july bart to livermore extension project … deir...parking management toolkit: strategies for bart...

JULY 2017 BART TO LIVERMORE EXTENSION PROJECT EIR

APPENDIX D: BART’S PARKING MANAGEMENT TOOLKIT

BART TO LIVERMORE EXTENSION PROJECT EIR JULY 2017 APPENDIX D: BART’S PARKING MANAGEMENT TOOLKIT

Strategies for Action in BART Station Areas

Prepared for: Bay Area Rapid Transit District

Prepared by: Richard Willson, Ph.D. AICP

October 2000

Parking Management Toolkit: Strategies for BART Station Areas, October 2000 1

How to Use ThisToolkitThis toolkit outlines ways to addressparking issues in the vicinity of the BARTstations. It is intended to help keystakeholders--community members, cityofficials, property owners, merchants andothers--as they develop parking strategiesthat support community goals.

The report provides a step-by-step processfor exploring parking issues and selectingparking management strategies. Thetoolkit includes worksheets that can beused to facilitate problem solving atcommunity meetings and workshops.

Parking management techniques work bestwhen they are tailored to local conditions.A "one-size-fits-all" approach is lesseffective than carrying out the specificplanning activities suggested in this toolkit.BART is issuing this report to supportcollaborative approaches to parkingmanagement.

About BART

The BART system consists of 95 miles oftrack and 39 stations in four Bay Areacounties. Now under construction, theBART San Francisco International AirportExtension will add 8.7 miles of newrevenue service track and four new stationsin San Mateo County.

BART connects residential areas with keyemployment, shopping and recreationaldestinations throughout the Bay Area. Atthe same time, BART provides a focus forcommunity development in the areassurrounding the stations. Parking forBART patrons and local uses is an integralpart of station area planning.

The BART system is changing, as are theland use patterns around stations. ForBART, ridership is up and the upcomingSFO Extension will provide new servicesand accessibility. For many localcommunities, station area developmentpresents opportunities for parkingmanagement. This toolkit provides aprocess for addressing these issues andideas about effective strategies.

Who to Call for MoreInformationBART is providing this document asresource to community members, cityofficials, property owners, merchants andothers. The primary responsibility foraddressing local parking regulations lieswith the respective cities. They adopt,implement and enforce on-street parkingregulations, set policies for city-owned off-street parking, and control the amount ofparking that private developers mustprovide. However, property owners,merchants, employers and others generallycontrol the use of off-street parking.Finally, BART manages the parking in itsown station facilities.

If you wish to discuss station area parkingissues in your city, you should call yourcity staff, usually in the Planning orEngineering department.

For BART-specific questions call PeterAlbert, Station Area Planning Manager, at(510) 287-4702.


IntroductionParking management involves the use ofprograms and policies that affect the use,price and availability of parking. Parkingmanagement ranges from simple timelimits to sophisticated computer-basedsystems that direct traffic flow to availableparking. Nationwide, communities areusing parking management to support theirtransportation, environmental andcommunity development objectives.

BART provides over 40,000 parkingspaces throughout the region. Althoughmore than half of BART riders in the AMpeak (57 percent) reach stations by travelmodes that do not involve parking, parkingis still an important part of BART service.

Recent trends call for a closer look atstation area parking. For BART, policyissues related to transit-orienteddevelopment, environmental quality andcustomer service are important strategicdirections. Furthermore, BART ridershipis increasing and new BART service--theSFO Extension--will open soon. Theseservice additions will affect station areasthroughout the region. For new stations,there will be easy connections to theregion, a new community focus, andcommunity development opportunities.Existing station areas may be used moreintensively as their transportation and landuse focus increases. Parking management

can ensure that the available parking isused in an efficient manner in keeping withthe goals of BART and the community.

BART recently addressed parking andother access issues with the adoption of anew BART Access Management andImprovement Policy Framework. Itprovides guidance on the strategies BARTmay consider on a system- and station-specific basis. With respect to parking, thepolicy directs BART to reconsider existingparking management strategies and createnew strategies that make station areasfunctional, accessible and attractive.

For local communities, BART station areasare important elements of their communitydevelopment and economic developmentplans. In addition, station areas play a partin livable community and traffic mitigationobjectives.

Local communities may initiate their ownreviews of on- and off-street parking policyand programs in station areas for a varietyof reasons. This toolkit is provided tosupport those efforts.

