt f the staff. This may invlve a charge in the first instance which is nt t much f a disincentive s as t get the principle f a charge in place and then yu can lk at the rates. Having clear and transparent criteria fr issuing permits is crucial. 2 It was stated that if we d intrduced 40 pence and 50 pence t start with it wuld have created sme difficulty. push-pull-parking.eu Page 17 f 136

18 D2 Implementatin and acceptance can be eased by selling the benefits such as yu are ging t get CCTV and... and we fund that since we intrduced a parking charge car theft has reduced by 75 per cent and frequently publicise that car crime has gne dwn. Accept that the parking charge may nt be a deterrent t car use. Being pen and transparent abut the purpse f charging, hw it will be implemented, and hw its impact will be mnitred treat it as a majr change initiative. Offering alternatives t driving t wrk and paying the charge. Barriers The main barrier t the implementatin f charging was ppsitin frm staff, as might be expected. This ppsitin was never fully vercme there has t be an acceptance that sme staff will always remain ppsed t the idea f paying fr parking that was previusly free t use but it was much reduced by the fllwing means: Widespread and smetimes lengthy (ver years) cnsultatin with staff and unins. Making the scheme simple t understand and use. Use f the mney raised t fund imprvements in the quality f remaining parking. Making everyne eligible pay, with n exemptins fr example fr senir staff, and in sme cases by making charges related t incme, s that staff n higher pay paid a higher charge. Allwing greater access t parking fr thse with less gd alternatives t driving thse living away frm gd public transprt, and/r thse with caring respnsibilities, fr example. Publicising gd news stries, fr example abut the reductin n n-site car crime after the intrductin f charges. In additin, it was bvius frm all cases that ppsitin t the scheme reduced t a lw level after it was intrduced, nce peple became used t it and culd als see that it reduced nsite cngestin and made it easier t find a parking space. D3 Drivers The main driving factr was the severity f the parking-related prblem n the site. This was s severe that nt charging was nt an ptin. Secndary drivers were the management supprt fr parking charging that was bserved at each site (hwever, this was a prduct f the severity f the prblem); and the dedicated site management staff wh were in mst cases key actrs in designing and implementing the scheme. Had they been less skilled r perseverant in the face f cnsiderable staff ppsitin, the scheme wuld have had few chances f successful implementatin. This case study is based n and in sme cases uses text frm the fllwing paper. The case study is written by Tm Rye, ne f the paper s authrs. Rye T and Isn S (2005) Overcming Barriers t the Implementatin f Car Parking Charges at UK Wrkplaces, Transprt Plicy, Vl 12, 2005 pp push-pull-parking.eu Page 18 f 136

19 Parking lt cncept Phenix West in the cntext f the mbility management f Drtmund Cuntry: Germany City: Drtmund A1 Objectives The City f Drtmund makes it pssible fr develpers f new buildings t build less parking with their develpment if they at the same time submit a mbility cncept/plan. This is in rder t reduce the reliance n the private car fr trips t the new/expanded building. A2 Descriptin f the CS The ld industrial City f Drtmund (abut 583,000 inhabitants) in the Ruhr area is significantly affected by structural change. The ambitin f the City is t make a transfrmatin frm an industrial city int a majr center f services and technlgy in Nrth Rhine-Westphalia. In this cntext, Phenix West - frmerly a steelwrks is being develped int a mdern technlgy park with up t 6,000 jbs n an area with abut 110ha. The park was designed t be built at high density and with high quality buildings and, related t this, a sustainable mde share fr trips t the site is als an bjective. The City f Drtmund makes it pssible fr develpers f new buildings at Phenix West t build less parking with their develpment if they at the same time submit a mbility cncept/plan, fr example that they will install bicycle racks r ther strage ptins fr bicycles. In cperatin with the city and ther experts, analyses f business trips and mbility behaviur can be carried ut in rder t create a custmized mbility cncept fr the cmpany. Parking management at Phenix West by the City f Drtmund Reductin f parking space requirements/parking standards: The specificatins in the develpment plan (in German: Bebauungsplan, a legally binding plan required t enable develpment) permit nly a few f the required parking spaces t be lcated n the surface. Cnstructin f undergrund r parking structures is expensive. Alternatives t reduce the number f parking spaces t be built are as fllws (these can be cmbined): Easement n a prperty nearby (s the walking distance between parking lt and wrkplace increases) Transfer f mney t the City, instead f building parking lts (7.000 per parking lt) Reducing the parking space requirement by means f a mbility cncept push-pull-parking.eu Page 19 f 136

20 Hwever, sme frm f reductin f the parking space requirement is essential fr negtiatins with the City. The parking space requirement is calculated accrding t an individual assessment in the planning permissin fr the cmpany (determining by the number f jbs, attendance rate, car user-share and s frth). Hwever, when the number f jbs is nt knwn, then the calculatin is perfrmed accrding t the specific tables (BauO NW) in this case: 1 parking lt per 30 m² f usable ffice space. This requirement can be reduced by building cycle parking spaces, as fllws: cycle parking fr 5% f emplyees: 2.5% fewer car parking spaces are permitted. cycle parking fr 10% f emplyees: 5% fewer parking spaces. cycle parking fr 15% f emplyees: 7.5% fewer parking spaces. An added bnus will be guaranteed if the creatin f a lcker rm (incl. shwer) is designated: 1 parking lt can be saved. High-quality bicycle parking Andreas Meißner Statin f the bicycle sharing scheme: Metrplrad Ruhr Andreas Meißner Further pprtunities fr reductins in parking spaces can be achieved thrugh agreements in the cntext f a mbility plan, as fllws: push-pull-parking.eu Page 20 f 136

21 The City f Drtmund ffers mbility cnsulting services fr the enterprises at Phenix West: Imprvement f prcesses in business trip lgistics (gds traffic) Jb tickets r ther public transprt ffers Measures t prmte carpling Other image-prmting measures Cnstructin f bicycle parking facilities / shwers / changing facilities Develpment f a mandatry prgram f measures ( urban develpment cntract ) fr example: Obligatry intrductin f Jb-Tickets fr the staff Cntract with a car-sharing cmpany Cnstructin f bicycle parking facilities, bicycle facilities in the building, stacking spaces, autmatic parking racks parking management f the cmpanies parking lts etc. The impact f the reduced parking requirements is subject t annual mnitring, and cmpanies must pay if there is a failure t cmply. The mney ges int a fundatin that ultimately can pay fr additinal Cmmunity parking spaces. B Csts and wh paid them Csts are unknwn r nt dcumented. Explicitly fr mbility management csts are incurred s far nly fr the Mbility Guide (publicatin by the LEG) and in the frm f staff hurs fr cnsulting. The csts f cycling infrastructure are included in the verall csts f land develpment. In additin, the csts fr the bus services are nt published. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Reducing the number f build parking lts and therefre a psitive effect f the wrktravel chice twards a sustainable mde f transprtatin A mdal shift (starting with abut 80 % car use in the beginning) Cunting cars befre and after the measure; mnitring f the amunt f jb tickets, number f bicycle facilities Unfrtunately the develpment f the whle Phenix West area is rather slw and therefre big amunt f space is unused; Drtmund ver all is facing a dramatic decline in its ecnmic perfrmance. A publicatin in 2009 reprted that 30 cmpanies with abut 50 Emplyee are lcated Phenix West. Especially the ffers fr mbility cnsulting and the bicycle facilities were used. push-pull-parking.eu Page 21 f 136

22 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages Installatin f the master plan: Mbility Drtmund 2004 The Drtmund mbility management cncept is part f the urban transprt master plan called Mbility Drtmund 2004 The measures that make up the master plan include: prmtin f mbility management in cmpanies mbility management fr the city administratin specific target grup mbility management (primary schls, vcatinal schls, cmpanies) Mbility Management in Urban Planning / Master Plan Mbility establishment f a Mbility Centre Prmtin f carpling Creatin f new public transprt services With the Cuncil Decisin n the amunt f cmmuted payment (transfer f mney t the Cuncil instead f building parking spaces, cst per parking space) was fixed; befre that this amunt had been flexible Develpment f (rad) infrastructure and bicycle paths in Phenix West up t 2009 D2 Barriers N barriers were reprted. D3 Drivers The Drtmund mbility management cncept is part f the urban transprt plan, the s-called master plan mbility Drtmund 2004, which was adpted by all majr parties in the city parliament and thus deeply rted in the administratin. The mbility management is slidly integrated in the future planning f the City. The City Cuncil understands itself as a rle mdel and implements cncrete measures. This cmmitment has been rewarded: The City f Drtmund reached 2 nd place in the German wide cntest Best Practice in mbility management. In ttal six cmpanies and municipalities were given awards by the German Federal Envirnment Ministry and German Energy Agency (dena) in recgnitin f exemplary mbility management and respective GHG reductins in transprt. Within this German wide cntest Best Practice in mbility management exemplary prjects aiming at changes f car drivers twards mre sustainable passenger transprt like PT r car pling were searched and awarded. push-pull-parking.eu Page 22 f 136

23 Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. Mbilitätsmanagement Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und Wirkungen in der Praxis. Hrsg.: Mechtild Stiewe u. Ulrike Reutter; Essen 2012, p "LEG Stadtentwicklung GmbH & C. KG (Hrsg): "Mbilitätshandbuch Zukunftsstandrt Phenix West" 2008: Unter: ( ) f899e&prjektId=59&back= ads/stadtplanung_1/masterplan_mbilitaet_.pdf push-pull-parking.eu Page 23 f 136

24 Mbility cncept f the Technical University f Graz fllwing the Push&Pull principles Cuntry: Graz, Austria Year(s): 2006 up t 2014 A1 Objectives I. Optimisatin f mbility f emplyees, students and deliverers II. III. A2 Establish an envirnmentally friendly mbility system Re-use f TU-space mre buildings instead f parking lts and mre recreatin and cmmunicatin area fr students and emplyees Descriptin f the CS The Technical University f Graz has apprximately emplyees and students. The University is lcated at 3 main places (2 very central) all f them well accessible by public transprt, bicycle and n ft. The public space surrunding f the campus is paid parking area. In 2006 the TU Graz started t develp a mbility cncept which cntains f a parking management system and mbility management measures t encurage the use f sustainable mbility mdes the apprach was a classical push & pull ne. The Push side: The parking management system cntained as a first step a reductin in available parking spaces frm t The criteria fr getting a permissin t park was the distance t the living place. Thse wh live less than 1,5 kilmetres frm the University weren t allwed t park their car at ne f University s parking lts any mre. Additinally the University intrduced parking fees. 20 / mnth permit t park but n allcated parking lt 15 / mnth - permit t park fr emplyees with hurs emplyment / week 40 / mnth - permit t park at a rfed parking space / garage In a secnd step the available parking lts were reduced frm t 740 nly by increasing the radius f the exclusin zne t 2,5 km. The Pull side: T encurage the use f sustainable mbility several measures have been implemented such as Financial supprt fr public transprt tickets fr thse wh wuld fulfil the criteria (the ticket has t be shwn and then ne culd receive apprx. 50% f the 6-mnths r annual tickets) push-pull-parking.eu Page 24 f 136

25 The TU Graz built hundreds f safe, weather prtected bicycle racks at the entrances f the different buildings In ne week each year emplyees culd bring their bikes t be repaired at the TU lcatin. A service cntract with a lcal bicycle dealer enables emplyees t receive that service free f charge. Only material has t be paid. The rest is paid by the revenues f parking management. During the rest f the year bikes culd be delivered at the repair shp f the bike dealer and substitute bikes are handed ver t TU emplyees fr the time when the bike is repaired. A business bike mdel has been develped. Emplyees can buy a high quality bicycle which is strngly subsidised by the University. 700 bikes have been purchased. Additinally t the mbility cncept fr emplyees and students n cmmuter trips a business trip mdel has been implemented which has as main bjective t carry ut business trips between different University lcatins and ther scientific entities by bicycle. B Csts and wh paid them The develpment and implementatin f the first step f the whle prgram cst apprx ,- Eur. 30% f the investment csts are funded by the Austrian initiative klimaaktiv and similar ther nes. The csts f the pull measures are funded by the revenues f the parking management system. Apprximately ,- Eur revenues frm parking management are invested every year int sustainable mbility. Fig.: High quality TU-Bike with wn design. Technical University f Graz push-pull-parking.eu Page 25 f 136

26 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Reductin f emplyees cmmuting by car. Distance hme-wrk. Parking fees have been implemented Number f permits t park. Mney that has been gained. The number f peple with parking permit has been reduced frm 1340 t 740. Financing sustainable transprt measures (pull) thrugh parking revenues Mney frm parking fees Spent mney n PT-ticket subsidies and n bicycle measures Receipts and expenditures csts In ttal ca Eur have been invested in the first phase. Per year ca ,- Eur are gained as revenues frm parking and invested int the maintenance f the system and int encuraging sustainable transprt mdes. Reductin f the negative impacts n the envirnment Average car km which were shifted 220 wrking days Calculatin f shifted km In ttal ca. 244 t CO 2 / year was saved D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The Case Study was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 2006 start f the develpment f a mbility cncept with phase ne (reductin f parking spaces frm t 1.100). Stage 2: By 2013 the 2 nd phase was finalised with a further reductin f parking permits t 740 and a building f 880 bicycle racks. Stage 3: In 2014 anther 170 bicycles have been purchased t be frwarded t the emplyees. push-pull-parking.eu Page 26 f 136

27 D2 Barriers When setting up the system which frmed a significant change in the general habits f the University the fear f ppsitin and resistance was quite high. Therefre the persns in charge f the system were really astunded that when the scheme was finally implemented a majr clash did nt and n additinal measures needed t be taken. D3 Drivers The driving frce behind the mbility cncept based upn the push & pull principles was the Technical University itself. DI Gerhard Kelz, head f the department f Buildings and Technic tk ver the respnsibility. Fr mre infrmatin (in German nly) see: 0Graz_07% pdf push-pull-parking.eu Page 27 f 136

28 Parking management in Vienna City, Cuntry: Vienna, Austria Year(s): Implementatin in varius steps, mainly 1994 up t 2012 A1 Objectives The aim f the parking space management system, which was first intrduced in 1994, was t lwer the traffic in the districts by a reductin in lng-term parking and parking space availability and furthermre t imprve the parking space situatin fr residents. A2 Descriptin f the CS The increase f mtrized individual traffic and the scarcity f parking space in Vienna frced the City t develp a plan fr parking space management. The aims were and are t reclaim public space and an imprvement f the parking space fr residential and shrt-duratin parking as well as urban freight traffic. As a result, mre peple switch t public transprt facilities r bicycles and an imprvement f the verall traffic situatin and quality f life in terms f better envirnment can be achieved. In 1994, Vienna City Cuncil, adpted a Traffic cncept and in 2003 this was develped further in a Transprt Master Plan Vienna 2003 in rder t prmte public transprt, pedestrian and bicycle traffic and t change mdal split (=> mdal shift). Parking management is ne f the strategies fr managing the statinary traffic aside frm a garage prgramme (fr prmting the building f cllective garages) and the develpment f Park & Ride systems. During the wrk n the traffic cncept 1994, a City Cmmissin develped a parking management cncept with the terms f peratin and exceptins fr large shrt-term parking znes, and a pilt prject was started in the frm f a shrt-term parking zne that was implemented acrss the entire 1st district. The Cmmissin was cmpsed f cncerned interest grups, district cuncils and representatives f business, residents and trade. The aims f parking management are: reductin f car traffic and envirnmental impact; a better situatin fr bth parking and public transprt (thrugh the reductin f illegal parking); imprved accessibility fr freight transprt and deliveries; reclaimed public space and enhanced rad safety; revenues fr the imprvement f urban transprt; and upgrading f the residential envirnment. push-pull-parking.eu Page 28 f 136

29 At the cre f parking space management in Vienna was the transfrmatin f entire districts r large cnnected parts theref int shrt-term parking znes. The area-wide shrt-term parking nw cvers the districts 1 t 9, 15, 20 and parts f the 12th, 14th, 16th and 17th district. In the 15th district the area arund Stadthalle is subject t special parking regulatins. In the shrt term parking znes there are restricted parking times and special parking fees. surce: B Csts and wh paid them The rates fr parking were increased frm 1,20 Eur per hur t 2 Eur per hur in 2012 with the effect f a lwer demand fr shrt time parking. push-pull-parking.eu Page 29 f 136

30 Fr the residents in the area there are permanent parking permits (Parkpickerl). Applicatins fr resident parking permits ("parking stickers") can be made nline r directly frm the municipal district ffice. Cmpanies and firms may apply fr a temprary parking permit ("Parkkarte"). C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS - In the parking management district 1-9 and 20 the mdal split targets fr the car traffic are already achieved very gd results fr the districts 14 t 19 lwer the traffic in the districts imprvement f parking space situatin fr the residential ppulatin imprvement f accessibility fr freight traffic Parking space management: restricted parking times and parking fees Evaluatin the bjectives f Transprt Master Plan Vienna in 2013 (mdal split, availability f parking space, numbers f illegal parkers, average parking time) - situatin fr residents further imprved thanks t an increase in perating hurs f parking management in inner districts up t 10pm - Befre intrductin f parking management the average parking time within the belt was 6 t 8 hurs. Nw it is 1 t 2 hurs Reductin in the utilizatin f parking lts f up t 30% after the intrductin f parking management, mainly due t the decline f cars with Nn-Viennanumberplates In additin, a significant reductin in parking search traffic and the number f illegal parking spaces has declined significantly. push-pull-parking.eu Page 30 f 136

