Search results

This chapter provides a case study of the implementation of the Parking Space Levy (PSL) in Sydney, Australia. Introduced by the Parking Space Levy Act 1992, the scheme places a levy on business use of off-street car parking spaces with the revenues from the levy being hypothecated to public transport improvements. The chapter outlines the implementation of what is now a relatively mature scheme and examines how the revenues raised by the scheme have been spent.

This chapter offers a review of the introduction of the levy in Sydney and explores its impact in implementation with respect to changes to the number of parking spaces and an analysis of the way in which the hypothecated revenue has been spent. The implementation of the PSL is evaluated against the literature on hypothecation of funds and includes a discussion of policy issues for Sydney in the light of the evidence presented.

Whilst off-street parking availability is a major contributor to peak period traffic, the implementation of the PSL as a single rate of application has not led to a decrease in total number of available parking places in the City of Sydney. The number of concessions for unused spaces, whereby the levy was not imposed, increased when the levy rate was doubled in 2009 although this was accompanied by a fall in the number of exemptions from the levy. The revenue from the PSL has been dedicated to improvements in public transport infrastructure, primarily interchanges and commuter car parks although the more recent provisions to spend on ‘soft’ measures to improve sustainable travel have not been taken up.

Whilst a stated objective of the PSL was to reduce congestion, the chapter concludes that the PSL had more than this single objective which makes it more difficult to assess whether its implementation has been a success.

This chapter provides an overview of the introduction, implementation and outcomes of the PSL in Sydney, relating it to the PSL in Melbourne (Chapter 13) and the WPL in Nottingham (Chapter 15). No other study to date evaluated the PSL in Sydney against the literature relating to hypothecation nor tracked the impacts of implementation of the PSL to evaluate its success.

The purpose of this chapter is to synthesise the issues and debates raised in the book as a whole.

This chapter reviews the content of the book, drawing together the threads to provide conclusions on parking issues and policies around the world.

The chapter reveals the way in which parking is fundamentally a land-use issue and the importance of parking to different travel demands. As cars spend most of their time parked at home, the issue of residential parking is important and determines the shape and nature of our cities. Planning for parking has a key role to play in determining the outcome of how walkable the built environment becomes. The synthesis of the chapters of the book reveals how the type of parking is intrinsically linked to the activity undertaken and the type of destination, whether the trip is for commuting or for retail or leisure.

The chapter identifies strategies such as car-free developments, park and ride and workplace parking levies used to provide solutions and the way in which the number of stakeholders involved influences the ease with which the complex interplay of issues in parking can be resolved.

Understanding that parking is primarily a land-use policy, dependent on the home location and destination of the trip, has implications for the development of parking policy within the package of measures making up travel demand management strategies. The chapter shows how parking for a stationary vehicle can influence the flow of moving vehicles and the built environment.

This chapter draws on the chapters of this book which offer a multidimensional investigation into parking issues and parking policy, providing a wealth of case study material providing evidence to underpin the design of effective parking management approaches.

This chapter provides an introduction to parking issues and policies. It seeks to place parking in the context of transport demand management (TDM) and takes as its tenet that parking is primarily a land-use issue. It outlines the types of parking which exist and why the management of parking is all important when addressing the policy goals of impacting on traffic congestion, tackling the issue of air pollution, stimulating economic activity or aiming to improve road safety.

This chapter discusses the role played by parking as a TDM measure and its various facets most notably pricing and regulation, the prioritisation of land for particular uses, such as Park and Ride, or indeed car free developments.

The chapter reveals the complex nature of parking from both the supply and demand side. The demand is driven by the kind of activity involved be it for commuter, retail or other reasons. Clearly, the type of housing stock and residential density impact on parking demand at the start point of the journey, whereas at the destination, the type of employment and the duration of parking are significant factors. Car parking is not homogeneous, since it can be found in various locations and provided by different bodies, be that the public or private sector. The cost of parking is an issue not simply in terms of the land take, cost of construction and maintenance but also searching for parking and the time involved.

