The main Street Parking Initiative - CiteSeerX

The Main Street Parking Initiative The National Main Street Center (NMSC) was established to foster the revitalization of traditional downtowns using a four-point approach: economic restructuring, promotion, design and organization. there was a realization that the lack of downtown parking was a major concern of business owners and city officials. ITE, with NMSC, commissioned The Parking Handbook for Small Communities.

By John D. Edwards, P.E.

30

Introduction

Downtowns are coming back! Recent articles in many national publications attest to the fact that there is renewed interest in living (and playing) in the central business district. This trend may be due to many factors, including the aging of the population (less interest in a lawn to mow); boredom with the same combination of national chains at the mall; traffic congestion on suburban and ex-urban roads; and the efforts of many urban and historic preservation groups to “sell” the unique character of historic downtowns. In any event, these combined factors are having an impact on downtowns and their health. As central business districts are repopulated, there will be new demands on traffic and parking systems—but they will not be like the old demands. Traffic and parking demands and needs for most downtowns changed with the construction of the Interstate Highway System. Prior to the interstate system, most traffic in the downtown was handled by one-way street systems and major arterials. Many of these systems were established in the early 1950s as a result of the burgeoning increases in traffic after World War II. When the Interstate Highway System was constructed and downtown bypasses and “freeway loops” were built, there were significant reductions in traffic volumes on many streets. At the same time, there was a decentralization of office and commercial employment (especially retail) and shopping trips to new suburban malls and office parks. In many cases, there was less need for highcapacity, high-speed facilities in the central business district. More recently, with the increased interest and investment in downtowns, there is a need for re-engineering of traffic and parking facilities. With downtown as a destination rather than a “place to go through,” there is the need to provide a traffic system that reflects these elements:

convenience and ease of traffic circulation; enhanced pedestrian accessibility; simpler transit operations; slower speeds; more convenient parking; and more emphasis on multimodal interconnectivity. Examples of the types of traffic and parking strategies that support the emerging downtowns of today include: conversions of one-way streets to two-way, uncoordinated signal systems (or those that encourage lower speeds); more pedestrian facilities (such as mid-block crosswalks and wider sidewalks); streetscape improvements; converting parallel parking to angle parking; and improved parking enforcement and management. One may ask why this is important to traffic engineers. Traffic engineers are inextricably related to the economic health of the society they serve. Their role is to provide good traffic and parking services that will enhance and support the economic development of communities. Most traffic engineers work for governmental entities that invest money in macrosystems—street, parking and transit systems covering large geographic areas (from hundreds of downtown blocks to statewide and national systems). They involve major governmental investments; however, when compared to the aggregation of individual private investments stimulated by public investments, the original public investment may turn out to be small. For example, the original public investment in the Main Street streetscape in Greenville, SC, USA, was $1.1 million. That stimulated private investment of $10–20 million. Subsequent public investment of $140 million has stimulated private investment in the downtown of about $750 million in the last 10–15 years. Role of the National Main Street Center

The National Main Street Center (NMSC) was established in 1980 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. ITE Journal / November 2006

The purpose of NMSC was to foster the revitalization of traditional downtowns using a four-point approach: economic restructuring, promotion, design and organization. Soon into the program, there was a realization that downtown parking—or the lack thereof—was a major concern of downtown business owners and city officials. NMSC found that, in many situations, the cause of downtown deterioration was not the lack of parking but the lack of good management of the parking that was available. There are many other reasons for downtown deterioration—some having little to do with parking. However, the perception was so strong that parking had to be dealt with anyway. In response to the need for a better understanding of current parking practices, in 1991, NMSC circulated a survey to the Main Street organizations throughout the United States. Responses were received from more than 100 cities and towns. The information was combined with surveys from the author and other consultants and analyzed to serve as a basis of comparison of parking practices. Some general guidelines were developed using data obtained through the survey. For instance, the median number of parking spaces was 75 per 1,000 population in the city. Questions on parking meters, revenue per meter, parking fines, shared parking, enforcement procedures, time limits, meter fees and parking management were posed. The responses provided the basis for comparing individual parking programs to national norms. As a result of the information gleaned from the survey, NMSC has sponsored many workshops and papers on downtown parking issues and solutions for small communities (smaller than 100,000 population). In 1994, NMSC and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) published a handbook on parking entitled The Parking Handbook for Small Communities and prepared by the author. This publication was in response to the overwhelming interest by small communities in finding economical solutions to existing parking problems. As a result of this effort, there has been a nationwide interest in improving parking and parking management in small to midITE Journal / november 2006