31 Mdal Split: Change in Mdal Split Plan 2003/2008 Vienna Mdal split per district in , , ,23 ft bicycle pt mtrcycle car driver car passenger Surces: Scialdata (2007): Evaluierung Masterplan Verkehr Wien, Bericht mit Zeitreihe mniphn (2012): Marktfrschung für die Wiener Linien: Mbilitätsverhalten In Masterplan Verkehr Wien 2003 Evaluierung push-pull-parking.eu Page 31 f 136

32 Reductin f illegal parking surce: surce: push-pull-parking.eu Page 32 f 136

33 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 1959: First shrt-term parking znes in individual streets in the 1st district were intrduced Stage 2: 1975: Paid parking was intrduced in these znes Stage 3: 1993/1994: Pilt prject: The shrt-term parking zne was applied within the entire 1st district (city center) f Vienna in Befre a cmmissin wrked ut a parking management cncept with terms and exceptins fr these large-area shrtterm parking znes. The Cmmissin was cmpsed f cncerned interest grups, district cuncils and representatives f business, residents and trade. In the fllwing years the system was enhanced t mre inner districts. Stage 4: 2012: The shrt-term parking znes were enlarged mre and mre and cntain nw additinally parts f the district 12, 14, 16 and 17 and furthermre the whle 15th district are included. The area arund Stadthalle is subject t special parking regulatins. Latest develpment: In cntinuus steps lng-term parking shuld be shifted frm n-streetparking int in garages r private parking spaces in public garages, especially cllective husing garages. (Garage Prgram 2014) D2 Barriers In the 1990s there was a majr public debate in Vienna as t whether it shuld cst smething t use public space ccupied by parked cars, culminating in a legal decisin that fund in favur f the City and fr charging fr parking. Initial ppsitin frm residents was vercme based n ratinal arguments and als pen debates where mtrists and residents tried t put themselves in the ther s psitin, t understand the ppsing pint f view. The City argues that it des nt need any special tactics, but rather that it just needs t lay its cards n the table in terms f making public data and facts that are understd by mst peple. D3 Drivers One f the drivers was that the Vienna Transprt Master Plan 2003 which was develped in cllabratin with citizens and s there was high acceptance already. In 2013 there was als a Vienna wide survey abut the parking management system. Fr managing the statinary traffic als garage prgrammes (fr prmting the building f cllective garages) and the develpment f Park & Ride systems is a driver. The increase in the number f cmmercial garage spaces between 2002 and 2007 f arund 18,000 is significant. Furthermre since 2002, nearly 3,000 park and ride spaces have been built. The newly published STEP 2025 Wien - Fachknzept Mbilität emphasizes the psitive effects f parking management fr Vienna s envirnment and ecnmy. push-pull-parking.eu Page 33 f 136

34 Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. STEP 2025 Wien - Fachknzept Mbilität - miteinander mbil, p in: t-mbilitaet-entwurf.pdf "Transprt Masterplan Vienna in Masterplan Verkehr 2003.Evaluierung und Frtschreibung 2008 In: Masterplan Verkehr Wien 2003.Evaluierung 2013 In: push-pull-parking.eu Page 34 f 136

35 Zurich parking supply cap City, Cuntry: Zurich, Switzerland Year(s): Starting in the early 1990ies, Intrductin f a new cmmunal traffic plan in 1996 A1 Objectives The parking supply cap aimed t achieve a balance between the demands fr mre pedestrianisatin and the interests f business t prvide enugh parking spaces by balancing the creatin f additinal ff-street parking with an equal reductin in n-street parking and usage f these spaces fr green spaces, pedestrianisatin and bicycle traffic. A2 Descriptin f the CS 1996, Zürich intrduced what is called the Histrical cmprmise seeking a balance between the demands fr mre pedestrianisatin and the interests f business t prvide enugh parking spaces. Since then, every intrductin f new ff-street parking spaces has t be balanced by taking away n-street parking spaces this is valid fr the inner city as well as a relative large area arund the inner city (see adjacent map). The law thus states, that n new parking can be built unless the City agrees t remve an equal number f n-street parking spaces. Frm 1996 t 2013 abut 800 n-street parking spaces have been taken ut and upgraded t mre urban, liveable and high quality street space, while abut 800 publicly accessible ff-street parking spaces have been created. At the same time, business in general has thrived. B Csts and wh paid them Parking facilities built under public plazas are usually privately perated with the exceptin f three facilities that are verseen by the city. Private develpers get a cncessin t manage the facilities n public grund. Tw large department stres used their wn mney t build large undergrund parking spaces. The city lst sme revenue because n-street parking spaces (that yu had t pay fr) were ablished and ff-street parking spaces are mstly private. push-pull-parking.eu Page 35 f 136

36 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS ( ) Maintaining the number f parking spaces Ttal number f parking spaces Cunt 7622 (1996) 7801 (2013) Balance: +179 Reducing the number f n-street parking spaces Number f n-street parking spaces Cunt 4605 (1996) 3667 (2013) Balance: -938 Creating attractive urban spaces Transfrmatin f urban spaces List The freed surface has been used fr creating attractive new squares, trees and greenery and additinal space fr pedestrians and bicycles Reductin f cruising (park search travel) Cncentratin f parking ffer in ff street parking Cunt 3017 (1996) 4134 (2013) Balance: The slight surplus f parking spaces is mainly there t give urban architects and traffic planners sme flexibility with ablishing n-street parking when they want t create new urban spaces. The amunt f search traffic is nt measured, but it can safely be assumed that the cncentratin f parking in park-huses substantially reduces search traffic. Befre/after picture frm Sechseläutenplatz (surce city f Zürich) push-pull-parking.eu Page 36 f 136

37 Arund 2009, 2010 there was a legal dispute whether the cunting methd by the city was crrect: fix reserved parking spaces were nt included in the histrical cmprmise as the parking cmprmise was abut temprary visitrs, nt fixed parkers. But there was a categry freihausparkkarte which was a srt f mnthly ticket an interest grup demanded that these shuld als be excluded frm the cunting as these did als nt belng t the visitr categry. Hwever, a cmmissin cncluded that this type f parking mstly just served t fill under used parking spaces in lw parts f the seasn. Except fr this dispute, the histrical cmprmise has held t date (2014). D Implementatin prcess The regular cunting f parking spaces in the determined zne is a fix part f the 1996 cmmunal traffic plan and the cunt shuld include visitr and custmer parking spaces (with up t 3 hur maximum parking time n-street) meaning parking spaces fr which visitrs have a realistic chance t indeed find a space. Since 2001, the cunt is dne by a private, independent cnsultancy. There are tw pssibilities fr a prject: The city intends t ablish n-street parking spaces In this case the city has t initiate a prject t build additinal ff-street parking spaces r negtiate the transfrmatin f fixed reserved ff-street parking spaces int public accessible parking spaces A private party intends t build a parking garage In this case, the city has t initiate ne r several prjects t reduce n-street parking spaces in the surrundings (preferably in a radius f 400m but the distance is nt bligatry, the law just states it has t be in the determined zne fr the histrical cmprmise) The city has prduced a whle range f urban transfrmatin prject plans, which are implemented step by step. D1. Stages There were n clear stages, hwever, there was a prcess: 1990 a new Kmmunaler Verkehrsplan cmmunal traffic plan - became active a Vlksinitiative peple s initiative fr mre attractive pedestrian znes was started a new cmmunal traffic plan was intrduced and the peple s initiative was withdrawn, as the plan cntained the histrical cmprmise: mre space fr pedestrians but als maintenance f the verall number f parking spaces this within a clearly determined inner zne f the city. After 1996 that sme fine tuning was needed in the cunting methds, as this was always a surce f dispute, and the city had t make a systematic range f plans fr urban transfrmatin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 37 f 136

38 D2 Barriers There was a clash f interests: n the ne hand, a demand fr mre pedestrianisatin, mre green, mre cycling n the ther hand the demand frm business, nt t reduce parking space as this was deemed imprtant fr thriving business. It was disslved thrugh the histrical cmprmise. Majr surce f disputes were the determinatin f the zne and the methd f cunting the parking spaces this has t be very clearly and transparently defined these bstacles did nt stp but hindered the prcess. The cncerned city departments need t have a clear strategy and planning fr urban transfrmatin several ptins need t be available and gd cmmunicatin is necessary it this is nt available it is a barrier. D3 Drivers The plitical culture in the city f Zürich and in Switzerland peple s initiatives and vtes have a lt f pwer and have t be taken int accunt and everybdy is used t that that led t the histrical cmprmise. Excellent accessibility f Zürich s centre by public transprt there are gd alternatives t the car. High level f planning culture in the planning departments f Zürich: due t their gd cmmunicatin skills, gd management skills and gd urban transfrmatin planning the histrical cmprmise is realised with steady, step-by-step prgress. The histrical cmprmise is embedded in an excellent verall urban and traffic planning strategy Zürich has detailed parking and traffic cncepts nt nly fr the inner zne cncerned by this cmprmise, but als fr the uter zne. That made implementatin easier. Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. Fact sheet n the status f the histrical cmprmise in 2013 (in German) shrt dcument mstly shwing the mst up-t-date numbers: ueren/parkierung/14_03_06_gesamtfaktenblatt_histkmp2013.pdf Explanatin and implementatin f the histrical cmprmise (2009) (in German) Cntains many befre after pictures. ueren/parkierung/bericht_web_der%20histrische%20kmprmiss.pdf Eurpe's Parking U-Turn: Frm Accmmdatin t Regulatin, ITDP-reprt 2011, Michael Kdransky and Gabrielle Hermann, n pages verview ver Zürichs parking plicy gd t understand the wider cntext. Turn%3A+Frm+Accmmdatin+t+Regulatin push-pull-parking.eu Page 38 f 136

39 Webpage f the city f Zürich with the histrical cmprmise: prviding links t further dcumentatin, especially n the legal disputes (all in German) and als sme befre/after pictures as well as the actual numbers f parking places. push-pull-parking.eu Page 39 f 136

40 Fahrtenmdell Trip Cntingent Mdel fr Parking Standards Plicy City, Cuntry: Zurich, Switzerland Year(s): 1999 up t 2012 A1 Objectives The City Cantn f Zurich adapted its wn flexible parking regulatin in rder t avid nnefficient use f urban space and traffic generatin f a new urban develpment that wuld be incmpatible with, fr example, neighburing husing areas. The mechanism was first used mainly t save mney fr investrs where a high parking demand is nt expected in urban areas. A2 Descriptin f the CS The City Cantn f Zurich adapted its wn flexible parking regulatin in rder t avid nnefficient use f urban space and traffic generatin f a new urban develpment that wuld be incmpatible with, fr example, neighburing husing areas. The mechanism was first used mainly t save mney fr investrs where a high parking demand is nt expected in urban areas. A specific regulatin, cmbined with mnitring and the bligatin fr mbility management measures was develped that respnds t the specific lcatin. In these cases the issue f traffic generatin annying the husing neighburhd directly was the main mtive. The Fahrtenmdell (trip cntingent mdel) is a tl t have a better planning f the traffic generatin frm highly frequented sites and t use the parking space in a mre efficient way. The Fahrtenmdell regulatin allws a mre flexible private parking management, cmpared t parking standards and parking limits (minimum r maximum numbers f parking spaces t prvide) in the building legislatin. The mdel calculates the traffic generatin f shrt term and lng term parking dependent n the land use at the lcatin, and defines a threshld f allwed traffic generatin frm this. In the case that this permitted traffic vlume is exceeded, measured by mnitring, mbility management measures becme mandatry fr the peratr f the garage t get the trip generatin back t the assigned traffic vlume. B Csts and wh paid them By managing the traffic/parking vlumes in a specific way t the lcatin and cnditins the measure is mre targeted and accurate fr the purpse. Main effect: budget savings by prviding nt mre parking than necessary / cmpatible t the lcal envirnment. Cmpared t ther infrastructure measures the mbility management measures are less cstly. push-pull-parking.eu Page 40 f 136

41 C Mnitring shws that the traffic generated nrmally des nt exceeding the level permitted. Mnitring csts are lw frm lcal survey r even lwer by analyses f the data f barrier rganized parking. Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results Example Sihlcity Best knwn example is Sihlcity, a shpping centre n a frmer factry site nt far frm the inner-city f Zurich and with excellent access by tram and reginal rail. Neighburing husing areas that wuld have cmplained abut the prject (with gd chance t succeed in the Swiss direct demcracy) were cnvinced that the new traffic generatin wuld be very lw by the regulatin s mechanisms. This limit had a majr influence n the high price per hur fr parking in the remaining parking facilities. New public transprt stps funded by the city encuraged the develper t accept the lw car traffic generatin apprach that was cntrary t the verall shpping centre plicies elsewhere. There are 850 parking lts ffered (50 park and ride spaces and tw Car sharing lcatins included), and charged parking is bligatry. In cnsequence the emplyees f shps in Sihlcity d nt have parking allwance. The maximum car trip cntingent is 8,800 trips / day (t be achieved within 5 years, starting frm 10,000 trips / day in 2007). Further specific threshlds are 1,300 trips / night and 800 trips / peak hur. The Sihlcity ffers 41,000 m 2 rentable space fr shpping, additinal space fr cinema, services, fitness etc.. Visitrs were cunted at 19,000 per day, whilst 2,300 persns are wrking there. There was a vlume f investment f 600 Mi. Already in 2002 Sihlcity was regulated by cntract. Part f the building permissin were cmplementing parking regulatins: e.g. 600 bike parking spaces and financial cntributin t public transprt imprvements. Tram line n. 5 extensin t Sihlcity was financed fr the first tw years frm 2007 by Sihlcity, and afterwards by the public transprt cmpany OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Reducing the amunt f (parked cars, therefre traffic generating) cars by building permit regulatin fr the Sihlcity develpment Car parking was nt fully ccupied during the week (nly n Saturdays full ccupied). Traffic generatin was apprximately 3,600 trips per day (8,800 trips by car per day are allwed). The barriers at the garage entrances are cunting cars steadily anyway. Very cheap t mnitr by an cnsultancy biannually.. Only 28% use the car the shppers frequency (19,000 visitrs per day) were stable push-pull-parking.eu Page 41 f 136

42 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages In 1999 the Fahrtenmdell (trip cntingent mdel) was adapted first as an unique exceptin fr the enlargement f the ETH University in Zurich. The higher density f buildings meant significant additinal cnstructin csts fr parking accrding t the legal parking standards at that time. Due t the fact that the university has a high share f nn-car based access anyway and f being a public institutin the denser institute buildings gt cnstructin permits withut additinal parking. The secnd case was in the brwnfield develpment Neu-Oerlikn fr retail and business, where a limitatin f 5,000 car trips /day traffic generatin was fixed fr a blck. This was result frm an Envirnment Impact Assessment (EIA) fr the entire area. The regulatin was practiced by the city administratin mre ften frm 2002 t 2012 in several cases f highly traffic generating land use. It was integrated part f the building permit prcedures. The investrs and develpers applying fr a building permit are asked t reflect their plicy and management n parking capacity in rder t get a mre efficient and sustainable urban develpment. D2 Barriers Barrier: Business cmmunity feeling restricted in their strategies t ffer maximum parking capacity t keep all ptins in future, this led t cnfrntatin in the city cuncil. The main bjectin t this push measure came frm the shpping retailers and develpers cmmunity wh expected lng term disadvantages frm nn-build parking vlumes. In anther case (cmbined stadium / shpping mall) the investr stepped ut f the prject fr ther reasns. But the image f prjects failing because f restraint based parking standards was discussed in the business cmmunity. Direct public reactin n the Trip Cntingent Mdel was rare, the matter mre an expert issue. It was supprted by the transprt & envirnment cnsumers assciatin VCS (Verkehrsclub der Schweiz) wh helped t disseminated the mdel t ther regins in Switzerland. Nevertheless the general interrelatin f traffic and envirnment / climate change mitigatin actin, made dynamic by parking plicy, is in public discussin, due t the right f the citizens t influence the strategy t a large extend by referendum. (SEE OTHER ZURICH CASE ON PARKING POLICY IN GENERAL). Basically the mdel is a legally allwed planning instrument, accrding t the cantnal legislatin. It is nt explicitly incrprated in the parking legislatin as a rule yet, therefre penalties are nt easy t implement, hwever it wrked in practice withut a case fr penalty. In advance during the planning phase the mdel shwed its pwer and was challenged legally. But the judiciary clarified the situatin in a critical case n a shpping lcatin in favur f the mdel. The judgement cnfirmed the right f the City f Zurich t intrduce such a regulatin in the public interest. push-pull-parking.eu Page 42 f 136

43 A key supprtive factr was a general restrictive parking plicy in the city cantn f Zurich, which was a kind f dr pener fr acceptance f the specific mderate regulatin. The regulatry frame wrks in this sense well as the threshld was never exceeded up t nw in the mnitring. This means that the parking management at lw level f parking facilities achieved the gal t limit the traffic generatin t a level that was tlerable befre. D3 Drivers Driver 1: Lng term rientatin f administratin in the Zurich city gvernment t integrate transprt planning and urban develpment fr sustainable develpment (envirnmental plicy) reasns: Key supprtive factr was a general restrictive parking plicy in the city cantn f Zurich, that was a kind f dr pener fr acceptance f the specific mderate regulatin. Main bjectin n this push measure came frm the shpping retailers and develpers cmmunity expecting lng term disadvantages frm nnbuild parking vlumes. Driver 2: The Zurich urban sciety, nn-regarding the specific Fahrtenmdell cases, after lng time f histric parking cmprmise in Zurich, were cnfirming a new parking plicy by referendum and urging n climate change mitigatin actin. Recently therefre the mdel s practice was substituted by a less flexible. List f references Field, Simn (2011): Case Study Sihlcity. In: Eurpe s Vibrant New Lw Car(bn) Cmmunities. p New Yrk City (ITDP). Fr Dwnlad at Hüsler, Willi; Urbani, Luca (2009): New strategies fr the reductin f shpping centres generated car trips thery and experiences. In Indr and built envirnment 2009, 18: Stadt Zürich (Editr, 2007): Leitfaden Fahrtenmdell eine Planungshilfe. (Manual fr develpers and ther leaflets / dcuments fr the public) Fellmann, Andy: Das Zürcher Fahrtenmdell. In: Cllage 6/05, p Rbert de Tmmasi, Rbert (2009): A gd example f integratin: Sihlcity, Zürich, Switzerland. Presentatin held at the Max Final Cnference, 15/16 September 2009 in Krakw Hesli, Brun, Widmer, Paul, Briner, Hans (2007): Fahrten- und Fahrleistungsmdelle: Erste Erfahrungen. Frschungsauftrag SVI 2000/384 i.a. Bundesamt für Straßen auf Antrag der Vereinigung Schweizerischer Verkehrsingenieure (SVI). Bern (Research n traffic cntingency mdels: first experiences) Sihlcity (surce: City f Zurich) push-pull-parking.eu Page 43 f 136

