Readiness for Small-Sized Parking Policies: A Path to Sustainable

Urban Mobility

Paulo Cantillano-Lizana

1,2 a

and Giulia Renzi

1,2 b

Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via Università, 4, Modena, Italy

ICOOR, Via Amendola 2, pad. Morselli, Reggio Emilia, Italy

Keywords: Parking Optimization, Small Passenger Vehicles, Sustainability, Urban Policies, Land Use.

Abstract: Urban land use presents critical challenges for cities as they strive to balance stakeholder interests and needs.

Several parking management policies have been implemented to optimise space, promoting more sustainable

transport modes, such as electric vehicles, and meet specific needs of network users. This study explores the

potential for European cities, especially those facing high density, heavy traffic, and limited urban space, to

meet the demand for compact vehicles. By examining the European passenger car market, specifically sales

of A-segment vehicles, this study establishes the readiness of national markets to adopt such policies. Findings

reveal that countries like Malta and Italy, where urban congestion and spatial constraints pose challenges for

urban planners, show a high adoption rate of small vehicles. This trend indicates an opportunity to improve

urban space efficiency through targeted policies, potentially encouraging a shift towards more compact and

fuel-efficient vehicles. By accommodating infrastructure for smaller vehicles, urban planners can support

sustainable urban mobility, reduce environmental impacts, and improve accessibility in densely populated

areas.

1 INTRODUCTION

Land use is one of the biggest challenges in urban

planning, as different stakeholders attempt to promote

and prioritise their own interests and needs. This issue

becomes even more critical in mobility planning,

where a complex ecosystem of actors creates

contradictions from various perspectives. For

example, while there is a push for soft mobility to

address the climate crisis, the lack of investment in

safe infrastructure influences modal choices (Sarker,

Morimoto, Koike, & Ono, 2002) (Orozco-Fontalvo,

Arévalo-Támara, Guerrero-Barbosa, & Gutiérrez-

Torres) (Shen, Sakata, & Hashimoto, 2019).

Additionally, the rise of shared mobility systems

introduces different approaches to parking

management (Jaber, Hamadneh, & Csonka, 2023)

(Reck, Haitao, Guidon, & Axhau, 2021). All these

factors affect how cities allocate urban land to their

citizens.

However, there is a consensus that cities

disproportionately allocate space to four-wheeled

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5646-4566

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4001-3714

vehicles (Balsas, 2001). Several examples,

particularly in North America, show how car-oriented

development has led to extensive urban areas being

repurposed for highways, which resulted in

marginalisation and segregation under the dominance

of car-culture (Archer, 2020) (Fielbaum & Jara-Díaz,

2021).

Nonetheless, in recent years, many cities have

started adopting policies to reclaim urban space

previously allocated to cars. It is now common to see

low-traffic zones in different urban centres, especially

in historic areas, with narrow streets, where shared

spaces for different transport modes, including cars

and pedestrians, can be challenging. These low traffic

zones vary in flexibility, allowing only electric

vehicles, imposing full bans, or applying restrictions

only on defined days. Regardless of the specifics, the

goal remains the same: to reduce congestion and air

pollution, thereby improving citizen satisfaction and

health outcomes (Azami, 2020).

Another aspect of urban policy involves parking

management measures, such as implementing

Cantillano-Lizana, P. and Renzi, G.

Readiness for Small-Sized Parking Policies: A Path to Sustainable Urban Mobility.

DOI: 10.5220/0013249300003941

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems (VEHITS 2025), pages 399-404

ISBN: 978-989-758-745-0; ISSN: 2184-495X

399

variable parking fees in high demand areas. By setting

higher fees, cities attempt to discourage car use while

encouraging more sustainable transport modes like

public transit or micromobility (Ding & Zhang, 2017)

(Cavadas & Antunes, 2018). This approach also

extends to designating parking lots for more

sustainable transport modes, such as electric vehicles

(EVs). However, recent trends are not solely about

adopting new power sources, like electric or hybrid

vehicles, but also address vehicle size. In fact, in the

European Union, it is estimated that 10% of vehicles

fall under the A-segment, meaning they are under 4

metres in length (Statista, 2024).

