Promoting Sustainable Mobility in Urban Areas – the Role of Residential Parking A Multiple Case Study of 13 Homeowner Associations in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille Master’s thesis in Design and Construction Project Management JENNY ANDERSSON ELIN NILSSON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE AND CIVIL ENGINEERING DIVISION OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2021 www.chalmers.se MASTER’S THESIS ACEX30 Promoting Sustainable Mobility in Urban Areas – the Role of Residential Parking A Multiple Case Study of 13 Homeowner Associations in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design and Construction Project Management JENNY ANDERSSON ELIN NILSSON Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering Division of Construction Management CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2021 I Promoting Sustainable Mobility in Urban Areas - the Role of Residential Parking A Multiple Case Study of 13 Homeowner Associations in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille Master’s Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design and Construction Project Management JENNY ANDERSSON ELIN NILSSON © JENNY ANDERSSON & ELIN NILSSON, 2021 Examensarbete ACEX30-21 Institutionen för Arkitektur och Samhällsbyggnadsteknik Chalmers tekniska högskola 2021 Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering Division of Construction Management Chalmers University of Technology SE-412 96 Göteborg Sweden Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000 Cover: Underground parking lot. (Shemesh, n.d). Retrieved from publicdomainpictures. Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering Göteborg, Sweden, 2021 I Promoting Sustainable Mobility in Urban Area - the Role of Residential Parking A Multiple Case Study of 13 Homeowner Associations in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille Master’s thesis in the Master’s Programme Design and Construction Project Management JENNY ANDERSSON ELIN NILSSON Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering Division of Construction Management Chalmers University of Technology ABSTRACT A well-functioning transportation infrastructure that meets individual and societal mobility needs without relying on private cars is a critical component of the effort to create sustainable development in urban areas. Research shows that the availability of residential parking affects trip frequency, car ownership, mode preference and can potentially minimize private car use. In this setting, it is important for property owners to be considerate of factors that may affect residential car parking demand as well as resident’s willingness to use more sustainable modes of transportation. Therefore, this thesis aims to examine the role of residential parking in the work to promote sustainable mobility in urban areas. To realize the aim, an analysis of the current parking situation at 13 homeowner associations in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille were conducted and combined with existing research on the topic. Various factors that are thought to influence residents' car and bicycle parking demand were examined. We conclude that the resident’s mobility condition affects their parking demand. The results indicate that high parking requirements, absence of carsharing, and relatively long travel time to city center by public transportation contributes to a higher residential car parking demand. Car parking located farther away from the residence as well as restricted car parking that only allows residents to rent one parking space per apartment can instead reduce the residential car parking demand. In terms of factors that influence residents' demand for bicycle parking, we observed that the bicycle parking demand increases when the residence is located relatively close to the city center, yet, most bicycle parking spaces are oversized. To contextualize the results, the development of Backaplan was used were the findings from the study were theoretically implemented to generate recommendations on how the area's mobility can promote sustainable development. It is clear that residential parking plays an important role in the work to promote sustainable mobility. In future urban areas, such as Backaplan, residential parking should be located further away than other more sustainable modes of transportation in order to make private car ownership less appealing. As a consequence, public transportation should be closer to a residence than a car parking lot. Key words: sustainable mobility, residential parking, parking requirement, mobility services, future car ownership II Främja Hållbar Mobilitet i Tätortsområden – Parkeringens Roll vid Flerbostadshus En Fallstudie av 13 Bostadsrättsföreningar i Göteborg, Mölndal och Partille Examensarbete inom Mastersprogrammet Organisation och Ledning i Bygg- och Fastighetssektorn JENNY ANDERSSON ELIN NILSSON Institutionen för Arkitektur och Samhällsbyggnadsteknik Avdelningen för Construction Management Chalmers tekniska högskola SAMMANFATTNING En väl fungerande transportinfrastruktur som tillgodoser individuella och samhälleliga mobilitetsbehov utan att förlita sig på privata bilar är en viktig del av arbetet med att skapa hållbar utveckling i stadsområden. Studier visar att tillgången på parkeringar vid flerbostadshus påverkar färdmedelsval samt resfrekvens och kan potentiellt minimera användningen av den privata bilen. I denna kontext är det viktigt för fastighetsägare att ta hänsyn till faktorer som kan påverka efterfrågan på parkering samt även de boendes vilja att använda mer hållbara transportsätt. Därför syftar denna studie till att undersöka parkeringens roll vid flerbostadshus i arbetet för att främja hållbar rörlighet i tätortsområden. För att förverkliga målet genomfördes en analys av den aktuella parkeringssituationen vid 13 bostadsrättsföreningar i Göteborg, Mölndal och Partille och kombinerades med befintlig forskning om ämnet. Olika faktorer som tros påverka invånarnas efterfrågan på bil- och cykelparkering undersöktes. Vi drar slutsatsen att de boendes mobilitetförutsättningar påverkar deras parkeringsbehov. Resultaten tyder på att höga parkeringskrav, avsaknad av bilpool och relativt lång restid till stadens centrum med kollektivtrafik bidrar till en högre efterfrågan på bilparkering. Bilparkering som är placerad längre bort från bostaden samt begränsningar som endast tillåter boende att hyra en parkeringsplats per lägenhet kan istället minska efterfrågan på parkering. Gällande faktorer som påverkar de boendes efterfrågan på cykelparkering observerade vi att; behovet för cykelparkering ökar när bostaden ligger relativt nära stadens centrum, dock så är de flesta cykelrummen överdimensionerade. För att kontextualisera resultaten användes utvecklingen av Backaplan. Resultaten har teoretiskt implementeras för att generera rekommendationer om hur områdets mobilitet kan främja hållbar utveckling. Det är tydligt att parkering för bostäder spelar en viktig roll i arbetet för att främja hållbar mobilitet. I framtida bostadsområden, såsom Backaplan, bör bostadsparkering placeras längre bort än andra, mer hållbara transportsätt, så att den privatägda bilen blir mindre attraktiv. Till följd av detta bör kollektivtrafiken vara närmare placerad ett boende än vad en bilparkering är. Nyckelord: hållbar mobilitet, parkering vid flerbostadshus, parkeringstal, mobilitetstjänster, framtidens bilägande CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 III Contents ABSTRACT I SAMMANFATTNING II CONTENTS III PREFACE V LIST OF FIGURES VI LIST OF TABLES VII 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Aim and Research Questions 2 1.3 Delimitations 2 1.4 Ethical Statement 3 1.5 Structure of the Thesis 3 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 5 2.1 Sustainable Mobility 5 2.2 Residential Parking as a Tool for Limiting Private Car Use 5 2.3 Car Parking Requirement in Sweden 6 2.3.1 Parking Requirements in Gothenburg 7 2.3.2 Zero Parking Requirement 9 2.4 Alternative Modes of Transportation other than the Private Car 9 2.4.1 The Bicycle 9 2.4.2 Carsharing 11 2.4.3 Public Transportation 11 2.4.4 Mobility Hubs 12 2.5 Mobility as a Service 12 2.6 Indications for Future Car Use 14 2.6.1 Residential Parking 14 2.6.2 Travel Behaviour 14 3 METHODOLOGY 16 3.1 Research Process 16 3.1.1 Literature Review 16 3.1.2 Multiple Case Study 16 3.1.3 The Development of Backaplan 17 3.2 Research Design 17 3.3 Data Collection 18 3.3.1 Literature Review 18 3.3.2 Multiple Case Study 19 CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 IV 3.4 Data Analysis 21 3.5 Ethical Consideration of Methodology 22 3.6 Quality of Study 22 4 RESULTS: MULTIPLE CASE STUDY 24 4.1 Case Specific Prerequisites 24 4.2 Case Specific Car Parking Situation 25 4.3 Case Specific Bicycle Parking Situation 26 4.4 Case Specific Travel Times to City Center 27 4.5 Case Specific Mobility Services 28 4.6 Mobility Service Usage 28 4.6.1 Carsharing 28 4.6.2 Bikesharing 29 5 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF MULTIPLE CASE STUDY 32 5.1 Car Parking 32 5.1.1 Carsharing’s Impact on Car Parking Demand 35 5.1.2 Car Parking Demand in Relation to Gothenburg's Guidelines 37 5.2 Bicycle Parking 38 5.2.1 Bikesharing’s Impact on Bicycle Parking Demand 39 5.2.2 Bicycle Parking Demand in Relation to Gothenburg's Guidelines 42 5.3 Car Parking in Relation to Bicycle Parking 43 6 APPLYING THE RESULTS ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF BACKAPLAN 45 6.1 Background to the Development of Backaplan 45 6.2 Mobility Prerequisites and Ambitions 46 6.3 Mobility Recommendations 48 6.3.1 Recommendations for Car Parking 48 6.3.2 Recommendations for Bicycle Parking 49 6.3.3 Recommendations for Mobility Services 50 6.3.4 Summary of Recommendations 52 7 CONCLUSION 54 7.1 Answering the Research Questions 54 7.2 Future Studies 56 8 REFERENCES 57 CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 V Preface This master's thesis has been the pinnacle of Chalmers University of Technology's master's program in Design and Construction Project Management. The study was conducted in collaboration with the housing company Riksbyggen. We would like to thank everyone who have contributed to this research, especially our supervisors. First, we would like to express our gratitude to our supervisor at Chalmers University of Technology, Frances Sprei, for her unwavering support and invaluable guidance throughout the thesis process. Secondly, we would like to thank our supervisor at Riksbyggen, Charlotta Brolin, for the opportunity to write about this meaningful topic. This thesis would not have been possible without your time and resources. Finally, we would like to thank Chalmers University of Technology for these rewarding and enjoyable five years. This education has provided us with invaluable experience and knowledge, and we are confident that it has laid a strong foundation for our future careers. Gothenburg, May 2021 Jenny Andersson and Elin Nilsson CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 VI List of Figures FIGURE 1. NORMAL SPAN FOR PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN GOTHENBURG. ADAPTED FROM GÖTEBORGS STAD (2019A). ........................................... 7 FIGURE 2. GOTHENBURG PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND POTENTIAL DEDUCTIONS AND ADDITIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. ADAPTED FROM GÖTEBORGS STAD (2019A). THE AUTHORS' OWN TRANSLATION. ................................................................................... 8 FIGURE 3. MAP OF THE HOAS EXAMINED. THE BIG DOT REPRESENTS WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT OF BACKAPLAN WILL BE LOCATED. ©LANTMÄTERIET (2021). .............. 17 FIGURE 4. ILLUSTRATION OF MIXED METHOD WITH EMBEDDED QUALITATIVE DATA. ADAPTED FROM CRESWELL (2006). ................................................................................................. 18 FIGURE 5. NUMBER OF BOOKINGS FOR A CARSHARING VEHICLE. ............................................ 