44 Sihlcity in cmparisn with an car-riented shpping centre in Zurich Sihlcity cmpared t car riented ther shpping centre in Zurich (surce: Hüsler / Urbani 2009) push-pull-parking.eu Page 44 f 136

45 Extensin f cntrlled n-street parking in Edinburgh - impacts in ne sub-area City, Cuntry: Edinburgh, UK (Sctland) Year(s): Outline scheme design in 2005, peratins frm 2007 nwards A1 Objectives The City f Edinburgh Cuncil s stated bjectives fr expanding its n-street parking cntrls (called a Cntrlled (Parking) Zne, C(P)Z) were t reduce parking-related cngestin, make parking easier fr shppers, enable residents t park near their hmes, discurage parking fr lng perids by drivers frm utside the lcal area, keep traffic mving, ensure access fr emergency vehicles, and imprve rad safety. A2 Descriptin f the CS Edinburgh is the capital f Sctland in the UK and is a city f arund 460,000 peple in a regin f arund 1,000,000 peple. Its first n-street parking cntrls were intrduced in 1974 and cvered the city centre and the very mst inner suburbs arund at the mst, the cntrls extended 1.5 km frm the centre. These cntrls required residents t hld a permit t park n street during cntrlled hurs, and charged visitrs by the hur t park, with maximum duratin f stay f between 1 and 4 hurs depending n lcatin. Residents culd park fr as lng as they wished. Mst cntrls applied nly frm 0830 t 1830 Mnday t Saturday in the very city centre, and 0830 t 1730 Mnday t Friday in the slightly mre peripheral cntrlled area. Outside these times there was n payment r permit required t park. Increasing pressure n residential parking by cmmuters raised the plitical imprtance f parking s that by the mid 2000s, the Cuncil was frced t expand the CPZ int mre residential areas further frm the city centre. Sme 16 new znes were intrduced in 2006 and 2007, such that at its furthest the new CPZ extended 3km frm the city centre. The number f cntrlled spaces in the extended CPZ is unknwn, but in the ld CPZ it was 5,740; the relative sizes f the ld and extended CPZs suggests that there are at least as many spaces in the extended area. This CS refers t a study f a very small part f the extended CPZ, in the wealthy Merchistn area in the suthwest f Edinburgh, abut 2.5km frm the city centre. The main emplyer and traffic generatr in the area is Edinburgh Napier University and many f its staff parked free n street in the Merchistn area, befre cntrls were intrduced. The new cntrls limited the maximum stay t 4 hurs and levied a charge f 70 pence (abut 1.10) per hur. Previusly there was n charge and n maximum stay. Residents were t pay arund 100 per year fr a parking permit with a maximum f tw permits per husehld. Impacts f the scheme n ccupancy f streets within and just utside the new CPZ can be seen belw, the pht n the left is a street just utside, whilst the pht n the right is a street just within the zne. (Pictures by William Mykura.) push-pull-parking.eu Page 45 f 136

46 B Csts and wh paid them This prject was an extensin t an existing CPZ and therefre the csts were cmpsed f paint and signs fr rad markings, ticket machines and the staff csts f preparing, cnsulting n and finalising the legal definitins f the CPZ. The additinal perating csts were enfrcement staff and staff time t empty and maintain the ticket machines. Since the parking peratin was already live, cvering ther areas f the city, there was n need fr the majr investment f setting up the back-ffice peratin needed t administer and run a CPZ ticket and permit issuing, handling mney and card payments, administering fines, and managing appeals against fines. The precise csts f the CPZ extensin in the area cvered by this CPZ are nt knwn. Belw, hwever, are sme indicative csts frm a CPZ in anther British city (nt Edinburgh) with abut 100km f n-street parking regulatins, althugh nly 1,000 cntrlled parking spaces. Its peratin was estimated t require 8 enfrcement staff and tw back ffice staff, and frm nthing, was frecast t require the fllwing investment csts: push-pull-parking.eu Page 46 f 136

47 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results In spite f the large number f stated bjectives fr the CPZ, n data were cllected by the City Cuncil (municipality) t measure whether r nt the bjectives had been achieved. Hwever, in the cntext f a study carried ut by the university lcated in the new CPZ, sme ccupancy and turnver data were cllected in the befre situatin, and then a few weeks after implementatin, in February and March OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Reducing cars parked fr lng perids f time Length f stay Prprtin f cars parked fr mre than 4 hurs fell frm 22% t 10% Reducing prprtin f lng term parkers frm utside area Making it easier fr residents t park Reducing parking related cngestin Prprtin f parkers wh are residents; ccupancy Occupancy Occupancy Befre and after number plate and permit survey Large majrity f parkers in after situatin were residents Occupancy n 3 f 4 streets surveyed fell by 40-50% after cntrls intrduced. Occupancy n uncntrlled streets just utside the new cntrlled area dubled. The perid f the evaluatin was very shrt s framewrk cnditins were unlikely t have had much impact. In the lnger term, factrs such as the increasing prprtin f n-car husehlds in Edinburgh, increasing levels f walking and cycling and fuel csts rising faster than inflatin will have had an effect n parking demand ver and abve the impact f the new parking cntrls. D Implementatin prcess The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: Outline scheme design and infrmal public cnsultatin. January t July Carried ut by City f Edinburgh Cuncil and its cnsultants; general public invlved in public meetings, respnding t questinnaires etc. Stage 2: Detailed scheme design, preparatin f Traffic Regulatin Orders (TROs - legal definitin f CPZ) September 2005 t February Carried ut by City f Edinburgh Cuncil and its cnsultants Stage 3: Frmal legal cnsultatin n the TROs. March t April Carried ut by City f Edinburgh Cuncil and its cnsultants, general public invlved in submitting frmal bjectins t the scheme. push-pull-parking.eu Page 47 f 136

48 Stage 4: Mdificatin f scheme in light f bjectins; apprval by Cuncil f final rders. May t September Stage 5: Prcurement and appintment f cntractrs and implementatin f scheme. September t December Stage 6: CPZ starts perating, 8 January D2 Barriers As with any CPZ scheme, the main barrier was public ppsitin, but this was managed thrugh careful scheme design and public cnsultatin. D3 Drivers The main driver fr the scheme was plitical supprt resulting frm pressure frm residents fr parking cntrls. Pliticians were mre likely t supprt requests frm residents fr parking cntrls than t listen t bjectins frm cmmuters, sme f whm cme frm utside Edinburgh. The fact that parking cntrls had been implemented previusly in the city withut detrimental effects n lcal shpkeepers als helped. This case study is based n research carried ut by William Mykura whilst he was emplyed as a lecturer at Edinburgh Napier University. The infrmatin is reprduced here with his permissin. There is n ther dcumentatin n which the CS was based. push-pull-parking.eu Page 48 f 136

49 Parking management in Graz Cuntry: Austria City: Graz A1 Objectives Mdal shift f cmmuter traffic twards public transprt; Use freed-up parking space fr pedestrians, cyclists and public transprt; Ensure the multiple use f parking spaces fr shpping and business traffic. A2 Descriptin f the CS The cncept Space fr peple is an verall and integrated strategy t imprve the living cnditins in the city f Graz, via the implementatin f crdinated transprt measures. Thse measures relevant t this case study are summarised belw: In the heart f the histrical ld city a pedestrian area was established, with cyclists nly having limited access; With a few exceptins, n shrt-term parking is allwed within the inner city area, althugh, shrt-term parking is allwed at the inner city utskirts; The mnitring and enfrcement f shrt-term parking was devlved t a private cmpany. The revenue earned frm parking tickets / fines (althugh, reduced by the csts f mnitring) is earmarked t supprt the expansin and imprvement f the quality f public transprt. These imprvements are primarily in relatin t service frequencies, as well as mbility management measures (e.g. mbility cnsultants) and imprving passenger waiting cnditins (stps expansin / canpy / passenger infrmatin). In parallel, as a result f the actins mentined abve, there were als significant investments fr imprving the system by establishing a cmprehensive system f parking ticket machines. Revenue generated In 2014, the City f Graz generated 24.8 millin via parking-space management millin were taken frm charges, the rest frm penalties. Taking int accunt csts fr mnitring, staff and maintenance f the parking machines, arund 3.8 millin remained and was used fr traffic measures such as Park & Ride, mbility checks r mre frequent and extended bus traffic. push-pull-parking.eu Page 49 f 136

50 Parking garages: Simultaneusly t the intrductin f the shrt-term parking area arund the ld twn area, the cnstructin f (undergrund) parking garages were implemented. With the pening f these parking garage, a reductin f surface parking lts was realised. B Csts and wh paid them As the develpment f Graz s parking strategy was nt really a case study - rather a lngterm adaptatin, it is difficult t estimate the ttal csts invlved. Further, many f the imprvements that have resulted, were partly c-financed by the measure n EU prjects such as CITIVAS Trendsetters. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Lng-term parking in the city centre n public prperty 17,000 spaces Reductin f surface parking lts in and arund the city centre. Ablitin f the permanent parking lts in the histric city centre -Frm 2,000 t 0. Shrt-term parking frm 1,700 t 2,000 spaces and temprary lading lts frm 800 t 1,500 Parking fees fr everyne: Special arrangements fr residents in the direct living envirnment and fr ecnmic peratrs Number f parking spaces befre and after implementatin f measures Reductin f surface parking lts; establishment f a pedestrian area and the imprvement f the public transprt Were there any majr changes in framewrk cnditins (e.g. lcal ecnmy, plitics) during the implementatin perid that may have affected the impacts f the CS? General change f City plitics with the prgramme Space fr peple and Gentle Mbility ; Influence f lcal law (shrt term parking prvince f Styria) and General speed Limit in City 30/50 regulatin (30 km/h zne in a whle city area natinal law); City internal pinin-frming prcess in GIVE (Grazer integrierte Verkehrsentwicklung); Decided by the cuncil f Graz in December push-pull-parking.eu Page 50 f 136

51 D Implementatin prcess General backgrund abut rganisatin f parking cntrl system: Since 1979, there were shrt-term parking znes in Graz, which were mnitred by the plice; In 1991, the mnitring rle was transferred t a private cmpany which led t a fivefld increase in revenue. This was part f the prject Place fr peple ; In 1993 the first 300 ticket machines were intrduced, in additin t pre-sale permits. Since 1998, the machines were set up natinwide; In 2000, ld machines were replaced with new nes; Frm the beginning f 2002 (Eur changever), nly machines were in use; paper parking tickets n lnger existed; In 2015, within a distance f 50m (frm the business district) and 100m (frm residential areas) f each parking area (blue r green zne) ticketing machines have been installed. Picture 1 Vending machines in Graz (Surce: Open Surce Map, 2015) push-pull-parking.eu Page 51 f 136

52 D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws: Trend-Setting Decisins n Traffic Plicies frm 1977 t 1985 / Decisin n the principles f traffic plicy; Integrated Traffic Cncept fr Graz 1987 / Guidelines n traffic plicy and general prgram f measures; VÜP 1988 t 1991 Slutins Acrss Varius Means f Transprt fr Graz-East / Decisin fr the alternative Tram and Bus Cncept crrespnding t the guideline Gentle Mbility ; Integrated Traffic Cncept 1992 / Cntinuatin f the integrated Traffic Cncept fr Graz 1987; Guideline 2000 n Traffic Plicy / Reslutin f December 1992 Gentle Mbility ; Integrated Traffic Cncept General Prgram f Measures; The GIVE Cncept Graz Integrated Traffic Develpment (Grazer Integrierte Verkehrs Entwicklung); Tramway-Expansin-Prgram / December D2 D3 Barriers Lack f awareness f the use f public space fr everyne: Awareness campaigns, such as Car free days, brchures, media campaigns, etc. The fcus was n the ne hand the integrated apprach, but n the ther hand the mdel Temp 30 thrughut the city, with exceptin f the main rads; Lack f acceptance amngst shp wners: Shp wners argued that parking was required fr custmers. In fact, the parking lts were used by the wners themselves r by emplyees; T lng distances t the ld twn f Graz (which is als the business centre): Supprt and initiatin f the cnstructin f parking garages with private investrs, by prviding the building grund fr a symblic price. Furthermre the additinal csts fr a high-quality surface design will be taken by the city. Apprved times fr lading between 05:00 and 10:00, un-bureaucratically cntrl f 10 minutes waiting, which is generally allwed withut labelling. Drivers High persnal cmmitment f cmpetent pliticians; Planning and implementatin f measures in a plitical respnsibility way; Fixing the integrated apprach and the ideas with the help f lcal cuncil decisins Parts f an integrated cncept ( Place fr peple and Sft Mbility ); Cmmunicating the idea f using the surplus f the parking management t prvide a better public transprt; Prmtin f the significance f the histrical ld twn this has led t the admissin as a UNESCO Wrld Heritage Site in 1999; push-pull-parking.eu Page 52 f 136

53 Cnstructin f undergrund car parking garages arund the histrical ld twn; Visible and tangible imprvement f public transprt, r later n as a cnstructin f the Park & Ride facilities. Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. Final Plicy Reprt f CIVITAS Trendsetter inal_plicy_reprt.pdf Brchure Gentle Mbility Hmepage City f Graz: Parking: / push-pull-parking.eu Page 53 f 136

54 On-street parking Enfrcement with digital parking permits City, Cuntry: Utrecht, the Netherlands Year(s): Implementatin prcess A1 Objectives The main bjective f this measure was t imprve the verall efficiency f the city s parking plicy thrugh: A2 An increase in the payment rate fr shrt term parking; A reductin in enfrcement csts (i.e. less wardens and less staff fr the frnt desk ffice); The cllectin f data that culd be used t better analyse the effects f parking plicy and t help the (plitical) decisin making prcess. Descriptin f the CS In 2009 the city f Utrecht decided t intrduce a new parking system based n the digitalizatin f the parking prduct. In shrt all paper based dcument related t parking i.e. the parking ticket fr shrt stay parking, the parking permit fr residents and the visitrs parking permit fr residents were digitalized. Fr visitrs the classical park and display system (i.e. yu pay and display the ticket in the car) has been replaced with a system where the mtrist must simply enter the digits f the number plate f their car in the ticketing machine and pay. There is n need t g back t the car. At any time the system knws which car has paid and, accrdingly, has the right t park. The enfrcement takes place with a number f s called scan-cars : these are cars equipped with several cameras that recrd all number plates f the cars parked n-street. The recrded number plates are then checked with a central database where all infrmatin abut the payments fr n-street parking and residents permits is cntained. Als all frms f residential parking permits have been digitalized; residents dn t need t display a card in their car but simply register their number plate. Within this measure 530 digital parking ticket machines have been installed and a large infrmatin campaign was implemented. Additinally als mbile phne parking was intrduced i.e. the pssibility t pay fr shrt stay parking thrugh yur mbile phne. The main advantages f the system are: mre efficient enfrcement; reductin in fraud; an increased payment rati; a decrease in the number f visitrs t the physical parking desk; and the generatin f parking data. push-pull-parking.eu Page 54 f 136

55 Figure 1: the scan-car; Left: the side f the scan car with cameras behind the mirrred glass. Middle: camera system inside the car. Right: the cmputer display shwing infrmatin n the scanned license plates. Figure 2: the digital parking ticketing machine B Csts and wh paid them The implementatin f the new parking system in the city f Utrecht was partially c-financed by the CIVITAS MIMOSA prject (EU-funded). The whle system is still in place after the cmpletin f the prject and it has been enlarged t ther areas f the city. push-pull-parking.eu Page 55 f 136

56 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Increase the payment rate fr shrt term parking The payment rate (i.e. the percentage f mtrist actually paying fr parking) The payment rate increased 10% in the perid (frm 68% t 78%) Reduce the enfrcement csts Number f wardens used fr the enfrcement The number f enfrcement fficers decreased frm 63 in 2008 t 45 in 2012 Reduce the enfrcement csts Number f visitrs t the parking desk per year All data cme frm the Parking Management System f the city The number f visitrs t the parking desk decreased 35% in the perid 2008 (befre the new system) and Frm 28,409 t 18,260 visitrs per year. The wrklad f the parking desk staff decreased cnsiderably and payrll was decreased by 1 Fte. Cllectin f data General data cllectin Data are nw used during the decisin making prcess fr new plicy push-pull-parking.eu Page 56 f 136

57 30000 The number f visitrs t the parking desk per year Figure 3: The number f visitrs t the parking desk per year (department f parking) D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: Installatin f new parking ticketing machines ( ) In the perid apprximately 700 new ticketing machines were installed in the city centre: 70 in 2009; 300 in 2010, 180 in 2011 and 150 in Stage 2: Intrductin f the digital parking permit and a persnal web page ( ) An imprtant stage in the implementatin f this CS was the replacement f the plastic parking permit fr residents i.e. a card that must be displayed in the car - with the digital parking permit. Since Octber 2010 parking permit hlders have nline access t a persnal web page t mnitr their parking credit and payment status. They can use a secure cde t find the digital frms needed t apply fr a permit, see the status and validity f their wn permit, rder visitr s tickets, find phne numbers r ask questins. push-pull-parking.eu Page 57 f 136