Sometimes, a strategy that phases inparking programs can help localstakeholders adjust to a new approach andprovide opportunities for refinements.Some policies may already be in place andworking well. If change is expected,however, development of a preliminary

consensus may be needed before thatchange occurs, with implementation keyedto actual changes. Still other long-termstrategies may be discussed in a conceptualway but not required until a station areareaches a certain maturity.

Many entities control parking. BART isresponsible for BART parking at BARTstations. Local jurisdictions areresponsible for managing on-street andmunicipal off-street parking, settingdevelopment standards for privatedevelopment, and facilitating traffic flow.Finally, property owners, employers andmerchants are responsible for managingtheir own private parking.

Many people (e.g., neighbors, businesses,and commuters) have a stake in station-area parking, and their interests andperspectives may vary quite considerably.Studies have shown that when the variousstakeholders work together they canachieve “win-win” parking solutions thatpromote community development andcommunity livability. With the release ofthis toolkit, it is BART's hope to encouragesuch collaborative solutions.


The ParkingManagement ToolkitThis toolkit provides ideas and suggestionson how to analyze and respond to parkingissues in BART station areas. It includesdiagrams and checklists to assiststakeholders in finding mutually beneficialsolutions to parking issues.

Who should undertake such a study? Anystakeholder could initiate a station areaparking study, but the best approach iscollaboration between BART, the city andrelevant stakeholders. This way, theanalysis is more informed and conclusionscan respond to the issues of the primarystakeholders.

The first step is to understand the parkingissues as outlined in Figure 1: The What-When-Where-Who-Why of ParkingManagement. This modification of theclassic reporter's approach to writing anewspaper story is useful forunderstanding parking issues. Goodparking strategies depend on a solidunderstanding of existing conditions.

The second step is to consider alternativestrategies. Tables 1 and 2 (pages 8 and 13,respectively) identify possible strategies,addressing on-street and off-street parking,respectively. Appendix A includes blank

versions of these figures and tables for usein workshop activities.

The third step is to design and implementprograms. The advice provided in thissection emphasizes the importance ofgaining support from all stakeholders andestablishing the mechanisms to implementthe strategy.

Step 1: Understand theParking IssuesDeveloping effective parking strategiesdepends on a complete understanding ofthe nature of the parking issues at hand.This is particularly important in stationareas because there are many groups ofpeople using the area's parking resources--BART riders, local residents, shoppers,workers and others--and the patterns ofparking use by each group may bedifferent.

Detailed information about existingconditions is required if the parking studyis to sort out the priorities to be given toeach parking user group.

Faulty conclusions about parking strategiescan be reached if the causes of a parkingproblem are not fully understood. Anexample is when a decision is made tobuild additional parking when in fact the

problem stems from the inconvenience ofusing existing parking. Alternatively, aparking strategy could inadvertentlydisadvantage one group of parkers whiletrying to solve the problems of anothergroup. For example, unrestricted parkingin residential areas provides flexibility forall, but can be problematic if too manyparkers from outside the neighborhood useon-street parking, reducing parkingavailability for residents and their guests.

The following paragraphs outline in greaterdetail what is meant by the what-when-where-who-why framework.

What? What is the issue?Parking issues usually concern theavailability, price, convenienceand/or safety of parking. Otherpossible issues include thepredictability of space availability andtraffic congestion issues related to driverssearching for parking spaces. Often, thebottom line for parkers is that the spacethey want is not available when they wantit (or at a price they are willing to pay).

The "what" question is important becausethe definition of the problem is closely tiedto the type of strategies selected. It is notunusual to start with one issue but arrive ata series of other issues after more detailedanalysis. For example, when shoppershave difficulty finding parking they mayassume that there are not enough


spaces, when in fact the issue is theturnover rate of the most convenient spaces(e.g., how many cars use each space perday).

When? When does the problemoccur? Parking may have aparticular pattern of usethroughout the day, among days of theweek, or even among different seasons.For example, an issue may be related to theholiday shopping period (for merchants),or weekday lunch periods (for restaurants),throughout the day (for workers), or in theevening (for movie theaters). The shorterthe duration of a parking problem, thegreater the possibility that some sort ofshared parking arrangement can bedeveloped. Nearby uses may have spacesavailable when another use has a shortage.