sized downtowns. The approach to the problem was outlined in the handbook as “Six Steps to a Good Parking Program”: • Getting Organized • Gathering Data and Analyzing Demand • Increasing the Effectiveness of Existing Parking • Planning and Developing New Parking Facilities • Promoting the Parking System • Managing the Parking System More than 6,000 copies of the handbook have been printed and sold through NMSC and ITE. The Parking Handbook for Small Communities now is in its second printing. The author has used the handbook in more than 75 consulting assignments for downtowns across the United States. Challenges in Addressing Current Parking Issues

Parking in small cities is a “fractured” element with no single agency responsible. For instance, the enforcement of parking typically is done by the police department; signing and pavement marking may be done by public works; design and planning of new facilities may be done by the planning or development department; and fines and penalties may be the responsibility of the finance department. Under this organization, it is difficult to have a coordinated approach to the operation of parking as a system. Cities have used different management approaches. Several cities have used the “parking authority” approach. Morgantown, WV, USA, has a parking authority that centralizes planning, design, enforcement and finance in one agency. As a result, Morgantown has one of the best parking operations in the United States. The parking system in Rome, GA, USA, is under the supervision of the downtown director. This agency plan manages existing lots and new facilities, maintains a “parking bank” and supervises enforcement and collection of fees and parking lease payments. Yet another approach to the solution of fractured management is management by a Main Street organization. The Spirit of Anniston Main Street, a non-profit

downtown organization, manages the parking system, enforces on-street time limits and collects fees for the City. This agency has converted a $50,000 annual loss for parking management to a $50,000 annual gain. Knowing What You Have Another challenge is having relevant information on the existing parking system. This is a serious problem when one is trying to make decisions on the operation and management of the system. The Parking Handbook for Small Communities devotes an entire chapter to “Gathering Data and Analyzing Demand.” Some of the questions about parking operations include: • How many spaces do we have? • How are these spaces being used? • How can we enhance the efficiency of existing use? • How many spaces do we need? One of the most common complaints is employees parking on-street in (customer) spaces. Parking surveys can answer all of these questions. A parking survey in Pharr, TX, USA (population 50,000), found that long-term parking (longer than 2 hours) accounted for 14 percent of parkers but used 50 percent of the space-hours on street. In Macon, GA (population 140,000), 560 parkers per day in downtown exceeded the 2-hour on-street time limit. Many areas in downtowns have underutilized spaces. Off-street spaces typically are under-used even when downtown stakeholders say they have a parking problem. In Salisbury, NC, USA (population 25,000), on-street spaces were 66-percent occupied in the peak hour; off-street spaces were 46-percent occupied. However, people in Salisbury say they have a parking problem. In Aiken, SC, USA (population 15,000), the peak occupancy of all downtown parking was 59 percent and the peak occupancy of off-street spaces (all within 600 feet of Main Street) was 32 percent. Maximizing Existing Efficiency The third chapter in The Parking Handbook for Small Communities is “Increasing the Effectiveness of Existing Parking.” A number of strategies are recommended 31

Figure 1. Implementing parallel to angle parking in Greenville, SC, USA.

Figure 2. Converting parallel parking to angle parking in Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Figure 3. Combination and redesign of adjacent parking lots in Athol, MA, USA.