58 Stage 3: Cmmunicatin campaign n digital parking (February- May 2009) In the perid February May 2009 an intensive cmmunicatin campaign tk place, called "Digitaal parkeren de je z" ( digital parking this is hw yu d it in English). The new parking machines, the digital visitrs passes and the digital parking permit fr residents were cmmunicated t visitrs, inhabitants and cmpanies in Utrecht, as well as emplyees at the city administratin and the pliticians. The aim f the cmmunicatin was twfld. On the ne hand it was meant t infrm citizens and visitrs abut the change, and t highlight the benefits f digital parking. On the ther hand, it was meant t generate internal supprt within the lcal authrity. Figure 4: An example f advertisement in the press. Stage 4: Intrductin f the digital visitr permit (2009) This prduct gives the pssibility t residents f the city t allw their visitrs t park fr a reduced fee (50% ff) in the centre. This prduct was based n a plastic card technlgy i.e. the residents culd give the card t their visitrs and they had t use it t get a parking ticket t be displayed in the car. Thanks t the digitalizatin f the system residents r their visitrs have simply t enter a cde in the ticketing machine and autmatically they are charged the reduced fee. Stage 5: Purchase f a scan-car (2010) A special scan car, equipped with license plate readers, that enfrces the digital parking permit was put int peratin in December The car drives thrugh the streets and 'reads' the license plates f parked cars. The scan car recgnises the license plates that are in the central digital parking database; cars that have been paid fr are registered in this database. Cars that are nt in there are checked by enfrcement persnnel n scters and push-pull-parking.eu Page 58 f 136

59 n ft. When a parked car is cnfirmed t have n right t park there, the wner receives a s-called after parking-tax assessment (an additinal assessment fr unpaid parking fees which has t be paid within 30 days - the tariffs in 2012 are plus the parking tariff due fr ne hur f parking; this tariff cvers the csts and des nt result in a prfit). Stage 6: Remval f the bligatin t enter license plate number (2012) Digital shrt term parking was technically pssible since the beginning but fr plitical reasns (mainly privacy) it was decided that visitrs still needed t be able t park annymusly in the case f shrt term parking. Fr this reasn in September 2011 the city cuncil decided that visitrs culd nt be bligated t enter the license plate f their car when they wanted t park. Accrdingly parking machines were adjusted in March The lcal authrity develped a variety f new prducts amng thers mbile parking (see stage 7) fr which visitrs entered their license plate number vluntarily. In this case they were infrmed befrehand what the license plate number wuld be used fr. Stage 7: Intrductin f Mbile Parking (2012) In March 2012 paying fr parking by mbile phne was intrduced. All phne prviders can be part f this. Payment takes place via a separate mbile parking prvider. The tariffs are the same as paying via the parking machine; the benefit fr users is that it is easy t use. Visitrs pay by calling, sms, mbile internet r a special smart phne-app when they park their car. Payment takes place after an agreed perid, mstly every mnth r tw weeks. Participants need t enter their license plate number fr this. D2 Barriers Barrier 1: the legal framewrk In case f mbile phne parking, sme legal issues had t be vercme (e.g. permissin t use the telephne bill fr purpses ther than t charge fr phne-csts). As a result it tk mre time t implement this. Furthermre the market share increased slwly because peple needed t apply themselves t a prvider f mbile phne parking befre they culd use it. Nwadays mbile parking is a large success. Barrier 2: new develpments must be accepted by all parties - Due t the innvative nature f the system, it tk mre time t prepare all the prducts and t agree their use with all actrs invlved. Barrier 3: Start-up prblems with digital parking machines Due t sme start-up prblems with the digital parking machines the implementatin was delayed by six mnths. Barrier 4: remval f the bligatin t enter license plate numbers There have been plitical discussins abut the privacy f car parkers which resulted in the plitical psitin that users need t give permissin t the city befre the city can use persnal infrmatin. Since mtrists cannt frmally give this permissin, they cannt be bliged t enter their license plate number. Barrier 5: digitised prducts make the prcess mre cmplex The system is sensitive t errrs/prblem that might ccur in the whle prcess. Fr example when the phne netwrk des nt wrk, the parking machines and the fficers cannt wrk either. It is very imprtant that the staff understand the whle system in rder t quickly identify ptential prblems. push-pull-parking.eu Page 59 f 136

60 D3 Drivers The city was respnsible fr enfrcement The fact that the respnsibility fr parking enfrcement shifted frm the lcal plice t the Parking Department f the City f Utrecht n January the 1 st f 2008 was ne f the mst imprtant drivers fr the intrductin f the new system. The technical pssibilities f the new system prvided many pssibilities and features fr the parking measures, which increased appreciatin fr the new system amng the users (bth visitrs and residents). The digitalizatin f the parking permits als allwed the pssibility fr mre flexible prducts. Mbile Parking has facilitated the implementatin f the system because it creates many advantages fr mtrists, e.g. peple d nt need t walk t the parking machine anymre. The descriptin was based mainly n tw reprts: Stumpel-Vs, P. and van de Vsse, W. (2012), Measure Evaluatin Results UTR 3.1 Innvatin f the system f parking permits and rates, CIVITAS MIMOSA reprt, 9 Nvember 2012; Gemeente Utrecht (2013), Nta Stallen en Parkern, February push-pull-parking.eu Page 60 f 136

61 On-street parking enfrcement and management thrugh a sensr system Cuntry: Italy City: Trevis A1 Objectives The main bjective f this measure was t imprve the city s parking plicy bth in terms f efficiency and in terms f user friendliness. This has been achieved mainly thrugh: A massive use f Infrmatin and Cmmunicatin Technlgy (ICT) t manage the parking area, namely the use f sensr technlgy; A reductin in the enfrcement csts (i.e. less wardens); The use f the data generated by the system t be able t better evaluate the effects f parking plicy and t help the (plitical) decisin making prcess. A2 Descriptin f the CS Since 2010 the city f Trevis has used f the Ipark system t manage the inner-city parking area, called TREVISOSTA. This parking management system utilises sensr technlgy t manage apprximately 2,400 n-street parking spaces in the city centre. Each parking space is prvided with a sensr and a number (see figure 1). The sensr is able t detect the presence f a vehicle and t send this infrmatin t the system. A car driver must pay fr parking at the parking meter: he has t enter the number f the parking bay where he parked and the amunt f time he wants t stay. It is nt necessary t put the ticket issued by the parking meter in the car s frnt windw. They system autmatically checks whether there has been a payment fr the parking bay where the sensr detects a vehicle. There is n need fr wardens t check the area. In case f any deviatin i.e. a sensr detects a vehicle in a bay fr which n payment has been made the mnitring team (wardens) can easily identify the vehicle that has nt paid and issue a fine. If the user wants t extend the parking time he can d it frm any ther parking meter in the central area (there are 54 parking meters in the whle area) r via mbile phne by indicating the number f the parking bay where he/she parked the car. This has increased the user friendliness f the parking system. The main advantages f the system are: mre efficient enfrcement (i.e. lwer csts), a higher user friendliness and the generatin f detailed parking data that are used t shape the parking plicy. Additinally, the user friendliness f the system cntributes t better acceptance f the parking management measure, namely paid parking. push-pull-parking.eu Page 61 f 136

62 Figure 1: Sensr, parking bay number and parking meters f the TREVISOSTA system. Figure 2: the parking management area in the innercity has tw znes (A and B) and three tariffs. push-pull-parking.eu Page 62 f 136

63 Figure 3: 52 parking meters are enugh t cver the whle parking management area, which includes 2,400 parking spaces n-street. B Csts and wh paid them The parking management system has been paid by the (private) cmpany that runs the system. Accrdingly it did nt lead t any extra csts fr the municipality. The private cmpany running the systems gets a fixed percentage f the revenues as fee. push-pull-parking.eu Page 63 f 136

64 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Reduce the enfrcement csts Number f wardens used fr the enfrcement The lcal authrity utilizes nly a few peple fr enfrcement Imprve the userfriendliness f the system Imprve the mnitring system fr the lcal authrity Surveys Real time data n ccupancy All data cme frm the Parking Management System f the city Surveys amng users suggest that bth drivers and lcal entrepreneurs are happy with the parking system Creatin f a dataset that allws the lcal authrity t mnitr the effects f new plicies (i.e. change in tariffs) Use f data t better shape plicy General data cllectin Data are nw used during the decisin making prcess fr new plicy Figure 4: example f the data prvided by the system: blu dts are residents hlding a permit, red dts are nn residents hlding a parking permit. push-pull-parking.eu Page 64 f 136

65 Figure 5: example f the data prvided by the system: real time infrmatin abut the ccupancy rati per parking lt. D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages In 2010 the lcal authrity decided t invest in new technlgy in rder t manage the parking system in the central area. It has been decided t make use f sensr systems: each parking lt has been equipped with a sensr (see figure 1) that is able t detect a vehicle parked. D2 Barriers N specific barriers and/r prblems have been encuntered. The funding issue has been slved by utsurcing the whle parking management system. The ttal investment i.e. the installatin f the sensrs in each bay and f the new parking meters has been paid by the private cmpany that perates the system. The cmpany gets a fee f the ttal parking incme and is respnsible fr the functining f the system. D3 Drivers The city was willing t invest in ICT t imprve the management f the parking area The advantages ffered by the sensr system were ne f the main reasns t adpt this kind f parking management system. The technical pssibilities f the sensr system prvided several benefits bth fr the drivers increased user friendliness f parking and fr the lcal authrity reduce enfrcement csts, better mnitring and state-f-the-art infrmatin t better shape plicy. push-pull-parking.eu Page 65 f 136

66 Funding has been facilitated by the utsurcing f the explitatin aspect f parking. The whle investment has been made by the private cmpany perating the system, which gets a fee f the ttal parking incme. N extra csts were incurred by the lcal authrity. The descriptin was based mainly n tw reprts: Gini, S., Mingard, M., D Allanl, M., Ambrsin, G. and Liberat, A. (2014), Sustainable mbility gvernance in small and medium histric twn: the LIFE + PERTH prject apprach, Transprt Research Arena 2014, Paris; Mingard, M. (2014), Le citta cintate al temp della smart city: mdelli, strumenti e prpste per l svilupp sstenibile, cnference presentatin, Lucca, 10 th Octber push-pull-parking.eu Page 66 f 136

67 Free Metrshuttle financed by a ring-fenced parking reserve City, Cuntry: Manchester, England Year(s): Since 2002, nging A1 Objectives As part f the campaign t becme Britain's Greenest City Manchester is cmmitted t reducing the City's carbn emissins. Target 1 f the Green City prgramme aims t reduce city-wide CO2 emissins at a rate exceeding the Kyt agreement. A2 Descriptin f the CS One f the main cntributrs t CO2 emissins in Manchester is frm vehicle exhaust. T tackle this Manchester has been wrking with the ther Greater Manchester Cuncils t put tgether a range f prpsals that will transfrm public transprt in the regin. Hwever, Manchester City Cuncil als appreciates that fr sme peple travelling by public transprt may nt always be a viable ptin. That is why Manchester City Cuncil has jined frces with NCP Manchester Ltd t reward drivers f lw emissin vehicles, and try t encurage thse parking in the city-centre t switch t lw emissin vehicles. Manchester City Cuncil and NCP have launched a unique Green Badge (=>Pllute Less, Pay Less) parking scheme which ffers a discunt f 25% n the cst f an annual seasn ticket at varius city centre car parks. Manchester City Cuncil has als a jint venture with NCP Car Parks fr ff-street parking (i.e. cmmercial car parks) and encurages visitrs t use an NCP car park during their stay. The new wners re-fcused the cmpany s peratins, changing NCP frm a mainly prperty wning cmpany int a mre service-fcused rganisatin in the brader transprt sectr. In 1999, NCP launched the UK s first private-public partnership setting up a jint venture with Manchester City Cuncil t establish NCP Manchester Ltd (NML). NML runs 43 car parks with ver 15,000 spaces acrss Manchester. The NML partnership allws Manchester t benefit frm the parking expertise NCP has develped as the market leader in car parking, whilst prviding the flexibility t supprt the city in the delivery f its strategic transprt planning. Metrshuttle buses link Manchester s city s train statins and NCP car parks with its shps and businesses. Metrshuttle is a free city centre bus funded by Manchester City Cuncil, Transprt fr Greater Manchester, NCP and Allied Lndn. The service links all the city centre railway statins, main car parks and many bus and Metrlink tram stps. Metrshuttle buses are lw-flr, easy access, diesel-electric hybrid buses. push-pull-parking.eu Page 67 f 136

68 The Manchester City Cuncil Executive Reprt n Reslutin (2010) stated the Cmmunity strategy as fllws: B Csts and where the mney came frm Patrnage Shuttle 1 1,082,518 1,100,868 1,204,310 1,172,822 1,083,018 1,098,576 1,149,098 Shuttle 2 648, , ,23 749, , , ,6 Shuttle 3 415, , , , , , ,854 Ttal Petrnage Annual Cst in Cst per Passenger in 2,145,825 2,249,061 2,531,368 2,586,138 2,361,115 2,485,696 2,627,552 1,253,358 1,284,470 1,539,005 1,556,143 1,500,935 1,500,935 1,500,935 0,58 0,57 0,61 0,60 0,64 0,60 0,57 push-pull-parking.eu Page 68 f 136

69 Accrding t the Manchester City Cuncil Executive Reprt n Reslutin (2010) the current annual cst f peratin the Metrshuttle service was 1,639 m. Manchester City Cuncil currently fund 455.2k f this cst frm the ring-fenced parking reserve (that is, mney that has been generated frm charges fr n-street and city-wned parking in the city centre and elsewhere). This was agreed by the Cuncil in March The annual cst f peratin f the new service will be m. The annual cntributin frm the parking reserve will increase t 544.3k. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results Only a few evaluatin data apart frm develpment f patrnage, csts and custmer satisfactin - were fund. But the three lines f the Metrshuttle have enjyed steady patrnage grwth and nw carry ver 2.5 m passenger annually. push-pull-parking.eu Page 69 f 136

70 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 2002: intrductin f the free-t-user city centre bus netwrk called Metrshuttle; cpied bth within the Greater Manchester and by ther regins. Stage 2: 2009: revised service cntract mdel with 20 lw carbn diesel-electric hybrid buses push-pull-parking.eu Page 70 f 136

71 The descriptin was based n the reprt _metrshuttle_patrnage_and_service_perfrmance _kpis_and_frecasts. push-pull-parking.eu Page 71 f 136

72 Measure title : A mdern tram netwrk as the key element f an urban develpment and mbility strategy City, Cuntry: Strasburg, France Year(s): Implementatin since 1990, nging; plans until 2020 A1 Objectives Since 1990 the Cmmunauté urbaine de Strasburg (CUS) has pursued these main bjectives at the cre f its transprt plicy: Develpment f an efficient public transprt system with the help f the tram netwrk Reductin f the car traffic within the city centre and n access rads int the city centre Create and cmplete bypass rads in rder t rute the thrugh traffic arund the city A2 Descriptin f the CS The Cmmunauté urbaine de Strasburg has 28 municipalities with abut 460,000 inhabitants; the City f Strasburg with abut 270,000 inhabitants and 50,000 students is the centre f it. Strasburg s first tram started running in 1878, extending t mre than 234 km in the 1930s, but with the system clsed in In the 1970s and 80s a lng debate and decisin prcess tk place abut whether t build a subway (undergrund) line r a tram line (abve grund). Apart frm the chice f technlgy, it was mainly a debate n the future f the city. The mayr frm Catherine Trautmann wn her electin in 1989 n the prmise f the renaissance f the tram. Since 1994 a tram netwrk with tday 6 lines has been implemented and it is still grwing. But nly tgether with the fllwing measures the strategy became such great success: Upgrading public space Restrictin f car traffic in the city center Develpment f a P&R-System Rerganizatin f the bus netwrk Scial tariff structure fr public transit Develpment f pedestrian znes Encuragement fr cycling Finally an implementatin n bicycle sharing scheme push-pull-parking.eu Page 72 f 136

73 Sme examples shw the upgrade f public space: Befre: 20,000 mtrized vehicles per day Afterwards: An attractive lcatin thrugh traffic calming Afterwards push-pull-parking.eu Page 73 f 136

74 Befre: A rundabut with 40, 000 mtrized vehicles per day Afterwards Afterwards: A place fr strlling withut (mtrized) vehicles Afterwards push-pull-parking.eu Page 74 f 136

75 Afterwards An advantage fr businesses and turism The restrictin f car traffic in the city center is ne f the key success factrs f the package f measures and has cmprised the fllwing: N thrugh traffic in many areas Enlargement f pedestrian znes Implementatin f bicycle rutes and bicycle racks Installatin f parking garages (ff-street parking) and reductin f n-street-parking in favur t upgrade public space The tram as an engine fr develpment f the city push-pull-parking.eu Page 75 f 136

76 Develpment f a Park& Ride-System: parking spaces 3 Eur per vehicle incl. tram ticket 5% f the tram user are using P&R; n Saturdays 15% push-pull-parking.eu Page 76 f 136

