Off-Street Parking Policy Update
-
Upload
lysandra-dodson -
Category
Documents
-
view
31 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Off-Street Parking Policy Update
Department of Transportation
Off-Street Parking PolicyUpdate
City CouncilOctober 15, 2012
Department of Transportation
Questions to be Addressed
• How has off-street parking been provided?
• What public policy objectives are currently in place?
• How do they work?
• What are the options for future action?
2
Department of Transportation
Timeline – Off-Street Parking
1940’s – Zoning Code established parking requirements for parcels in commercial districts
1950’s – PK Overlay Districts formed in residential areas adjacent to Colorado Boulevard and South Lake Avenue- Intended to provide parking for businesses
1960’s – Parking Authority created (PMC §2.25) for purpose of supplying public parking3
Department of Transportation
Timeline – Off-Street Parking
1970’s – South Lake Parking Place District created to consolidate parking in Shoppers Lane; Holly Street leased
1980’s – Zoning Code updated to create Zoning Parking Credit Spaces; Old Pasadena garages constructed; Plaza Las Fuentes garage constructed via development agreement
1990’s – No free-standing (City) public parking structures constructed; ZPC expanded to 150% of parking supply
4
Department of Transportation
Timeline – Off-Street Parking
2000’s – Zoning Code updated to reflect reduced parking requirements in Central District;
TOD overlay implemented with further reductions in parking;
Marriott, Paseo Colorado, Archstone (Del Mar) Garages constructed via development agreements;
Trio garage privately constructed with 324 public spaces5
Department of Transportation
Timeline – Off-Street Parking
2010’s – TOD overlay challenged by Pasadena Chamber study and East Pasadena businesses;
Public parking removed from Playhouse Plaza project;
Zoning Parking Credit Space pool expanded to include Del Mar garage;
South Lake Avenue credit program adopted on basis of on-street supply 6
Department of Transportation
7
Zoning for Parking
CONCEPT IN PRACTICE• Reduce over-
reliance on street parking>Provide adequate
off-street parking supply
• Equitable means of providing parking in proportion to use>Each parcel satisfies
its own parking demand
SHORTCOMINGS• Applies only to new
uses or change in use>Does not address
existing parking demand in already built areas Cannot be applied
retroactively
>Restricts adaptive reuse of sites/buildings in older urban areas
Department of Transportation
8
Pasadena’s Policy Objectives
• Reduce proliferation of Code-required parking>Shared Parking/Contracts for off-site parking>Joint management of on- and off-street parking
• Facilitate adaptive reuse of existing building stock and parcels in historic areas>Zoning Parking Credit
• Facilitate development of compact walkable districts and reduce auto travel>Park Once>TOD Parking Overlay
Department of Transportation
Shared Parking
• What it is/does>Allows for land uses on one site to share
parking with adjacent sites to minimize the overall space dedicated to parking
• Why it works>Takes advantage of the peak parking capacity
required of most land uses>Relies on the differences in parking demand by
time of day for different land uses Offices – daytime demand Cinemas – evening demand
9
Department of Transportation
Contracts for Off-Site Parking
• What it is/does>Allows for one site to contract to use under-
utilized parking on a nearby site to minimize the overall space dedicated to parking
• Why it works>Takes advantage of existing under-utilized
parking capacity>Utility is limited by requirement for contract for
deed
10
Department of Transportation
11
Joint Management
• What it is/does>Pricing system that encourages short-term use
of on-street parking and provides for economical off-street parking
• Why it works>Old Pasadena Model uses a 90-minute free
period in the garages and a modest daily maximum to moderate the shopper and employee demand that would otherwise use on-street parking
Department of Transportation
12
Zoning Parking Credits
• What it is/does>Facilitates preservation of the historic urban
form of a district by allowing adaptive reuse of existing building stock and parcels without adding parking on individual parcels Alternate means (of shared parking) for
meeting zoning requirements for adequate parking
• Why it works>Central reservoir of public parking provided at
sufficient scale to support parking needs of the district
Department of Transportation
13