Where? Where is theparking issue occurring?The geographic locationand the extent of the areaaffected will affect thetype of strategies that maybe used. Does the issueaffect a single block, acommercial district, aneighborhood, or the entire community?Are there concerns about the impact of acommercial area on a residential area, orvisa versa? It is a good practice to map thearea affected by the parking issue. Theanswers to the "where" questions

determine the geographic extent of policiesand possible effects at the boundary of thearea affected by a new policy.

Who? Who is using parking in away that is creating impacts?Who is affected by the newparking use patterns? The needsof different users of parking must beunderstood, as should the way in whichdifferent uses affect each other's access toparking. People who use station areaparking include the residents of the stationarea, those who work in the station area,visitors to local businesses, shoppers, andtransit riders. Among transit riders, usersinclude those who park at stations for all-day work trips, shorter mid-day trips, andwhen the SFO Extension opens, possiblyairport travelers using BART to access theSFO airport.

A comprehensive parking strategy shouldaddress and set priorities for each usergroup. A consensus should be built amongthose who own or control parking aboutthe entitlement of each group to useparking, taking into account their historicalclaim to the parking, broader city goals,willingness to pay, and how much parkingeach group owns. Such a discussionshould include consideration of howalternative transportation modes could beused to shift parking demandcharacteristics. For example, how wouldshifting BART access modes to bus transit

affect parking for patrons of local merchantparking? Similarly, how can rideshareprograms for station area employees freeup spaces for shoppers?

Why? Why has the issueemerged and why now? Has therebeen growth in business activitythat has brought more visitors tothe area? Has residentialpopulation and automobile ownershipgrowth outpaced parking supply? Has thegrowth in BART patronage increasedparking by transit riders? Have parkingissues emerged simply because of a lack ofinformation or a lack of coordinationbetween property owners and activities?The answers to the "why" questions pointto the type of responses that areappropriate and who should be responsiblefor solving them.

How to Answer These Questions

The framework presented in Figure 1 is atool to assist stakeholders in analyzingparking issues. Answering these questionsrequires local research. Depending onlocal circumstances, a consortium ofstation area businesses, public agencies andresident groups could be formed to sponsorthese studies. A variety of studytechniques can provide the neededinformation:


1) Parking utilization studies. Suchsurveys provide a baseline of theconditions, including a map that shows thepercentage of spaces occupied at differenttimes of the day. They can answerquestions about where shortages orsurpluses exist, highlight shared parkingopportunities and provided a basis againstwhich change can be assessed. Asappropriate, they should also surveyparking charges and rates, the presence ofvalidation systems and other parkingcontrol measures in place.

2) Field studies of parking conditions,which can include observation of parkingpatterns, parking counts, license platesurveys, or duration surveys over multipletime periods.

3) Surveys of parkers, addressing parkingpurposes, trip origin, length of time parked,and attitudes about parking facilities. Suchsurveys could also probe for reasons whyparkers do not use other access modes suchas bus transit, walking, biking, etc.

4) Studies of comparable station areas.These studies can reveal strategies thathave been effective in similar situations.

Parking utilization surveys are most usefulin addressing the what, when and wherequestions. Field studies, parking surveysand interviews can address the who andwhy questions.

In answering these questions, one needs tounderstand trends and likely future eventsthat might change the context for stationarea parking policy. That trend analysis isneeded for the station area and the broaderregional context.

An important question in addressingparking issues is determining the degree ofresponsibility of different land uses foraccommodating parking demand. Forexample, if BART commences operationsat a new station and a new developmentopens at the same time, it is important todistinguish between the impact of each ofthose activities. Comparing thoseconditions to the pre-BART conditions is agood way of measuring impacts.

Finally, there must be a discussion and aconsensus formed on the broadercommunity goals that parking programsmust serve. For example, somecommunities might make automobilemobility their priority, while others mightshift their policies to promote livablecommunities that do not rely on theautomobile. These basic directionsstrongly influence which alternativeprograms would be chosen, particularlywith regard to the question of whether newparking is to be added in response todemand.

Notes:


Step 2: ConsiderAlternative StrategiesStrategy checklists have been developedfor on-street parking (Table 1) and off-street parking (Table 2). A series ofcommon parking issues is listed on thevertical axis. These issues are typical ofwhat might result from a "what-when-where-who-why" analysis. The horizontalaxis lists various strategies for parkingmanagement. The checks in the matrixrepresent strategies that are worthy ofinvestigation for each parking issue.