77 B Csts and wh paid them Since 1970 the versement transprt (an emplyer payrll tax t supprt public transprt) has been in existence: Emplyer-levy fr financing the urban public transprt system (infrastructure and peratin) Due fr all cmpanies with 9 r mre emplyees in cities r regins with mre than 100,000 inhabitants Percentage rate (n basis f the grss payment) is dependent n the size and the type f the transprtatin netwrk 10, ,000 inhabitants 50, ,000 inhabitants with tram/brt/metr >100,000 inhabitants >100,000 inhabitants with tram/brt/metr Jining areas Turist areas Max. 0,55% Max. 0,85% Max 1% Max. 1,75% +0,05% 0,2% Csts f investment and peratin f the Strasburg tram system per year: 182 M (theref 109,1 M fr peratin) Financied by Cmmunauté urbaine de Strasburg Fares Emplyer-levy 32M, 20% 91 M, 56% 39M, 24% push-pull-parking.eu Page 77 f 136

78 Number f passengers per year in thusands Catalgue n Parking Management Slutins C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS - Develpment f an efficient public transprt system with the help f the tram netwrk - mdal split - Patrnage (User f public transprt each year frm 1992 up t 2011) - Increase f public transprt users (mre than dubling the number in 20 years); - 13 % fr PT in the mdal split (2009) - - Reductin f the car traffic within the city centre and n access rads int the city centre - cunting car - Number f vehicles in the street - Less than 50% car use in the City Center: Strasburg is the best ranked city in France (decrease frm mre than 240,000 vehicle/d dwn t 180,000/d) - - Strengthening f the nn-mtrized mbility: 33% walking and 8% cycling Year push-pull-parking.eu Page 78 f 136

79 (mtrized) vehicles/per day Catalgue n Parking Management Slutins Patrnage f public transprt in Strasburg 1992 t 2011 Strng decrease f vehicle in the city center and n the access rad Mdal Split in % Year Walking Bicycle Mtrbike car user public transprt push-pull-parking.eu Page 79 f 136

80 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 1994 : line A: 9,8 km Stage 2: : extensin line A + implementatin f lines B, C and D: 21,4 km Stage 3: : extensin lines B, C and D + implementatin: line E: 22 km Stage 4: : extensin lines A, C and D + Line F: 6,5 km Stage 5: 2013: Implementatin f a BusRapidTransit(BRT)-Line G D2 Barriers Barrier: Building the first tramline was the hardest. It was particularly difficult t cnvince shp wners that it was a gd idea. Overcme: Weekly meetings were held n the building site between the rganisatin building the tram line tgether with the affected shpkeepers and residents. push-pull-parking.eu Page 80 f 136

81 D3 Drivers Driver 1 - As stated abve the mayr f Strasburg frm Catherine Trautmann wn her electin in 1989 with the prmise f the renaissance f the tram. In the lcal electins in 1989 she advcated the re-establishment f the tram, while her rival Marcel Rudlff was in favur f a Metr. With her electin victry, the prject was realised, and it became bvius that it wuld play an imprtant rle in the enhancement f the cityscape f Strasburg. Driver 2 - The France-wide emplyer-levy called versement transprt gives a slid basis fr financing the urban public transprt system (infrastructure and peratin) Driver 3 - An integrated apprach t cmbine urban and transprtatin develpment was and is still realized; the Plan Déplacements Urbains (the new transprtatin cncept frm 2009) cnnects new building activities with the expansin f the tram netwrk. Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. All charts and pictures were taken frm a presentatin by Christian Berger, Directin de la Mbilité et des Transprts, Service Déplacements, Cmmunauté urbaine de Strasburg (CUS) held at Difu-Seminar: Attraktiven ÖPNV entwickeln unter dem Handlungsrahmen eines nvellierten PBefG Erfahrungen und Lösungen in Berlin n 11th Nvember 2014 Infrmatin abut Catherine Trautmann push-pull-parking.eu Page 81 f 136

82 Natinal maximum parking standards as part f natinal gvernment planning guidance t lcal authrities, PPG13 (nw replaced by ne natinal planning guidance dcument) City, Cuntry: All municipalities, England (UK) Year(s): PPG13 s maximum parking standards applied frm 2001 t 2010 A1 Objectives The main bjective f PPG13 was t use the planning system t reduce the need t travel and t reduce the use f the car t access develpments. Maximum parking standards are seen as an imprtant way t achieve the secnd bjective and indeed the limited literature n this tpic bears this ut (see COST342 reprt (2006)), fr example. A2 Descriptin f the CS In the English planning system, decisins n the shape f lcal area plans and n what is allwed t be built are taken by lcal authrities (municipalities). Hwever, natinal gvernment issues planning guidance that lcal authrities must take int accunt in their plans and in decisins n what is allwed t be built. One part f the guidance cvers the transprt aspects f new buildings (develpments). As their name suggests, England's maximum parking standards (MPS) set natinallyapplicable maximum amunts f parking that were allwed t be built with new develpments. The MPS were an Annex t the then PPG13, althugh they were nly intrduced in the last versin f PPG13 in Earlier versins f PPG13 suggested that lcal authrities set their wn maximum standards at lcal level, but many were reluctant t d s because f the fear that neighburing authrities wuld set less restrictive standards in rder t attract develpment. Therefre natinal standards were intrduced t reduce this risk f lcal authrities cmpeting fr develpment by ffering mre generus parking. The standards in PPG13 did nt apply t residential develpments. The standards and the minimum size f develpments t which they applied are shwn belw. This meant that many authrities were in the situatin f having maximum standards fr large develpments and their previus minimum standards that cntinued t apply fr smaller develpments. PPG13 s maximum parking standards applied frm 2001 t 2010 at which pint they were ablished due t central gvernment cncerns that they had negative ecnmic develpment impacts. The empirical evidence fr these impacts was hwever difficult t find (see DfT, 2008). push-pull-parking.eu Page 82 f 136

83 B Csts and wh paid them Csts are nt knwn. Hwever, the direct csts were lw: nly thse invlved in cnsulting n and then adpting a guidance dcument prduced by central gvernment. Implementatin csts in terms f the parking prvided with new develpments were paid by the builders f these new develpments, as they were when minimum parking standards applied, previusly. This means that the standards culd in many cases reduce the land and cnstructin csts assciated with new develpments. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results This was nt a single prject rather, it was a regulatin that was intended t have impacts acrss all large develpments in the whle cuntry. N systematic data were cllected t assess the impacts f the regulatin. Maximum parking standards were applied in Sctland als, and the authr cllected frm City f Edinburgh Cuncil data abut three large develpments in that city, which als undertk travel surveys t measure the mdal share fr emplyees based at each develpment (2004 and 2005). All these three develpments are lcated in the suburbs f this city f 450,000 peple, at a distance f between 4 and 8 km frm the city centre, s in areas with mderate t pr accessibility by public transprt. Had they been built with minimum parking standards, a mde share f 90-95% drive alne by car culd be expected. Emplyees Parking spaces Car (drive alne) mde share Hspital % Bank % Business park % This was a perid f cntinuus ecnmic grwth fr mst parts f the UK. D Implementatin prcess There was really nly ne stage fr implementatin, which was t prduce a draft f the standards and then t cnsult n them and adpt them. This was a prcess run by tw central gvernment departments (thse respnsible fr planning and fr transprt) with input frm mstly expert cnsultees althugh any member f the public was free t respnd t the cnsultatin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 83 f 136

84 D2 Barriers The standards were develped by central gvernment but had t be implemented by municipalities, s it was these latter rganisatins that had t deal with any barriers. Principally these barriers r prblems related t reprts frm a ne authrity (cited in DfT 2008) that the land that they had earmarked fr develpment became less attractive t develpers when it was subject t maximum parking standards; and that develpments built with maximum standards led t verspill parking n surrunding residential streets. The frmer barrier was difficult t deal with but was an intentin f the plicy t steer develpment twards areas mre accessible by car. The latter was dealt with by the applicatin f parking cntrls n residential streets, smetimes paid fr by the develper, smetimes by the municipality; r, if less acute, it was nt dealt with at all. D3 Drivers Demand frm municipalities fr natinal maximum standards, alng with supprtive natinal civil servants wh were genuinely interested in demand management, and a supprtive natinal minister, helped t drive the adptin f the natinal maximum standards. The experience f authrities that had already adpted their wn lcal maximum standards prir t 2001 was als imprtant. References City f Edinburgh Cuncil (2004, 2005) Internal Travel Surveys Department fr Transprt (UK), (2008) Research int the Use and Effectiveness f Maximum Parking Standards. DfT UK, Lndn. PPG13 (2001) available at building/pdf/ pdf This case study als uses text frm the MAX prject MaxLup Case Study C20 available at written by the same authr as this Push and Pull case study. Further infrmatin available frm the case study authr tm.rye@tft.lth.se push-pull-parking.eu Page 84 f 136

85 New n-street parking plicy in the city centre after the new Public Transprt Netwrk implementatin Cuntry: Spain City: Vitria-Gasteiz A1 Objectives In the year 2009 a new Public Transprt netwrk was implemented as the first large scale actin in the first phase f the Sustainable Mbility and Public Space Plan f Vitria-Gasteiz. The same day the new netwrk was launched, a new n-street parking plicy in the city centre was established in rder t discurage private car use fr travel int the central city. A2 Descriptin f the CS Vitria-Gasteiz changed its entire public transprt system in Octber 2009, and the increase in passengers shws that the change is paying ff. Cmbined with the new bicycle lane grid and pedestrian paths, the plan is clearly influencing peple s travel behavir. Previusly the netwrk was based n 18 bus lines with frequencies f minutes and lng circuitus rutes. The new system is made up f 2 tram lines and 9 bus lines. The new bus lines all have 10 minute frequencies. Rutes are nw mre direct, withut cmprmising cmprehensive cverage f the entire city. Allwing fr mre effective transfers between lines are a range f supprting measures, including bus lanes, queue jumpers, traffic light pririties and new platfrms. The result is that passenger numbers have rcketed with an 85 percent increase in the number f trips per mnth since the first tramway line came int peratin in January A new netwrk f mre efficient, mdern and attractive public transprt was seen as necessary but nt sufficient cnditin t ensure a mdal shift twards public transprt. Fr this purpse it was cnsidered necessary t prpse a new parking plicy in the center f the city thrugh a series f steps: Expansin f regulated parking area in the center f the city, with mre streets inside the residential parking zne, s that the previus 3,800 parking places were increased by adding 1,100 new regulated places. Differentiatin f new types f regulated parking (residents nly, shrt t medium stay nly, shrt t medium stay and residents) rather than the nly previus typlgy (shrt t medium stay and residents). Establishment f an annual fee in rder t benefit frm resident card fr regulated parking, instead f the free access t the card fr residents. Significant increase in the price per minute fr parking in regulated parking area. The price increased by apprximately 200% cmpared with the previus price. push-pull-parking.eu Page 85 f 136

86 A special regime fr peple wh want t park fr less than 15 minutes was established t avid the practice f duble parking n main rads. Enabling new Park&Ride car parks. The appraching rads were signpsted and infrmatin abut public transprt was placed in these car parks. The measure was applied immediately after the entry int peratin f the new public transprt netwrk, with a unanimus agreement f all plitical parties in the city cuncil. This actin was crdinated and cmmunicated tgether with the change f the public transprt netwrk, relying, like the rest f the wrk develped in the Plan f Sustainable Mbility and Public Space, n an intense participatry prcess. B Csts and wh paid them The actin was financed with the City f Vitria-Gasteiz wn funds (new parking meters, bus shelters, bus lanes, new traffic signal priritizatin,...) and frm the CIVITAS prgram (cmmunicatin and awareness campaign). In any case the cst assciated mainly with changes in the parking system was a tiny part f the verall cst in cmparisn t the cst f the rerganizatin f the public transprt system, but the tw elements were inextricably linked. The first Phase f the Sustainable Mbility and Public Space Plan had a budget f 26 millin Eur, where the cst f the new public transprt netwrk was 7 millin Eur. Pht: eltis.rg / Harry Schiffer push-pull-parking.eu Page 86 f 136

87 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS De-incentive the private car use t access t the city centre Mdal split fr private car. Mbility surveys cmparisn between 2006 and 2011 data. Accrding t the 2011 Mbility Survey daily trips by car drpped frm 36% t 28% cmpared with 2006 data. The new bus and tram netwrk had a 43.5% increase in the number f trips per mnth (nearly 500,000 passengers mre than befre) during the first 6 mnths after the change. Increase in the number f public transprt users. Number f public transprt users. Data btained frm the register f titles issued travel by bus and tram peratrs. Since the intrductin f the new system passenger numbers have rcketed with a 85 percent increase in the number f trips per mnth cmpared with 2009 data. The number f registered cars in the city has decreased in the same perid by abut 2,500 vehicles. The share f cycling dubled frm 3.5 t 7% f all trips (up t 12% fr t wrk trips). Increase in the public transprt cmmercial speed after aviding duble parking rw in main buses itineraries. Cmmercial speed fr public transprt bus rutes. Cmmercial speed average registered frm the public transprt rutes. Cmmercial speed was imprved by 14.5% in nly six mnths cmpared t befre the netwrk was launched. Thus, it went frm a speed f t km / h. The average frequency ffered increased frm t minutes, with a 31.54% imprvement. The mst challenging element has been the cntinued participatin f all stakehlders in an nging prcess that has lasted mre than seven years. The Plan drivers have made cnsiderable effrts t invlve all the agents in a rich participatry prcess thrugh the Frum (Citizen Frum fr Sustainable Mbility) and an intensive cmmunicatin with citizens. Each f the mbility measures undertaken was accmpanied by an infrmatin campaign with illustrative material (brchures, psters), press releases, ad hc cntent in the mbility push-pull-parking.eu Page 87 f 136

88 page f the municipal website and even disseminatin f infrmatin at street level by the lcal plice service. Figure: Mdal Split in Vitria Gasteiz time rw (Surce: Vitria Gasteiz) D Implementatin prcess 2006: First call f the interdepartmental crdinatin technical cmmittee. This is a wrking grup was cmpsed f experts frm different municipal departments with respnsibilities in the field f mbility. This grup wrks cntinuusly in this field. 2006: A Citizen Frum fr Sustainable Mbility was created with the aim f reaching a cnsensus n a scenari fr future mbility in the municipality f Vitria-Gasteiz. 2007: As a result f an in-depth participatin prcess, a Citizen Agreement fr Sustainable Mbility was signed, which defined a new city mdel. In this new scheme, urban transprt must be cmpatible with imprved public health, the quality f life, the urban envirnment and the lcal ecnmy. 2007: First draft f the Sustainable Mbility and Public Space Plan. In this dcument, mbility is addressed hlistically and the strategies defined in the Citizen Agreement are specified. 2008: Writing f the Phase I f the Sustainable Mbility and Public Space Plan with cncrete measures fr the develpment and implementatin f the Plan fr the perid push-pull-parking.eu Page 88 f 136

89 Frm 2008 t 2009: Design f the new netwrk, feedback frm several stakehlders, cmmunicatin campaign. Summer-Fall 2009: New public transprt netwrk and parking plicy scheme prelaunching adaptatin wrks and disseminatin f the initiative. 2009, Octber 30 th : Launching f the new netwrk. Kick-ff fr the new parking plicy scheme. D1. Stages The CS was implemented, as fllws, in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: Pre-design and participatry prcess feedback (2008 t 2009) One f the strengths f Vitria-Gasteiz PMSEP and ne f the reasns fr the success achieved s far, is the cntinuing invlvement f all stakehlders and, in particular, the general public. As already mentined, this is als ne f the challenges that have arisen cntinuusly thrughut the design prcess and implementatin f the plan. Therefre, ne aspect that has required a lt f wrk has been the citizen participatin prcess that has been develped parallel t the plan. Stage 2: Final design and disseminatin campaign (Spring 2009 Fall 2009). Stage 3: Final implementatin (Summer 2009) Stage 4: Kick-ff fr the new n-street parking scheme the same day the new public transprt netwrk was launched (2009, Octber 30 th ) D2 Barriers The develpment prcess was cnducted in a frame f shared learning amng all the stakehlders: municipal technicians, pliticians and citizens. Its basic principles derive frm the Citizen Agreement fr Sustainable Mbility, written between 2006 and 2007 by a citizen frum, agreed by all participants and later endrsed by the City Cuncil with the agreement f all plitical parties. Thus, the main barrier, the acceptance f the measure by the citizens, was much easier because it was supprted by the previus participatry prcess. An additinal identified barrier was t btain the supprt f the gvernment team even after the plitical change ccurred in the city after the last electin in May The supprt f plicy makers is required fr technical decisins becme a reality and was achieved demnstrating the technical feasibility and effectiveness f the measures and citizen invlvement thrugh the Citizens Frum fr Sustainable Mbility. D3 Drivers The strng cnsensus between all plitical grups, prviding unanimus apprval f a Plan that, besides the plitical cnsensus, required the crdinatin f technical areas that usually perate separately, must be seen as a key driver. As was stated befre, the mst challenging issue has been the cntinued participatin f all stakehlders in an nging prcess that has lasted mre than seven years. The Plan drivers have made cnsiderable push-pull-parking.eu Page 89 f 136

90 effrts t invlve all the agents in a rich participatry prcess thrugh the Citizen Frum fr Sustainable Mbility calls and an intensive cmmunicatin with citizens. A wide range f stakehlders has participated. An interdepartmental technical cmmittee was set up t versee the wrk develped. The apprach t implementing the Plan has been multidisciplinary and participatry, seeking the invlvement, besides the different municipal departments, f as many citizens' rganizatins as pssible: transprtatin prfessinals, reduced mbility grups, Cuncil f Envirnment, Ecnmic agents, Traders, Prfessinal and Neighburhd Assciatins, Cuncil f the Agenda 21 fr Schls The high level f public participatin, leading t the Citizen Agreement fr Sustainable Mbility, has served t strengthen the cllective sense f citizenship and enabled a cmmn scenari t be drawn up, vercming the cnflicts f interest and adjusting the Plan t the requirements f citizenship. Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins push-pull-parking.eu Page 90 f 136