29 FIGURE 6. NUMBER OF UNIQUE USERS OF CARSHARING. .......................................................... 29 FIGURE 7. ELECTRIC BIKESHARING AT HOA VIVA. ................................................................. 30 FIGURE 8. ELECTRIC CARGO BIKESHARING AT HOA VIVA. ..................................................... 30 FIGURE 9. ELECTRIC BIKESHARING AVERAGE UTILIZATION RATE AT HOA VIVA. .................. 30 FIGURE 10. ELECTRIC CARGO BIKESHARING AVERAGE UTILIZATION RATE AT HOA VIVA. .... 31 FIGURE 11. CARSHARING USAGE. ............................................................................................. 36 FIGURE 12. NORMAL SPAN FOR PARKING REQUIREMENTS, WITH THE HOA MARKED WITH BLACK DOTS. ADAPTED FROM GÖTEBORGS STAD (2019A) ............................................. 37 FIGURE 13. BIKESHARING USAGE HOA VIVA. ......................................................................... 40 FIGURE 14. BIKESHARING UTILIZATION RATE HOA VIVA. ...................................................... 41 FIGURE 15. PLANNED DESIGN OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF BACKAPLAN. ADAPTED FROM WHITE ARKITEKTER (N.D.) .......................................................................................................... 45 FIGURE 16. MAP OF THE BACKAPLAN AREA AND THE DIVISION OF THE DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLANS. ADAPTED FROM FASTIGHETSKONTORET (2015). ........................ 46 FIGURE 17. MAP OF THE PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK IN BACKAPLAN. THE AUTHOR'S OWN TRANSLATION. ADAPTED FROM GÖTEBORGS STAD (2019B) ........................................... 47 FIGURE 18. MAP OF THE PLANNED PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN BACKAPLAN. THE AUTHOR'S OWN TRANSLATION. ADAPTED FROM GÖTEBORGS STAD (2019B). .......................................... 47 CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 VII List of Tables TABLE 1. THE 13 HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS EXAMINED. ..................................................... 16 TABLE 2. EXPLANATION OF DESCRIPTIVE PARAMETERS. ......................................................... 19 TABLE 3. SOURCE FROM WHICH THE DESCRIPTIVE PARAMETERS WERE OBTAINED. ............... 20 TABLE 4. LOCATION, TIME AND DATE FOR THE BICYCLE PARKING OBSERVATIONS. ............... 20 TABLE 5. MEASURED DISTANCES AND TOOLS FOR ESTIMATION. ............................................. 21 TABLE 6. OVERVIEW OF THE HOAS. ........................................................................................ 24 TABLE 7. THE HOAS CAR PARKING SITUATION. ...................................................................... 25 TABLE 8. THE HOAS BICYCLE PARKING SITUATION. ............................................................... 26 TABLE 9. TRAVEL TIMES TO THE CITY CENTER. ....................................................................... 27 TABLE 10. AVAILABLE MOBILITY SERVICES. ........................................................................... 28 TABLE 11. SIGNED UP RESIDENTS FOR CARSHARING AT THE HOAS IN MÖLNDAL. ................. 29 TABLE 12. CAR PARKING AND APARTMENTS CONDITIONS. ...................................................... 32 TABLE 13. CAR PARKING DEMAND AND TRAVEL TIMES. .......................................................... 33 TABLE 14. CAR PARKING DEMAND AND AVAILABLE CARSHARING. ........................................ 35 TABLE 15. BICYCLE PARKING AND APARTMENT CONDITIONS. ................................................ 38 TABLE 16. BICYCLE PARKING DEMAND AND TRAVEL TIMES. .................................................. 38 TABLE 17. BICYCLE PARKING DEMAND AND AVAILABLE BIKESHARING. ................................ 40 TABLE 18. CAR PARKING IN RELATION TO BICYCLE PARKING. ................................................ 43 CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 VIII CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 1 Introduction This chapter lays the foundation for the research subject by introducing the connection between sustainable mobility and residential parking and why it is a topic of interest. Further, the thesis's aim, research questions and delimitations are presented, as well as an ethical statement of the topic and the structure of the thesis. 1.1 Background Mobility, movement, is fundamental to people’s everyday life and to the functioning of societies and economies (Merriman, 2009). The use of private cars is at large the most dominant and preferred way to be mobile in a vast number of cities as it enables people to travel in a convenient and comfortable way (Kent, 2013). However, according to the European Commission (2019), it is necessary for travelers to have accessible, healthier and cheaper alternatives than the private car, as it is associated with global ecological, social and physical harm (Kent, 2013). Therefore, there is a need to shift emphasis to sustainable mobility and use modes of transportation such as cycling and public transportation, that are not as harmful to the environment. Despite the fact that the car is parked for the majority of the day, most research has focused on its motion (Christiansen, Fearnley, Hanssen and Skollerud, 2016). The limited research that actually exists on parked cars mostly concern destination parking, meaning parking connected to work, shopping malls or downtown areas. However, several studies indicate that residential car parking has an effect on trip frequency, car ownership and mode choice, thus, parking is perceived as a vital tool for mobility management and needs to be further investigated (Sprei, Hult, Hult and Roth, 2020; Christiansen et al., 2016; Boverket, 2020). In Sweden, The Planning and Building Act (PBL 2010:900) states that municipalities must ensure adequate parking for new construction of houses. This is typically accomplished by the municipalities establishing a parking requirement span, which refers to the amount of parking spaces appropriate for a property owner to construct. Gothenburg is one of the municipalities that works with flexible parking requirements, indicating that the developer can influence the amount of car parking spaces by providing other mobility services (Boverket, 2018a; Göteborgs Stad, 2019a). However, studies show that the current parking requirements are outdated and rarely correctly reflect the real need for parking. As a response, The Committee of Inquiry in Sweden (SOU 2021:23) proposes amendments to the The Planning and Building Act which states that the car and number of residential car parking spaces should not have a special position in legislation. It is suggested that the transportation system should meet the individual's and society's mobility needs without the use of private cars. Yet, Sweden has an increasing car dependence (Nykvist and Whitmarsh, 2008), indicating that the individual's and society's mobility needs might be heading towards an unsustainable direction. To break the trend and encourage the creation of future urban housing that facilitates sustainable mobility it's not just a matter of switching modes of transportation (Høyer, 2000); it is also a matter of evaluating what influences residents' choice of transportation. In this setting, it is important for the property owners to assess what factors that can influence residents to use more sustainable modes of transportation. Riksbyggen is a CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 2 co-operative association developing homeowner associations (Bostadsrättsföreningar) housing (Riksbyggen, 2019a). Riksbyggen plans to develop residential buildings in the Backaplan area in Gothenburg (Riksbyggen, 2019b). An area that will be densified since around 7,000 houses, utilities, offices and city trade will be developed within the next 20 years, which will involve challenges and uncertainties regarding future mobility (Göteborgs stad, 2019b). By studying factors that influence residents' demand for car and bicycle parking, property owners such as Riksbyggen could gain a better understanding of how to engage and encourage residents to choose more sustainable modes of transportation. Ultimately, designing future urban areas with measures that contribute to reduced car use and ultimately benefit the transition to sustainable mobility. 1.2 Aim and Research Questions The aim of this thesis is to examine the role of residential parking in the work to promote sustainable mobility in future urban areas. In order to realize the aim, an analysis of the current parking situation at 13 homeowner associations is conducted to identify factors that influence parking demand disparities. To fulfil and support the aim of the thesis, four research questions were established: RQ1: How does the car and bicycle parking supply at the examined homeowner associations correspond to the residents' car and bicycle parking demand? RQ2: How does the car and bicycle parking demand at the examined homeowner associations correspond to the municipality of Gothenburg's current guidelines regarding car and bicycle parking? RQ3: How does the carsharing and bikesharing usage differ between the examined homeowner associations, and what factors influence usage? RQ4: How does the prerequisites for parking and mobility services in connection to residential buildings affect residents' car and bicycle parking demand? 1.3 Delimitations This thesis includes a case study of 13 homeowner associations developed by Riksbyggen in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille. All empirical data is therefore collected from these homeowner associations. Although some of these cases are located in surrounding municipalities, only Gothenburg's parking requirement guidelines are addressed in this study. The study only examines parking connection with housing; thus, it will not consider parking in connection with service or other business. The parking spaces refers exclusively to car and bicycle parking that are confirmed to belong to a housing association and are intended for residents, not visitors. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 3 Furthermore, this thesis in regard to the topic of sustainable mobility mainly address the ecological aspect. 1.4 Ethical Statement The discipline of ethics deals with dilemmas of what is right and wrong as well as with moral responsibility and obligations (Merriam-Webster, 2021). According to Resnik (2020) it is of great importance to raise consciousness about ethical problems while conducting research. Considering this thesis’ topic of sustainable mobility in a broader context, some ethical considerations need to be acknowledged. An essential aspect of moving towards sustainable mobility is reducing people's private car use. Residential parking is perceived as a vital tool in promoting sustainable mobility as it is thought to influence private car ownership, trip frequency and mode choice. Using residential parking to influence and steer residents towards other forms of transportation possess ethical and moral concerns. It can be debated whether it is right to restrict people’s mode choices as it can be argued that every individual should be able to make their own decisions on how to be mobile, rather than it being decided by municipalities or property owners. Although the intention is to encourage sustainable development, it should naturally not be done at any cost. Another consideration for the topic of this thesis is the technical knowledge that certain mobility services require. It may be considered unfair and unreasonable to force elderly to adopt this digitalization. It is evident that the subject of sustainable mobility raises numerous ethical issues. The aftermath of this thesis is however considered beneficial for sustainable development rather than causing any harm, and the positive outcomes are perceived to outweigh the negative ones. 1.5 Structure of the Thesis Chapter 1 – ‘Introduction’, lays the foundation for the research subject by providing a background to sustainable mobility and residential parking, as well as introducing the thesis aim, research questions and delimitations. Chapter 2 – ‘Theoretical Framework’, aims to present existing research in the field of mobility and residential parking. The chapter establishes a theoretical framework which is applied to the analysis and discussion later on. Chapter 3 – ‘Methodology’, describes how this thesis has been conducted by presenting the research process and research design. Further, the data collection and the data analysis are described. Additionally, an ethical consideration of the methodology and a reflection on the quality of study is presented. Chapter 4 – ‘Results: Multiple Case Study’, presents the findings from the multiple case study. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 4 Chapter 5 – ‘Analysis and Discussion of Multiple Case Study’, compares, analyses and discuss the findings from the multiple case study with support from the theoretical framework. Chapter 6 – ‘Applying the Result on the Development of Backaplan’, aims to contextualize the findings from the multiple case study and the literature. To understand Backaplan’s specific mobility conditions, the chapter begins with a background to the development. Chapter 7 – ‘Conclusion’, answers the thesis research questions and presents suggestions for future studies. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 5 2 Theoretical Framework The aim of this chapter is to establish a theoretical framework that can be applied to the multiple case study and to the development of Backaplan. Initially, the concept of sustainable mobility is presented followed by a description of how residential parking can be used as a tool for limiting car use. Then, parking requirements in Sweden and Gothenburg are explained and alternative modes of transportation other than the private car is presented. Lastly, indications for future car use is reviewed. 2.1 Sustainable Mobility The word mobility can refer to movement and the ability to physically move freely or to be easily moved (Cambridge Dictionary, 2021). Mobility in the context of this thesis is related to the transport sector, i.e. mobility in the form of transportation of individuals or goods in a society. Sustainable mobility is "a mobility in accordance with the principles and requirements of sustainable development" (Høyer, 2000). Sustainable development is defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. The concept of sustainable development emphasizes three fundamental components: social equity, environmental protection and economic growth. Sustainable mobility can then be defined as “the ability to meet the needs of society to move freely, gain access, communicate, trade, and establish relationships without sacrificing other essential human or ecological values today or in the future” (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2004). In many cities, the use of private cars is the most dominant and preferred way to be mobile as it bridges distances and enables people to travel in a convenient and comfortable way (Kent, 2013). However, there is a prevailing consensus that the use of private cars needs to be limited (Khreis and Nieuwenhuijsen, 2016). The car is associated with global ecological, social and physical harm that requires urgent attention (Kent, 2013). The car emissions contribute to both air and noise pollution, as well as to global climate change by generating CO2. According to a report from IVA (2019), passenger cars in Sweden account for 67 percent of road traffic's carbon dioxide emissions. Achieving sustainable development requires fundamental changes in behavioral patterns and consumption (Høyer, 2000). To achieve sustainable mobility, it is therefore not enough with technological progress, technical measures and environmentally friendly vehicles, it takes more than switching between different modes of transport (Høyer, 2000). 2.2 Residential Parking as a Tool for Limiting Private Car Use As every car journey starts and ends in a parking space (Gunnarsson-Östling, 2020) and since the car is parked 95 percent of the time on average (Shoup, 2018), parking policies can be an effective way to influence people’s travel behavior. Residential parking has an effect on trip frequency (Sprei et al., 2020), car ownership (Christiansen et al., 2016; Sprei et al., 2020) and mode choice (Boverket 2020; Sprei et al., 2020), thus, a vital CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 6 tool for mobility management and limiting car use. According to a study conducted in Norway where residents were questioned about their parking arrangements, Christiansen et al., (2016) found a positive relationship between parking availability and car ownership. People who have access to an owned or reserved parking space are three times more likely to own a car than those who do not. The study by Christiansen et al., (2016) also states that longer distances between home and residential parking substantially lower the car's modal share in favor for walking and public transportation. Respondents stated they could consider a maximum distance of 155 meters between their home and car parking on average. The cost for renting a parking space is another factor influencing people's travel behavior (Ostermeijer, Koster and van Ommeren, 2019). A study conducted in the Netherlands showed that the cost for parking space in the city center is four times higher than in the periphery, accounting for about 30% of the disparity in total car ownership rates between these areas (Ostermeijer et al., 2019). 2.3 Car Parking Requirement in Sweden In Sweden, guidelines from the municipalities govern the number of residential parking (Boverket, 2018b). The Planning and Building Act (PBL 2010:900) states that municipalities must ensure suitable space for parking for new construction of houses. This is usually done by setting a parking requirement which states the number of parking spaces that is required for new construction and rebuilding. The parking requirement is specified as the amount of parking spaces per apartment or per 1000 m2 gross floor area. The property owner is primarily responsible for securing space for parking, but the municipality is obliged by the law to ensure that the parking requirement is met before granting a building permit. Sweden has since the 1950s used minimum parking requirements, meaning that municipalities mandate property owners to provide a minimum amount of residential car parking spaces (Johansson and Henriksson, 2018). Minimum standards remain the norm for residential car parks in both European and U.S. cities (Guo and Li, 2014). However, studies show that these requirements are outdated and rarely correctly reflect the real need for parking (Antonson, Hrelja and Henriksson, 2017; Fastighetsägarna, Hyresgästföreningen and Naturskyddsföreningen, 2020; Christiansen et al., 2016; Guo and Li, 2014). Additionally, as a way of competing for tenants, property owners can intentionally oversupply parking and can therefore help generate a demand instead of satisfying a need that exists (Guo and Li, 2014). In an interview study with five property owners in Södertälje, everyone agrees that they generally want to build less car parking than what the municipality's minimum requirement states (Envall and Nissan, 2013). Criticism has also been leveled at the fact that parking cost for car owners is subsidized by non-car owners in new building projects (Envall and Nissan, 2013; Boverket, 2018b). Bundling the cost of parking spaces into the cost of development can be seen as an injustice between car owners and non-car owners. In terms of actual construction costs for parking spaces, Malmö Stad (2020) states that the monthly costs for one car parking space are 140 SEK for ground parking, 1200 SEK for parking facilities and between 1850-2500 SEK for underground car parks. Naturally, the costs are approximately and varies depending on factors such as location. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 7 2.3.1 Parking Requirements in Gothenburg As a response to the outdated minimum parking requirements, several municipalities, Gothenburg included, have started using flexible car parking requirements (Boverket, 2018a). Flexible parking requirements indicate that the developer can be involved and influence the amount of car parking spaces. Providing mobility services that facilitate alternative modes of transport and reduce the need for car ownership for the residents, can result in the developer being allowed to build fewer parking spaces than the minimum policy requires. Göteborgs Stad’s (2019a) report Guidelines for mobility and parking in the city of Gothenburg provides recommendations for appropriate mobility measures in Gothenburg, including the flexible car parking requirements. These guidelines ensure that mobility assessments are handled in similar and appropriate ways. The work process for deciding the car parking requirements for residential buildings (minimum of three apartments) in Gothenburg follows four steps resulting in a project specific solution for mobility measures, and the amount of parking spaces to be provided. The first step determines which standard parking span should form the basis for the assessment of the parking requirements per apartment. Gothenburg is divided into five zones (A-E) with different requirements and the geographical location therefore determines in which span the assessment will originate, see Figure 1. The standard span's upper value serves as the starting value for the following steps. Figure 1. Normal span for parking requirements for residential building in Gothenburg. Adapted from Göteborgs Stad (2019a). The subsequent three steps can adjust the parking requirement per apartment that is set in step one. The regulation can vary based on the zone the residential building is located, illustrated in Figure 2. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 8 Figure 2. Gothenburg parking requirements and potential deductions and additions for residential buildings. Adapted from Göteborgs Stad (2019a). The authors' own translation. The second step regards a situation assessment where the specific area around the building is evaluated in more detail with emphasis on the areas' weighted accessibility to public transportation, services, bicycle infrastructure and other urban activities. For the zones C and B, deduction can be given if the building has a direct proximity to a large district center. The third step concerns the project specific conditions where the assessment is focused on, for example, the distribution of the apartments and the potential for shared use of parking spaces. The fourth step is a voluntary offer to the property owner to further reduce the parking requirement. The property owner can provide the residents with mobility services that reduce the need for a private car. This step requires an agreement between the property owner and the municipality of Gothenburg which is included in the building permit application and remains in effect until the municipality determines that the steps are helping to accelerate the transition to sustainable transportation. The measures are implemented by the property owner, but it is the housing cooperatives or tenants' associations responsibility to ensure that the mobility services are monitored and evaluated. Set measures for mobility solutions can be found in the guidelines in two different packages, the basic-package and the star-package, see Figure 2. Within the basic package, all eight measures must be implemented to achieve a deduction of 0.05 on the project's parking requirement. There are fourteen measures in the star-package where seven of them are marked with a star. These are more demanding than in the basic- package and provide strong incentives for sustainable travel. Deductions through the star-package are given in three steps and can first be given if the developer has met the requirements for the basic package. If the developer performs all measures in the basic package and six measures from the star package, where at least three are marked with a star, a full deduction of 0.2 is given, see Figure 2. There is also an opportunity within the star package for developers to come up with their own incentives that can reduce the car use for tenants. It is then the municipality of Gothenburg that assesses whether the measure can be regarded as a star measure. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 9 2.3.2 Zero Parking Requirement For a new residential building in zone A in Gothenburg, the lowest parking requirement a developer can achieve is 0.2 (Göteborgs Stad, 2019a). However, it is possible to reduce the parking requirement to zero. The City of Gothenburg has guidelines if a new residential building can be granted a zero parking requirement, for example that the project comprises a maximum of 30 apartments and that the developer provides the basic package with mobility measures. Yet, several municipalities have launched pilot projects of so-called car-free housing, in which parking guidelines are ignored and other mobility measures are assumed to fully replace the need for residential parking (Romson, Ivansson and Holm, 2020). The research project HOA Viva in Gothenburg is an example of this, where there are no parking spaces offered to the residents (Olsson Jeffery, 2021). Romson et al., (2020) speculates about the long-term effects and what the potential outcome of a car-free residential area could be. Mobility measures may contribute to residents not having their own car. According to a survey conducted by Lund (2020), where 27 residents at HOA Viva answered questions regarding their travel behavior, the average car ownership in HOA Viva is 0.18 cars per person. The corresponding figure for Gothenburg as a whole was 0.28 cars per person in 2018, indicating that the car ownership in Viva is significantly lower than the average (Lund, 2020). However, an additional outcome of a car-free residence could be that residents have their cars parked in the immediate vicinity of the residence such as on the street or in a car park. The survey conducted by Lund (2020), found that slightly more than half of those questioned drive their own car at least 2-3 times a month and park it on the street near HOA Viva. 2.4 Alternative Modes of Transportation other than the Private Car The most common way to achieve reduced parking requirements for developers or housing owners is to offer different mobility services to the residents, principally various forms of bicycle measures and carsharing (Hult, 2017). Tickets for public transportation is another measure (Göteborgs stad, 2019a). Additionally, physical locations that connect a variety of transportation modes, so called mobility hubs, are essential in order to facilitate more environmentally friendly modes of transportation (Schemel, Niedenhoff, Ranft, Schnurr and Sobiech, 2020). The subsequent chapter will further describe the bicycle as transportation mode, carsharing, public transportation and mobility hubs. 2.4.1 The Bicycle Many of the detrimental consequences of car usage, such as greenhouse gas emissions, traffic collisions, lack of physical activity, social inequality and lack of accessibility, can be remedied by cycling (Martens, 2007). The city of Gothenburg’s ambition is that cycling will triple by 2025 compared to 2011, and that the city will be seen as bike- friendly by three out of four people (Trafikkontoret, 2017). Statistics from Trafikkontoret (2020) show that bicycles account for 9% of daily travel in Gothenburg, while the car accounts for 48%, public transport for 24% and pedestrians for 19%. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 10 According to a study conducted by Cykelfrämjandet (2020), cyclists in Gothenburg are dissatisfied with the city's current bicycle infrastructure, especially in terms of protection and accessibility. One study from Malmö explored cyclists' needs and preferences in three residential areas located in Malmö (Andersson, 2017). By conducting a survey, the author found that the research population preferred indoor bicycle storage compared to outdoor bicycle parking as the perception of security was higher and the risk of theft was deemed lower by the participants. 2.4.1.1 Bicycle Parking Requirement in Gothenburg Göteborgs Stad’s (2019a) report Guidelines for mobility and parking in the city of Gothenburg also includes recommendations for appropriate bicycle parking requirements. The work process for deciding the bicycle parking requirements for residential buildings in Gothenburg follows three steps; the standard span, situation assessment and project specific conditions. The bicycle parking requirements starting point is 2.5 parking spaces per apartment if the apartments have an average size distribution, which means that 55 percent are one- or two-bedroom apartments and 15 percent are at least four-4-bedroom apartments. This applies to all residential buildings in Gothenburg with more than two apartments, regardless of the zone the building is located in. In step two, the parking requirements can increase if the car parking spaces connected to the building are limited and/or if the location provides good conditions for cycling. However, the parking requirements can be reduced if the conditions for accessing the building with a bicycle is poor and there is no possibility for improvement. In step three, the parking number for bicycles can be increased if a predominant part of the apartments are large. If a predominant part of the apartments are small, the parking number can be reduced. According to the guidelines, a property owner can achieve a minimum parking requirement of 2.0 per apartment and a maximum of 3.0, however guest parking is not included. 2.4.1.2 Bikesharing Bikesharing is an example of “sharing economy”, indicating an economic system with the fundamental idea of people sharing services or possession, for money or for free, by using the internet for organizing (Cambridge Dictionary, 2019). Bikesharing implies shared use of a bicycle fleet where individuals can use bicycles on an on-demand and temporary basis (Shaheen, Guzman and Zhang, 2010). This enables people to cycle without worrying about storage, parking, high purchase costs or maintenance costs (Shaheen et al., 2010). Developers or housing owners can offer bikesharing to their residents to achieve reduced car parking requirements, bicycle fleets that may consist of both “ordinary bicycles” or “special bicycles” such as cargo bicycles (Göteborgs Stad, 2019a). Despite the fact that several studies have been devoted to evaluating bikesharing, evidence on the benefits are still limited (Teixeira, Silvia and Moura e Sá, 2020). There are some arguing that bikesharing can compete with the car and decrease its modal share, and that bikesharing through synergies with other modes of transportation, such as public transportation, can to some extent replace the car (Teixeira et al., 2020). CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 11 2.4.2 Carsharing Just like bikesharing, carsharing is an example of “sharing economy” and implies people to temporarily and locally rent a car on an on-demand basis (Münzel, Boon, Frenken, Blomme and van der Linden, 2019). Carsharing enables individuals to use a car when needed, and throughout one day, several different members can have access to a shared-used car (Martin, Shaheen and Lidicker, 2010). Carsharing differs from traditional car rental as it does not require pick up at a rental station and it differs from vehicle leasing since leased cars are not being shared on a daily basis (Frenken, 2013). Developers in Gothenburg can decrease the parking requirement by providing incentives and prerequisites for carsharing (Göteborgs stad, 2019a). Offering carsharing for residents may result in reduced need for private car ownership (Vaca and Kuzmyak, 2005; Martin et al., 2010). There are studies indicating that carsharing can reduce household car ownership with between 40 to 60 percent (Vaca and Kuzmyak, 2005). A study by Martin et al. (2010) suggests that carsharing members in North America minimized their car ownership from 0.47 vehicles per household to 0.24 by switching to carsharing. The shift from owning a car to instead using carsharing was most seen in one-car households. Furthermore, since you pay as you go and the costs are linked to use, carsharing implies variable costs, which can encourage people to limit their driving (Vaca and Kuzmyak, 2005). The variable cost carsharing implies may also be a reason why carsharing is generally not used for commuting or for full days of renting as it becomes too expensive (Martin et al., 2010). Indicating that households that require a car for trips or commuting will most likely own a vehicle regardless of access to carsharing (Martin et al., 2010). Likewise, findings from a study done in Sweden shows that carsharing is more of a complement to the existing private car use rather than replacing it (Bocken, Jonca, Södergren and Palm, 2020). Vaca and Kuzmyak (2005) questions if carsharing will really influence individuals' travel behavior on a large scale, since carsharing is mainly attractive to those who rarely drive cars. Additionally, the idea of sharing economy is more appealing to younger people (Rudmin, 2016; Benoit, Baker, Bolton, Gruber and Kandampully, 2017). Older people appear to be less willing to change their driving behaviour and seem to find it more difficult to use digital applications of carsharing platforms (Rudmin, 2016). Likewise, a survey conducted in London, Paris and Madrid showed that people under the age of 45 are much more likely to use car sharing services (Prieto, Stan, Baltas and Lawson, 2019). Further, a study conducted in Seoul showed that carsharing demand is larger in areas with a higher proportion of young residents in their 20s and 30s (Kang, Hwang and Park, 2016). To help promote carsharing usage, the study also suggests that carsharing should utilize city owned public parking facilities. However, according to the The Committee of Inquiry in Sweden (SOU 2020:22) there is currently no legal support in Sweden for leaving carsharing vehicles parked on public property. 2.4.3 Public Transportation There is a significant body of research on public transportation, indicating its importance in terms of sustainability, especially the economic and ecological dimension, but also in terms of social sustainability (Stjernborg and Mattisson, 2016). Thus, public transportation can generate benefits to societies and is an important mode CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 12 of transport to create mobility (Stjernborg and Mattisson, 2016). According to Redman, Friman, Gärling and Hartig (2012) public transportation together with walking and cycling is a more sustainable option to the use of private cars. As carsharing generally is not used for full days of renting (Martin et al., 2010), public transportation is also an alternative for daily work commuting. Tickets for public transportation is a mobility service that developers or property owners can offer to their residents (Göteborgs Stad, 2019a). Residents can receive one free public transportation card per apartment, valid either 30, 90 or 365 days. The purpose is to establish a habit among the residents to use public transportation as well as to make car ownership feel redundant as the residents have gotten their collective travel paid for. Studies show that if residents want to continue to use public transport and invest in a mobility tool such as a season ticket, it is a significant financial investment and therefore a powerful incentive to actually use that mode instead of the car (Loder and Axhausen, 2018). Weinberger (2012) argues that if residents' parking requirement is generous, people tend to use the car for destinations that are relatively well integrated with public transport. In addition, the study by Loder and Axhausen (2018) states that if the provision of public transport is good and comparatively more accessible than the car as a mode of transport, the likelihood of car ownership is reduced. The study by De Gruyter, Truong and Taylor (2020), found that it is more necessary to consider the supply of public transport (frequency and quality) rather than the distance to transit. According to a study conducted in the Netherlands, the travel time of public transportation compared to alternative modes has a significant impact on its market share (CE Delft, 2018). For example, when the travel time by public transportation is twice as long as by car, the public transportation market share drops under 30%. When the travel time by public transportation is 1.5 times higher than when travelling by car, the public transportation market share instead grows to over 60%. 