TOD Parking Overlay
• What it is/does>Facilitates the trip reduction goals of the 2004
General Plan by limiting parking requirements in rail transit-served areas
>Restricts the number of parking spaces that can be built without a discretionary action
• Why it works>Promotes/facilitates self selection by specific
market segments interested in walkable areas>Promotes affordability by reducing the cost of
construction
Department of Transportation
14
TOD Parking Overlay
• Where it applies
Department of Transportation
15
TOD Overlay Outcomes
PLUS• Demographic
changes are yielding changes in residents’ travel patterns
• Foothill Extension will allow similar options for commuters
• Does not preclude the more than minimum parking
MINUS• Viewed as detracting
from the ability to both build and fill commercial space in East Pasadena>Discretionary actions
add time to approval process
>Financing may be linked to higher parking ratios
>Leasing flexibility limited by amount of parking
Department of Transportation
16
Providing Public Parking
• City’s approach has changed over time> Parking Authority – used 1970 – 1980’s> Parking Districts – used once> (Re)Development Commission – used 1980’s – 2010’s> Allow public parking in private development projects
• Role of new development in the process>Increased after 1985 shift of tax increment to FPRS>Current approach is to accommodate public parking
privately in new development projects Playhouse Plaza project outcome nullified that
approach Unwillingness of projects to undertake discretionary
approvals limits utility of this approach
Department of Transportation
17
Current Approach – Issues
• Issue 1 – Different conditions public to private> Public structures/lots rates, hours and accessibility are
governed by City Council; Public parking in private facilities is subject to property owner/parking operator
• Issue 2 – Location of spaces/convenience of parking> Private facilities that serve non-retail land uses
essentially treat public parking as a secondary activity – access to exits, elevators, etc. are oriented to primary tenants, not nearby retail
• Issue 3 – Lack of control over where parking is built> Reliance on development means that siting and timing is
entirely dependent on suitable sites and willing private participants
Department of Transportation
Pending Projects/Needs
• Civic Center>Currently exploring feasibility and cost of
public parking under Garfield Responding to need to replace Holly Street
when lease expires in 2023• Playhouse District
>Two surface parking lots have been evaluated for parking structures Cost is prohibitive on small sites
»$40,000 per space (more without automation)
18
Department of Transportation
Pending Projects/Needs
• South Lake Avenue>Parking District has reached capacity>Expansion hindered by previous agreements>Revenue being depressed by abuse of free
period• North Lake Avenue, East Washington,
Lincoln, East Colorado>Limited opportunities to site parking structures>Insufficient adjacent parking to form a district
• East Pasadena>TOD Overlay being studied
19
Department of Transportation
20
Going Forward – Options
ISSUE• The perception that
parking is lacking in the Central District>There is a lack of
FREE off-street parking
>There is a confusing mix of public and private parking and free and paid parking
>Parking is limited in isolated instances
OPTIONS• Revisit priorities for
providing public parking>Retention of historic
structures/urban form>Facilitating change in
use to bolster sales tax base
• Revisit Zoning Code >Are goals being met?>What changes are
needed?
Department of Transportation
21
Going Forward – Options
ISSUE• Impediments to the
City building/operating public parking>Lack of public
resources to site/fund new parking facilities
>Funds needed to maintain the existing parking system physical plant
OPTIONS• Reconstitute the
Parking Authority>Consolidate existing
parking resources Pool existing equity
>Leverage financing for Deferred maintenance New construction
>Standardize Operations Reduce management
expenses
Department of Transportation
22
Going Forward – Options
OPTIONS• Develop new funding
mechanisms>Institute a parking tax
Percentage of transactions or flat rate per space
• Define Standards>Maximum cost per
space for new parking>Operating parameters
Free periods, cost to park
ISSUE• Impediments to the
City building/operating public parking>Lack of public
resources to site/fund new parking facilities
>Funds needed to maintain the existing parking system physical plant