91 Implementatin f new access restrictins and parking management schemes in Krakw Cuntry: Pland City: Krakw A1 Objectives T extend access-cntrlled areas in the city T implement a new parking management scheme (remval f n-street parking places due t the implementatin f new undergrund parking lts) T free-up public space T make the histric city centre mre attractive t nn-mtrized mdes f transprt A2 Descriptin f the CS Krakw was the first city in Pland t implement severe access restrictins in the city centre, based n three levels f access znes. A zne are restricted exclusively t pedestrians and cyclists; B zne is accessible fr residents and gds delivery vehicles; while in the C zne, parking fees are applicable between 10 am and 8 pm. Map: Existing scheme f A, B, C (red, green, blue) znes with restrictins fr individual cars. push-pull-parking.eu Page 91 f 136

92 In respnse t the prblems f cngestin and pr air quality, the city is cnstantly implementing extensins f the paid parking zne and the limited traffic znes, imprvements in public transprt, including its integratin within the wider metrplitan area, better service standards (including mdern rlling stck), imprvement f public transprt cnnectins at the natinal and Eurpean level and investments in bus hubs, integrated PT ndes, lgistics centres and urban traffic cntrl systems. There are als strategies related t imprved parking management (including implementatin f Park & Ride). Parking standards fr new develpment (e.g. parking-space-t-unit r per inhabitant ratis) are set in lcal develpment plans but nly abut a third f the city s area is cvered by such lcal plans; implementing parking requirements in the remaining areas is nt regulated in a unifrm way. Within this particular measure (partly implemented within the Civitas Caravel Prject) the city intended t implement an updated parking management scheme in cmbinatin with sme new access restrictins in the B zne. Arund 300 n-street parking spaces in tw large public squares were eliminated (thanks in part t the nging cnstructin f a cmmercial undergrund car park). There were tw areas where n-street parking was eliminated: Mały Rynek ( Little Square ) with 100 parking places and Szczepański Square with 200 parking places. These tw histric squares were used nly as parking lts, but nw they are nce again restred t their previus cnditin and used as a space fr pedestrians bth citizens and turists. Picture: Little Square befre and after restratin. The main activities fcused n traffic rerganizatin in the city centre, including a new detailed prject fr the C zne. The detailed prject fr new access rules in the city centre was created n the basis f a wide cnsultatin prcess and stakehlder invlvement. The traffic restricted B-Zne has been enlarged by sme several hundred metres. Als changes were implemented at Karmelicka street (a clsure f bth exits). These changes did nt affect the verall B zne dimensins significantly, but bth have had a real effect n reductin f car traffic in the area. push-pull-parking.eu Page 92 f 136

93 B Csts and wh paid them The main csts were related t the redesign f traffic mvements and accmpanying regulatins at several intersectins and streets within C zne in Krakw (ca EUR). Other csts cncerned paint and signs fr rad markings, etc. (ca EUR). Cncerning the renvatin f the tw public squares, there were high investment csts (ca 1.5 mln EUR). All implemented changes are in place (i.e. measure is cntinued up t nw). push-pull-parking.eu Page 93 f 136

94 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Extensin f restricted area % r km f rads Measurement B zne was extended t Szczepanski square and surrunding streets, with dimensins f apprximately 62x62 m. and sectin f Dunajewskieg street t Garbarska street. The result f this peratin is an increase f the length f the B zne by 310 m. Als there have been changes implemented at Karmelicka street (clsure f bth exits). Althugh these changes did nt affect verall B zne dimensins significantly, bth have had a real effect n car traffic in the area (due t limitatins in pssible thrugh-traffic). Reductin f car traffic in B -Zne % Measurement/Mdelling Direct measurements, supprted by mdeling, shwed that intensity f traffic [vehicles/hur] befre and after implementatins decreased by ca. 20% (5122 v/h vs v/h). Eliminated n-street parking Number f parking spaces Measurement There were tw areas where n-street parking was eliminated: Mały Rynek ( Little Square ) with 100 parking places and Szczepański Square with 200 parking places. Public perceptin % f persns having nticed psitive changes in travel times 300 direct questinnaires - perceptin f PT passengers cncerning time needed t travel in the area f Karmelicka and Dunajewskieg streets, where new access restrictins elements have been implemented. Citizens were asked abut their perceptin f travel time (if it has been shrtened/extended/n change ccurred). Surveys results: N change - 44,6% Shrtened travel time 49,3% Extended travel time 6,1% Vehicle fuel efficiency l/vehkm Mdelling Estimatin f saved energy in private cars (mdeling with micr simulatin sftware Vissim). The difference between analyzed scenaris is 17 litres / hur fr whle number f vehicles travelling within the calculatin area (fr ne hur f simulatin). push-pull-parking.eu Page 94 f 136

95 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages Stage 1: Cnceptual prject f new access cntrl strategy ( ) Main activities frm the beginning were fcused n the creatin f a cnceptual plan fr traffic rerganizatin in the city centre. It meant adapting existing plans t the current situatin, and subcntracting a new detailed prject fr the whle C zne. Stage 2: Finalizing f the detailed design f the new access cntrl scheme ( ) a widespread cnsultatin prcess and stakehlder invlvement tk place in rder t create a final detailed design fr the new rules fr access in the city centre. The main stakehlders cnsulted were as fllws: inhabitants f the zne, the shpkeepers assciatin, rad management structures, Plice, city cuncil, district cuncils and envirnmental lbby grups clubs. Many adaptatins were made t take cncerns int accunt, mainly cncerning rad safety issues. Stage 3: New undergrund parking lts prgramme ( ) A new innvative tendering prcedure including a public-private partnership was launched by UMK. As a result, a Spanish cmpany was subcntracted t build and perate an undergrund parking lt at Plac na Grblach clse t the histrical city centre. Stage 4: Implementatin f first changes in the city centre traffic scheme ( ) cncerning access restrictins and parking eliminatin: clsure f exits frm Karmelicka street (where trams were cngested tgether with cars due t a narrw street after a recnstructin prject that left a cmmn lane shared by PT and private cars) extensin f the B zne n the Dunajewskieg street and n streets arund Szczepanski Square eliminatin f parking spaces in tw histric squares in the city centre D2 Barriers Delays in the cnstructin f undergrund car parks - due t cnsiderable plitical discussin and ppsitin frm sme city cuncillrs, nly sme elements f the measure the extensin f the "B" zne - were implemented within the prject. Mre access restrictins and eliminatin f n-street parking places was pssible frm July 2009, after the pening f the first undergrund parking lt (at Plac na Grblach). Building f new undergrund parking lts in the histrical city centre is perceived as an innvative slutin helping t rerganize parking management and t attract car drivers and ease cnditins fr PT, since cngestin caused by cars nwadays creates big prblems and takes space riginally planned fr pedestrians and cycles. push-pull-parking.eu Page 95 f 136

96 Lbby in City Cuncil against extending access restricted B-zne - The city administratin (and specifically the department respnsible fr the administratin f lcal rads) refused t implement the measure in its entirety and prpsed several majr changes. The initial scheme and the changes that it prpsed were perceived by the department t be t demanding. The reasn was that the city administratin wanted t prevent cmplaints frm residents, shpkeepers, ther lcal businesses, and s n. An interesting pint is that in internal talks with the mayr, he suggested an even mre severe restrictin. Hwever, the main pririties fr the city are hard measures such as the imprvement f infrastructure (parking, rads and public transprt). Therefre the measure implementatin very much relied n the prcess f tendering and subsequently cnstructing the undergrund car park. Negative public pinin - Plish sciety is very much geared t pssessing a private car. Frm the day cars became affrdable and at the same time a symbl fr freedm, Plish peple strived t have their wn car. Understandably, t alter this develpment is rather difficult. Mrever, a big part f Plish sciety is nt aware f the prblems caused by private transprt and restricting car access is mre ften assciated with hindering sciety s develpment than with a psitive impact. Negative Infrmatin and public relatins - Frm the very beginning the measure received much media attentin since everybdy culd be affected by its implementatin. Lcal media reprted quite negatively abut the plans t extend access restrictins in the inner-city. The lack f a prfessinal public relatins strategy and the fcus n the technical implementatin f the measure was the reasn fr the negative image. But this initial critique gradually turned int mre psitive cverage acknwledging the crrect directin f the measure and admitting that building rads des nt slve traffic prblems. D3 Drivers Supprt frm independent institutins - several institutins such as the Plish Eclgical Club r bicycle rganizatins were invlved in the implementatin prcess. Hwever, their rle was nly limited and rather supprtive than leading. Nevertheless, these institutins always sent psitive signs t the utside wrld abut the schemes and influenced brader public pinin. Their invlvement was a crucial driver within the measure s implementatin and shuld even have been enhanced. These rganizatins are independent, believable and reliable. Invlvement f external experts as a partner with an wn budget frm the very beginning f the prject. This apprach helped t reach the citizens. Engagement f the pliticians which supprt sustainable mbility - mainly Deputy Mayr has been engaged fully t supprt measure implementatin (i.e. his presence n almst all stakehlders meetings and an imprtant vice in the discussin). push-pull-parking.eu Page 96 f 136

97 Mbility Cmpany City f Ghent as a merger f tw frmer units (Parking Cmpany and Mbility Department) Cuntry: Belgium City: Ghent A1 Objective T create a Mbility Cmpany within the City f Ghent, which enables the City t wrk in an integrated way n mbility planning n different levels, frm strategic t peratinal levels. T (partly) finance the planning and executin f the mbility plicy using the n and ff street parking incmes fr sustainable mbility purpses. The figure abve shws the banner annuncing the end f the Mbility Department and the Parking Cmpany and the start f the new Mbility Cmpany as frm January 1, A2 Descriptin f the CS The measure largely cnsists f the merger f the frmer City Parking Cmpany and the Mbility Department in the city administratin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 97 f 136

98 A shrt histry The city f Ghent had a s-called parking cmpany since The Parking Cmpany, fully wned by the city, was created t build, finance and run the first undergrund parking in the City (Vrijdagmarkt). A few years later, n street parking cntrls were installed in parts f the cmmercial heart f the City. The Parking Cmpany was in charge f the enfrcement f these n-street cntrls. Later n, they built a number f new parking garages and were still in charge f the ever increasing amunt f paying n-street parking spts. As an utcme f the Bicycle Plan, implemented in 1993, a small Bicycle Planning unit was created in 1994 within the City Administratin. They were the nucleus f a real Mbility Department. Until then, mst peratinal issues were cvered by the Plice, while strategic traffic planning was carried ut by the Urban Planning Department. In 1997, as a part f the Mbility Plan fr the Inner City a clear parking plicy was established, truly embedded in an integrated mbility visin fr the inner city. The parking plicy supprted the prpsed circulatin scheme fr the inner city, which created a pedestrian zne in the city centre, banned thrugh traffic in the histrical part f the inner city, prvide fr the bicycle. The Parking Cmpany supprted this plicy, by installing a dynamic parking guidance system and by intrducing a restricted parking plicy, the scalled stand still principle : n additinal parking spts wuld be builtin the city centre. All new capacity in an undergrund garage had t be cmpensated by the remval f an equivalent number f surface parking spaces. Thus, the rle f the Parking Cmpany became bviusly mre and mre imprtant. Between, 1997 and 2012, the Parking Cmpany grew systematically, in accrdance with a number f new undergrund parkings (always within the cnstraints f the stand still principle!) and the systematic extensin f paid n street parking spaces (nw abut n street parking spaces have t be paid fr!). Furthermre, in 1999, the bicycle planning unit was transfrmed and bradened int the new Mbility Department, largely because as a result f the Mbility Plan and subsequent wrk, there was a real need fr such a Department in the City administratin. Frm the beginning n, the idea was t merge these tw units (Parking Cmpany and Mbility Department) int a new Mbility Cmpany, but it tk quite a few years t realize this. While the Mbility Department was a pure part f the City Administratin, the Parking Cmpany had much mre autnmy, althugh under cntrl f the city cuncil. Their tasks were mainly t explit n street parking and t build and explit parking garages. In 2011, they had abut 55 emplyees. Within the city administratin, the Mbility Department was in charge f the verall mbility strategy and implementing mbility measures in the city. This included als the realisatin f bike parking facilities and bike sheds thrughut the City. It was clear that the Parking Cmpany and the Mbility Department had t wrk tgether very ften. Parking issues are f curse crucial in a mbility strategy. Althugh there was gd c-peratin between the tw entities, it was nt always clear wh shuld decide n, fr example, the pprtunity t build a new parking garage, setting n street parking tariffs, and s n. push-pull-parking.eu Page 98 f 136

99 Als, smetimes a cnflict f interest existed, fr example when n street parking had t be remved fr bus lanes r bicycle stands. The need fr cntinuus cnsultatin and jint wrking, verlap and pssible duplicatin f wrk fr sme tasks, the parking cmpany nly fcusing n car parking, and ther related prblems all cnspired t make the situatin less than ideal. On the ther hand, the Mbility Department suffered frm time t time frm a lack f funding, unable t create fr instance, bicycle infrastructure, r ff-street bicycle parking. Mrever, this whle situatin had as a cnsequence that parking plicy was nt always an integral part f mbility and spatial planning plicy. Arund 2007, as a result f a new Decree f the Flemish Regin, lcal authrities were frced t alter the scpe f their City cmpanies such as the Parking Cmpany. The chice was either t transfrm the cmpany in an internal agency r an external agency. In an internal agency the directr has sme mre autnmy cmpared t a regular city department, althugh it is still under supervisin f the City Cuncil. An external agency is nt directly under supervisin f the City Cuncil (there is an appinted Bard f Directrs) and has therefre much mre autnmy. There was a scrupulus screening n the prs and cns f the tw ptins, but in the end the chice was fr an internal agency, ne f the main reasns being that an internal agency des nt have t pay taxes n benefits, as it is cnsidered as a lcal authrity. The new Mbility Cmpany The result was the creatin f an internal agency, named the Mbility Cmpany.f the City f Gent, that was after merged with the Mbility Department. The Mbility Cmpany has existed since At its inceptin the Directr cncluded a management agreement with the City Cuncillrs, clearly setting ut the tasks the Mbility Cmpany has t fulfil. A remarkable gal was that frm then n, the Mbility Cmpany wuld als be respnsible fr building/prviding fr ff street bicycle parking. This resulted almst immediately in the building f tw undergrund parking garages fr bicycles in the city centre and in the cfinancing f a huge undergrund bicycle parking garage at the main railway statin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 99 f 136

100 Undergrund bicycle parking in the city centre, paid fr by the Mbility Cmpany revenues Due t this merger peratin, the Mbility Cmpany has nw all the tls t install and execute an integrated mbility plicy, frm the planning stage at a strategic level, thrugh implementatin, such as raising parking tariffs, installing bicycle sheds, right up t the real time fllw up f traffic situatin n the field, all within ne and the same entity. The Mbility cmpany has the fllwing fficial main bjectives: researching, implementing, and evaluating rad safety measures in the cntext f the ptimizatin f the mbility plicy f the city f Ghent; managing and further develpment f the (bicycle and car) parking infrastructure; the further develpment f traffic and transprt management in cllabratin with bth city departments and third parties; t supprt prjects t imprve mbility in Ghent and taking care f the cmmunicatin and awareness raising with respect t parking and mbility. Financial flw The Mbility Cmpany has a degree f financial autnmy. In the agreement it cncluded with the City Cuncillrs, an (increasing) amunt f mney has t be paid t the city; in this way the city benefits frm the gains f the Mbility Cmpany. Hwever, after the payment f this fixed sum and after paying fr persnnel and expenditure, the reminder f the gains can be used fr investment in car parking (including P&R lts) and bicycle parking. Mrever, the csts fr persnnel and daily expenditure cver quite a wide range f mbility management measures, including: The Mbility Cmpany pays eur fr the system f night buses in the city (the remaining amunt is cvered by the Public Transprt Cmpany) The Mbility Cmpany pays abut eur/year t an NGO fr expliting a scalled bicycle pint in the city centre (cycle hire, cycle repair, etc.) push-pull-parking.eu Page 100 f 136

101 The Mbility Cmpany will pay fr a future small scale shared bike system The Mbility Cmpany pays fr studies r fr cnsultants giving advice n sustainable transprt and mbility Sme members f staff are fully ccupied with Mbility Management, e.g. a Mbility Manager fr cmpanies, a parking mediatr, etc. Daily expenditure als cvers the csts fr campaigning fr sustainable mbility Mre in detail: The incme f the Mbility Cmpany cnsists f the parking revenue f bth n street parking and the parking garages. All csts are deducted frm this grss incme: persnnel, daily expenditure, smaller investments and maintenance csts, etc. As explained abve, these csts already include quite sme expenditure n sustainable mbility. After deductin f all csts, we get the net benefit. Fr the latest year available, this benefit was abut 7,5 millin Eur. The amunt due t the city is paid (this amunt is fixed in the management agreement): last year, it was 1,6 millin eur, but this amunt will increase ver the next years. The remaining amunt ges in a kind f reserve fund that can be used fr larger investments in car parking (including P&R3) and bicycle parking. The Mbility Cmpany can make prpsals fr these new investments, but they have t be apprved by the City Cuncillrs. If necessary, the Mbility Cmpany can als brrw extra mney t have mre funds fr investments, bserving sme pre-set rules abut the amunt that can be brrwed. The new structure f the Mbility Cmpany The new rganizatinal structure (2014) cnsists f 4 units wh wrk in clse c-peratin 1. Plicy Unit This Plicy Unit is necessary t give rm t the elabratin f a lnger term strategic visin and always t keep an eye n the bigger picture. The Unit's bjective is t elabrate the strategic framewrk fr all relevant issues in the cmpany, in cperatin with the relevant experts. The Unit takes care f the strategic visin, such as the develpment f the mbility plan, parking plan, etc. but als includes a smaller sub-unit that is respnsible fr the transfrmatin f the strategic visin int peratinal plicy plans. Anther sub-unit is invlved in mnitring and advising n urban develpment prjects and supprting green travel plans fr schls and cmpanies. - 3 The Mbility Cmpany will pay fr a (planned) P&R garage cmprising f 530 parking spaces and at a cst f abut 7,5 millin Eur push-pull-parking.eu Page 101 f 136