2.4.4 Mobility Hubs The concept of mobility hubs is described by Schemel et al. (2020) as a physical place that connects and provides a variety of transport modes (such as bikesharing, carsharing, public transportation, information, charging and bike repair) as well as acting as a seamless interchange between the different modes of transportation. According to Schemel et al. (2020), Mobility hubs are essential in order to meet the current as well as the prospective mobility demand, while also facilitating the transition to a low-carbon transportation system. By providing alternative mobility modes in combination with the hub’s design and location, the hub can nudge people to change their travel behavior. In comparison to other less environmentally friendly modes of transportation, mobility hubs can make environmentally friendly modes easier, more convenient and more appealing. 2.5 Mobility as a Service Mobility as a Service, or MaaS, is a recently emerged mobility concept that has the potential to be a game-changer when it comes to how people travel and conceive mobility (Storme, De Vos, De Paepe and Witlox, 2020). The concept is defined by Hietanen (2014) as a distribution model for transportation services that merges various available mobility services and transport modes (such as bikesharing, carsharing, public transportation and taxi) into a single mobility package. The key idea of MaaS is to offer CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 13 tailored mobility solutions based on travelers’ individual needs, through a single digital interface (Hietanen, 2014), with the aim to improve and smoothen the users’ everyday travel (Storme et al., 2020). The desired outcomes from MaaS are according to Butler, Yigitcanlar and Paz (2021) associated with increased trip awareness, enhanced social equity, reduced distance traveled, reduced parking and reduced vehicle ownership. The emergence and development of MaaS is also an important driving force for increased use of carsharing (Boyer, Schnurr and Andersson, 2020). Likewise, Storme et al. (2020) describes that, as MaaS claims to decrease private car ownership, it promotes vehicle sharing and multimodality as well as more active travelling such as walking and cycling. Hence, MaaS can contribute to solving environmental issues such as carbon emissions and air pollution, and to a transition towards a more sustainable mobility system. There is however limited research on how and to what extent MaaS will affect future car use and car ownership (Liljamo, Liimatainen, Pöllänen and Viri, 2021). Liljamo et al. (2021) tries to fill the gap by investigating how public transportation, MaaS and automated vehicles can impact car ownership in Finland, as well as how people's willingness for car ownership may change in the future. According to the findings, 58 percent have no need or do not want to own a car if MaaS is available, hence, implementation of MaaS may result in decreased car ownership. In addition, the study concludes that new mobility systems such as MaaS need to meet people’s mobility requirements while offering economic benefits to decrease car ownership. There are however those who differ in opinion. Storme et al. (2020) points out that expectations regarding the future use of MaaS often lack sufficient empirical support and nuance as they are pitched by commercial organizations or are think pieces. Their study instead suggests that it cannot be assumed that MaaS will radically reduce car distance travel and car ownership. The results rather indicate how MaaS could be a complement to a private car and not a substitute, thus, MaaS could potentially have an effect on individuals' travel behaviour and potentially even generate additional car trips. The pilot project HOA Viva is currently offering a MaaS concept to their residents’ where a number of different mobility services, such as public transportation, carsharing and bikesharing, are compiled in an application (Lund, 2020). In addition to the application, the concept also includes personal counselling, support and campaigns to help the residents find the best possible mobility solution. The overall aim with MaaS at HOA Viva is to create a simple and flexible alternative to private car ownership that covers the residents’ everyday travel needs. According to Smith (as cited in Olsson Jeffery, 2021) the MaaS concept at HOA Viva helped the residents accept that there was no residential parking. Additionally, those who still own a private car at HOA Viva need to park a distance away from the residence, this inconvenience made them interested in the mobility services included in the MaaS concept. MaaS has only been operated as pilot projects in Sweden, but there are plans for commercializing MaaS applications (Boyer et al., 2020). It is however hard to predict at what rate MaaS to a greater extent will develop and establish in Sweden since it according to Arby (as cited in Olsson Jeffery, 2021) depends on factors such as quality, easy operation for the consumer, value for money and the working business models. Implementing MaaS on the Swedish market does also require great changes in both behavior and infrastructure as well as innovation in several areas (Olsson Jeffery, 2021). Additionally, Arby (as cited in Olsson Jeffery, 2021) points out that it is hard to CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 14 distinguish between long-term and short-term trends right now, as the ongoing pandemic most certainly will have long-term effects. 2.6 Indications for Future Car Use The residences developed today and in the near future are expected to last a long time, thus, the design must suit the future. Developing an underground car park with a certain number of car parking spaces may become unsustainable if car ownership declines and they are not fully utilized. Particularly because, when not in use as a garage, residential underground car parks typically have a limited area of use (Broere, 2016). As a result, future indications of both parking policies as well as people's travel behavior must be considered when developing new residential houses. 2.6.1 Residential Parking In policy terms, Gothenburg has set an ambitious goal to reduce CO2 emissions by 16% each year in order to fulfil Västra Götaland’s part of the Paris Agreement (Anderson, Schrage, Stoddard, Tuckey and Wetterstedt, 2019). An efficient transportation system is seen as a prerequisite for achieving societal goals, such as economic growth and sustainable development (Regeringskansliet, n.d). Hence, it is important to look at alternatives to the car as a mode of transport rather than car usage. Also referring to Sweden's goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector by at least 70 percent between 2010 and 2030, and to become climate neutral by 2045 (Kungl. Ingenjörsvetenskapsakademien, 2019). To facilitate an efficient transportation system, The Committee of Inquiry in Sweden (SOU 2021:23) has recently presented a report that proposes amendments to the The Planning and Building Act (PBL 2010:900). As mentioned, The Planning and Building Act (PBL 2010:900) states that the Swedish municipalities must ensure suitable space for parking for new construction of houses. The new report suggests that the car should not have a special position in legislation and that it is not necessary for each plot to have a certain number of parking spaces available. Instead should carsharing, bikesharing, infrastructure for home deliveries and other forms of mobility solutions be within reach for the residents. The main purpose should be to meet the individual's and society's mobility needs, instead of focusing on the amount of parking spaces that new construction requires. Implementing this new proposal can entail decreased costs for the residents, developers and municipalities as well as larger land areas can be used for greenery and housing. Additionally, positive effects of the proposal include reduced environmental impact, better use of the existing infrastructure and that the need for passenger and goods transport can be kept at a lower level. 2.6.2 Travel Behaviour While the climate goals call for a shift to more sustainable modes of transport, it is necessary to study people's needs for a car and thus residential parking, as well as future indicators of how this might change. Envall and Nissan (2013) conclude that the parking solution must consider that the residents' needs as well as travel behavior may change character over time. Car ownership is growing in Sweden, demonstrating a trend towards higher car dependence (Nykvist and Whitmarsh, 2008). According to a study, CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 15 this increase is largely due to the fact that the proportion of households with two cars is increasing (Trafikanalys, 2015). It is hard to predict what the future may hold in regard to the future of mobility. Achieving sustainable mobility takes, just as Høyer (2000) argues, more than just switching between different modes of transport. When the car was first introduced it did not take long until it dominated the transportation market, as the transition from horse to car a century ago went fairly rapidly (Nakicenovic, 1986). Sprei (2017) claims in her article that the socio-technical system surrounding the car today is a more complicated, indicating that the transition from private car ownership to more sustainable options is harder to achieve in comparison to the evolution of the car. According to Sprei (2017) technological advancements are not enough in order to meet the citizen mobility needs. To eradicate the dominant private car ownership, the alternatives must create a transportation system that can guarantee sufficient mobility and accessibility. Also, an integral part of this transition is change in travel behavior (Banister, 2008). CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 16 3 Methodology This chapter aims to describe how this study has been conducted in order to answer the research questions and includes the research process, research design, data collection, data analysis, ethical consideration of methodology and a reflection of the quality of the study. 3.1 Research Process The topic of sustainable development and residential parking in this master thesis was originally proposed by Riksbyggen. The authors who contributed equally to the study explored the subject further. The main method employed in this thesis is a multiple case study where the findings are applied on the development of Backaplan. A literature review was initially carried out in order to establish a relevant foundation of expertise. This chapter delves further into how the process was carried out. 3.1.1 Literature Review The literature review was conducted to establish a theoretical background to the subject of sustainable mobility and residential parking as well as to provide context to the development of Backaplan. It also aims to identify and generate knowledge about the existing research in the field (Rowley and Slack, 2004). The literature review began prior to the planning phase of the thesis and proceeded in parallel with the multiple case study, as it aimed to systematically complement the results from the studies with conceptualized meaning (Dubois and Gadde, 2014). 