IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v67y2014icp352-365.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do parking standards matter? Evaluating the London parking reform with a matched-pair approach

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Fei
  • Guo, Zhan

Abstract

Minimum parking standards, which require developers to build a certain amount of off-street parking spaces, are increasingly criticized for leading to excess parking supply and automobile travel in recent years. However, due to the difficulty in identifying the policy effect, few empirical studies have directly and accurately estimated the effects of parking standards on parking supply. The present study examines a parking reform in London, UK, where minimum parking standards for residential developments were replaced with maximum standards in the early 2000s. Using planning application records, we match neighboring pre-reform and post-reform developments to estimate the effect of the parking standard switch and further identify the “binding” and “capping” effects of minimum and maximum parking standards. It is found that the parking reform in London has led to a reduction of approximately 0.76 parking spaces per unit in residential development applications, or 49% of the pre-reform level. Minimum parking standards seem to have a larger impact than maximum ones on parking supply that fell more upon inner city developments, while maximum parking standards have more influenced suburban neighborhoods. Market forces have played a major role in the decline of parking supply. The findings provide strong evidence for the market distortion effect of minimum parking standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Fei & Guo, Zhan, 2014. "Do parking standards matter? Evaluating the London parking reform with a matched-pair approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 352-365.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:67:y:2014:i:c:p:352-365
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.08.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414001815
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2014.08.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    2. Michael Manville, 2013. "Parking Requirements and Housing Development," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(1), pages 49-66, January.
    3. Simon McDonnell & Josiah Madar & Vicki Been, 2011. "Minimum parking requirements and housing affordability in New York City," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 45-68, January.
    4. repec:ucp:bkecon:9781884829987 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. de Grange, Louis & Troncoso, Rodrigo & González, Felipe, 2012. "An empirical evaluation of the impact of three urban transportation policies on transit use," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 11-19.
    6. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    7. Zhan Guo & Shuai Ren, 2013. "From Minimum to Maximum: Impact of the London Parking Reform on Residential Parking Supply from 2004 to 2010?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(6), pages 1183-1200, May.
    8. Moshe Givoni, 2012. "Re-assessing the Results of the London Congestion Charging Scheme," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(5), pages 1089-1105, April.
    9. Zhan Guo & Asha Agrawal & Jennifer Dill, 2011. "Are Land Use Planning and Congestion Pricing Mutually Supportive?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(3), pages 232-250.
    10. Handy, Susan & Cao, Xinyu & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2005. "Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5b76c5kg, University of California Transportation Center.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thumm, Alex Jürgen & Perl, Anthony, 2020. "Puzzling over parking: Assessing the transitional parking requirement in Vancouver, British Columbia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 85-101.
    2. Yegor Yu. Muleev, 2019. "Investigating The Cross-National Comparability Of Testing Using Response Time," HSE Working papers WP BRP 09/URB/2020, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Fredrik Johansson & Greger Henriksson & Pelle Envall, 2019. "Moving to Private-Car-Restricted and Mobility-Served Neighborhoods: The Unspectacular Workings of a Progressive Mobility Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    4. De Gruyter, Chris & Truong, Long T. & Taylor, Elizabeth J., 2020. "Can high quality public transport support reduced car parking requirements for new residential apartments?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Olaru, Doina & Mulley, Corinne & Smith, Brett & Ma, Liang, 2017. "Policy-led selection of the most appropriate empirical model to estimate hedonic prices in the residential market," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 213-228.
    6. McAslan, Devon & Sprei, Frances, 2023. "Minimum parking requirements and car ownership: An analysis of Swedish municipalities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 45-58.
    7. Taylor, Elizabeth Jean, 2020. "Parking policy: The politics and uneven use of residential parking space in Melbourne," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. De Gruyter, Chris & Davies, Liam & Truong, Long T., 2021. "Examining spatial variations in minimum residential parking requirements in Melbourne," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Gabbe, C.J. & Pierce, Gregory & Clowers, Gordon, 2020. "Parking policy: The effects of residential minimum parking requirements in Seattle," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Anna Lower & Agnieszka Szumilas, 2021. "Parking Policy as a Tool of Sustainable Mobility-Parking Standards in Poland vs. European Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-15, October.