102 The Unit als huses a bicycle sub-unit wh is respnsible fr the develpment and elabratin f the cycling netwrk, integrated cycling plicy and a high quality bike parking plicy. The marketing sub-unit is the vice f the Mbility Cmpany and ensures that Gent is in the picture, by fcusing n branding, external cmmunicatin, events and building awareness and paying attentin t public participatin, cnsultatin and c-creatin. 2. Operatins Unit This unit frms the well-iled machine f the Mbility Cmpany. The peratin f parking facilities, the enfrcement f bicycle and car parking regulatins, new rad signs and s n find their place here. By uniting these different peratins, an advantage f scale was created and there is a greater likelihd f effective crdinatin f the wrks t be carried ut. This unit has als a new sub-unit, invlved in rads signs and traffic rders. This new task was transferred frm the Plice Department t the Mbility Cmpany. Finally there is a sub-unit invlved in creating a real multi-mdal traffic cntrl centre. 3. Prject Office Unit Prject wrk was nt yet established in the frmer entities, s this was als launched. They mnitr a number f larger prjects, the financial cnsequences f these, and are respnsible fr the mnitring and evaluatin wrk within the Mbility Cmpany. In additin, the Prject Office als has a number f prject leaders wh tackle larger prjects. One staff member takes care f innvatin, making sure the Mbility Cmpany can invest in the latest techniques. 4. Supprt Unit B This Unit is respnsible bth fr administrative supprt within the Mbility Cmpany and fr the first cntacts with the citizens. Custmer care is always in the picture. ICT is ne f the ther cmpnents f this Unit. This Unit cmprises als ur in-huse lawyers and a financial sub-unit. Csts and wh paid them The csts f the merger peratin cnsisted in the fee fr the cnsultancy firm that did an indepth research in the chice between an internal and an external agency. The amunt paid was abut Eur. push-pull-parking.eu Page 102 f 136

103 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The transfrmatin f the tw frmer rganisatins int the cmbined Mbility Cmpany happened in three stages: 1. The transfrmatin f the Parking Cmpany int the internal agency Mbility Cmpany, January The merging f the Mbility Department and the Mbility Cmpany, January The integratin f a number f frmer plice tasks int the wrk f the Mbility Cmpany (January 2015). D2 Barriers The mst difficult parts were: The discussins abut the legal issues: this was the first time that the city had created an internal agency and as such a lt f legal matters had t be reslved. There was clse cperatin with the City s legal department t tackle these issues. The discussin n the financial issues and the management agreement between the City Cuncillrs and the directr f the Mbility Cmpany als required a lt f discussin with ther city departments, befre a satisfactry cnclusin culd be reached. D3 Drivers The willingness f the pliticians t merge the tw units The supprt f the management f bth units invlved The supprt f the management cmmittee f the city f Gent The willingness f the pliticians t create the reserve fund fr investments and therefre the willingness t have an agreement n the amunt f the benefits that had t be transferred t the city. In fact if the decisin had been t transfer all benefits t the city, it wuld be far mre difficult t get/find mney fr investments in car parking r bicycle parking. Details: what dcument(s) was (were) used fr answering the questins. This dcument was written by Peter Vansevenant f the Mbility Cmpany f Ghent. push-pull-parking.eu Page 103 f 136

104 The Master Plan and the rle f parking in Maastricht Cuntry: NL City: Maastricht A1 Objectives In recent years the quality f pen urban space within Maastricht has becme an imprtant subject f plitical debate. The Master Plan supprted a strng and cnsistent plicy f imprving the quality f urban design fr the inner city. The city cuncil realised that a high quality living and wrking envirnment shuld have the impact f an enrmus magnet n the verall ecnmical viability f the city. A2 Descriptin f the CS The quality f pen space is mainly seen as a bst t the image and the identity f a city centre. A great effrt was put int achieving a sense f style and spatial quality and mre attentin paid t the manageability f public space. The lng traditin f parks and squares in Maastricht has definitely been an imprtant surce f inspiratin fr recent city develpment. When thinking f Maastricht it is certainly impssible t nt keep in mind its famus triangle f squares frmed by Vrijthf, Market and Onze Lieve Vruweplein and it was necessary t free the public spaces f cars and parking areas. the central pedestrian streets f Maastricht and the lcatin f the parking structures. push-pull-parking.eu Page 104 f 136

105 The Municipality develped a strategic parking plicy in 1996 t transfrm the use f the public space (streets and squares large and small) f the inner areas f the city and the parking and parking tariff plicy became central t the plan. The present day parking system serving the central area csts 1 fr a time perid ranging frm 17 t 43 minutes, the fee scale is based n the criteria f the clser t the city centre yu get - the mre yu pay. Tday the central area f Maastricht is lively and dynamic with a prsperus dwntwn area. One f the imprtant results f the accessibility plicy is that the Municipality supprted an increase in sales flr surfaces frm 78,000 m² in 2000 t 110,000 m² in push-pull-parking.eu Page 105 f 136

106 B Csts and wh paid them There is a lng term Public Private Parternship between the City f Maastricht and Q-Park. Q-Park invested in the rebuilding the Vrijthf car park and the cmplete renvatin f an uter city centre car park and maintenance f anther 8 (partially residential) car parks fr a ttal investment f abut 25 millin. The city receives a fixed cmmissin based n the tariff settlements. The parking revenues have enabled Q-Park t recver the investments dne, t implement the parking system. Withut the current and future cash flws, the investments wuld nt have been made. The duratin f the City f Maastricht Q-Park cntract is 50 years. C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Imprvement f dwntwn envirnmental quality air, visual, nise. Prperty value increase Increase f sales Increase f custmers Grwth f ecnmic activity Freedm and pleasure f mvement Increase f activity C-mbility slutins Public transprt Private transprt (cars, etc) Pedestrians (walking running etc) Cycling Increase in Accessibility 3 millin peple every year use the Msae Parking Frum Financial cntributins (Private funding) Value f histrical fabric and public space Increase in turism * Imprved well being - a better place t live * 18.6 millin turists came t Maastricht in millin came t shp r dine; 6.5 millin were that the Dutch call prper turists (they stayed fr mre that a day) 0.5 millin tk part in cnferences; 1.4 millin participated in varius events. push-pull-parking.eu Page 106 f 136

107 There were n majr changes in framewrk cnditins (e.g. lcal ecnmy, plitics) during the implementatin perid that may have affected the impacts f the case study D Implementatin prcess The prcess f transfrmatin cncerned the transfrmatin f parking places frm free t paid parking. in 1996: 6100 spaces available f which 2400 free in 2000: 6450 spaces f which 700 free spaces in 2006: 7600 spaces f which 0 free spaces spaces in parking structures increased frm 1700 t In additin t the 4035 ff-street supply parking and walking spaces were set up in uter areas and 175 spaces were destined t park and ride. The final result being an ffer f parking spaces serving the transfrmed inner area guaranteeing accessibility at different price cnditins. D1. Stages The changes were implemented via the transfrmatin f the usage f the surface parking areas and then cmpleted by the building f the 1,082 capacity Msae Frum parking garage in This parking structure substituted 400 surface parking spaces that were then transfrmed int the extensin f the pedestrian area. This peratin invlved the City f Maastricht, the cmmercial peratrs, and Q-Park. D2 Barriers The mst relevant task was t maintain the fcus n the verall gal and bjectives f the transfrmatin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 107 f 136

108 Lcatin f ff strret parking structures and the P&R area n the left and the Park & Walk lcatins serving the central pedestrian area n the right. D3 Drivers The mst imprtant factr was the ability f the Public Private Partnership t maintain the ecnmic viability f the verall cntract wrking and cncentrating n maintaining a dynamic functinal aspect t the verall parking system and the relative fee scale. This psitive attitude has enabled the city f Maastricht t have tday an efficient and high quality accessibility system fr all thse arriving by car. Bannerman, L.A Urban Dynamics, Public pinin and Parking. 14 th EPA Cngress Vienna., Austria September 2009 Martens, Peter Directr Q-Park ntes and crrispndence Huub Smeets, Directr Department f Urban Planning and Develpment - Extract frm the Publicatin En plein air Maastricht stad van parken e pleinen, Maastricht 1999 Website Q-Park: Website - The city f Maastricht : City plan and phtgraphs- Laurence A. Bannerman: push-pull-parking.eu Page 108 f 136

109 The transfrmatin f Vreijthf tday the heart f Maastrichts public life. push-pull-parking.eu Page 109 f 136

110 Extended pedestrian areas and renewed piazzas in Trin Cuntry: Italy City: Trin A1 Objectives The verall strategies fr parking in Trin is part f an verall planning dcument - The 1990 Urban Parking Plan, which has fllwing three main bjectives: 1. The creatin f parking structures t eliminate n street parking and t restre streets and piazzas fr pedestrian use; 2. The creatin f parking availability n the brder f the limited access area f the city centre; 3. The creatin f parking structures t meet the demand frm private residents. A2 Descriptin f the CS The time line f the main events relevant t this case study is shwn belw. push-pull-parking.eu Page 110 f 136

111 The 1995 Urban Parking Plan apprved in the cntext f the Urban Mbility Plan endrsed the fllwing guidelines: 1. T facilitate public transprt; 2. Accelerate private vehicle circulatin; 3. Optimise the parking system; 4. Extend the cycle netwrk; 5. Create innvative systems using infrmatin technlgy fr mbility management. Strategic Plan The city f Trin planned recvery prjects (the first Italian city t debate a strategic ecnmic plan) that was prepared, by 1998, debated and apprved in the year 2000: Inspired by the effectivness f the strategic planning effrts f ther eurpean cities PASCAL MARIGAL frm Barcelna n the Scientific Cmmittee; Established a 10 year rad map; First result awarded 2006 Olympic Winter Games that prmted Trin s new pst industrial image internatinally; Integrated the metrplitan area int the internatinal system; Turning the ex-industrial city int a centre f educatin and research; Prmting Trin as a city f culture, turism, cmmerce and sprts; Imprve the urban quality by upgrading the envirnment and the urban areas. In the year 2006 Trin hsted the Winter Olympics. This special ccasin cntributed greatly t the urban transfrmatin that has included the building f a new fully autmatic subway line, new rad cnnectins, new parking areas, transfrmatin f dwntwn piazzas int pedestrian areas, new architectural masterpieces, (Jeanne Nuvelle, Gae Aulenti, Renz Pian, Arata Iszaki.). B Csts and wh paid them The whle parking peratin was in a sense self-funding, as prfits cntributed t the financing f the building f the parking structures and the cntinuus develpment f the nstreet parking sectr. The verall parking supply cnsisting f almst 60,000 n street spaces and almst 9,500 ff-street spaces required a prgressive investment f rughly 133,500.The subsequent parking fees and the develpment f the cntinuus increase f parking spaces were the key elements in the prcess. push-pull-parking.eu Page 111 f 136

112 The Parking fees prgressin % increase in parking fees frm 2000 t 2012 Zna % Zna % Zna % The different tariff znes. push-pull-parking.eu Page 112 f 136

113 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Creatin f parking structures t eliminate n street parking and restre street and piazzas fr pedestrian use; High Parking fees which all car-users have t pay Mnitring the demand befre and after the measure The number f parking spaces has been decreased Creatin f parking availability n the brder f the limited access area f the city centre; Lwer Parking fees which all car-users have t pay except residents with permits Parking fee which all car-users have t pay Increase in ffstreet parking supply Creatin f parking structures exclusively fr the private resident s demand. Even thugh the Winter Olympics tk place in 2006, the parking plan was basically well cnslidated and subsequently we can cnclude that there were there nt any majr changes in framewrk cnditins (e.g. lcal ecnmy, plitics) during the implementatin perid that were sufficiently cnsistent t have affected the impacts f the case study. D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The case study was implemented in the fllwing stages: Increase in parking availability t Parking places push-pull-parking.eu Page 113 f 136

114 Central Trin indicating the different parking fee znes and crrespnding parking fees in parking structures D2 Barriers The principal difficulty was the changing f the nature f the city. Up until the 1990's the City f Trin was primarily an industrial city being the centre f the Italian autmbile industry dedicated t the Fiat mtr cmpany. The transfrmatin prcess, in the cntext f a ten year plan required cnsistency and dedicatin invlving cllabratin f all lcal stakehlders including lcal authrities and the public and private cmpanies invlved in the scial, cultural and ecnmic transfrmatin. D3 Drivers The recgnitin f being able t hst the Olympic winter games was an imprtant bst and cnfirmatin f the directin taken in applying the transfrmatin prcess freseen in the strategic plan. In illustrating particular aspects f Trin, particular attentin must be dedicated t the undergrund parking system that cnnects Piazza Carl Felice, Via Rma, Piazza San Carl e Piazza Castell. This is made up f 3 different parking structures that are cnnected and cmpse a system f 800 places that cvers an verall distance f 900 metres and crsses the histrical centre undergrund. This slutin has enabled an imprtant urban planning initiative t establish a lively and qualified pedestrian area where the traffic is subject t strng limitatins. push-pull-parking.eu Page 114 f 136

115 The plan f the central ZTL area the ff limits zne t nrmal private vehicle transit, the indicatin f the electrnic gates, (red dts), the pedestrian streets (yellw) and the public transprt lines (vilet). The blue parking signs indicate the structures whse access is external t the limited transit bundaries. Trin is ne f the best examples f an verall integrated parking management peratin, which dates back t the first half f the1990 s. Bannerman, L.A Urban Dynamics, Public pinin and Parking. 14th EPA Cngress Vienna., Austria September 2009 The city f Trin website: GTT website: push-pull-parking.eu Page 115 f 136

116 The rle f parking management in restructuring the dwntwn area in Lyn Cuntry: France City: Lyn A1 Objectives In 1989, the city f Lyn initiated a redevelpment plan fr the Presqu île - the histric city centre lying between the Rhône and Saône rivers. This peratin, named 'Plan Presqu île included: A full revisin f the transprt system; Measures t supress transit traffic; Imprvements t public spaces by creating wide pedestrians areas (streets and squares); Cnstructin f undergrund car parks in rder t free up abve grund space. In Lyn, parking has always been cnsidered as a key element f mbility plicy. Between 1990 and 1995, 4 undergrund car parks were built in the city centre, and 11 ther car parks were built frm 1995 t 2009 near the city centre. Anther utstanding element f this prgram was the intrductin f architecture and cntemprary art in the car parks. A2 Descriptin f the CS In 1998, Lyn was designated by UNESCO as a Wrld Heritage Site wh stated, Lyn is a prime example f a human settlement, an exceptinal witness t enduring installatins ver mre than tw millennia. Tday s life in the histrical centre is dynamic with many restaurants, shps, cultural and leisure sites. A centre that cntinues t mve with the times, restre its buildings and which is mindful f the harmny f its squares, hills and rivers. The agglmeratin f Lyn is secnd nly frm Paris frm a demgraphic and ecnmic perspective. It has a ppulatin f 690,000 in the city and a ppulatin f 1,500,000 within Grand Lyn. Befre recgnitin by UNESCO, Lyn in the 1990 s was in a very critical situatin. The perid marked the peak f the crisis fr cmmercial peratrs, with many shps clsing. Excessive traffic seemed t be an integral part f the prblem causing peple t mve away frm the centre. push-pull-parking.eu Page 116 f 136

117 The City f Lyn was ne f the French cities that activated an imprtant urban renewal prjects in the cntext f a Eurpean cmpetitive strategy, namely: T becme a bitech capital; T psitin its university amngst the tp 30 in Eurpe; T cntinue ambitius urban develpment with quality prjects; T further develp the turist industry; T strengthen the financial and services systems. Tday the Presqu'île (Peninsula) is 800 metres wide and 3 km lng. It cntains a cncentratin f ecnmic activity, a bustling shpping and business district with ne f Eurpe s lngest pedestrian streets Rue de la République, cntaining banks, butiques, department stres, cinemas, tgether with cafés and restaurants that enliven the area, as well as imprtant cultural establishments including The Célestins Theatre, The Opera and The Museum f Fine Arts. B Csts and wh paid them The ttal investment fr the cnstructin f car parks was 60 M (stage 1), with the average cst fr ne space being 25,000, Lyn Parc Aut (LPA) financed the whle investment. There was n Eurpean financing. The scheme is a lng-term BOT building-perate-transfer: LPA pays fr all the expenses (building and perating) and perates the car parks fr (usually) 30 years. The park is then given back (fr free) t the lcal authrity wh then rganizes a new tender. In this mdel, users wh pay the parking fees finance the car park csts. In additin, a yearly fee, usually a percentage f the turnver is paid t the lcal authrity. The main drawback f this mdel is that the glbal ecnmic balance is nly predictable at cnstant cnditins and the inevitable variatins need cnstant mnitring invlving bth the public authrities and the cncessinaires. push-pull-parking.eu Page 117 f 136

