This study empirically investigates the proposition that TOD, and specifically housing near suburban rail stops, is “over-parked” in the U.S. This is done by comparing parking generation rates for 31 housing complexes near rail stops in the San Francisco Bay Area and Portland, Oregon with on-site parking supplies and with ITE parking generation rates. Factors that explain parking demand for transit-oriented housing are also investigated, both statistically and through case analyses. The results of a national survey on parking codes and variances for 80 U.S. cities with rail stops are also presented. The paper ends with several policy prescriptions that fall out of the research findings.

Just as land-use environments vary throughout suburban America, so should parking policies. Parking ordinances should be more flexible for projects situated near rail stops. Based on our research, for example, developers of relatively dense apartments with adjoining retail shops and short, direct walking connections to rail stations should have the option of supplying fewer parking spaces than the norm. Flexibility might also take the form of unbundling the cost of parking from the cost of renting housing or providing residents with the option of choosing transit eco-passes rather than paying for an on-site space. And in light of the fact that TOD residents were found to commute by transit proportionately more than they shed cars or reduced parking, car-sharing should be provided in as many rail-served neighborhoods as possible. Putting shared-cars in and around TODs could relieve many households from owning a second car or a vehicle altogether, which would result in not only considerably lower trip generation rates, but considerably less parking demand as well.