Research today proves what Vancouver intuitively knew in the early 1970s. By not expanding road capacity or parking significantly, the city had more room for people, services and employment, and less need to drive, and even less need to provide space for parking – a positive feedback loop.
Not the case in other cities, which this research illustrates:
.
From Atlantic Cities:
Cars and Robust Cities Are Fundamentally Incompatible
In the early 1960s – when highway construction was at its peak and cars were just beginning to leave their mark – a handful of critics predicted there would be irreconcilable tensions between vibrant cities and their motorized inhabitants. Nearly 50 years later, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania published research validating this idea. …
For our study, recently published in Urban Design International, we analyzed a dozen historically dense, small cities from around the country in which the shares of residents getting to work by automobile range from 43 to 91 percent. We compared the rates of automobile use to the number residents and employees per square mile. ..
What we found was shocking. In cities with higher rates of automobile use (roughly 30 percent more driving), about twice as much land is committed to parking for each resident and employee. …
The city leaders played an important role, either by requiring developers to include parking or by having it built themselves. Municipal records reveal they did this in hopes that it would support economic development and help their cities compete with the surrounding suburbs. …
What actually increased in these cities were the rates of driving. Driving increased for people commuting in and out of the city by more than 30 percent. But even for shorter trips within each city, driving increased by as much as 45 percent. Even worse, this change was the most pronounced in places where vehicle ownership rates remained the lowest (low-income cities). The combined effects of improved convenience for drivers, a degraded walking environment, service cuts to public transit and the physical separation of residential and commercial areas were forcing city-dwellers into cars.
.
.
Cities like Berkeley, Arlington and Cambridge experienced something different. Even as they cut back on surface parking, the number of people and jobs climbed upward, as did incomes. Less parking in these places has meant the urban fabric can be stitched back together and there is more space for shops, restaurants, jobs and other things that make cities great.
More importantly, the parking isn’t needed. People own cars at higher rates, but they don’t use them as much. Instead, they live close to the urban core where upwards of 30 percent walk or bike to work.
Full article here.
