Planning for Low Parking/No Parking DevelopmentPresented by Kevin Shively, Nelson\Nygaard, October 28, 2013

Overview

Changing travel patterns Implications for off-street parking Trends in low-parking/no-parking development Challenges for planning and implementation Case Study: Low parking development in Berkeley, CA Minimum parking requirements > Access

requirements

2

Travel patterns are changing...

3

Vehicle travel peaked in 2008

Millenials are driving less (23% less than their counterparts in 2001!)

‘Boomer driving will decline…

Implications for developers and employers

Less interest in bundled parking

More interest in – location, – walkability, – transit accessibility– nearby amenities– Bike access & parking– Carsharing

Affordable housing imperative

Focus on transportation benefits

4

Challenges: Planning Legal Political

Genentech

5

Bus/Shuttles $4 per day

incentives for all users / alt

Priced parking 100 million

miles saved $100 million

saved on parking

South SF TDM Ordinance

Demand vs. Requirement: Downtown Palo AltoObserved peak

occupancy: 1.91 spaces

per 1,000 s.f.

Existing Requirement: 4 spaces per 1,000 s.f. Would require 5,210 more spaces than observed demand to bring

downtown to 4 spaces per 1,000 sf requirement At $51K/space = $298 million

Peak occupancy w/ 10% vacancy:

2.1 spaces per 1,000 s.f.

Example: The Gaia Building, Berkeley, CA

The Gaia Building – Parking Demand

91 apartments, theater, café & office space

42 parking spaces supplied Result: 237 adult residents with just 20 cars

Parking fee: $150/month

Parking costs are “unbundled”

Case Study: Garden Village, Berkeley, CA

81 dwelling units– 36 2br units– 45 4br units– Student-oriented

Replaces 20,000 sf office on-site

No private off-street parking proposed*

Applicable Parking Requirement: 72 spaces

*Proponent applied for a concession under the state density bonus law

Case Study: Berkeley, CA

12

Case Study: Garden Village Apartments, Berkeley, CA

162 secure bike parking spaces inside apartments

24 bike lockers on ground floor

16 bike racks for short-term/visitor parking

Off-street parking for up to 10 shared vehicles

No private off-street parking.

13

Transit passes On-site bike repair

station $10 bike link

parking card for all residents

Grocery trolley in each unit

Parking Demand Analysis

Questions: 1. How many spaces will residents/visitors use?2. How many vehicle trips will be made?3. Where will residents/visitors park?

Alternative methods to estimate demand: 4. ITE-rates5. Vehicle-ownership6. URBEMIS7. Surveys of comparable sites

14

Methods for Estimating Demand

Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE): Parking Generation, 4th edition– New use: “Low/Mid-Rise Apt.” (ITE 221 = 1.2

spaces/unit)– Existing use: “Office” (ITE 701 = 2.4 space/1,000 sf)– Estimated net peak demand = 48 spaces weekday/ 78

wknd– ITE itself acknowledges that Parking Generation, “may

not best reflect local conditions…surveys of comparable local conditions should always be considered as one of the best means to estimate parking demand to account for local factors.”

Vehicle ownership– 5% student vehicle ownership rate (UC survey)– Estimated demand for 14 spaces (5% of 266 residents) 15

URBEMIS

Trip generation based emissions model

Takes factors besides land use into account:– density– mix of uses– local-serving retail– transit service– ped/bike environment

Avoids double-counting

Daily Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit (Average Rate)

9.577.5 6.59 5.86

4.2 4.18

02468

1012

Single-Fam

ily Deta

ched

Reside

ntial P

UD

Low-Rise

Apartm

ent

Reside

ntial C

ondo/T

ownho

use

High-Rise

Apartmen

t

High-Rise

Res.Con

do/Tow

nhou

se

Parking Analysis: URBEMIS estimated ratios

17

Garden Village Apartments, Berkeley, CA

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites

18

42 Units 30 parking

spaces (0.7/unit)

Residents ineligible for on-street permits

19

75 units + retail

18 parking spaces (0.24/unit)

Residents ineligible for on-street permits

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites

20

Parking Analysis

40 units + retail

11 parking spaces (0.27/unit)*

Residents eligible for permits, but none taken

* Parking leased separately, some to non-tenants

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites

Count entering/existing vehicles Intercept residents/visitors at main entrance &

ask: 1. Do you live here? 2. What mode of travel did/will you use?3. How many vehicles do you keep in town? 4. Where is/are vehicle(s) currently parked?5. Did you pay to park there? 6. Does your vehicle have a permit?7. Are you affiliated with UC?

21

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites

22

85%

15%

No Ve-hicle1 Ve-hicle

73%

7%

3%

10%

3%4%

1%

Walk

Bus

Bike

Rail

Drive-alone

Carpool

Other

Mode of current trip

Vehicle availability

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites

23

35%

33%

31% On-site garage/lotOther off-streetOn-street

Parking locationPaid; 59%

Did not pay; 41%

Payment for parking

Case Study: Garden Village, Berkeley - Conclusions

Literature shows ample free on-site parking can increase vehicle trips, VMT and emissions

Residents and visitors primarily use non-auto modes of travel

URBEMIS, vehicle ownership and local surveys suggest total peak parking demand for 14-38 vehicles (before TDM provisions)

Surveys showed 40% of vehicles at comparable sites parked off-site, off-street.

Healthy private market for parking (Craigslist showed 12 offers for monthly parking within 7 blocks at $70-$120/mo)

Some residents may opt to park on-street in RPP zones or walk 10-15 min. to outside of zone.

Prior surveys show 19 on-street spaces available within 2 blocks overnight.

24

25

Effects of Minimum Parking Requirements

Cost

– Makes Smart growth less financially feasible

– Housing less affordable

Land unavailable for other uses (reduced tax revenue!)

Impacts on design and pedestrian friendliness

Generates traffic

Ample, free parking provides little incentive to use alternative modes

Adam Millard-Ball, Nelson\Nygaard

Replace Minimums with Maximums

26

• Sacramento, CA• Portland, OR• San Francisco, CA• Stuart, FL• Seattle, WA• Spokane, WA• United Kingdom (illegal in entire nation)

• Eugene, OR!• Coral Gables, FL• Fort Myers, FL• Fort Pierce, FL• Los Angeles, CA• Milwaukee, WI• Olympia, WA

These cities have abolished minimum parking requirements, citywide or in districts:

NELSON\NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES © 2013

Kevin Shively1402 Third Avenue, Suite 1200

Seattle, WA 98101(206) 428-1927

kshively@nelsonnygaard.com