| 1. |
What is "Bundling" v. "Unbundling"? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Bundling |
Forcing residents to pay for both parking and
housing in their housing payment (typically rent.) |
| |
|
|
|
|
Unbundling |
Allowing residents to pay separately for
costly parking spaces and housing. |
| |
|
|
Unbundling is separating the payment for a housing unit and the payment of a
parking space. In most cases, the cost of parking is "bundled"
into the price of rent. When parking costs, which are prohibitive in the
high land and construction cost climate of the Bay Area, are incorporated into
rent, all households are forced to pay for a significant cost of vehicle
ownership, whether they use zero, one, two or three spaces. Since
essentially of the affordable housing developments surveyed did not have a
system of charging for parking, parking and housing costs are bundled for
residents. |
| |
|
|
|
| 2. |
Why Unbundle? |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair |
Households who choose to own fewer vehicles released from
obligation to pay significant cost of vehicle ownership. |
|
|
Efficient |
Linking prices with consumption leads to rational
decisions -- including vehicle ownership. Once parking is bundled it
is almost irrational not to own a vehicle. Lower vehicle ownership
will mean more walking and transit ridership. |
|
|
Units |
Since unbundling can reduce parking demand on a site,
developers should be required to build less parking, and more housing. |
|
|
Savings |
Cost savings from parking construction and
savings to households who choose to forego a second or first car
(since they haven't sunk the cost into a parking space) in the form of lower
housing payments and transportation costs. |
| |
|
|
|
| 3. |
How to Unbundle? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Use Rent Rebates |
|
|
To remain sensitive, the
"charge" for parking can be structured as a
"reduction" or "rebate" for households with fewer
vehicles. For example, three-bedroom units at a particular affordability
level could rent for $1,000 a month including two parking spaces, $900 a
month with one, and $800 a month if no parking spaces are used. |
|
Begin with Second Space |
|
|
Charging for at least the second
parking space can introduce fairness to residents. A single-car
household is penalized when other households with up to three cars does
not pay for parking |
|
Market Excess Spaces |
|
|
In parking-constrained environments,
a development may not use all of its off-street parking. Leasing the
spaces to other users in a neighborhood can fund the rent-rebates above. |
|
Address On-Street Issues |
|
|
The difficult issue of congestion in
on-street parking must be addressed. If parking is expensive in a
development and on-street parking is free, residents may just use
on-street parking. |
| |
|
|
|
| 4. |
Barriers to Unbundling
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Oversupply of Parking |
|
|
Since parking is free and abundant
in most cases outside of dense urban settings, the natural market price is
not high, despite its very high cost. Thus areas of constrained
parking supply are best for introducing unbundling, although the inequity
of bundling exists in all areas. |
|
Concerns about Spillover into On-Street Parking |
|
|
As mentioned above, if policy makers
or community members feel free, on-street parking will be congested if a
development unbundles, it will resist this innovation. |
|
No Benefits to Developer for
Unbundling (i.e. reduced parking) |
|
|
A blanket parking requirement that
does not recognized the potential impact of unbundling provides not
incentive to developers, thus expensive parking is given away. |
|
State, Federal, and Local
Restrictions on Housing Funds. |
|
|
Rent-rebate structure described
above would penalize a developer in seeking various housing funds.
Charging for parking at existing developments is considered the removal of
an amenity. Housing programs at the local, state and federal level should
be reexamined to remove barriers to incorporating parking costs into
development pricing structures. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