The management of parking is important as part of a package of measures commonly implemented by authorities and one which needs to be understood alongside land-use planning. It is an area involving conflict between parking supply, demand, revenue raising and economic development.

The book offers a clear understanding and insight into the area of parking and its issues and policies. The book uses case studies where appropriate providing originality in the area of parking and effective management approaches.

The pricing of parking is a common tool used by governments to facilitate the efficient movement of traffic, raise revenue and, more recently, influence travel behaviour. An important and under-researched by-product of parking pricing schemes is the impact of these schemes on parking supply.

This chapter offers a review of prior research and literature, and explores: who pays the parking levy, the impact of the Congestion Levy on the provision of parking and an overview of the transport impacts of the levy.

The direction of the levy at parking operators and owners rather than the vehicle drivers does not provide a direct link between users and the levy and results in many parking providers not passing the levy onto commuters. The study of parking supply impact shows that, since the introduction of the levy, the supply of commercial off-street parking spaces has declined while the growth in private, non-residential, parking spaces has slowed. Over the same period, there has been a decrease in the number of parking spaces provided for long-stay parking (which attract the parking levy), and an increase in the number of spaces provided for other uses. Understanding these parking supply impacts are important, not only because a reduction in the number of long-stay car parking spaces is an objective of the levy, but also because any such reduction could magnify the travel behaviour impacts that may have occurred solely as a result of an increase in parking price. Investigation of the overall transport impacts of the levy indicate that the parking levy did have an impact on mode choice. However the extent of this impact was not clear due to a large number of associated changes in policy and economic conditions that took place at the same time as the levy.

The chapter shows that the parking levy was positive in its impact on transport use, however there were a number of improvements that could be made to the way the levy was implemented that could improve these. Interestingly, there have been a number of recent changes in the implementation of the levy that address some of these issues. Most importantly, following its own investigation into the impact of the levy, from January 2014 the cost of the levy was increased by 40% to $1,300 per annum, and its coverage extended (Victorian State Revenue Office, 2013). The impact of this change has not been considered in this research.

The uniqueness of the chapter lies in its exploration of how increased prices of parking has influenced supply and how the levy, as a new form of congestion pricing, has influenced the supply of parking in the context of the case study of the Melbourne parking levy in Australia.

A Workplace Parking Levy (WPL) scheme represents a major transport demand management intervention which raises a levy on private non-domestic off street parking provided by employers to employees, regular business visitors and students. It therefore increases the average cost of commuting by car and stimulates a contraction in the supply of workplace parking places. Under UK legislation the revenue from such a scheme is hypothecated funding for further transport improvements. As such it is potentially an important mixed policy instrument available to transport authorities to tackle traffic congestion and create extra transport capacity by using the additional funding such a scheme provides. At present, in the United Kingdom, only Nottingham City Council has implemented such a scheme and thus an understanding of how that scheme was implemented, how it operates and the outcomes after a full year of operation are of importance to transport academics and other local authorities considering utilising a similar approach.

This chapter presents an overview of the WPL scheme in Nottingham. The legislation, implementation experience, monitoring framework and outcomes for this scheme after the first year of full operation are discussed by drawing on current literature, documentary evidence and monitoring data.

The Nottingham WPL scheme was fully implemented in April 2012. The gap between the provisions of the underpinning legislation and the functioning scheme has necessitated the formulation of policy in line with the spirit of the legislation. Acceptance by the business community and the public were further barriers to implementation which were mitigated by a consultation process and a Public Examination. However acceptance remains a concern until the scheme has been shown to meet its key objective of reducing congestion. To date there is no evidence that the scheme has had a negative impact on business investment and, while there is as yet no evidence traffic congestion has reduced, it is still early for such impacts to be identified especially as the majority of the associated public transport improvements are yet to be implemented. However the WPL has already raised £7 million in net revenue in its first year of operation which is hypothecated for public transport improvements which may help encourage inward investment and reduce car travel.

At present the Nottingham WPL scheme has only been operational for a short time and a limitation to the research presented here is that the major public transport improvements part funded by revenue hypothecated from the WPL are not yet in place. It will be necessary to wait at least a further 3 years before more definite conclusions as to the success of the WPL package can be drawn.

