Feedback and the use of land for parking

Lewis Lehe

doi:10.5198/jtlu.2016.835

PDF

Published

2016-12-09

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1 (2017)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with JTLU agree to the following terms: 1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. 3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

How to Cite

Lehe, L. (2016). Feedback and the use of land for parking. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2016.835

Feedback and the use of land for parking

Lewis Lehe

UC Berkeley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2016.835

Keywords: parking, density, walkability, feedback, planning, land-use, regulation

Abstract

Land-use patterns are often the result of feedback effects in which one agent's decision both influences and is influenced by urban form. This paper argues that such feedback---of a positive or negative kind---could plausibly arise in the provision of off-street parking. A stylized model is used to illustrate feedback in the case of bundled parking, to note how such feedback may change a neighborhood in the long run and to analyze several policies. A theme is that feedback opens the door to surprising effects that are hard to predict from the status quo.

Author Biography

Lewis Lehe, UC Berkeley

grad student

References

Bar-Yosef, A., Martens, K., and Benenson, I. (2013). A model of the vicious cycle of a bus line. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 54:37–50.

Chatman, D. G. (2013). Does TOD Need the T? Journal of the American Planning Association, 79(1):17–31.

Cutter, W. B. and Franco, S. F. (2012). Do parking requirements significantly increase the area dedicated to parking? A test of the effect of parking re- quirements values in Los Angeles County. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(6):901–925.

Ewing, R. and Handy, S. (2009). Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability. Journal of Urban Design, 14(1):65–84.

Feitelson, E. and Rotem, O. (2004). The case for taxing surface parking. Trans- portation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 9(4):319–333.

Granovetter, M. (1978). Threshold Models of Collective Behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 83(6):1420.

Inci, E. (2014). A review of the economics of parking. Economics of Transportation.

Krugman, P. (1990). Increasing returns and economic geography. Jounral of Political Economy, 99(3):483–499.

Li, F. and Guo, Z. (2014). Do parking standards matter? Evaluating the London parking reform with a matched-pair approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67:352–365.

Manville, M. (2013). Parking Requirements and Housing Development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 79(1):49–66.

Schelling, T. C. (1971). Dynamic models of segregation. The Journal of Math- ematical Sociology, 1(2):143–186.

Shoup, D. (2005). The high cost of free parking. Planners Press American Planning Association, Chicago.

Talen, E. and Koschinsky, J. (2013). The Walkable Neighborhood: A Literature Review. International Journal of Sustainable Land Use and Urban Planning (IJSLUP), 1(1).

Weinberger, R. (2012). Death by a thousand curb-cuts: Evidence on the effect of minimum parking requirements on the choice to drive. Transport Policy, 20:93–102.