Presented in May 2011 at the CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT, AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN. HOW TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE URBAN TRANSPORT? See http://www.cleanairinstitute.org/evento_rosario_program_r.php

1. Learning from Parking Policies in Asia
Based on a Study commissioned by ADB under RETA 6416: A Development Framework for
Sustainable Urban Transport - Parking Policy in Asia: Status, Comparisons and Potential
Paul Barter
Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy
National University of Singapore
paulbarter@nus.edu.sg
http://www.reinventingparking.org/
Photo: Zaitun Kasim

2. Summary
1. Parking policy: big choices
2. Suitability of the main parking policy
approaches to different contexts
3. Striking contrasts among Asian city
parking policy approaches
4. Lessons

3. 1. Parking policy: big choices
Should each building
site have its own
dedicated parking?
OR
Should most parking
serve its whole vicinity?

4. Parking policy: big choices
a. ‘Conventional’ approaches
– parking as ancillary infrastructure
for each building (like toilets)
b. ‘Parking management’
approaches
– Parking as infrastructure for whole
neighborhoods (like streets)
– Parking as a tool for wider
policy goals
c. Market-oriented approaches
– parking as a real-estate based
service locality by locality
(like hot food outlets)

5. Parking policy: big choices
Approaches to Central goals
parking policy
Avoid parking scarcity/spillover (via
Conventional
minimum parking requirements)
Serve wider urban & transport policy
Parking goals (via wide range of policy tools).
management For example, constrain car travel to certain
locations by limiting parking supply
Ensure demand, supply and
Market-based
prices are responsive to each other

6. 1. Parking policy: big choices
2. Suitability of the main parking policy
approaches to different contexts
3. Striking contrasts among Asian city
parking policy approaches
4. Lessons

7. 2. Suitability of the main parking policy approaches to
different contexts (at least in the West)
Parking management approaches
Autocentric conventional approach
are common in inner urban areas
dominates auto-oriented suburban areas
Constraint-focused parking management City centres often have market parking as
(for TDM) in transit-oriented city centres a by-product of parking-scarce context

8. Conventional parking policy tends to
promote automobile dependence Los Angeles

9. Conventional parking policy can blight
older, dense areas
Near Houston’s city centre

10. The conventional approach is a response to
fear of on-street chaos.
But in dense, mixed-use areas, getting good control of on-street
parking is essential no matter what parking policy approach you adopt
Dhaka

11. Market-oriented approach relatively untested
• Professor Donald Shoup (‘The
High Cost of Free Parking’)
suggests:
– Performance pricing for
on-street parking
– Abolish minimum parking
requirements (since now we don’t
need to worry about spillover)
• Trials of performance pricing Source: Shoup, D. The High Cost of Free Parking
Shoup,
(eg see www.SFPark.org)
• Accidental examples in many
city centers?
11

12. Parking management works!
It is tried and tested in many cities but can be
challenging to implement unless the need is very clear
In Sydney
• Can be complex
• Can involve conflict
• Parking management
for TDM especially
needs political will …
– Strong green movement
– Acute congestion
– Acute parking problems,
and
– Adequate alternatives

13. ‘Park-once neighbourhoods’
• Parking management and market-oriented approaches
are best suited to ‘Park-once neighborhoods’
• This means that most parking is in shared parking that
is open to the public and is usually priced (even parking
within buildings)

14. 1. Parking policy: big choices
2. Suitability of the main parking policy
approaches to different contexts
3. Striking contrasts among Asian city
parking policy approaches
4. Lessons

15. 3. There are striking contrasts among Asian city
parking policy approaches
ADB-sponsored 14-city study of parking policy in Asia
I expected parking management to be common:
Because most Asian city areas have ideal conditions for
park-once neighborhoods -- High urban densities;
mixed-use urban fabric; High use of non-car modes;
Acute problems arising from rapid motorization
Surprise! All of the cities use minimum parking requirements
Only Seoul had vigorous parking management approach
(in its business districts)

16. Contrasting Asian responses to their
emerging parking problems
• As motorization arrived, ALL of the Asian cities
sought ways to increase parking SUPPLY
– Some focused mainly on raising their minimum parking
requirements
– Several cities focused also on public-sector parking supply
• But a few learned to NOT WORRY about parking supply!

