1 / 21

COST WATCH WG1&WG2 meeting Piraeus, Greece 18 – 19 April 2006

COST WATCH WG1&WG2 meeting Piraeus, Greece 18 – 19 April 2006. Private car traffic demand and land use planning: steering tools in the field of private off street parking: results from a best practice study. University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Austria.

yukio
Download Presentation

COST WATCH WG1&WG2 meeting Piraeus, Greece 18 – 19 April 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COST WATCH WG1&WG2 meeting Piraeus, Greece 18 – 19 April 2006 Private car traffic demand and land use planning: steering tools in the field of private off street parking: results from a best practice study University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Austria Klementschitz Roman Stark Juliane

  2. Types of measures • Limiting the total number of private off-street parking spaces, • obligatory parking pricing for private off-street car parks, either to be paid by the real estate owner or the user of the car park (customer or employee) and • defining and negotiating trip-contingents based on a mobility plan (including exit-metering).

  3. Procedure of data collection Screening-Phase:  Relevant cities Relevant persons (experts) Detailed Analysis: Interview supported by questionnaire Telephone or email interviews

  4. Case study cities Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Copenhagen Newcastle Hamburg Rostock London Amsterdam Berlin Bremen Rotterdam Erfurt Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Linz Zurich Bern Salzburg Graz Lyon Innsbruck Madrid Thessalonica Athens

  5. (1) Limiting the number of private parking spaces Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Copenhagen Newcastle Measure exists … Hamburg Rostock obligatory optional not at all Amsterdam London Bremen Berlin Rotterdam Erfurt Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Linz Zurich Bern Salzburg Lyon Innsbruck Graz Madrid Thessalonica Athens

  6. Regulation example: Hamburg Relation of upper limits of the number of private off street parking spaces and gross floor space in Hamburg:

  7. Regulation example: Hamburg

  8. (1) Limiting the number of private parking spaces Comparison of the limits of the number of parking space for office buildings in city centres

  9. Practice example: Helsinki Office building Sörnäisten rantatie 19 /Helsinki Sörnaisten rantatie

  10. Practice example: Helsinki • Office building • Central area • 15600 m² floor space • Requirement in building permit:45 parking spaces maximum 345m² floor space /parking space

  11. (2) Obligatory parking pricing Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Kopenhagen Newcastle Measure exists … Hamburg obligatory optional not at all Rostock Amsterdam London Bremen Berlin Rotterdam Erfurt Aachen Paris Stuttgart Munich Linz Zurich Bern Salzburg Graz Lyon Innsbruck Madrid Thessalonica Athens

  12. 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 (2) Obligatory parking pricing Switzerland Environmental Act (Umweltschutzgesetz) Emission Act (Luftreinhalte-VO) Noise Act (Lärmschutz-VO) Kantonal masterplan for transport and enterprises Traffic generatingbuilding Obligatory parking pricing Requirements in Building Permits

  13. Practice example: Abtwil (Switzerland) • Shopping mall and leisure centre Säntispark • 12245m² sales floor • 1022 parking spaces Säntispark

  14. 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

  15. (3) Trip-contingents Stockholm Helsinki Aalborg Kopenhagen Newcastle Measure exists … Hamburg obligatory voluntary basis not at all Rostock London Amsterdam Bremen Berlin Rotterdam Erfurt Aachen Paris Stuttgart München Linz Zürich Bern Salzburg Graz Lyon Innsbruck Madrid Thessaloniki Athen

  16. 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 (3) Trip-contingents Switzerland Environmental Act (Umweltschutzgesetz) Emission Act (Luftreinhalte-VO) Noise Act (Lärmschutz-VO) Kantonal masterplan for transport and enterprises Traffic generatingbuilding Trip contingents Requirements in Building Permits

  17. 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

  18. Practice example: Zurich - Sihlcity

  19. Practice example: Zurich - Sihlcity Requirement in building permit: • 850 parking spaces (limited)175 m² floor space/parking space • Trip contingent8800 daily car tripsca. 5 arrivals per parking space or 50% PT-share of visitors • Case of exceeding:- penalty per trip exceeded - increasing parking fees - reduction of parking spaces

  20. 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).

  21. COST WATCH WG1&WG2 meeting Piraeus, Greece 18 – 19 April 2006 Private car traffic demand and land use planning: steering tools in the field of private off street parking: results from a best practice study University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences Vienna, Austria Klementschitz Roman Stark Juliane

More Related