Lastly, European projects have been advocating

for smaller, compact vehicles. For example, ZEV-UP

project is working on a prototype for a smaller, more

affordable, and more efficient vehicle. This paper

aims to explore the readiness of European countries

to adopt parking policies that support small-sized

vehicles and to assess how such changes could

contribute to urban space reclamation and

sustainability goals. It is structured as follows: an

analysis of the policies for non-regular parking lots is

presented as the theoretical background, followed by

the methodology and its application using a European

dataset. Finally, suggestions and conclusions are

provided based on the results obtained

2 THE POLICIES FOR SPECIAL

PARKING LOTS

City authorities have dealt with various strategies and

policies related to parking management and parking

lot allocation to optimise land use, tackle congestion

and emissions, and encourage sustainable transport

modes, such as EVs, by designating special parking

lots equipped with charging infrastructure. These

policies consider factors such as demand level,

location, vehicle type, and so on.

For example, in recent years, it has become

common to see parking areas equipped with charging

stations designated exclusively for plug-in electric

vehicles. These special lots may not necessarly differ

significantly from standard parking spaces; however,

their design and layout often include specific

modifications to optimise space, facilitate charging,

and improve user experience (Sanjay-Kumar, et al.,

2022) (Faddel, Elsayed, & Mohammed, 2018). Other

policies are related to dynamic pricing management,

which adjusts parking fees based on time of day,

and/or location, requiring special permits or fees for

parking access (Maternini, Ferrari, & Guga, 2017).

Some policies are emission-driven, with many

cities adopting measures to limit carbon emissions by

banning internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles

and allowing only zero-emission vehicles in certain

areas, such as city centres or crowded zones

(Gonzales, Gomez, & Vassallo, 2022). Additionally,

more specific policies target vehicle emissions

through emission-based parking fees, where vehicles

with lower emissions pay less to park, and vice versa.

In these cases, parking management serves as an

instrument to incentivise the adoption of cleaner

vehicles (Krishnamurthy & Ngo, 2020).

Other policies boost the use of shared mobility

options, such as carpooling and car sharing

(Krishnamurthy & Ngo, 2020) (Mackowski, Bai, &

Ouyang, 2015), allowing vehicles not owned by the

user but that can be rented or used temporarily. These

policies also impact parking management by giving

priority or even dedicated lots to shared vehicles.

The dimensioning of special parking areas is

another topic. On one hand, there is often a reduction

in space allocated to two-wheelers to maximize

availability, especially as these vehicles offer a

dynamic and affordable alternative to passenger cars.

On the other hand, some cities allocate larger parking

spaces adapted for disabled users, as these spaces

accommodate wheelchair access and

manoeuvrability.

For passenger cars, parking management also

extends to cargo vehicles. In commercial areas,

designated parking spaces are available for small

supply trucks, allowing loading and unloading during

defined times and days according to local policies,

normally aligning with market days or events. These

policies also promote sustainable transport modes for

cargo, banning ICE vehicles while allowing other

greener engines, like EV, to reduce pollution rather

than to optimize space.

Currently, the standard size for parking spaces in

Europe varies by country, with dimensions typically

ranging from 5 to 5.5 meters in length and 2 to 2.5

metres in width (Deutsches Institut für Normung,

2014), (Ayuntamiento Madrid , 2024), (AFNOR,

1994), (BME Faculty of Architectural Engineering,

2013), (Direction des Déplacements doux et de la

Sécurité des aménagements de voiries, 2024), with

exceptions for the special cases mentioned above.

However, there is limited evidence of policies

specifically aimed at designing parking spaces for

small vehicles, despite the potential benefits these

could bring to cities facing high traffic congestion and

limited parking availability. Assessing the impact of

such policies is, therefore, important.