On-Street ParkingOn-street parking regulation isunder the purview of each city.A city can address parking issuesin establishing and enforcingregulations, time limits and parking meterrates. Modification of on-street parkingregulations is most effective when done incoordination with changes in policies foroff-street facilities.

Issues

The following explains four typical on-street parking issues that are summarizedin Table 1. They include:

1. Residents and/or their guests cannot findon-street parking spaces in theirneighborhood. If residents complain of

insufficient parking, it is important tomeasure parking utilization at varioustimes and days of the week. Residentialneighborhoods may lack available on-streetparking for a number of reasons. Forexample, shortages can exist if theresidential population and automobileownership exceed levels anticipated inlocal off-street parking regulations.Similarly, if neighborhoods are locatednear other uses that have high parkingdemand, such as commercial areas ortransit stations, then those seeking parkingmay be using neighborhood parkingresources. Finding the cause of theproblem has a bearing on the type ofstrategy to be implemented.

Sometimes residents have plenty ofneighborhood parking but do not wantothers to use it. Discussions can exploreprograms that provide benefits tocommunities that share their on-streetparking, such as returning parkingrevenues to neighborhood improvementprojects.

2. Convenient spaces are not available toshoppers in commercial areas. This isoften an issue because the desirable spacesare not used productively. On-streetspaces are often shoppers' first choice forparking; each of these spaces can servemany short-term patrons during the day.

Understanding the reason for the lack ofavailability is important. For example, if

an employee parks all-day in a desirablespace, then many potential customers areprevented from using that space.Similarly, if parkers from adjacent areas"invade" commercial parking there couldbe shortages for shoppers.

3. It is difficult to find on-street parkinganywhere in the station area. If there is alack of available on-street parking in theentire station area, it suggests an imbalancebetween activity levels. Somecommunities may have removed on-streetparking to enable greater through trafficflow, address safety concerns or achieveaesthetic goals, making off-street parkinginsufficient. Alternatively, the lack of on-street spaces could be connected to ashortage of off-street parking or a problemregarding the management of on-streetparking, e.g., on-street parking is beingused for long-term parking and vehiclestorage.

The approach taken to this situationdepends on the overall character that isappropriate for the station area--in asuburban context there may be an effort toaccommodate parking demand, while in anurban context the total demand would notbe supplied because of land constraints,urban design priorities and transit andpedestrian objectives. But even insuburban areas, the total demand might notbe supplied because of a community visionto support public transit and reduceautomobile use for local trips.


4. Traffic congestion problems occur asdrivers search for on-street parkingspaces. For example, if drivers are circlingfor extended periods of time or waiting forspaces to become available they createadditional traffic congestion. In certainlocations, the vehicular maneuvering whileparking can be also an impediment totraffic flow.

Strategies

The horizontal axis of Table 1 shows avariety of on-street parking strategies thataddress the issues described above. Theyinclude:

�� Permit parking programs. Permitparking programs create a system whereall-day or overnight parking is reserved forresidents of some other designated group.These programs are used in many BayArea communities. They are appropriatewhen parking demand from one land useaffects the parking provided for another.

A permit parking program, for example,can prevent BART patrons from parking inresidential neighborhoods around a station.Under a permit parking system, localresidents and their guests would be able touse on-street parking, but cars parked formore than a defined number of hourswithout permits would be cited. AppendixB provides details on the implementationof permit parking districts. Most often, the

permit parking district is established by thecity at the request of a local neighborhood.

Permit parking can also be applied to on-street parking in commercial districtsaround stations. The concept providesunrestricted access to parking for residents(or employees) who have business in aparking district. Those without permitswould be ticketed and/or towed if theyparked longer than the permitted time. Thedesign of permit programs should considerimplementation costs for the city.

� � Enforcement of on-street parking regulations.

New enforcementprograms can increase parking availabilityif regulations have not been enforced, ornot consistently enforced. If a city is aboutto more stringently enforce time limits,however, sufficient notice should beprovided to those who might be ticketed.Warnings, tickets, booting vehicles andtowing can increase compliance. Thepublic will support enforcement if it isconsistently applied and tied to benefitssuch as increasing the availability ofconvenient spaces.

� � Merchant programs.

Merchants can provide programs to reduceparking demand, such as incentives forstore employees to use alternative travelmodes. If employees drive and park,

merchant programs can encourage them touse underutilized off-street parkingfacilities.