118 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Transfrming the city int an internatinal metrplitan area; Develping tertiary service activities apart frm the traditinal prductive functins? Intrducing cmmercial plicies aimed at imprving the verall image f the city and prvide a better quality f life fr residents. Cnsidering envirnmental values aimed at imprving: public space; illuminatin; water; green; parking in the central area. Cunting cars befre and after the measure; mnitring f the amunt f parking tickets and shpping area revenue generated The cmmercial centre was restructured; Internatinal ideas cmpetitin s fr the requalificatin prcess were determined; 260 cmmercial activities were invlved; 4,200 undergrund parking spaces were planned and built frm 1990 t 1994 (Stage 1) undergrund parking spaces were planned and built frm (Stage 2) spaces in public transprt was revitalised: new bus lines new tram lines subway lines imprved A survey f parking facilities cnducted in 1999 by Lyn Parc Aut indicated: 20 30% f the visitrs arrived frm the metrplitan area; 30 40% came frm the central part f the city; 30 50% were freigners wh came frm utside the city up t 200km away. In relatin t the lcal ecnmy, LPA s parking custmers spent an average f 140 per visit and in certain areas n Saturdays, this value rse t 200 a visit. This equates t arund 240,000 a day during the week and 600,000 n Saturdays- arund 80,000,000 a year generated by parkers. There were nt any majr changes in framewrk cnditins (e.g. lcal ecnmy, plitics) during the implementatin perid that may have affected the impacts f the case study. push-pull-parking.eu Page 118 f 136

119 D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages Stage 1: "Plan Presqu île" ( ); Stage 2: Urban Mbility Scheme ( ) : 11 new undergrund car parks (8,700 spaces). During that time, 2 new tramway lines, 1 new metr line, bike-share prgram with mre than 3,000 bikes (Vel'v). D2 Barriers Frm 2000, Eurpean regulatins (i.e. cmpulsry tenders) are pulling prices and cnsequently the verall renwned quality f the LPA parking structures dwn ; Grwth in labur csts (35 hurs wrk per week, increase in wages, etc.); New rules and standards (e.g. disabled persn accessibility, fire regulatins, lifts regulatins, etc.) increase verall csts. D3 Drivers The main factr f success were: Cllabrative wrking between lcal authrity departments (City f Lyn, Grand Lyn); Supprt f the elected City f Lyn representative; Quality f and within car parks (artists, architects): which alleviates custmers cncerns when using the car parks. Bannerman, L.A Urban Dynamics, Public pinin and Parking. 14th EPA Cngress Vienna., Austria September 2009 Gindré, Francis CEO L.P.A ntes and crrispndence Maubant Jean - Luis La Ville, L Arte & LA Viture Art/Editin et Art /Enterprise pur Lyn Parc Aut, 1995 Website - Lyn Parc Aut: Website - The city f Lyn City plan (graphic elabratin) - Laurence A. Bannerman push-pull-parking.eu Page 119 f 136

120 Images f the Lyn Park Aut activity. The area f the restructuring peratin f the Presqu île The new Place des Terreaux with undergrund parking structure The new Place de la Rèpublique with undergrund parking structure Le Place des Celestins and undergrund parking structure with kaleidscpe push-pull-parking.eu Page 120 f 136

121 The kaleidscpe within the helical ramp f the Celestins undergrund parking structure The undergrund car parks fr cars and mtr bikes. The undergrund cntrl rm The lift and stair wells and the first EPA Award (1994). push-pull-parking.eu Page 121 f 136

122 push-pull-parking.eu Page 122 f 136

123 Urban renewal and the ratinal use f parking spaces in Barcelna Cuntry: Spain City: Barcelna A1 Objectives T mdernize the city by transfrming the urban envirnment t reinfrce cmmercial, ecnmic and leisure activities in the city centre. Implementatin f the Area Verde system that regulates the demand fr private transprt applying imprtant parking fees cmbined with efficient cntrlling activities. The area verde mdel is an efficient alternative mdel t electrnic cngestin-cmbating measures implemented in ther cities. A2 Descriptin f the CS A summary f key statistics are presented belw: 1.6 millin residents 102 bus lines 1,065 buses 7 metr lines 102,6 Km 141 statins 165 trains 585,000 registered cars 214,000 mtrcycles 83,000 mpeds parking spaces mtrbike spaces lading and unlading spaces Ciutat Veilla: Undergrund car parks cntaining 6,401 parking spaces. push-pull-parking.eu Page 123 f 136

124 Changes in the layut and capacity f rads and pavements frm Rads: reductin in the surface area frm 56 t 50% area Pavements: increase in the surface area frm43 t 50% area 18% n-street parking 141,747 spaces ( paid parking spaces) 82% ff street parking 646,107 spaces ( paid parking spaces) In ttal 42% f all parking in Barcelna is paid r cntrlled. B Csts and wh paid them The Barcelna urban renewal transfrmatin fllwed the strategic plan develped in preparatin fr the 1992 Olympic Games. This event sparked a ttal transfrmatin f the city and its ecnmic develpment, which has generated cntinuus grwth and develpment. The new mbility infrastructures have enabled a virtuus develpment enabling the generatin f resurces t prgressively implement new metr lines, parking structures, pedestrian areas, bike sharing initiatives etc. The verall prject is the result f ecnmic resurces generated by bth public and private parking revenues. The verall investment by the city fr the setting up f mre than 54,000 paid parking n street spaces and 25,000 ff street spaces in structures built directly by the city and the verall management system amunts t rughly 650 millin. The develpment prcess is dynamic and prgressive and recently a public tender enabled the city cntract ut the management f 25 car parks in a public (40%) / private (60%) peratin fr all the parking structures serving the central area f Barcelna. The Public/private netwrk enabled the city t btain a financial cntributin f 232millin fr a 25 year management cncessin. push-pull-parking.eu Page 124 f 136

125 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results OBJECTIVE INDICATOR DATA USED IMPACT/RESULTS Create an integrated parking system f bth nstreet and ff-street parking in rder t satisfy verall mbility demand, by freeing up f inner city rad space t enable the transfrmatin f the inner city int a dynamic urban pedestrian space Parking fee scale has been develped t cnditin the use, in a selected manner, f the private vehicle. The parking fees tgether with efficient cntrlling measures have enabled the realisatin f a balanced c-mbility system. Traffic cunts during a mnitred ten year perid fr mdal split data The number f n street parking spaces have been decreased t 18% f the ttal supply and the increase t 82% f the prtin f the ff street parking supply The mdal split data and the extensin f the pavement areas are the indicatrs f the effective results btained Statistical data indicating increase in turist activities and the grwth f the turist industry The urban mbility mdel has enabled the increase f pavement surfaces and streets with pedestrian pririty Turism Ge-referenced data indicating the rati between vehicle space and pedestrian space. The turist industry has dubled the presence f turist ver the last ten years The emplyment f dedicated staff in the turist industry has mre that dubled New sft mbility measures, (bike sharing) has been financed by the parking revenue (10 /mil./yearly) push-pull-parking.eu Page 125 f 136

126 Turism ( ) Turists 3,8 7,6 millin Prfile 40,9% 50,6% 8,5% Cngresses/fairs Hlidays Other Origin 73% 27% Eurpe Rest f Wrld Accmdatin 37,2 72,8 Thusand beds Turist activities + 13% Htels, restaurants, travel agencies, etc Wrkers emplyed + 130% 51,6 120 thusand Of particular plitical, scial and ecnmical interest is the psitive emplyment enabling aspect generated by the renewal scheme. There have been majr changes in framewrk cnditins in relatin t the lcal ecnmy and plitical gvernance that have affected the impacts f the case study. Hwever, the verall structure and integrated systems apprach f the Barcelna mdel have enabled the verall integrated structure t withstand and in certain cases t cntinue its develpment and ecnmic feasibility. D Implementatin prcess An imprtant aspect f the implementatin prcess was the implementatin f the 1998 Mbility Pact. This innvative prcess invlved a frum f public participatin invlving public institutins, experts, assciatins and stakehlder representatives. The bjective was t establish strategies and actins cncentrating n the quality f public services, rad safety and the prmtin f cycling with the intentin t reduce traffic in the central area imprve the urban quality and revitalise the centre. This nging prcess implemented prmtinal activity in schls and ffices, prmtinal activity fr the use f the public transprt, the rerganisatin f the parking plan (Area Verde) and the strategic plan fr the bicycles (2006). The intentin behind the Area Verde system was t reduce the number f trips made t the push-pull-parking.eu Page 126 f 136

127 city centre in private vehicles. The system was nt based n a cngestin charge, as in Lndn, but rather n the applicatin f tariffs t all parking in the city centre. D1. Stages The case study was implemented in the fllwing stages: Stage 1: 1983 The first 281 blue parking spaces Stage 2: 1992: - The Olympic Games Stage 3: The mbility pact Prpsal t alter the trend f increasing vlumes by cmprehensively regulating parking spaces in center city. Stage 4: 2001 The intrductin f shrt stay spaces and regulatin lading and unlading spaces in Ciutat Veilla e Eixample Stage 5: 2005 The new Area Verde regulatin f 7000 high demand parking spaces Stage 6: the new urban mbility plan Stage 7: The intrductin f bicing Stage 8: Over 54,000 blu spaces and green spaces, 11,000 lading and unlading spaces, 55,000 mtr cycle spaces D2 Barriers The intrductin f a cmplete change in the way public space was useable was the cause f cntinuus interactin between the peratrs, the pliticians and the residents and stakehlders. Having a base line reference t the decisin making prcess in the Mbility Pact there was a gd cnsensus n the initiatives, but it had t be shared and the time factr tended t dilute the prcesses. D3 Drivers The Mbility Pact n the ne hand and the planning and management intelligence that cnstantly develped, fine tuned and implemented the peratin were key t success. Anther success factr relates t the fact that the parking plicy is placed at the centre f the urban mbility plicy and parking is seen as a service t clients wh are the mtrists. Bannerman, L.A Urban Dynamics, Public pinin and Parking. 14 th EPA Cngress Vienna., Austria September 2009 Rig i Alegre, Antni Parking Planning & Management cruising fr parking. 15 th : EPA Cngress Trin, Italy September 2011 The city f Barcelna website: push-pull-parking.eu Page 127 f 136

128 Phtgraphs and images Laurence A. Bannerman: f the Ciutat Veilla Barcelna push-pull-parking.eu Page 128 f 136

129 Fast extensin f cntrlled n-street parking in Ljubljana Cuntry: Slvenia City: Ljubljana A1 Objectives Implementatin f parking management measures such as cntinuus extensins f cntrlled n-street parking is nw part f the new Sustainable transprt plicy f the Municipality f Ljubljana (2012) where parking management plays an imprtant rle in achieving sustainable transprt bjectives. Parking plicy in Ljubljana became mre cmprehensive after the intrductin f SUMP; hwever sme elements, e.g. mnitring and evaluatin f parking measures, are still missing. Befre the intrductin f the SUMP, the municipality used parking management reactively in rder t slve prblems with n-street parking. The largest prblem was fr residents trying find a parking place in areas that als ffered free lng-term parking by daily cmmuters. A2 Descriptin f the CS Ljubljana is the capital f Slvenia with 290,000 inhabitants. As a capital and University City it attracts a lt f daily migrants mre than 100,000, 90 % f them travel by car (data fr 2010). The first n-street parking cntrls were intrduced in year 1971 n sme streets in city centre. This gradually expanded with the main push in the last 10 years. In year 2006 there were 2164 cntrlled n-street parking places in an area abut 700 m in diameter arund the city centre. This is nw zne 1 with highest prices and strictest time regulatin (max. 2 r 4 hurs). Befre the regulatin it was difficult fr residents t park, because daily cmmuters and visitrs ccupied mst free parking spaces. After regulatin residents can buy a yearly permit and nn-residents wh want t park must buy a ticket. The maximum length f stay fr nn-residents is 2 r 4 hurs depending n the area. Parking is cntrlled frm 8:00 19:00 n weekdays and 8:00 13:00 n Saturdays. In 2012 cntrlled n-street parking expanded t ther, less central parts f the city zne 2 and 3 - with a less strict regime. Parking regulatin is dne by a public cmpany JP LPT whse wner is Ljubljana municipality. The cmpany carries ut activities related t the bligatry cmmercial public service f the maintenance and cleaning f public parking facilities based n the Decree n Public Parking Facilities Management (Official Jurnal f the Republic f Slvenia, N. 48/2011). A large part f the new n-street parking spaces were created with the cnversin f tw ways int ne way streets. This was dne simultaneusly with the parking regulatin. On sme streets the new space was als used t accmmdate a cycle path. As mentined abve, Ljubljana is nw divided in three parking znes. The spatial distributin f parking znes in Ljubljana is shwn in Figure 1. push-pull-parking.eu Page 129 f 136

130 Figure 1: Parking znes in Ljubljana push-pull-parking.eu Page 130 f 136

131 Prices and maximum allwed time in different znes are shwn and described in Table 1. Table 1: Parking znes in Ljubljana Zne Price ( /h) Max. time (hurs) Operating time Yearly permit fr residents ( /annually) Wh can buy a permit N. f parking places (2014) N. f ticket machines (2014) N. f yearly permits ( ) r 4 depending n the lcatin M.-Fri. 8:00 19:00 Sat. 8:00 13:00 1. permit: 100 Only residents with permanent address M.-Fri. 7:00 17:00 1. permit: permit: 200 All residents M.-Fri. 7:00 17:00 1. permit: permit: 120 All residents permit: 180 B Csts and wh paid them One ticket machine csts 4500 including VAT, s with 395 ticketing machines in ttal this sums t arund 1.8 millin. The expansin f parking regulatins was dne gradually, s the incme frm parking charges was used t buy new ticket machines t expand the cntrlled n-street parking zne. In additin t the ticket machines there is als a centre fr managing and cntrlling the system. The cst f this centre was 43,200. This includes maintenance f the centre fr 4 years. Data n the csts f changing signage and paint was nt available. Mnthly maintenance f ne ticket machine csts 6, ttalling 2370 a mnth fr 395 machines. In the year 2012 the cmpany cllected 1.4 millin frm n-street parking. Data n the ttal perating csts fr enfrcing n-street parking znes was nt available. Cmpany JP LPT had mre than 160 emplyees in 2012 and almst 14 millin incme (mainly frm ther activities such as managing main market place and frm ff-street parking charges), ut f which 650,000 was net prfit. In the first half f the year 2013 incme frm parking was lwer than in 2012 due t the ecnmic crisis, despite the intrductin f new regulated parking znes. push-pull-parking.eu Page 131 f 136

132 C Prject bjectives, indicatrs, data and impact/results The intrductin f cntrlled parking znes in Ljubljana was an ad-hc prject withut strategy, bjectives r mnitring. Therefre the nly available data is incme frm parking charges and csts f investments and maintenance f the cntrlled parking znes. Data n the perfrmance f parking znes e.g. ccupancy f parking spaces r length f stay has nt been cllected systematically. After the first stage in 2006, the 2008 financial crisis had an impact n less parking in city centre, especially after In 2012 subsidized PT tickets fr students were intrduced. As a result, fewer students nw travel t Ljubljana by car, which has an impact n less parking arund clleges and campuses. D Implementatin prcess D1. Stages The CS was implemented in fllwing stages: Stage 1: First n-street parking cntrls were implemented until year 2006 in city centre with 2164 parking places at that time. This was in the area abut 700 m in diameter arund city centre. This area is parking zne 1 with highest prices and strict time regulatin (max. 2 r 4 hurs). Stage 2: year new ticket machines in areas arund the city centre and sme high density residential areas. This was dne as a result f high parking ver-spill frm the cntrlled city centre int the surrunding areas. Sme f these areas are in parking zne 2 and sme in zne 3. Stage 3: year 2014: 70 ticket machines in mstly residential areas. The ticket machines entered service in January. These areas are 1 2 km frm the city centre and are all in zne 3. After this stage a ttal f 6640 n street parking spaces were available in all three znes. Stage 4: year 2014: 53 new ticket machines are planned in residential areas in zne 3. Mre cntrlled parking znes are planned in the future including sme streets arund majr traffic generatrs (e.g. schls, bigger emplyers) with nly limited time parking and with n permits fr residents (see figure 2). push-pull-parking.eu Page 132 f 136

133 Figure 2: Implementatin stages D2 Barriers There were sme difficulties with residents and visitrs that were ppsed t cntrlled parking. Initially, the public perceptin was that cntrlled parking had been intrduced nly t supplement the municipal budget. There was als sme vandalism invlved (see pht n next page). On the ther hand, as the parking znes expanded, mre and mre peple, mainly residents became supprtive f regulatins, mainly because they are aware f their psitive effects. Implementatin was slwed dwn fr sme years because f difficulties with tenders fr new ticket machines. push-pull-parking.eu Page 133 f 136

134 Figure 3: Destryed ticket machine D3 Drivers The main driver fr the very speedy extensin f cntrlled n-street parking was strng plitical supprt frm the current mayr and increasing supprt and demand frm residents as thse utside the zne saw hw thse within were enjying much easier access t parking. This reprt is based n the interview with the JP LPT cmpany representative Ms. Darja Pungečar, data made available by the cmpany and news articles: push-pull-parking.eu Page 134 f 136

135 The Amsterdam Mbility Fund Cuntry: Netherland City: Amsterdam This reprt frms part f Innvative Parking, a Swedish research and develpment prject. The study has been prduced in respnse t an instructin frm Pelle Envall, TUB, fr a paper summarising the Amsterdam Mbility Fund. The reprt has been prepared by Marjlein de Lange, MLAdvies, PUSH&PULL has taken this paper directly as it was frm the authr as the cnsrtium believes that this summary gives the needed infrmatin in way that, if re-written r shrtened it wuldn t be imprved. push-pull-parking.eu Page 135 f 136

136 136 The sle respnsibility fr the cntent f this publicatin lies with the authrs. It des nt necessarily reflect the pinin f the Eurpean Unin. Neither the EASME nr the Eurpean Cmmissin are respnsible fr any use that may be made f the infrmatin cntained therein.