    11. Qian Liu & Mingjian Zhu & Zuopeng Xiao, 2019. "Workplace Parking Provision and Built Environments: Improving Context-Specific Parking Standards Towards Sustainable Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aston, Laura & Currie, Graham & Kamruzzaman, Md. & Delbosc, Alexa & Teller, David, 2020. "Study design impacts on built environment and transit use research," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    2. Ding, Chuan & Wang, Donggen & Liu, Chao & Zhang, Yi & Yang, Jiawen, 2017. "Exploring the influence of built environment on travel mode choice considering the mediating effects of car ownership and travel distance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 65-80.
    3. Van Acker, Veronique & Ho, Loan & Stevens, Larissa & Mulley, Corinne, 2020. "Quantifying the effects of childhood and previous residential experiences on the use of public transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    4. Ding, Yu & Lu, Huapu, 2016. "Activity participation as a mediating variable to analyze the effect of land use on travel behavior: A structural equation modeling approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 23-28.
    5. Liu, Yan & Wang, Siqin & Xie, Bin, 2019. "Evaluating the effects of public transport fare policy change together with built and non-built environment features on ridership: The case in South East Queensland, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 78-89.
    6. Chetan Doddamani & M. Manoj, 2023. "Analysis of the influences of built environment measures on household car and motorcycle ownership decisions in Hubli-Dharwad cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 205-243, February.
    7. Wenjia Zhang & Ming Zhang, 2018. "Incorporating land use and pricing policies for reducing car dependence: Analytical framework and empirical evidence," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 3012-3033, October.
    8. Miotti, Marco & Needell, Zachary A. & Jain, Rishee K., 2023. "The impact of urban form on daily mobility demand and energy use: Evidence from the United States," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 339(C).
    9. Nicolas, Jean-Pierre & Pelé, Nicolas, 2018. "Reprint of Measuring trends in household expenditures for daily mobility. The case in Lyon, France, between 1995 and 2015," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 19-29.
    10. Lucas, Karen & Philips, Ian & Mulley, Corinne & Ma, Liang, 2018. "Is transport poverty socially or environmentally driven? Comparing the travel behaviours of two low-income populations living in central and peripheral locations in the same city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 622-634.
    11. Keskisaari, Ville & Ottelin, Juudit & Heinonen, Jukka, 2017. "Greenhouse gas impacts of different modality style classes using latent class travel behavior model," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 155-164.
    12. van de Coevering, Paul & Maat, Kees & van Wee, Bert, 2018. "Residential self-selection, reverse causality and residential dissonance. A latent class transition model of interactions between the built environment, travel attitudes and travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 466-479.
    13. Hamid Mostofi & Houshmand Masoumi & Hans-Liudger Dienel, 2020. "The Association between the Regular Use of ICT Based Mobility Services and the Bicycle Mode Choice in Tehran and Cairo," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-19, November.
    14. Cervero, Robert & Guerra, Erick, 2011. "Urban Densities and Transit: A Multi-dimensional Perspective," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3mb598qr, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    15. Md. Kamruzzaman & Simon Washington & Douglas Baker & Wendy Brown & Billie Giles-Corti & Gavin Turrell, 2016. "Built environment impacts on walking for transport in Brisbane, Australia," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 53-77, January.
    16. Lori Zeller, 2015. "Potential changes in transportation patterns of New York Islanders fans due to stadium relocation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 951-966, November.
    17. Lin, Tao & Wang, Donggen & Guan, Xiaodong, 2017. "The built environment, travel attitude, and travel behavior: Residential self-selection or residential determination?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 111-122.
    18. Faizeh Hatami & Jean-Claude Thill, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Evaluation of the Built Environment’s Impact on Commuting Duration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Wang, Fenglong & Mao, Zidan & Wang, Donggen, 2020. "Residential relocation and travel satisfaction change: An empirical study in Beijing, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 341-353.
    20. Næss, Petter, 2012. "Urban form and travel behavior: experience from a Nordic context," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 5(2), pages 21-45.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:67:y:2014:i:c:p:352-365. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.