�� Time limits and time-based userestrictions. Time limits are perhaps thesimplest way to control the uses of on-street parking facilities. For example,parking use is effectively limited tocustomers by setting a two-hour limit incommercial areas. Even a four-hour timelimit in a commercial area woulddiscourage workers from using thosespaces (whether riding BART or workinglocally). The time limit for spaces can beadjusted to reflect the particular purposefor the parking, ranging from a drop-off tolonger-term parking. These time limits canbe varied according to the convenience ofthe spaces to direct all-day parkers tounderutilized spaces. If time limits arecombined with parking charges, state-of-the-art parking meter systems offerflexibility in varying time limits andprovide convenience to the parker.

Time-based parking restrictions prohibitparking for certain periods to preserveroadway capacity during peak commutingperiods and to save parking resources forparticular user groups. For example, earlymorning parking prohibitions reserveparking resources for mid-day parkers.


�� Urban design/signage/traffic calming.Urban design features can make moredistant on-street parking spaces known tocommuters and enhance pedestrianconnections to those spaces. Good signagecan direct parkers quickly and efficiently toavailable spaces. Sometimes the solutionis as simple as providing information aboutspace location and availability. Trafficcalming, which includes strategies thatmoderate traffic speeds in order to improvethe pedestrian environment, can alsosupport parking management strategies.Traffic calming makes the pedestrianenvironment safer and more pleasant andincreases parkers' willingness to walk frommore distant parking spaces. Or, for thoseliving or working nearby a station animproved pedestrian environment mightreduce their use of a car to access BART.

�� Assignment of parking location.This strategy assigns particular parkingusers to specific locations to increase theefficiency with which spaces are used. Forexample, employer policy could requireall-day parkers to parking in remotefacilities to free up close-in on-streetparking. Alternatively, the mostconvenient spaces could be devoted to pickup and drop off functions.

� � Charges for on-street parking. Asystem of differentiated parking meterrates is a key element in encouragingdrivers to use parking efficiently, by

directing long-term parking to lessconvenient spaces and gaining the mostproductivity from the most attractive on-street spaces. There are many alternativesfor collecting on-street parking charges,ranging from traditional parking meters, tocentralized parking machines, to debit cardsystems. Multi-space parking meters canbe programmed to implement differentparking charges by day of the week. Theycan also implement charges thatdifferentiate between short- and long-termuse, time of day, and the location of aparticular parking space.

If implemented for on- and off-streetfacilities, parking charges reduce auto useand increase transit and pedestrian access.They provide more effective capacity froma given number of spaces because theyencourage quicker turnover of spaces andincrease the use of alternative modes ofaccess (e.g., transit or carpool).

Parking charges make space availabilitymore predictable for shoppers. The ratescan be set so that there are always spacesavailable. Finally, parking charges create arevenue stream that can fund new parkingor area improvements. Any parking chargesystem can include validation programsthat reduce or eliminate parking chargesfor preferred user groups, such as shoppers.

Some residential areas might have excesson street parking, but prohibit non-residents from using it because no benefits

flow back to the community from lettingothers use that parking. The parkingbenefit district concept is setting up asystem in which residents parking free(using some type of residential permitsystem) but non residents would becharged the market price for parking. Therevenues would be used for additionalpublic services in the neighborhood wherethe revenue was collected, such as streetcleaning, tree maintenance, sidewalkmaintenance, or other improvements. Theincentive of these improvements mightcause neighborhoods to open up new on-street supply to other users.

� � Parking benefit districts for on-streetparking. This concept is a variation of anon-street parking charge scheme forresidential areas. Instead of prohibitingnon-resident parking in neighborhoods, asoccurs with a residential permit parkingprogram, non resident parking could beallowed with an appropriate parkingcharge. The charge could be collected withmeters, payboxes or monthly passes.Revenues from the charge would flow backto the community, for neighborhood ortransportation improvements. Someneighborhoods might prefer toallow non-resident parking if itbenefited local parks, landscapingor transportation facilities.


� � Increasing on-street parking supplythrough restriping/redesigning spaces.Additional curbside areas can be striped foron-street parking, including angle parking,if right-of-way and traffic conditions allow.In addition, on-street parking has a trafficcalming effect and improves the pedestrianenvironment, by physically protectingpedestrians from moving traffic. Cityofficials can also review the size of on-street parking spaces to see if their sizecould be reduced. Spaces do not have tobe individually marked in locations thatuse central parking machines, enabling agreater density of parked cars. However,there is a tradeoff between smaller parkingspaces and the traffic impact of carsmaneuvering into parking spaces.

