Parking: A Multi-Level Issue
- connect2783
- Sep 2
- 7 min read
Updated: Sep 11
In India’s small and mid-sized cities, multi-level car parking (MLCP) projects are increasingly promoted to address growing parking pressures. Yet, most facilities remain underutilised, often lying vacant despite significant investment. This article examines the reasons behind this paradox, including behavioural preferences for on-street parking, accessibility challenges, safety concerns, and inadequate integration with broader urban mobility strategies. It explores how successful MLCPs combine technology, enforcement, user-friendly design, and multipurpose uses to improve uptake. The challenge lies not merely in constructing parking facilities, but in shaping habits, managing expectations, and establishing operational frameworks to ensure these spaces serve their purpose rather than becoming costly, underused monuments.
Multi-Level Car Parking (MLCP) projects are increasingly being promoted in Indian cities as a response to growing parking pressures. Policies and guidelines such as the National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) and IRC’s Guidelines for Parking Facilities in Urban Areas position MLCPs as a solution for providing organised parking. Beyond these, schemes like the Smart City Mission and AMRUT have further accelerated their adoption, with several smaller cities investing heavily in such facilities. For instance, Thiruvananthapuram opened a ₹18.89 crore facility in 2023–24 (for 400 two-wheelers and 26 cars), followed by additional facilities worth ₹16.58 crore (202 cars) and ₹19 crore (210 cars). Patna recently launched two hydraulic MLCPs costing ₹28.86 crore for 96 and 60 vehicles. Trichy has built a ₹20 crore facility for 650 cars and a smaller ₹6 crore unit for 30 cars.
Similarly, Coimbatore has also developed a ₹41.67 crore structure for 380 cars; Itanagar has inaugurated projects of ₹18.09 crore (108 cars) and ₹14.71 crore (143 cars); Mangaluru has invested around ₹94 crore; and Shimla has built a smaller ₹6.5 crore facility for 80-100 vehicles. These projects translate to a construction cost per parking space ranging roughly from ₹4.5 lakh to ₹18.5 lakh. This is just a snapshot; other small and mid-sized cities, such as Ernakulam, Mathura, and Dehradun, are also rolling out MLCP projects, making it a common model for addressing urban parking challenges in many smaller cities.
However, a closer look reveals a different picture: most of these facilities remain underutilised, often lying vacant despite a significant public investment. Across cities such as Bhopal, Chandigarh, and Guwahati, occupancy rates range between near zero to 37%.
This article examines the reasons behind this paradox and asks, if smaller and mid-sized cities adopt MLCPs, what can be done differently to ensure that these facilities actually work? The global evidence increasingly has shown that MLCPs succeed only when integrated into broader urban mobility strategies, combined with enforcement, user-friendly design, and behavioural interventions; with added success when commercial facilities within the building attract regular users.
The case for MLCPs
With rapidly increasing private vehicle ownership, on-street parking is a growing source of congestion in Indian cities. It reduces the usable width of roads and adds friction to already crowded networks. With land being a scarce resource, MLCPs provide a way to consolidate parking vertically, making more efficient use of limited urban space. In areas with a lot of traffic, a multi-level parking system can increase the number of available parking spaces by 6 to 7 times.
In many central business districts (CBDs) and market areas of smaller cities, settlements are dense, roads are narrow, and buildings often lack setbacks or buffers. In such contexts, every parked vehicle adds another layer of congestion. According to a study, cars remain parked for an average of 23 hours each day, being used for only about one hour. If each trip required parking at both ends, this further stresses the need for organised facilities to accommodate them efficiently.
By shifting cars into MLCPs, pedestrian and traffic movement can improve considerably. In addition:
Safety and order: reduces haphazard curbside parking that blocks sightlines and creates accident risks.
Environmental benefits: minimises fuel wastage and emissions from drivers endlessly circling for space.
Support for local businesses: reliable parking availability can increase footfall in commercial areas.
Revenue potential: structured parking generates steady municipal income when priced and enforced properly.
Future-ready design: MLCPs can be retrofitted with EV charging stations or adapted for mixed uses such as last-mile logistics, cycle docks, or community facilities.
The ground realities and challenges
According to the India Investment Grid, many states and city authorities are promoting MLCP construction, yet utilisation in small and mid-sized cities remains low. For example, in Bhopal’s MP Nagar and New Market MLCPs, only 300 of 800 two-wheeler spaces (37%) and 300 of 1,800 four-wheeler spaces (17%) are being used. Similarly, Chandigarh’s Sector-17 MLCP has a utilisation of roughly 22% (200 of 900 spaces). The same trends can be observed in other cities as well.
Citizens often prefer on-street parking close to their destinations, perceiving MLCPs as time-consuming to enter, locate a free space, and park. For instance, Guwahati’s recently constructed MLCPs remain largely empty while nearby roads continue to be congested. In Coimbatore, low public uptake has prompted authorities to consider handing management over to private contractors.
