Reinventing Transport

[Update: Looking for more parking policy information?   Try Reinventing Parking. ] I asked the sustran-discuss list for responses to my post on park-and-ride being a bad idea . In response to the discussion so far, I tried to clarify some of my points. Here is an edited version. 1. My objection to park-and-ride is strongest when such facilities are within the dense urban fabric (such as 'inner city' areas). It is in these dense areas that the opportunity cost of space is highest. Most of the other uses of station-vicinity space will do much more to build public transport ridership than P&R. Many mass transit systems in developing Asia are, for now, limited to these dense/mixed-use areas. In most cases, they don't yet extend out into the newest 'suburban areas'. P&R seems least defensible in these high-density locations with high property prices. Yet it is still being implemented in various dense urban localities in Asia. The photos of Bangkok...

[Update: Looking for more parking policy information?   Try Reinventing Parking. ] Park-and-ride facility at Chatuchak, Bangkok (This one is free-of-charge. And notice the institutionalised double-parking arrangement?) The idea that car parking should be provided at mass transit stations has taken root in Asia. The team that helped me investigate parking policy in Asian cities found active park-and-ride programs in Bangkok, Beijing, Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Seoul, Singapore and Taipei. Park-and-ride facilities have been debated in Ahmedabad and Jakarta for their BRT systems. Delhi wasn't in our study but park-and-ride at Delhi Metro stations has been a hot topic there too. Interestingly, we found no government-sponsored park-and-ride in the Tokyo region, although there are private parking lots used in this way (without public subsidy) in the outer reaches of the metropolitan area. I doubt the wisdom of building park-and-ride in dense parts of Asia...