3.1.2 Multiple Case Study A multiple case study is a valuable source of reference for building on existing literature (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The multiple case study is suitable as it is well-suited for information-rich cases (Yin, 2009) and allows understanding of the cases similarities and differences (Baxter and Jack, 2008). The aim of the multiple case study is to build theoretical premises that serve as a tool for making assertions regarding circumstances similar to the ones being studied (Yin, 2013). The multiple cases study consists of 13 homeowner associations, further referred to as HOAs, developed by Riksbyggen in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille, see Table 1. The cases were selected by Riksbyggen due to their geographical spread and recent development, see Figure 3. All HOAs are located in urban areas, meaning coherent settlements with at least 200 inhabitants (SCB, 2020), thus the conditions regarding service and activities have been assumed to be the same. Data was collected regarding the HOAs parking supply and occupancy as well as their mobility prerequisites. Table 1. The 13 homeowner associations examined. Tuve Sannegården Eriksberg Munkebäck Guldheden Mölndal Partille Ljuspunkten Akterspegeln Salteriet Munkebäcksäng Viva Tigeröga Kronhöjden Ljusglimten (+55) Kajutan Albertina Munkebäckslund (+55) Grandalia Rosenrot (+55) CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 17 The cases are located relatively close to each other within the examined areas. Three of the cases are Riksbyggens’ concept for senior housing, Bonum. The apartments in these associations can only be owned by people over the age of 55 thus named "+55" (Bonum, 2019). The result from the multiple case study is presented in Chapter 4. 3.1.3 The Development of Backaplan To contextualize the findings from the literature review and the multiple case study and understand how to promote sustainable mobility in urban areas, the results were applied on the development of Backaplan where Riksbyggen plans to develop residential buildings. Backaplan has similar conditions as the cases in the multiple case study since Backaplan is located in an urban area, see Figure 3. Also, the area aims contribute to a more sustainable society by not promoting the car as the main mode of transportation (Sundberg and Mattsson, 2019). The collected literature on the development of Backaplan laid the groundwork for how the findings could be applied to the area's specific conditions. The implementation aims to generate recommendations on how the area's mobility can promote sustainable development. The background to the development of Backaplan and the mobility recommendations are presented in Chapter 5. Figure 3. Map of the HOAs examined. The big dot represents where the development of Backaplan will be located. ©Lantmäteriet (2021). 3.2 Research Design This thesis has a mixed method research design, meaning a combining of qualitative and quantitative approaches (Creswell, 2006). According to Bryman and Bell (2015), CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 18 quantitative research is characterized by collecting information, transforming it into data, comparing it and then interpreting the results of the analysis. Embracing a quantitative research approach can be seen as a prerequisite in the multiple case study as it seeks to contrast the cases. Applying the results on the development of Backaplan has a more qualitative approach since it aims to create a deeper understanding of a specific area (Björklund and Paulsson, 2014). The quantitative results from the multiple case study were analysed and contextualized through a qualitative approach when applying the results on the development of Backaplan. According to Creswell (2006), this is one of the benefits of mixed methods since it enables researchers to answer questions that are difficult to explain if you only used one approach. Saunders, Lewis, and Thornill (2016) also claim that mixed methods may enable the generalizability of a study. The mixture of the two different approaches can be seen as embedding one dataset into the other, as illustrated in Figure 4, meaning that the data in the multiple case study have a supportive role when analysing the development of Backaplan (Creswell, 2006). Figure 4. Illustration of mixed method with embedded qualitative data. Adapted from Creswell (2006). The mixed method research design is well suited as it allows a combination of both inductive and deductive thinking (Creswell, 2006). Therefore, this study has an abductive approach, meaning that the progression of the study moved back and forth between literature and empirical data (Bryman and Bell, 2015). 3.3 Data Collection The data of this study consists of both primary and secondary data. Some empirical findings are made from observations, indicating primary data that is collected for the purpose of being used in this study (Björklund and Paulsson, 2014). However, the majority of the literature as well as the empirical findings are obtained from secondary data, such as literature and documents that have been produced for an aim other than this study (Björklund and Paulsson, 2014). Using secondary data creates more time for data analysis and new interpretations of the results (Bryman and Bell, 2015). Additionally, the use of multiple data sources improves the reliability of results as well as conclusions (Antonson et al. 2017). 3.3.1 Literature Review Scientific publications, books, reports and student literature gathered from electronic databases such as Google Scholar, Scopus and Chalmers library website, as well as from Chalmers library, were included in the literature review. Several search keywords were used in research databases to develop knowledge of theoretical concepts. Keywords such as sustainable mobility, parking requirements, future car ownership and mobility services. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 19 3.3.2 Multiple Case Study The multiple case study consists of collecting case specific descriptive parameters which are illustrated in Table 2. The parameters are collected through secondary data, observations and by estimations of travel times. The same parameters were collected from all HOAs to allow comparison. Table 2. Explanation of descriptive parameters. Descriptive parameters Explanation Year of moving in The year of which the residents moved in Number of apartments Number of apartments at each HOA Apartment sizes Apartment sizes stated as number of rooms Number of car parking spaces Number of available car parking spaces for the residents Monthly cost for parking The monthly fee for renting a car parking space Residents queuing for parking Number of residents in queue for car parking Number of bicycle parking spaces Number of available indoor bicycle parking spaces for the residents Available mobility services Available mobility services at each HOA Mobility services usage and utilization rate Number of bookings, unique users and to what extant the mobility services are used in relation to their availability Number of Bicycles observed The number of bicycles observed in the HOAs indoor bicycle parking Travel time to the city by car Travel time from the HOAs to the city center of Gothenburg by car Travel time to the city by bike Travel time from the HOAs to the city center of Gothenburg by bike Distance to public transportation The distance in meter to the nearest public transportation stop Travel time to the city by public transportation Travel time from the HOAs to the city center of Gothenburg by public transportation 3.3.2.1 Secondary Data The descriptive parameters that were gathered through secondary sources are listed in Table 3, as well as the source from which they were obtained. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 20 Table 3. Source from which the descriptive parameters were obtained. Descriptive parameter Obtained from Year of moving in Riksbyggen Number of apartments Riksbyggen Apartment sizes Buildings permit documents from Gothenburg’s city planning office Number of car parking spaces Riksbyggen Monthly cost for car parking Riksbyggen Residents queuing for car parking Riksbyggen Number of bicycle parking spaces For the HOAs in Gothenburg: Buildings permit documents from Gothenburg’s city planning office For the HOAs in Mölndal: the detailed development plan from the city of Mölndal’s website For HOA in Partille: Unable to obtain Available mobility services Riksbyggen Mobility service usage and utilization rate Carsharing and bikesharing companies 3.3.2.2 Observations Bicycle parking observations were done on site at six of the HOAs, selected by Riksbyggen. Table 4 presents the HOAs were observations were conducted as well as the time and date of the observations. The observations aimed to get a perception about the current bicycle supply and demand. The HOAs property managers were contacted to make the site visits and observations possible. Table 4. Location, time and date for the bicycle parking observations. Descriptive parameter Done at Time and date Number of bicycles observed HOA Kajutan 8:00 a.m., 2021-03-19 HOA Akterspegeln 8:10 a.m., 2021-03-19 HOA Albertina 8:20 a.m., 2021-03-19 HOA Ljusglimten (55+) 9:20 a.m., 2021-03-19 HOA Ljuspunkten 9:40 a.m., 2021-03-19 HOA Viva 10:40 a.m., 2021-03-22 Merely HOAs with a year of move-in that was no later than 2017 were included in the observations for bicycle parking. To only include certain HOAs in the observations was initiated by Riksbyggen as it was considered that the bicycle rooms in the newly moved CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 21 in associations would not be sufficiently established among the residents. HOA Ljuspunkten is an exception to this, since the year of moving in was 2018. HOA Ljuspunkten were included since it is located directly next to HOA Ljusglimten, and Riksbyggen deemed it interesting to compare those two since one of them is a 55+ housing. HOA Viva was also an exception since it was finished in 2019. HOA Viva is a pilot project and Riksbyggen considered it interesting to compare HOA Viva's parking situation with the other associations. 3.3.2.3 Estimated Travel Time Table 5 presents how the travel times to the city center of Gothenburg were estimated by car, bicycle and public transportation. Table 5. Measured distances and tools for estimation. Descriptive parameter Distance Measure tool Travel time to the city by car HOA to Nordstan’s parking garage Google maps directions tool Travel time to the city by bicycle HOA to Brunnsparken Google maps directions tool Distance to public transportation HOA to nearest stop Google maps directions tool Travel time to the city by public transportation HOA to Brunnsparken or Nordstan Västtrafiks planning tool The travel time by public transportation is based on the route that generated the shortest travel time. 3.4 Data Analysis The multiple case study had a comparative design when the data collected were analysed, meaning that the cases were studied in more or less identical ways (Bryman and Bell, 2015). First, case descriptions were created by compiling the collected descriptive parameters into tables. Secondly, further descriptive parameters were generated by simpler calculations to interpret the collected data. The parking requirement for both car and bicycle are calculated by dividing the number of available parking spaces that belongs to a HOA by the number of apartments, see (1). To evaluate how much of the parking space that is actually used, the parking occupancy rate is calculated by dividing the number of occupied parking spaces by the number of available parking spaces, see (2). An estimation of the resident’s car parking demand is formulated, where the number of residents in queue for a parking space is added to the number of occupied parking spaces and divided by the number of sold apartments, see (3). An estimation of the bicycle parking demand is also developed at the six HOAs where bicycle parking observation was done. The estimation considers the number of bicycles observed in the storage area divided by the number of sold apartments, see (4). The estimated car and bicycle parking demand enables an understanding of the resident’s actual need for parking. Additionally, the transportation demand depends on the number of users, in this case the number of residents in each HOA. As the number of residents living in each association is unknown, an average apartment size is calculated in order to perform a more reliable study, see (5). CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 22 Parking requirement: !"