Reducing Congestion throughParking Policies

Allison Yoh

Presentation to the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee

February 24, 2008

A8054-b-2 11/08

Moving Los Angeles: Short-Term PolicyOptions for Improving Transportation

•Study completed in Dec 2008

•Strategies within 5 years

•Resulted in 13 strategies for managing congestion, including parking

A8054-b-3 11/08

L.A. Congestion Is the Worst in the Nation

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Los AngelesAtlanta

San Francisco

DallasHouston

DetroitMiami

PhoenixBoston

ChicagoNew York

SeattlePhiladelphia

Congestion costs Los Angeles $9.2 billion annually in wasted fuel and time

Annual delay per peak-hour driver

in largest U.S. metropolitan

areas

Annual hours of delay

Washington, DC

A8054-b-4 11/08

Manage demand and

raise revenue through pricing

Improve alternative

transportation

Maximize the efficiency of existing road

capacity

Our Findings Suggest the Need for Several Policies that Complement One Another

Recommended Policy Framework

A8054-b-5 11/08

OtherModes

OtherTimes

Most Available Strategies BecomeLess Effective Over Time

OtherRoutes

Congestion

This is often called“triple convergence”

New /EnhancedCapacity

Congestion

A8054-b-6 11/08

Why Pricing Is Critical

• Pricing raises the cost of driving and discourages the over-consumption of road and parking capacity

• Pricing makes drivers pay the true cost of auto travel more efficient use of existing capacity

• Proper pricing provides a signal when it is efficient to build more parking

• Pricing raises revenue for needed investments

A8054-b-7 11/08

Parking-Related Recommendations

• Eliminate curb parking during peak hours– With active enforcement, can improve arterial

travel speed by 10 percent (Kumar 2007)

• Variable curb-parking rates– Can reduce traffic volumes in commercial and

retail districts by 30 percent on average, and by up to 90 percent in one instance (Shoup 1997)

• Parking cash-out– Can shift 15 percent of employees to alternative

modes (Shoup 1997)

A8054-b-8 11/08

Controversial, with Compelling Benefits

• Is viewed with skepticism because it is unfamiliar– But it is extremely cost-effective to implement

• May create financial difficulties for lower-income drivers who are unable to shift their travel patterns– But revenues can be used for alternatives, and– Unbundling parking can reduce housing costs

• Is difficult to justify to constituents– But can be implemented widely (equitably)– And revenues can be returned to localities

A8054-b-11 11/08

Growth in Automotive Travel Has Far Outpaced Growth in Lane Miles

U.S. Growth in Lane Miles, Population, VMT,and GDP Since 1970

A8054-b-14 11/08

RAND Developed 10 Primary Recommendations

Primary Recommendations

1 Improve signal timing and control where deficient

2 Restrict curb parking on busy thoroughfares

3 Create a network of paired one-way streets

4 Support voluntary employer trip reduction programs

5 Develop a network of HOT lanes

6 Implement variable curb parking rates

7 Enforce state’s employer parking cash-out law

8 Promote deep-discounted transit passes

9 Expand bus rapid transit with bus-only lanes

10 Implement a regionally connected bicycle network

A8054-b-27 11/08

Fuel Tax Revenue Shortfalls Limit Further Investment in New Infrastructure