17. Minimum parking requirements at
comparable commercial buildings
versus
approximate car ownership

18. Tokyo (and Japan generally)
• Minimum parking requirements
but very low rates and exempt
small buildings
• Very limited on-street parking
with improved control
(and not allowed overnight!)
• Some government supply was
built in the past but it is now
market priced
• Throughout Japan, very low
• Ubiquitous commercial parking parking requirements but no
• Proof-of-parking rule parking shortage problem
(prove access to a near-home parking place • Park-once neighborhoods
before registering any car)
are the norm

19. Exempting small buildings from requiring parking
Floor area threshold below which there are no parking requirements
Tokyo Yes (1,500 m2 or 2,000 m2). Above the threshold, parking requirements phase in
gradually according to a formula . At full force only from 6,000 m2 floor area.
Guangzhou Yes (500 m2)
Taipei city Yes (300 m2 or 500 m2)
Bangkok Yes (commercial, office, shopping malls: 300 m2; condominiums: 60 m2 per unit;
hotels: 30 rooms; restaurants: 300 m2; entertainment buildings: 500 seats)
Hong Kong Small, street-side retail serving local residents is generally exempt
Ahmedabad Yes (60 m2)
Hanoi Low-rise residential buildings exempt
Beijing Yes?
Seoul No?
Jakarta No?
Singapore No
Kuala Lumpur No
Manila No
Dhaka No

20. Tokyo has local parking markets in many areas
In Tokyo

21. Tokyo has local parking markets in many areas
In Tokyo

22. Bangkok, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, and Manila
• Fear of on-street parking chaos
• Regular increases in minimum parking
requirements seen as the answer
• Little government-provided parking
• Low parking prices (even though pricing is common)

23. Ahmedabad, Dhaka, Hanoi
• Weak on-street parking management =
on-street parking chaos
• Policy efforts (so far) focus on BOTH
minimum parking requirements
AND local government-provided parking

24. Hong Kong, Seoul, and Singapore
• Increasingly effective on-street
parking management
• Shifting away from supply focus
• Parking requirements but with effort
to make them realistic (Singapore and
Hong Kong lowered their minimum requirements
when found to have been too high!)
• Parking maximums in Seoul’s CBDs
• Pricing widespread

25. Beijing, Guangzhou, and Taipei
• Modest parking standards
• Keen on government-provided supply
(but Taipei has abandoned supply focus)
• Increasingly effective on-street
parking management with pricing
• Off-street pricing widespread
But problem: mainland Chinese cities have
parking price controls
• In Taipei, government parking now
close to market priced
• Possibly tending towards Japan model?

26. 1. Parking policy: big choices
2. Suitability of the main parking policy
approaches to different contexts
3. Striking contrasts among Asian city
parking policy approaches
4. Lessons

27. 5. Lessons
• Apply parking management strongly if you can
• But if that is not politically possible don’t just follow
USA-style conventional parking policy that points
towards automobile-dependence!
• Experience in eastern Asia suggests that fears of
parking shortage crises are exaggerated
• There are pragmatic middle ways

28. Lessons
• Several eastern Asian cities have what we might call a
‘relaxed pragmatic’ version of the conventional
approach to parking policy
• They don’t worry about shortages since their ‘park-
once neighborhoods’ seem to cope (especially when prices are
left to market forces)
• They didn’t bother increasing parking requirements as
car ownership and use increased (they seem to see on-site
parking as just a contribution to neighborhood supply)

29. More detailed and refined policy approach categories
Approaches to Central goals
parking policy
Autocentric Avoid parking scarcity
Avoid both scarcity and
Demand-realistic
wasteful surplus
Conventional
Relaxed/ Require (large) buildings to merely
Pragmatic contribute to local parking supply
Serve wider urban &
Multi-objective
transport policy goals
Parking
management Constraint of car travel
Constraint-focused
(to certain locations)
Ensure demand, supply and
Market-based
prices are responsive to each other

30. Lessons
• Get adequate control of on-street parking
• Foster ‘park-once neighborhoods’
with most parking open to the public, not restricted to customers or
tenants only, and with market prices
• If you can’t lower or abolish minimum parking
requirements, at least don’t increase them
Thank you!
To download the full study go to
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1780012
For more on parking policy see
http://www.reinventingparking.org/