Safety and security concerns further limit usage. Poor lighting, lack of attendants, waterlogging, and unhygienic conditions deter drivers. In Bhopal, traders avoid MLCPs due to fears of theft or mugging, while in Dehradun, one floor of the local facility is defunct because of broken floors, poor lighting, and inadequate maintenance. In Puri, an under-construction parking lot was opened prematurely, resulting in a car falling 25 feet below and causing severe injury to the driver.
Accessibility is another key issue. Many MLCPs are located far from markets or key destinations. Even if they reduce traffic congestion, long walking distances discourage use. In Chandigarh, traders protested against the MLCP, arguing that customers would avoid shops requiring a long walk from the parking. Similarly, Mussoorie's Kingcraig MLCP, built 2 km from the town centre for ₹30 crore, has faced underutilisation. In an effort to generate revenue, the facility's operators have proposed using the space for wedding events.
Beyond distance, the strategic placement of MLCPs also matters. When facilities are either very close together or poorly located, especially near workplaces or office clusters where users arrive and leave at the same time, peak-hour congestion can emerge around them. While this issue is not yet highly visible in smaller cities, these patterns suggest that without careful planning, similar operational challenges could arise as vehicle numbers grow.
Finally, there is a misalignment of priorities. Authorities often focus on constructing more MLCPs rather than addressing usage patterns or integrating them into broader traffic management strategies. For smaller cities with limited budgets, underutilised MLCPs risk becoming financial burdens rather than solutions. For instance, estimates indicate that building an automated parking facility can cost nearly as much per slot as conventional structures. In Guwahati’s Panbazar MLCP, the ₹11 crore investment translates to approximately ₹4.4 lakh per slot, a steep expenditure considering its almost negligible utilisation.
What could be the way ahead?
MLCPs can be designed as multipurpose facilities, combining parking with commercial or retail uses to activate the ground floor and generate revenue, making the space vibrant even if parking utilisation varies. For instance, Visakhapatnam has completed a multi-level facility named ‘The Deck’, with a basement plus eight floors accommodating 440 cars and 250 bikes. Fifth floor of The Deck will house the proposed Visakhapatnam spoke of the Ratan Tata Innovation Hub (RTIH). Similarly, Kolkata’s New Town has constructed a 1,500-car MLCP adjacent to the Biswa Bangla Convention Centre, featuring commercial spaces on the ground floor for retail activity, showrooms, food joints, and display areas, making the facility financially sustainable while activating the space for public use.
Cities can also make MLCPs effective by integrating them with strict on-street parking enforcement, including hefty fines for violations. However, before construction, a proper feasibility assessment is essential: avoid “one-size-fits-all” solutions, evaluate local demand, user behaviour, and alternatives, and choose locations carefully. MLCPs must be treated as part of a broader parking management strategy, not as standalone infrastructure.
For users who are far from MLCPs, or for those with mobility challenges, feeder services like e-rickshaws and shuttle cars can improve accessibility. In Bhopal’s New Market, for instance, two e-rickshaws ferry parking users, easing both access and traffic management. While not a permanent fix, such services can be effective till users are accustomed to the MLCP system. Authorities should also prioritise regular upkeep, security, and maintenance to ensure user confidence.
Behavioural factors significantly influence MLCP underutilisation. Many citizens continue to prefer on-street parking out of habit and convenience, even when multilevel facilities are available. Unfamiliarity with automated systems or multilevel parking can create anxiety, with users worried about delays in retrieving their vehicles or unsure about operating the technology. Targeted interventions (such as awareness campaigns, on-site assistance, trial periods, and clear signage) can help build confidence and encourage adoption.
Globally, successful MLCPs are integrated into broader urban mobility strategies. Seoul, for instance, utilises Internet of Things (IoT) sensors and automated monitoring systems that enable seamless e-payments and digital reservations, integrating parking into the city's robust network infrastructure. Singapore’s Parking.sg app allows users to locate available spots, pay per minute, and track their parking time, complementing existing travel behaviour seamlessly. These examples show that integration with broader mobility planning and technology adoption is crucial, lessons that smaller Indian cities could adapt.
In India, the multilevel parking at Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport functions effectively thanks to integrated traffic management, UPI and Fastag payment, staff support, and strict enforcement of surrounding road rules. Smaller cities such as Patna and Chandigarh have begun offering online booking for MLCPs, representing early steps toward aligning technology with user convenience and behaviour.
Ultimately, solving the MLCP problem in smaller cities is as as much about behaviour as infrastructure. Citizens need convenient, safe, and accessible facilities and must support the enforcement of on-street restrictions. Until people are willing to trade immediate convenience for the larger public good, even the best-designed MLCPs risk remaining underutilised. The challenge is more than building parking; it involves shaping habits, expectations, and integrating facilities into a wider urban mobility and commercial context. Otherwise, MLCPs risk becoming costly, underused monuments rather than effective solutions to urban parking challenges.
Research Team: Rohit Bhatt and Tarun Sharma
Does your city have a multi-level car parking?
Yes
No
Its being planned
Additional Resource:
Table 1: Pros and Cons/Challenges of Multi-Level Car Parking (MLCPs) in Smaller Cities
Comments