VEHITS 2025 - 11th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

400

3 METHODOLOGY

This study aims to assess the potential impact of

implementing small-sized parking lots designed for

compact vehicles by examining European passenger

car sales data segmented by vehicle categories. Using

Statista’s dataset (Statista, 2024), it is possible to

obtain detailed information on passenger car sales

data. This data is classified under the ACEA

categorization (ACEA, 2023), which divides

passenger cars into various segments, with the

smallest being minicars, also referred to in European

Car segmentation as the A-segment.

To understand the practicality of small-sized

parking lots, this methodology proposes examining

A-segment sales data broken down by car

manufacturer, allowing for the tracking of models

within this segment available on the market, and thus

their lengths. This analysis entails market research in

each country, reviewing manufacturer websites and

open sales markets.

Once the sales are allocated to car models in the

A-segment category and therefore to a defined car

length, an aggregation of sales data by threshold is

proposed, with three thresholds defined:

 Vehicles under 3 meters in length;

 Vehicles under 3.5 meters in length;

 Vehicles under 4 meters in length.

The aggregated data from models allows for

understanding the percentage of vehicles in the

market under these three established thresholds,

providing an overview of the readiness of national car

markets to support the formulation of policies that

incentivize smaller parking lots.

4 DATA SET ANALYSIS AND

APPLICATION

By analysing the total passenger car market, it is

possible to determine the share of A-segment in the

European Market, which has shown a steady

percentage variation since the 2015 update. Dividing

Europe into macro regions, the following average

percentages correspond to data from 2015 to 2023

(Statista, 2024):

 Eastern Europe: 5.5%;

 Northern Europe: 7.5%;

 Southern Europe: 8.2%;

 Central and West Europe: 6.1%

Figure 1 shows the average percentage of sales of A-

segment vehicles over the last 10 years, highlighting

the high presence of these vehicles in countries like

Malta, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark and

Lithuania.

Figure 1: Map of European countries with the percentage of

A-segment vehicles sold in the last 10 years.

The presence of small vehicles can be explained

by diverse factors. In Italy and Malta, the high rate of

car ownership (Eurostat, 2024) has led to significant

congestion and limited parking space, making

motorcycles and small vehicles attractive options due

to their agility. In other cases, such as in the

Netherlands or Denmark, the presence of small

vehicle could be attributed to a combination of

environmental policies and tax incentives, as small

vehicles are typically more fuel-efficient and incur

lower registration and annual taxes (Davies &

Bastien, 2021). This trend may also be influenced by

cycling culture and alternative transport, where small

vehicles are seen as complementary modes.

Additionally, economic factors contribute to this

choice, as small vehicles tend to be more affordable

in terms of purchase price and running costs.

In addition to A-segment vehicles’ share in the

overall passenger car market, Statista provides a

breakdown of the A-segment by brand, allowing the

tracking of models within the A-segment through

manufacturers and their sales in Europe. Table 1

shows the A-segment models per brand and their

respective lengths. This information helps establish

the presence of these vehicles by length threshold.

Readiness for Small-Sized Parking Policies: A Path to Sustainable Urban Mobility

401

Table 1: Brand and models sold in Europe belonging to the

A-segment Category.

Brand and Model Length (Approx.) (m)

Kia - Picanto 2.69

Mitsubishi - Space Sta

2.87

Renault - Twingo 2.88

Aston Martin - Cygnet 2.90

Skoda - Citigo 3.07

Hyundai - i10 3.19

Abarth - 595 3.46

Daihatsu - Sirion 3.47

Peugeot - 108 3.47

Fiat - 500 3.50

Nissan - Micra 3.54

Fiat - Panda 3.56

Citroën - C1 3.57

Chevrolet - CH 3.60

SEAT - Mii 3.60

Suzuki - Alto 3.60

DR - DR Zero 3.61

Tazzari - Zero EM2 3.65

Smart - EQ Fortwo 3.66

Toyota - Aygo 3.67

Opel/Vauxhall - Karl 3.68

Volkswagen - up! 3.80

Mia - Vitale 3.85

Bolloré - M1 3.99

This information allows for the creation of length

thresholds. In this study, three length thresholds were

applied. Figure 2 shows how each brand and its

models fall within these thresholds.