#$%& () *+*,-*$-% .*&/,01 2.*3%2!"#$%& () *.*&4#%042 (1) Parking occupancy rate: !"#$%& () (33".,%5 .*&/,01 2.*3%2!"#$%& () *+*,-*$-% .*&/,01 2.*3%2 " 100% (2) Estimated car parking demand: !"#$%& () (33".,%5 .*&/,01 2.*3%267"%"%!"#$%& () 2(-5 *.*&4#%042 (3) Estimated bicycle parking demand: !"#$%& () $,383-% ($2%&+%5!"#$%& () 2(-5 *.*&4#%042 (4) Average apartment sizes: 9.*&4#%04 2,:%2 !"#$%& () *.*&4#%042 (5) Third, working hypotheses were set up and tested in order to get an idea of potential patterns that transcends the cases. Hypothesis testing is a common method in quantitative research studies aiming to conduct statistical analyses and processing (Bridgmon and Martin, 2012) and includes comparing data with various statements of prediction and assumptions (Trochim, 2006). Additional tables were then compiled based on the hypotheses, yet the disposition is reorganized for a better structure. Lastly, any correlations and constant associations derived from the findings were discussed and reflected upon with support from the theoretical framework. 3.5 Ethical Consideration of Methodology According to Bryman and Bell (2007), the representation of primary data findings should be done in an honest way, meaning that no misleading data is illustrated. The reporting of data is done with integrity and honesty. No personal information has been managed to protect the residents' privacy. The purpose of gathering information has always been clarified when requesting it. Individuals who provided the data are kept anonymous and are not presented in the study. Additionally, the authors declare no financial support from any organization for the submitted work. 3.6 Quality of Study According to Björklund and Paulsson (2014) validity, reliability and objectivity are the three measures to ensure credibility of a study and must always be considered. Validity refers to the absence of either methodological or systematic errors. Reliability implies to what degree the measuring instruments are operationally accurate and if the same values would be obtained if the study was repeated. Objectivity refers to which extent values have affected the research. To ensure credibility, the cases, methods, and results have all been described and handled in the most transparent, truthful, and equitable manner possible to verify the study's authenticity. When no clear connections have been confirmed in the analysis, it has been considered scientifically just as important and has been included in the study. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 23 However, the authors are aware of possible deficiencies in the thesis. The study mainly consists of secondary data, meaning that the information might be biased or not completely comprehensive (Bryman and Bell, 2015). When reviewing literature, it is not always established which method has been used and how information and data has been collected. Nor is it always justified for what purpose the information has been collected. Although the collected data was controlled, the figures did vary depending on the sources, implying margins of error. The travel time and distances are approximate, and the actual travel time may depend on factors such as time of day or current traffic situation. Also, the time for observations of bicycle rooms had to be adapted to property managers at the respective HOA. Making further observations at various times of the day may have increased the study's validity and reliability. For example, conducting an observation during the day and another during the evening to be able to draw a conclusion on how much bicycles are actually used. Furthermore, the study did not consider that residents have bicycles elsewhere than in bicycle storage. Additionally, the data collection was carried out during the covid-19 pandemic, which has affected residents travel behavior (Göteborgs Stad, 2021). If data were collected under normal circumstances with no restrictions, such as no traveling and working from home, a more complete result could be obtained. Therefore, caution is required when interpreting the findings from the multiple case study. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 24 4 Results: Multiple Case Study The following chapter presents the result from the multiple case study, consisting of 13 homeowner associations, HOAs, located in Gothenburg, Mölndal and Partille. 4.1 Case Specific Prerequisites Table 6 presents an overview over the examined HOAs. Table 6. Overview of the HOAs. Area Homeowner Association Year of moving in Number of apartments Average apartment size Tuve Ljuspunkten 2018 72 2.6 Ljusglimten (55+) 2017 47 3.0 Sannegården Akterspegeln 2015 85 2.6 Kajutan 2017 22 2.5 Eriksberg Salteriet 2018 61 2.6 Albertina 2016 89 2.4 Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 2020 79 2.6 Munkebäckslund (55+) 2020 66 (of which 15 are not sold) 2.9 Guldheden Viva 2019 132 2.3 Mölndal Tigeröga 2018 26 1.6 Grandalia 2019 69 2.4 Rosenrot (55+) 2018 50 2.8 Partille Kronhöjden 2019 74 (of which 1 is not sold) 2.7 Average - - 67 2.5 CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 25 4.2 Case Specific Car Parking Situation Table 7 presents the collected and calculated data regarding the HOAs car parking. Table 7. The HOAs car parking situation. The column in Table 7 named “number of parking spaces” refers to all of the parking spaces that belong to each HOA. All associations offer parking spaces in an underground car park. HOA Akterspegeln and HOA Kajutan share an underground car park, located under HOA Akterspegeln. The residents at HOA Kajutan must exit the building and walk approximately 60 meters to their car parking. Furthermore, when residents of Mölndal's HOAs moved in, they were only allowed to rent one parking space per apartment. Three of the HOAs offer additional parking options. Residents of HOA Ljuspunkten have access to additionally 10 ground parking spaces, and residents of HOA Kronhöjden have access to 20 parking spaces on a parking deck situated approximately 300 meters away. Residents of HOA Albertina have the possibility to rent parking spaces at Eriksbergsdockan’s garage nearby through an external company. Furthermore, the users of the additional parking spaces in HOA Ljuspunkten and HOA Albertina are not considered as residents queuing for the underground parking spaces. However, at HOA Kronhöjden, the five residents who occupy the additional parking spaces are known to represent the five residents in the queue for the underground parking spaces. Area Homeowner Association Number of parking spaces Cost for paring/month Parking requirement Parking occupancy rate Residents queuing to parking Estimated parking demand Tuve Ljuspunkten 58 800 SEK 0.8 100% to underground car park, 33% to ground parking 15 queuing to the underground car park 1.0 Ljusglimten (55+) 30 800 SEK 0.6 100% 5 0.7 Sannegården Akterspegeln 55 1100 SEK 0.6 100% 8 0.7 Kajutan 14 1100 SEK 0.6 57% 0 0.4 Eriksberg Salteriet 47 1100 SEK 0.8 100% 26 1.2 Albertina 59 1100 SEK 0.7 100% 38 1.1 Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 42 1100 SEK 0.5 100% 8 0.6 Munkebäckslund (55+) 46 1100 SEK 0.7 87% 0 0.8 Guldheden Viva - - - - - - Mölndal Tigeröga 5 1250 SEK 0.2 100% 0 0.2 Grandalia 45 1250 SEK 0.7 67% 0 0.3 Rosenrot (55+) 40 1250 SEK 0.8 60% 0 0.5 Partille Kronhöjden 60 950 SEK 0.8 100% to underground car park and 25% to parking deck 5 queuing to underground car park 0.6 Average - 42 1075 SEK 0.7 - - 0.7 CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 26 4.3 Case Specific Bicycle Parking Situation Table 8 presents the collected and calculated data regarding the HOAs bicycle parking. Table 8. The HOAs bicycle parking situation. There is one thing worth noting regarding the HOAs bicycle parking; during the observation of the bicycle storage room it was revealed that some of the HOAs have had burglary issues in the bicycle storage rooms. At HOA Viva, there have been thefts that has included electric bicycles and associated batteries (C. Brolin, personal communication, March 22, 2021). At HOA Akterspegeln, notes where attached to the bicycle storage room with warnings about thefts. Area Homeowner Association Number of bicycle parking spaces Parking requirement Number of bicycles observed Parking occupancy rate Estimated bicycle parking demand Tuve Ljuspunkten 215 3.2 56 26% 0.8 Ljusglimten (55+) 126 2.7 36 29% 0.8 Sannegården Akterspegeln 100 1.2 89 89% 1.0 Kajutan 41 1.7 28 68% 1.3 Eriksberg Salteriet 126 2.1 - - - Albertina 111 1.2 72 65% 0.8 Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 127 1.6 - - - Munkebäckslund (55+) 124 1.9 - - - Guldheden Viva 268 2.0 95 35% 0.7 Mölndal Tigeröga NA 1.5 - - - Grandalia NA 1.8 - - - Rosenrot (55+) NA 2.0 - - - Partille Kronhöjden NA NA - - - Average - 138 1.9 63 52% 0.9 CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 27 4.4 Case Specific Travel Times to City Center Table 9 presents the estimated travel times from the HOAs to the city by car, bicycle and by public transportation. Table 9. Travel times to the city center. Area Homeowner Association Travel time to the city by car Travel time to the city by bike Distance to public transportation (nearest stop) Travel time to the city by public transportation Tuve Ljuspunkten 15 min 29 min 50 m (Tuve centrum) 22 min Ljusglimten (55+) 100 m (Tuve centrum) Sannegården Akterspegeln 10 min 11 min with ferry or 17 min over Göta Älv bridge 200 m (Sannegårdshamnen) 13 min Kajutan 150 m (Sannegårdshamnen) Eriksberg Salteriet 13 min 19 min with ferry or 25 min over Göta Älv bridge 220 m (Bockkranen) 21 min Albertina 11 min 18 min with ferry or 24 min over Göta Älv bridge 150 m (Eriksbergsdockan) 20 min Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 8 min 16 min 200 m (Ättehögsgatan) 16 min Munkebäckslund (55+) Guldheden Viva 14 min 12 min 350 m (Doktor Fries torg) 13 min Mölndal Tigeröga 13 min 27 min 400 m (Mölndals innerstad) 21 min Grandalia 300 m (Mölndals innerstad) Rosenrot (55+) 350 m (Mölndals innerstad) Partille Kronhöjden 13 min 31 min 220 m (Partille centrum) 12 min Average - 12 min 21 min (based on the fastest option) 220 m 18 min CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 28 4.5 Case Specific Mobility Services Table 10 presents the collected data regarding the HOAs available mobility services. Table 10. Available mobility services. As shown, 6 out of 13 HOAs offer mobility services. All six HOAs offer carsharing, HOA Viva also provides various bicycle services, and the HOAs in Mölndal provide public transportation cards. The carsharing at HOA Munkebäcksäng, HOA Munkebäckslund, and HOA Viva is provided by the same company, while the HOAs in Mölndal are supplied by a different carsharing enterprise. The free public transportation cards in Mölndal entails one 365-day period ticket per apartment, valid in Gothenburg and surroundings. 4.6 Mobility Service Usage As presented in Table 10, the HOAs in Munkebäck, HOA Viva and the HOAs in Mölndal offers a variety of mobility services. The data gathered regarding the use of these services is presented in the following section. 