As the first of its kind in the United Kingdom or indeed in Europe, the WPL scheme in Nottingham provides a unique contribution to the literature, comparing and contrasting implementation and outcomes with those in Australia and Canada. Geographical and cultural differences between the United Kingdom and these countries mean that conclusions drawn concerning existing schemes in other continents are not necessarily transferable to the United Kingdom. This chapter provides evidence in a UK framework to assess if the approach could be suitably applied more widely.

This chapter provides an overview of parking policy. The chapter takes as its start point that parking is first and foremost a land-use issue. It looks at the conflicts and synergies between parking policy for the purposes of traffic management and parking policy to support various key land-uses and policy objectives.

This chapter discusses the main practice-oriented viewpoints on what is meant by parking policy and what it aims to achieve. It then provides a state-of-art review of the evidence base on residential, retail and workplace parking as the three key parking destinations before drawing together these findings.

The reviews reveal that there has been an overemphasis on the importance of the impact of parking pricing to trip frequency, destination and walk times in the literature. Much greater emphasis should be given to establishing the extent to which parking restraint supports the economy, the environment and social equity. Only then will we be able to develop a consistent policy framing within which good parking management policy can play out and make a long-term difference to travel patterns and the quality of life in our cities.

If parking policy is to work well as part of an overall package of demand restraint, it needs to be applied in conjunction with land-use planning. In transport terms, this means connecting parking policy to non-car accessibility. If the overarching land-use and transport accessibility policies are right, then there is a greater possibility for other parking management policies to be effectively applied and integrated in broader transport strategies.

This chapter suggests that without a clear understanding of the broader objectives that parking policy supports it will not be possible to design effective parking management approaches.

The purpose of this study is to measure the supply and demand for parking in London to determine whether there is sufficient provision for night-time residential needs and to determine whether policies designed at controlling car ownership by restricting residential parking are effective.

The history of parking controls and early studies of parking in Central London are reviewed to put into context recent surveys of parking supply undertaken by MVA. Data from the National Travel Survey, the English Housing Survey and various travel demand surveys by Transport for London have been analysed to determine the overnight demand for parking and the supply both off-street and on-street.

The study shows that there appears to be saturation in inner London for controlled on-street parking (which is the majority of available parking) and high utilisation for off-street parking. In outer London, there is more spare capacity. The evidence suggests that restricting residential parking space does not limit the growth in car ownership especially in outer London where the car is an essential part of modern living.

Restrictive policies on parking supply in new developments leads to unsightly and dangerous parking on streets not designed for parking or illegal parking on footways. Policy makers must appreciate that car ownership will continue to rise and that parking spaces must be provided, if necessary, underground.

The study uses several different sources of data to investigate the under-researched area of parking availability which is of considerable importance to transport planners and policy makers.

A tax based on land value is in many ways ideal, but many economists dismiss it by assuming it could not raise enough revenue. Standard sources of data omit much of the potential tax base, and undervalue what they do measure. The purpose of this paper is to present more comprehensive and accurate measures of land rents and values, and several modes of raising revenues from them besides the conventional property tax.

The paper identifies 16 elements of land's taxable capacity that received authorities either trivialize or omit. These 16 elements come in four groups.

In Group A, Elements 1‐4 correct for the downward bias in standard sources. In Group B, Elements 5‐10 broaden the concepts of land and rent beyond the conventional narrow perception, while Elements 11‐12 estimate rents to be gained by abating other kinds of taxes. In Group C, Elements 13‐14 explain how using the land tax, since it has no excess burden, uncaps feasible tax rates. In Group D, Elements 15‐16 define some moot possibilities that may warrant further exploration.

This paper shows how previous estimates of rent and land values have been narrowly limited to a fraction of the whole, thus giving a false impression that the tax capacity is low. The paper adds 14 elements to the traditional narrow “single tax” base, plus two moot elements advanced for future consideration. Any one of these 16 elements indicates a much higher land tax base than economists commonly recognize today. Taken together they are overwhelming, and cast an entirely new light on this subject.