Figure 2: Average length of A-segment vehicles by model

and brand sold in Europe.

By applying the thresholds to car sales data

provided by Statista, it is possible to develop the

following chart presented in Figure 3, which reflects

the market shared of the A-segment by thresholds

based on sales over the past 10 years.

Figure 3: Percentage representation of thresholds per A-

segment vehicle length in European countries.

The previous graph shows a significant

opportunity for countries like Malta and Italy to adopt

policies promoting smaller parking areas within their

parking infrastructure. This approach would

particularly benefit drivers whose choice of vehicle

size is influenced by externalities such as limited

urban space or high traffic conditions.

4.1 Policy Challenges

Introducing policies to designate parking spaces

specifically for small vehicles could encourage the

adoption of more sustainable and compact vehicles,

improving urban mobility and reducing congestion.

However, implementing such policies presents

unique challenges that must be addressed to ensure

their effectiveness and user acceptance.

A primary challenge is the lack of standardization

around the concept of a “small vehicle.” Despite other

types of designated parking spaces, such as those for

EVs, disabled users, or loading zones, there is no

standardized definition for small vehicles. This

ambiguity can lead to confusion among users about

which vehicles qualify for compact parking spaces,

potentially reducing compliance and undermining the

policy’s effectiveness.

Additionally, vehicle segmentation alone may not

be sufficient to clearly define eligibility for small

vehicle parking spaces. An example of standardisation

VEHITS 2025 - 11th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

402

could be the one given by the EU related to A-

segmentation; however, this classification alone may

not be enough, as the policy could consider other

thresholds depending on vehicle length.

To address these challenges, more descriptive

instructions should accompany the policy. Signage

and markings could provide clear criteria, such as

vehicle size limits or specific models that are eligible

for these spaces. Moreover, these measures should be

reinforced with educational campaigns to inform the

public about the advantages of small vehicle parking

spaces and the qualifications for using them. Such

campaigns could emphasize the benefits of compact

vehicle use in urban areas, like reduced

environmental impact, ease of parking, and support

for sustainable urban development.

The success of small parking policies may also

depend on broader urban planning and enforcement

mechanisms. Without clear, visible enforcement,

drivers of larger vehicles may occupy compact

parking spaces, negating the policy’s benefits.

Policymakers may need to consider additional

enforcement measures, such as digital monitoring,

fines, or parking attendants, to ensure compliance.

Finally, integrating small vehicle parking policies

with other urban mobility initiatives can help

overcome potential public resistance. To build

support, cities could demonstrate the policy's positive

impact through pilot programs, highlighting how

prioritizing small vehicles can benefit densely

populated urban areas.

5 CONCLUSIONS

Implementing policies for smaller parking spaces

could lead to a more efficient use of available land,

especially in densely populated or historically compact

urban areas where space is limited. For example,

reducing the standard size of parking spots could

increase parking capacity in busy areas, accommo-

dating the needs of A-segment vehicle owners without

requiring significant infrastructure expansion.

Additionally, these policies could promote the

adoption of compact vehicles by offering economic

incentives for small car owners, such as lower parking

fees or prioritized access in crowded zones. This

aligns with broader urban mobility goals to reduce

emissions, decrease congestion, and make cities more

pedestrian-friendly. However, successful implement-

tation may depend on a clear, standardized definition

of a “small vehicle” to avoid ambiguity and ensure

compliance. Unlike other specialized parking

designations, the concept of a small vehicle lacks

universal understanding, making additional clarity

through signage and consistent guidelines essential.

