Abstract
Energy saving is the most sustainable solution in the long run to achieve the 2020 goals and mobility is one of the highest energy-consuming activities in our towns. The way people move in the urban environment is manageable through several policies, strategies and actions. Parking management is an important strategy in most planning activities, those addressing land use management as well as traffic plans. Private parking lots (usually at the origin of trips) are planned with a minimum standard quantity in most countries, but there are some good examples where a maximum amount of parking is ruled by plans, in order to discourage residents from possessing too many cars! The availability of public parking places (at the destination of the trip) and their fees have a direct influence on modal choice and so on inter-modality, as the economic sustainability of private motorised mobility is also influenced by economic estimations. Several options in managing public parking regulations can influence mobility patterns, such as regarding location, parking fees and time-related policies. The paper proposes a methodology for the analysis of the space-time relations between public parking and individual travel choices. The methodology has been assessed in the case study of Brescia, in northern Italy. First of all, the location and the density of parking areas within the city have been mapped to show the spatial coverage of car parking supply. Then, the time variable has been considered, to illustrate the degree of use of each parking area during the day—thus showing modal choices and their variation in time and space. The results of the analysis can be extended to similar situations as the methodology has a broad application. The final goal of the research, rather than simply monitoring parking use, is to encourage sustainable mobility through the management of parking supply in urban areas and so to foster energy saving policies.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
These figures include intra-EU air and sea transport but not transport activities between the EU and the rest of the world. As for the other modes: powered two-wheelers accounted for 2 %, buses and coaches for 8.2 %, railways for 6.5 % and tram and metro for 1.5 %. Intra-EU air and intra-EU maritime transport contributed 9 and 0.6 % respectively (European Commission 2014).
- 2.
According to the “EU transport in figures”, only Luxembourg shows a higher motorisation rate, such as 663 passenger cars per 1000 inhabitants in 2012.
- 3.
“Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area—Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system” (2011).
References
Journals and Articles
Bertolini L, Le Clercq F (2003) Urban development without more mobility by car? Lessons from Amsterdam, a multimodal urban region. Environ Plann A 35(4):575–589. doi:10.1068/a3592
Bonotti R, Rossetti S, Tiboni M, Tira M (2014, June) Diachronic analysis of parking usage. The case study of Brescia, TeMA J Land Use Mobil Environ (Special Issue):77–85. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.6092/1970-9870/2505
Bonotti R, Rossetti S, Tiboni M, Tira M (2015) Analysing space-time accessibility towards the implementation of the light rail system: the case study of Brescia. Plann Pract Res. doi:10.1080/02697459.2015.1028254
Gorsevski et al. (1998) Air pollution prevention through urban heat island mitigation: An update on the urban heat island pilot project. 1998 ACEEE Summer study on energy efficiency in buildings Proceedings, 9. Report Number: LBNL-42736. Washington, D.C.: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
Hansen WG (1959) How accessibility shapes land use. J Am Inst Plann 25(2):73–76
Maternini G, Ferrari F (2014) Innovative parking strategies through the application of variable pricing techniques. The case of San Francisco. CSE J 2:49–60. doi:10.12896/cse20140020019
Selicato F, Cardinale T (2014) Energy aspects of urban planning. The urban heat island effect. CSE J 1:79–91. doi:10.12896/cse2014001008
Shoup DC (1999) The trouble with minimum parking requirements. Transp Res Part A 33:549–574
Simićević J, Milosavljevi N, Maletić G, Kaplanović S (2012) Defining parking price based on users’ attitudes. Transp Policy 23:70–78
Tira M (2015) Verso nuove mobilità sostenibili. Sentieri urbani: 14–22. ISSN:2036-3109
Wickham J (2006) Public transport systems: the sinews of European urban citizenship? European Societies, 8(1):3–26
Willson RW (1995) Suburban parking requirements: a tacit policy for automobile use and sprawl. J Am Plann Assoc 61(1):29–42
Books and Chapters
Banister D (2005) Unsustainable transport. City transport in the new century, Routlege (Taylor & Francis), London and New York
European Commission (2009) White paper. Adapting to climate change: towards a European Framework for action. EU Publications office, Brussels
European Commission (2011) White paper. Roadmap to a single European transport area. Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system. EU Publications office, Brussels
European Commission (2014) EU transport in figures. Statistical pocketbook 2014. Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Eurostat (2012) EU transport in figures. Statistical pocketbook 2012, Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Greater London Authority (2002) SDS maximum parking standards: derivation of PTAL-based parking restraint. SDS Technical Report Twenty. Greater London Authority, London. ISBN 1 85261 412 9
Greater London Authority (2011) The London plan. Spatial development strategy for Greater London. Greater London Authority, London. ISBN 978 1 84781 451 7
Shoup D (2013) The high cost of free parking. American Planning Association, Chicago-Washington DC
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) (2011) Climate neutral cities. How to make cities less energy and carbon intensive and more resilient to climatic challenges, United Nations, Geneva
Weinberger R, Kaehny J, Rufo M (2010) U.S. parking policies: an overview of management strategies. Institute for Transportation and development Policy, New York
World Health Organisation (WHO), Peden M, Scurfield R, Sleet D, Mohan D, Hyder A, Jarawan E, Mathers C (eds) (2004) World report on road traffic injury prevention. WHO, Geneva
Online Publications
City of Ottawa (2007) Transit oriented development guidelines. Approved by City Council on 26 Sept 2007. http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/planning-and-development/community-plans-and-design-guidelines/design-and-planning-0-1-8pdf. Accessed 18 Apr 2015
City of Seattle (2015) Best practices in transportation demand management. Seattle urban mobility plan. http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/briefingbook.htm. Accessed 18 Apr 2015
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (2015) Parking management strategies for more efficient use of parking resources. TDM Encyclopedia. http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm28.htm. Accessed 18 Apr 2015
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tira, M., Rossetti, S., Tiboni, M. (2016). Managing Mobility to Save Energy Through Parking Planning. In: Papa, R., Fistola, R. (eds) Smart Energy in the Smart City. Green Energy and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31157-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31157-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31155-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31157-9
eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)