32

that have received extensive coverage in other reports. Changing parallel parking to angle parking has been covered in two ITE Journal articles and has been recommended extensively in many recent downtown parking plans.1,2 Figures 1 and 2 are examples of the implementation of parallel to angle parking in Greenville, SC (population 150,000) and Milwaukee, WI, USA (population 600,000). A study in San Marcos, TX (population 25,000), would add 120 on-street parking spaces by simply re-marking several streets from parallel to angle parking. The strategy that likely would increase the effectiveness of parking the most is establishing and enforcing on-street time limits. Parking plans in Lexington, NC and Martinsburg, WV, indicated increases in effective parking supply by 150 and 300 spaces, respectively, with increased enforcement. Shared parking and the combination and redesign of off-street parking lots is a third strategy outlined in the handbook. Figure 3 shows a lot in Athol, MA, USA, which, with redesign, increased parking by 50 spaces. The City leased the private parcels for $1 per year and redesigned, maintains and operates the free facility. There are many other techniques for increasing the effectiveness of parking, including meters, increasing fines and fees, enforcement and management of the facilities. With the increased activity in central business districts, there ultimately will be a need to increase the parking supply. “Planning and Developing New Parking Facilities” is the next step in the handbook. It involves estimating future demand, selecting a site and designing and financing the facility. The estimate of future demand is important to determine the amount of additional parking needed and the best location for a new facility. The Parking Handbook for Small Communities outlines a parking model that bases projections of future demand on future building use and square footage. The parking model has been applied in a number of cities including Lexington, KY, USA; Martinsburg; Orange, VA, USA; DePere, WI; San Marcos; Salisbury; Rock Hill, SC; Gainesville, GA; and many other locations. ITE Journal / November 2006

Table 1. Rating matrix: alternative parking sites in downtown Lexington, VA, USA. Roy Smith site

Old Fire Station site option 1

Old Fire Station site option 2

McCrum’s Lot site

National Wholesale site

3

1

5

5

5

4

Pedestrian access

3

5

4

4

5

3

Vehicular access

2

2

5

5

4

3

258 square feet per space






11

5

32

3

3

3

$1.8 million

$1.7 million

$3.1 million

$3.1 million

$1.75 million

$0.7 million

184

186

202

187

217

135

$9,750

$9,200

$15,300

$16,580

$8,100

$5,200

132

132

136

127

138

86

Preservation of historic structures

3

5

3

3

5

5

Acquisition difficulty

?

1

3

3

2

2

2

13

2

3

“Friday’s Alive” site

Proximity to parking demand

Rating factor/site

Layout efficiency (square feet per space) Land cost, site preparation Structure cost (000) (lump sum) Number of spaces provided Per space cost ($ per square foot) Net gain in parking supply

Economic opportunity

2

4

* Note: Rating scale: 5 = Excellent; 4 = Better; 3 = Good; 2 = Fair; 1 = Poor 1 Must relocate a major storm sewer at an estimated cost of $150,000. 2 Must demolish Old Fire Station at a cost of $____ 3 Provides opportunity to develop retail space on South Main Street

The second aspect of future parking is evaluating alternative locations and design approaches. An article listing criteria for location evaluation has been prepared and applied by the author in many locations.3 Table 1 illustrates elements of the evaluation matrix used in downtown Lexington, VA. Six alternative locations and facility configurations were evaluated. Many articles have been written on the design aspects of parking lots and decks. Perhaps one of the most definitive is “Parking” by Weant and Levinson.4 The design of parking facilities is well documented in the literature and will not be covered in this feature. The fifth step in the process is “Promoting the Parking Program.” The Parking Handbook for Small Communities includes sections on parking maps, parking articles and educational efforts. Figure 5 illustrates a typical parking map used in Stillwater, MN, USA. Another aspect of parking promotion is signing, which is of direct interest to traffic engineers. A section on wayfinding signing for parking as well as other downtown sites is included. Sign and graphic ITE Journal / november 2006

Figure 4. Typical parking map from Stillwater, MN, USA.