4.6.1 Carsharing Figure 5 presents the number of bookings for a carsharing vehicle in the HOAs Munkebäcksäng, Munkebäckslund and Viva. The statistics for HOA Viva are from the time period 2020-05-01 - 2021-03-31, while the statistics for the HOAs in Munkebäck are from the time period 2020-10-01 - 2021-03-31. In addition, Figure 6 presents the number of unique users each HOA has during the same time period. Area Homeowner Association Mobility service Tuve Ljuspunkten - Ljusglimten (55+) - Sannegården Akterspegeln - Kajutan - Eriksberg Salteriet - Albertina - Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng Carsharing: Shares 2 vehicles Munkebäckslund (55+) Guldheden Viva Carsharing: 3 vehicles Bikesharing: 5 electric bicycles 3 electric cargo bicycles Service room Mölndal Tigeröga Carsharing: Shares 3 vehicles Free public transportation card Grandalia Rosenrot (55+) Partille Kronhöjden - Average - - CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 29 Figure 5. Number of bookings for a carsharing vehicle. Figure 6. Number of unique users of carsharing. Regarding the carsharing usage at the HOAs in Mölndal, there is no data available for the number of bookings or number of unique users. Table 11 presents the number of residents that have signed up for carsharing, i.e. members connected per HOA Table 11. Signed up residents for carsharing at the HOAs in Mölndal. 4.6.2 Bikesharing Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 below present the monthly electric bikesharing and the electric cargo bikesharing usage at HOA Viva during the time period 2020-05-01-2021-03-31. Figure 7 presents the monthly number of bookings for electric bikesharing as well as monthly number of unique users. Figure 8 presents the monthly number of bookings Area Homeowner Association Number of residents signed up for carsharing Mölndal Tigeröga 1 Grandalia 3 Rosenrot (55+) 6 CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 30 for electric cargo bikesharing at HOA Viva together with the number of unique users. Figure 9 depicts the average monthly utilization rate for electric bikesharing, which indicates to what extent the electric bicycles are used in relation to their availability. Lastly, Figure 10 shows the average monthly utilization rate for the electric cargo bicycles. Figure 7. Electric bikesharing at HOA Viva. Figure 8. Electric cargo bikesharing at HOA Viva. Figure 9. Electric bikesharing average utilization rate at HOA Viva. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 31 Figure 10. Electric cargo bikesharing average utilization rate at HOA Viva. CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 32 5 Analysis and Discussion of Multiple Case Study The tables and figures presented in previous chapter are in the following section analyzed and discussed with support from the theoretical framework. To begin with, the HOAs case specific characteristics are analyzed in relation to the estimated car parking demand. The estimated car parking demand is then compared to Gothenburg's current guidelines to examine the accuracy of the guidelines. The analysis and discussion for the bicycle situation is then presented with a similar disposition. Finally, the correlation between car and bicycle parking is analyzed in order to identify travel behaviors that transcend the cases studied. 5.1 Car Parking Table 12 compare the HOAs car parking with the number of apartments and average apartment size. Table 13 compare the estimated car parking demand with the travel time to the city center by various modes of transportation. Table 12. Car parking and apartments conditions. Area Homeowner Association Estimated car parking demand Parking requirement Parking occupancy rate Monthly cost for parking Number of apartments Average apartment size Tuve Ljuspunkten 1.0 0.8 100% to underground car park, 33% to ground parking 800 SEK 72 2.6 Ljusglimten (55+) 0.7 0.6 100% 800 SEK 47 3.0 Sannegården Akterspegeln 0.7 0.6 100% 1100 SEK 85 2.6 Kajutan 0.4 0.6 57% 1100 SEK 22 2.5 Eriksberg Salteriet 1.2 0.8 100% 1100 SEK 61 2.6 Albertina 1.1 0.7 100% 1100 SEK 89 2.4 Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 0.6 0.5 100% 1100 SEK 79 2.6 Munkebäckslund (55+) 0.8 0.7 87% 1100 SEK 66 (of which 15 are not sold) 2.9 Guldheden Viva - - - - 132 2.3 Mölndal Tigeröga 0.2 0.2 100% 1250 SEK 26 1.6 Grandalia 0.3 0.7 67% 1250 SEK 69 2.4 Rosenrot (55+) 0.5 0.8 60% 1250 SEK 50 2.8 Partille Kronhöjden 0.6 0.8 100% to underground car park and 25% to parking deck 950 SEK 74 (of which 1 is not sold) 2.7 Average - 0.7 0.7 - 1075 SEK 67 2.5 CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 33 Table 13. Car parking demand and travel times. Although parking requirements and estimated parking demand differ when examining each association, the average for both is 0.7, see Table 12. Indicating that in general, the built car parking spaces for the HOAs examined correspond to the residents' demand. The HOAs in Eriksberg and HOA Ljuspunkten in Tuve have the highest estimated car parking demand. Where the underground car park has full occupancy rate and there is generally a long queue, resulting in that the demand exceeds the set parking requirement, i.e. the offered parking spaces do not satisfy the need for residential parking. It is possible to conclude that the HOAs with the highest estimated car parking demand has an above-average travel time to the city center by public transportation, see Table 13. The results are supported by literature, which states that the longer it takes to travel by public transport compared to driving, the lower the market share for public transport (CE Delft, 2018). In the case of HOA Ljuspunkten, the travel time by public transportation is nearly twice as long as travel time by car, according to CE Delft (2018), this results in a 30% decrease in the public transportation market share. This statement cannot be applied to the HOAs in Mölndal and Partille that does not belong to the municipality of Gothenburg. As they are located in the middle of their municipality’s center, the need for travel to Gothenburg city center might be limited. Hence, the relatively low estimated parking demand for these HOAs might be explained by the residents' proximity to relevant services that do not necessitate the use of a car on a daily basis. It is hard to determine why HOA Ljuspunkten has higher estimated parking demand than nearby HOA Ljusglimten. HOA Ljusglimten has 25 more apartments and a slightly larger average apartment size than HOA Ljuspunkten, as shown in Table 12. Also, the parking requirement for HOA Ljuspunkten is 0.2 higher than HOA Ljusglimten. What Area Homeowner Association Estimated car parking demand Travel time to city center by car Travel time to city center by bike Travel time to city center by public transportation Tuve Ljuspunkten 1.0 15 min 29 min 22 min Ljusglimten (55+) 0.7 Sannegården Akterspegeln 0.7 8 min 11 min with ferry or 17 min over Göta Älv bridge 13 min Kajutan 0.4 Eriksberg Salteriet 1.2 13 min 19 min with ferry or 25 min over Göta Älv bridge 21 min Albertina 1.1 11 min 18 min with ferry or 24 min over Göta Älv bridge 20 min Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 0.6 8 min 16 min 16 min Munkebäckslund (55+) 0.8 Guldheden Viva 0 14 min 12 min 13 min Mölndal Tigeröga 0.2 13 min 27 min 21 min Grandalia 0.3 Rosenrot (55+) 0.5 Partille Kronhöjden 0.6 13 min 31 min 12 min Average - 0.7 12 min 21 min (based on the fastest option) 18 min CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 34 further distinguishes them is the fact that no one under the age of 55 is permitted to reside in Ljusglimten, which could have an effect on car ownership. The HOAs in Mölndal and HOA Kajutan in Sannegården have the lowest estimated car parking demand. In Mölndal, this can be linked to the fact that residents were only allowed to rent one parking space per apartment when they moved in, a limitation that was not present in any of the other HOAs studied. Research show that the growing car ownership in Sweden is mainly due to the increasing proportion of households with two cars (Trafikanalys, 2015). The HOAs Kajutan and Tigeröga, which have low estimated car parking demand of 0.4 and 0.2, respectively, are both associations with fewer apartments than all other HOAs examined, see Table 12. It can also be deduced that the average apartment size in both HOA Tigeröga, HOA Grandalia and HOA Kajutan is lower than the overall average. HOA Kajutan has a travel time to the city center that is below average for all modes of transportation, see Table 13. The same prerequisites apply to the nearby HOA Akterspegel, which has a remarkably higher estimated parking demand of 0.7. HOA Kajutan and HOA Akterspegel are distinguished by the latter's slightly larger average apartment size and a higher number of apartments, see Table 12. HOA Kajutan is also the only association where the residents must exit the building to access the underground car park. According to Christiansen et al. (2016), a longer distance to residential parking results in a substantial decrease in the car’s modal share, which may explain why residents at HOA Kajutan have a lower car ownership. Table 12 shows that the cost for car parking varies between 800SEK and 1250SEK. However, no clear correlation between the estimated car parking demand and the price factor can be interpreted. CHALMERS Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 35 5.1.1 Carsharing’s Impact on Car Parking Demand Carsharing is the second most common measure to achieve reduced car parking requirements (Hult, 2017) and it is therefore interesting to examine the estimated car parking demand is affected by the provision of carsharing. Table 14 presents the HOAs that offer carsharing services to their resident. Table 14. Car parking demand and available carsharing. As illustrated in Table 14, the absence of a carsharing service connected to the residential building is a feature identified for all HOAs with high estimated car parking demand. Likewise, both Vaca and Kuzmyak (2005) and Martin et al. (2010), states that carsharing can minimize the need for private car ownership. However, it is hard to ascertain if this is accurate for the HOAs studied as the estimated car parking demand is only reliable for the HOAs in Munkebäck. The associations in Mölndal have a car parking limitation and HOA Viva have a parking requirement set to zero. Yet, to obtain a clearer understanding of the conditions for a higher carsharing usage rate, it is interesting to examine how the HOAs carsharing usage differ. The number of bookings for a carsharing vehicle and the number of unique users are illustrated in Figure 11 for the HOAs Viva, Munkebäcksäng and Munkebäckslund. Area Homeowner Association Number of apartments Estimated car parking demand Carsharing Tuve Ljuspunkten 72 1.0 - Ljusglimten (55+) 47 0.7 - Sannegården Akterspegeln 85 0.7 - Kajutan 22 0.4 - Eriksberg Salteriet 61 1.2 - Albertina 89 1.1 - Munkebäck Munkebäcksäng 79 0.6 Shares 2 vehicles Munkebäckslund (55+) 66 (of which 15 are not sold) 0.8 Guldheden Viva 132 - 3 vehicles Mölndal Tigeröga 26 0.2 Shares 3 vehicles Grandalia 69 0.3 - Rosenrot (55+) 50 0.5 - Partille Kronhöjden 74 (of which 1 is not sold) 0.6 - Average - 67 0.7 - CHALMERS, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Master’s Thesis ACEX30 36 Figure 11. Carsharing usage. Although the various number of apartments are considered, HOA Viva has the most extensive carsharing usage, see Figure 11. HOA Viva does not offer any car parking and a survey conducted among the residents showed that the car ownership among the residents is significantly lower than the average in Gothenburg (Lund, 2020). Although the number of residents that owns a car at the HOAs in Munkebäck are unknown, their parking requirement and estimated parking demand is around the average for the HOAs studied, implying that the car ownership may be around the average in Gothenburg. A lower proportion of car owners can be interpreted as a natural explanation why the carsharing is used more in HOA Viva than in the HOAs in Munkebäck, as carsharing is mostly appealing to those who rarely drive cars (Vaca and Kuzmyak, 200