Planning for Low Parking/No Parking Development Presented 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 Alto Observed 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: 1.ITE-rates 2.Vehicle-ownership 3.URBEMIS 4.Surveys of comparable sites 14

Methods for Estimating Demand Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE): Parking Generation, 4 th 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

Parking Analysis: URBEMIS estimated ratios 17 Garden Village Apartments, Berkeley, CA

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites 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 Mode of current trip Vehicle availability

Parking Analysis: Travel Surveys of Comparable Local Sites 23 Parking location 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 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 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 Shively 1402 Third Avenue, Suite 1200 Seattle, WA (206)