European Conference on Mobility Management Parma, Italy 27 - 28 October 2005 Best practice of integrating Mobility Management in Land Use Planning in the field of off street parking policy University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Austria 1 Klementschitz Roman Stark Juliane Types of measures (1) Limiting the total number of private off-street parking spaces, (2) obligatory parking pricing for private offstreet car parks, either to be paid by the real estate owner or the user of the car park (customer or employee) and (3) defining and negotiating trip-contingents based on a mobility plan (including exitmetering). 2 Procedure of data collection (1) Screening-Phase:  Relevant cities  Relevant persons (experts) (2) Detailed Analysis:  Interview supported by questionnaire  Telephone or email interviews 3 Case study cities Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Copenhagen Newcastle Hamburg London Rostock Amsterdam Bremen Rotterdam Berlin Erfurt Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Bern Lyon Zurich Innsbruck Linz Salzburg Graz Madrid Thessalonica 4 Athens (1) Limiting the number of private parking spaces  In 21 out of 27 cities analysed the tool of limiting the total number of private off-street parking spaces is invented.  In 12 of these cities the measure is obligatory at least for certain areas or for the whole city and practice examples are demonstrating the feasibility of the measure.  Generally spoken, it can be stated, this mobility management tool is the most used one in the cities analysed. 5 (1) Limiting the number of private parking spaces Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Copenhagen Newcastle Hamburg Rostock London Amsterdam Bremen Berlin Rotterdam Erfurt Maßnahme: exists … Measure obligatory konkret umgesetzt optional gesetzl. Grundlage vorh. not at all nicht vorhanden Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Bern Lyon Zurich Linz Salzburg Innsbruck Graz Madrid Thessalonica 6 Athens Regulation example: Hamburg Relation of upper limits of the number of private off street parking spaces and gross floor space in Hamburg: Traffic inducing source Upper limit of parking spaces Offices, administration and services buildings with more than 4000 m² total floor space 1 / 320 m² floor space other buildings 1 / 280 m² floor space Shops buildings with less than 700 m² total sales floor 1 / 200 m² sales floor (min. 1 per shop) shops with small share of clients per sales floor, e. g. furniture stores 1 / 200 m² net sales floor other shops 1 / 200 m² net sales floor Other commercial plants manufacturers, industrial, etc. 7 1 / 400 m² floor space Regulation example: Hamburg 8 Regulation example: Helsinki Relation of limits of the number of private parking spaces, land use and floor space in Helsinki (1 parking space / xx m² floor space): Zone min./max. nr. (Y) (I) (II) Office building 1 / 500 1 / 350 1 / 280…220 Retail 1 / 200 1 / 150 1 / 110…90 Industrial use: production 1 / 500 1 / 350 1 / 280…220 other use (e. g. administration) 1 / 300 1 / 200 1 / 140…120 Use 9 Max. number gross floor space per parking space (1) Limiting the number of private parking spaces 10 600 500 Helsinki 400 Hamburg 300 Zurich Rotterdam 200 Munich 100 Berlin 0 Comparison of the limits of the number of parking space for office buildings in city centres Practice example: Helsinki Office building Sörnäisten rantatie 19 /Helsinki Sörnaisten rantatie 11 Practice example: Helsinki  Office building  Central area  15600 m² floor space  Requirement in building permit: 45 parking spaces maximum 345m² floor space /parking space 12 (2) Obligatory parking pricing  Only one out of 27 cities implemented obligatory parking pricing for private off street parking spaces.  A legal basis for implementing the measure exists in eight cities analysed. 13 (2) Obligatory parking pricing Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Kopenhagen Newcastle Hamburg London Rostock Amsterdam Bremen Berlin Rotterdam Erfurt Maßnahme: exists … Measure obligatory konkret umgesetzt optional gesetzl. Grundlage vorh. not at all nicht vorhanden Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Bern Lyon Zurich Innsbruck Linz Salzburg Graz Madrid Thessalonica 14 Athens (2) Obligatory parking pricing Switzerland N A T I O N A L P R O V I N C E C O M M U N I T I E S 15 Environmental Act (Umweltschutzgesetz) Emission Act (Luftreinhalte-VO) Noise Act (Lärmschutz-VO) Kantonal masterplan for transport and enterprises Obligatory parking pricing Requirements in Building Permits Traffic generating building Practice example: Abtwil (Switzerland)  Shopping mall and leisure centre Säntispark  12245m² sales floor  1022 parking spaces Säntispark 16 Practice example: Abtwil (Switzerland)  Immissions exceeds thresholds  Obligatory parking pricing in the building permit (no refund): CHF 1.00 first hour (0.66 €) CHF 0.50 further hours (0.33 €) no rebate for longer stays 17 (3) Trip-contingents  There are existing experiences with mobility management plans including the reduction of the number of trips in 19 out of 27 cities or regions basically on voluntary basis.  Such mobility plans are either agreed between operators and authorities or operator internally.  The only exception is Switzerland, where not exceeding agreed trip contingents are causing consequents (e. g. the operator must increase the parking fees). 18 (3) Trip-contingents Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Kopenhagen Newcastle Hamburg London Amsterdam Bremen Rotterdam Rostock Berlin Erfurt Maßnahme: exists … Measure obligatory konkret umgesetzt voluntary basisvorh. gesetzl. Grundlage not at all nicht vorhanden Aachen Paris Stuttgart München Bern Lyon Zürich Innsbruck Linz Salzburg Graz Madrid Thessaloniki 19 Athen (3) Trip-contingents Switzerland N A T I O N A L P R O V I N C E C O M M U N I T I E S 20 Environmental Act (Umweltschutzgesetz) Emission Act (Luftreinhalte-VO) Noise Act (Lärmschutz-VO) Kantonal masterplan for transport and enterprises Trip contingents Requirements in Building Permits Traffic generating building Practice example: Zurich - Sihlcity  149038m² floor space - 35000m² sales floor - 30000m² services - 15000m² cinema, food - 20000m² hotel, housing  Begin of construction: July 2003  Opening: 2007 21 Practice example: Zurich - Sihlcity 22 Practice example: Zurich - Sihlcity Requirement in building permit:  850 parking spaces (limited) 175 m² floor space/parking space  Trip contingent 8800 daily car trips ca. 5 arrivals per parking space or 50% PT-share of visitors 23  Case of exceeding: - increasing parking fees - reduction of parking spaces Conclusions  Practice examples exist for all three types of measures.  The experiences are generally positive and the effects are supporting the traffic development goals targeted.  The measures are transferable to other cities easily.  To prevent inequity of competition, it should be a goal to invent (and harmonize) the measures throughout Europe (or at least within one country). 24 European Conference on Mobility Management Parma, Italy 27 - 28 October 2005 Best practice of integrating Mobility Management in Land Use Planning in the field of off street parking policy University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Austria 25 Klementschitz Roman Stark Juliane