Educational campaigns and public engagement

will also play a crucial role in helping residents

understand and support these changes. By making

smaller vehicles more practical and advantageous for

urban drivers, city planners in countries like Malta

and Italy can advance sustainable mobility solutions

while addressing the unique challenges of their urban

landscapes.

In the long term, fostering an ecosystem that

supports smaller vehicles could shifts consumer

behaviour toward compact and energy-efficient

vehicles. Enhanced enforcement mechanisms, such

as digital monitoring or fines, may also be necessary

to maintain the integrity of these spaces and

encourage proper usage. This could reduce some of

the pressure on public transit systems and lessen the

environmental impact of urban transportation

networks. Overall, adapting parking infrastructure to

better accommodate small vehicles aligns with

sustainable urban development and can contribute to

creating cities that prioritize accessible, low-impact

mobility solutions.

6 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE

RESEARCH

The study does not account for market evolution in

the coming years, as vehicle dimensions may change

in response to numerous factors, such as consumer

preferences, regulatory impacts, and technological

advances. Additionally, ultra-compact vehicle

categories like L6 and L7 are not included in the

analysis due to a lack of related data. These vehicles,

which are even smaller than the A-segment, could

significantly impact urban parking needs and

infrastructure if widely adopted. Future research

could explore these evolving dynamics and assess

their implications for sustainable parking policies and

urban planning, exploring not only Europe but other

regions and continents.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work is part of ZEV-UP project, co-funded by

the European Union which received funding from the

Horizon Europe Program under the Grant Agreement

number 101138721. Views and opinions expressed

are however those of the authors only and do not

necessarily reflect those of the European Union or

Readiness for Small-Sized Parking Policies: A Path to Sustainable Urban Mobility

403

European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment

Executive Agency (CINEA). Neither the European

Union nor the granting authority can be held

responsible for them.

REFERENCES

ACEA. (2023, 05 18). New passenger cars by segment in the

EU. Retrieved from New passenger cars by segment in

the EU: https://www.acea.auto/figure/new-passenger-

cars-by-segment-in-eu/

AFNOR. (1994). NF P 91-100 parcs de stationnement

accessibles au public règles d'aptitude à la fonction

conception et dimensionnement. AFNOR.

Archer, D. (2020). 'White Men’s Roads Through Black

Men’s Homes’: Advancing Racial Equity Through

Highway Reconstruction. Transportation Planning &

Policy eJournal.

Ayuntamiento Madrid . (2024, 08 30). Portal de transparencia

del Ayuntamiento de Madrid. Retrieved from

Compendio 2024 de las Normas Urbanísticas del Plan

General de Ordenación Urbana de Madrid de 1997

(actualizado a 23.02.2024): https://transparencia.madrid.

es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/UDCUrbanismo/PGOUM

/CompendioNNUU/Compendio%202024/COMPENDI

O_MPG_NNUU_2024.pdf

Azami, P. J. (2020). Determining the Optimal Restricted

Driving Zone Using Genetic Algorithm in a Smart City.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 20. doi: https://doi.org/

10.3390/s20082276

Balsas, C. (2001). Cities, Automobiles, and Sustainability.

Urban Affairs Review, 36, 429-432. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1177/10780870122184920

BME Faculty of Architectural Engineering. (2013).

Közlekedési És Parkolási Segédlet. Budapest: BME.

Cavadas, J., & Antunes, A. (2018). An optimization model

for integrated transit-parking policy planning.

Transportation, 1-25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/S111

16-018-9905-4

Davies, H., & Bastien, C. (2021). An approach for the crash

safety assessment of smaller and lightweight vehicles.

Transport Policy, 12-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/

J.TRANPOL.2021.02.009

Deutsches Institut für Normung. (2014). DIN 18040-3.

Deutsches Institut für Normung.