37

design samples are illustrated. Culpeper, VA, is a good example of a wayfinding system that has been implemented. In addition to The Parking Handbook for Small Communities, NMSC has sponsored a number of papers and presentations at the National Town Meeting on promotion. In fact, promotion is one of the points in the four-point program fostered by Main Street. Once a parking program is developed for a city, the concurrent step is the preparation of a management program to implement and monitor the recommendations. The section entitled “Managing the Parking System” identifies five different types of management organizations that range from the least formal (an ad hoc parking advisory committee) to a city department. The degree of complexity of the parking problem and the size and resources of the city are the major determinants of the type of management selected. In most cities of 50,000 or less, a parking advisory committee comprising representatives from city departments, Main Street organizations, merchant groups and other governmental entities will suffice as a management approach.

ParKInGInSmall CITIESISa“FraCTurED” ElEmEnTWITHno SInGlEaGEnCY rESPonSIblE.unDEr THISorGanIZaTIon,IT ISDIFFICulTToHavEa CoorDInaTEDaPProaCH ToTHEoPEraTIonoF ParKInGaSaSYSTEm.

oTher MaiN STreeT iNiTiaTiveS

More recently, the Main Street Program has been expanded to include community and neighborhood commercial districts in large urban areas. Termed “secondary districts,” Boston, MA; Baltimore, MD, USA; and Chicago, IL, USA, all have “urban programs” that were established and fostered by NMSC and respective city governments. These programs also address parking issues in the secondary districts similar to the original program in central business districts. The Federal Transportation Enforcement Program (SAFETEA), which has provided the construction funds to implement major physical improvements in downtowns, is having the most impact on parking and traffic improvements in downtowns. These improvements range from the rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities to streetscape improvements. Local Main Street organizations in many cities and towns have had a major influence on the planning and design of these fa38

cilities. Streetscape projects have afforded the opportunity to add parking on-street and to provide additional off-street parking for historic transportation structures such as railroad stations. Perhaps the best example of this impact is the rehabilitation and reuse of the B & O’s roundhouse in Martinsburg, which will become an exhibition and meeting facility. This will require additional parking that will further enhance the downtown parking supply. SuMMary

other transportation enhancement plans. It appears that the national, state and local Main Street organizations are in the “right place at the right time” to positively influence the direction of parking in central business districts. ■ References 1. Edwards, J.D. “Changing On-Street Parallel Parking to Angle Parking.” ITE Journal, Vol. 72, No. 2 (February 2002): 28–33. 2. Voigt, K.H. and J.S. Polenske. “Applying New Urbanism Street Principles in Downtown Milwaukee, WI, USA.” ITE Journal, Vol. 76, No. 5 (May 2006): 26–30. 3. Edwards, J.D. “Emerging Issues in Downtown Parking.” Unpublished paper presented at The National Town Meeting, April 2005. 4. Weant, R. and H.S. Levinson. “Parking.” Eno Foundation for Transportation, 1990.

johN d. edwardS, P.E., is principal of Transportation Consultant Inc. He was the founder (1962) and president of Traffic Planning Associates Inc. prior to its merger with the RBA Group. He has extensive experience in downtown planning, traffic engineering, transportation planning and the parking fields. He holds a bachelor of science in civil engineering from North Carolina University and a master of science in civil engineering from North Carolina State University. He was the recipient of the Herman J. Hoose Distinguished Service Award and the Marble Hensley Individual Activity Award. He also was ITE president in 1985. He was a recipient of the Burton W. Marsh Award for Outstanding Service and was named the 1996 Transportation Professional of the Year by the Georgia Section of ITE. He is an honorary member of ITE.

The impact of NMSC on downtown parking for small communities has many facets—the initiation of a nationwide survey of parking practices, the joint sponsorship of The Parking Handbook for Small Communities, the sponsorship of a series of seminars and papers at the National Town Meeting and the participation of local Main Street organizations in the development of streetscape and ITEJournal/novEmbEr2006