Transport-related financial contributions are linked to trip generation estimates, which help planners assess a development’s impact. Developments generating more trips may be required to fund public transport upgrades, new infrastructure, or subsidised transport passes. Key planning factors include public transport accessibility, parking provision, and trip generation. Good public transport access combined with limited parking reduces car trips, lowering road upgrade costs but potentially increasing contributions for public transport capacity. This creates a feedback loop: better transit access reduces car use, which raises demand for trips, prompting further investments funded by developers to maintain a balanced transport network.

Going beyond the doorstep: mobility in public, cooperative and social housing

Clara Mafe Cortes, representing Housing Europe, the European Federation of Public, Cooperative, and Social Housing, shared thoughts from a housing federation perspective. Based in Brussels, Housing Europe represents over 25 million homes across the continent and serves as the voice of the social and affordable housing sector at the EU level.

She introduced the SN2 project, which integrates mobility and housing by partnering with social housing providers to test shared mobility solutions. The project aims to reduce car ownership, lower construction costs, and increase housing affordability by optimising land use and limiting parking.

Housing remains a top priority on the EU agenda amid ongoing crises in many member states. Integrating innovative mobility solutions into affordable housing is essential, as reducing parking requirements cuts construction costs, while promoting shared and public transport significantly lowers housing’s carbon footprint. EU legislation increasingly links housing and mobility, such as renovation rules mandating two bicycle parking spaces per residential unit.

Enabling housing development through sustainable mobility in Europe

Rob Goodall, Ali Saad, and Tiago Oliveira from ARUP, have led some of Europe’s most ambitious housing and transport master plans for both local governments and private developers. Their expertise lies at the intersection of housing delivery and sustainable mobility, focusing on practical, climate-resilient solutions like decarbonisation, urban logistics, and sustainable city design to enhance livability and resilience.

Rob emphasised that while many homes and jobs have been created across Europe, without early sustainable transport planning, developments risk increasing congestion, emissions, and social isolation. Successful projects limit parking and prioritise public and active transport, resulting in greener, more desirable communities.

The presentation highlighted the European policy context promoting Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) to shift travel toward public and active modes, reducing car use and land consumption. Key challenges include understanding residents’ travel behaviours and balancing movements across housing and other urban functions. ARUP advocates a systems-thinking approach, stressing that sustainable mobility is best achieved through large-scale, dense, mixed-use developments where homes, jobs, and amenities are within walking distance, embodying the practical application of the 15-minute city concept.

Ali Saad, from the Berlin Office, highlighted six examples of successful integration of sustainable mobility and urban development across Europe and the UK:

• Madrid Nuevo Norte: A large regeneration project on former rail tracks focusing on compact, mixed-use development to promote walking and biking, supported by extensive bus and metro access, reduced parking, and hyperconnectivity through intermodal hubs.
• Guterbahnhof Köpenick (Berlin, Germany): A mixed-use, high-density garden city with shared mobility, cargo bike-based micro-logistics, multifunctional streets, and limited car access.
• L’Innesto (Milan, Italy): Redevelopment of former rail tracks into green public spaces with a strong pedestrian and cycling network, an intermodal hub, and sustainable commuting options, resulting in a projected 69% CO2 reduction.
• Merwedekanaalzone (Utrecht, Netherlands): Conversion of industrial land into a vibrant urban district prioritising pedestrians and cyclists, car-free zones, high-quality public transport, and local shared mobility and logistics hubs.
• London Borough of Enfield (UK): Focus on walkable neighbourhoods with high density and local amenities, transit-oriented development with improved rail services, human-centric streets featuring separated cycling lanes, and low parking provision.

These projects illustrate how integrated design can foster sustainable mobility and create livable, low-carbon communities.

The key ingredients for successful sustainable mobility and housing development

Some elements are consistent across projects. A “carrots and sticks” approach is essential, encouraging desired behaviours while using policy restrictions to guide people in the right direction. Central elements include the 15-minute city concept, promoting dense, mixed-use planning that supports walking and cycling; multimodal streets; and delivering infrastructure upfront to shape travel habits. Mobility hubs and integrated Mobility-as-a-Service solutions are crucial for connecting transport modes and shifting behaviours. Other important factors are shared mobility systems, micro-logistics, social inclusivity, restrictive car use policies, comprehensive mobility management strategies, and clear commitments with goals, investments, and monitoring to ensure progress toward sustainable modal shares.

Discussion and challenges raised

The discussion emphasised that housing demand, especially in the UK, drives many development projects, with a growing focus on compact, sustainable urban growth. Private developers must align with policies that prevent low-density, car-dependent developments, with large-scale projects working best. Political will is critical, as seen in ambitious government targets for new homes and efforts to avoid car-centric towns through integrated planning and localised amenities. Scale matters: policies should be tailored to location and development type, not just size. For example, parking requirements vary depending on urban context and transit access.

Regarding social housing and shared mobility, local champions or ambassadors are not yet widely used to promote behaviour change. Success depends more on service quality, cost transparency, and support from housing providers than on grassroots promotion. Projects are typically driven by municipalities, transport authorities, and private sharing operators.

The Utrecht Merwedekanaalzone project highlights effective policy tools like bylaws mandating bike parking quality and quantity to secure building permits, encouraging investment in sustainable infrastructure. Challenges include managing shared mobility fleets and ensuring access for maintenance. Car-sharing needs to balance exclusivity (for residents) and availability to meet residents' needs, recognising physical constraints like limited curb space. The key takeaway from the meeting was that zero-car parking developments are unlikely in the near future, but reduced and shared parking solutions are viable, especially considering the needs of people with reduced mobility.