Ding, L., & Zhang, N. (2017). Estimating modal shift by

introducing transit priority strategies under congested

traffic using the multinomial logit model. KSCE Journal

of Civil Engineering, 21, 2384-2392. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1007/S12205-016-0640-0

Direction des Déplacements doux et de la Sécurité des

aménagements de voiries. (2024, 30 08). L’espace dédié

au stationnement – Principes de base. Retrieved from

Sécurothèque: https://securotheque.wallonie.be/b-dimen

sionnement-horizontal/b-largeur-de-voiries-profil-en-tra

vers/b-stationnement-et-acces/b-stationnement/lespace-

dedie-au-stationnement-principes-de-base

Eurostat. (2024, 08 01). Passenger cars - per thousand

inhabitants. doi: https://doi.org/10.2908/ROAD_EQS_C

ARHAB

Faddel, S., Elsayed, A., & Mohammed, O. (2018). Bilayer

Multi-Objective Optimal Allocation and Sizing of

Electric Vehicle Parking Garage. IEEE Transactions on

Industry Applications, 54, 1992-2001. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2018.2803151

Fielbaum, A., & Jara-Díaz, S. (2021). Assessment of the

socio-spatial effects of urban transport investment using

Google Maps API. Journal of Transport Geography. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2021.102993

Gonzales, J., Gomez, J., & Vassallo, J. (2022). Do urban

parking restrictions and Low Emission Zones encourage

a greener mobility? Transportation Research Part D:

Transport and Environment, 107. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103319

Jaber, A., Hamadneh, J., & Csonka, B. (2023). The

Preferences of Shared Micro-Mobility Users in Urban

Areas. IEEE Access, 11, 74458-74472. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3297083

Krishnamurthy, C., & Ngo, N. (2020). The effects of smart-

parking on transit and traffic: Evidence from SFpark.

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,

99. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2019.102273

Mackowski, D., Bai, Y., & Ouyang, Y. (2015). Parking

Space Management via Dynamic Performance-based

Pricing. Transportation Research Procedia, 7, 170-191.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2015.06.010

Maternini, G., Ferrari, F., & Guga, A. (2017). Application of

variable parking pricing techniques to innovate parking

strategies. The case study of Brescia. Case Studies on

Transport Policy, 5(2), 425-437. doi: https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.cstp.2017.03.010

Orozco-Fontalvo, M., Arévalo-Támara, A., Guerrero-

Barbosa, T., & Gutiérrez-Torres, M. (s.d.). Bicycle

choice modeling: A study of university trips in a small

Colombian city. Journal of Transport & Health. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTH.2018.01.014

Reck, D., Haitao, H., Guidon, S., & Axhau, K. (2021).

Explaining shared micromobility usage, competition and

mode choice by modelling empirical data from Zurich,

Switzerland. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging

Technologies. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.20

20.102947

Sanjay-Kumar, G., Leela-Grace, U., Ramu, S., M., P., V., L.,

& G., C.-K. (2022). Architecture Design of Electric

Vehicle Parking Lot. 2022 Trends in Electrical,

Electronics, Computer Engineering Conference

(TEECCON), 154-159. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/

TEECCON54414.2022.9854840

Sarker, M., Morimoto, A., Koike, H., & Ono, A. (2002).

Impact of transportation infrastructure development on

modal choice. Journal of Urban Planning and

Development-asce, 128, 56-76. doi: https://doi.org/10.10

61/(ASCE)0733-9488(2002)128:2(59).

Shen, J., Sakata, Y., & Hashimoto, Y. (2019). The influence

of environmental deterioration and network

improvement on transport modal choice. Environmental

Science & Policy, 12, 338-346. doi: https://doi.org/

10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2009.01.003

Statista. (2024, 10 10). Passenger Cars - Europe. Retrieved

from Mobility: https://www.statista.com/outlook/mmo/

passenger-cars/europe

VEHITS 2025 - 11th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

404