� � Development of off-street parkingfacilities. If existing parking facilities arebeing efficiently used (e.g., employees areparking in off-street lots and on-streetspaces turn over frequently), then citiesand property owners may consider addingoff-street parking. Off-street parking cantake the pressure off on-street supplies. Ofcourse, provision of additional parkingmust take into account other potentialcommunity goals, such as reducing trafficcongestion and auto dependency,improving environmental quality, andachieving livable communities.

� � Initiate new or enhanced alternativesto driving. This toolkit focuses on parkingmanagement strategies, not the largergroup of transportation demandmanagement measures. However, any on-street parking supply issue can beaddressed by changing parking demandthrough incentives that convince parkers touse other modes, whether that be newshuttle bus services, bicycle lockers, orfinancial incentives. Furthermore,strategies that provide a mix of land uses inan area may reduce automobile ownershipand use.

Notes:


Off-Street ParkingOff-street parking regulations and policyare under the purview of both public andprivate entities. Publicly owned facilitiesare subject to policies established by thegovernment agency with responsibility,i.e., the city, BART or others. However,most off-street parking is owned andoperated by private property owners. Inthose instances, the property owner or thetenant establishes policies for the use of thefacilities based on the ownership or leasearrangements. The actual operation ofmuch off-street parking is contracted toparking management companies.

The connection between public and privateparking entities is established in theminimum parking requirements containedin the city's zoning ordinance. Theserequirements compel developers to providea certain amount of parking when theybuild a project. Parking supply is alsoinfluenced by lender requirements andstandard development practices. However,minimum parking requirements are notaddressed here because parkingrequirements are primarily an issue for newdevelopment, whereas the focus of thistoolkit is managing existing parking.

Issues

Table 2 summarizes a series of off-streetparking issues that are elaborated furtherbelow:

1. Convenient spaces are not available toshoppers in commercial areas. This maybe an issue if spaces are not usedproductively. For example, if an employeeparks all-day in a desirable off-street space,many potential customers are preventedfrom using that space. Similarly, theremay be parking shortages for shoppers oremployees if parkers from adjacent areas"invade" free, uncontrolled commercial orworkplace parking.

2. Parking lots and structures are usuallyfull. When the off-street parking supply isless than the demand, uses compete forparking on a first-come, first-served basis.This could occur when a new land use hasincreased the parking demand without acommensurate increase in parking supply,or a new tenant has a high employeedensity or a high level of visitors. Whenthese conditions exists, market prices forparking generally emerge to ration thescarce parking resource, and/or parkingspills over to on-street and other off-streetparking.

3. Parking patterns are uneven--some lotsare full and others underused. Uneven useof parking may relate to the access policiesof the owners of those facilities,differences in attractiveness, perceptions ofsafety, temporary factors relating to theoccupancy of the buildings, and so on.The opportunity presented by such anuneven distribution is policies that shift

parking location to change the perceivedavailability of parking.

4. Parking "poaching" is occurring--parkers from one use occupy parkingprovided for another use. Parkingpoaching can occur when off-street parkingdoes not have regulations, enforcementprograms or parking access control.Examples of poaching includecircumstances where employees park inspaces provided for retail uses or whereBART transit riders park in spacesprovided for employees.

5. Cars are parked for long periods oftime, thereby excluding daily parkers.Cars parked for more than 24 hours takeaway spaces from more productive short-term uses. In this instance, "productive" ismeasured in terms of length of timeparked.

Strategies

Table 2 also summarizes potentialresponses to off-street parking issues. Theparagraphs that follow describe them ingreater detail:

� � Access control. A wide variety ofdevices are available to control the use ofoff-street parking. The following describessome examples, ranging from simple tomore complex systems:


1) For retail locations, property ownerscan:

• post signs that limit who can use theparking facility and for what purposes.Existing security personnel givewarnings, post notices, and ifnecessary arrange for towing. Closedcircuit television and intelligenttransportation systems (ITS) cansupport enforcement activities.

• chain off parking entrances until storesopen in the later morning period. Thisprevents most journey-to-work transitcommuters from poaching parking.

• use gate arm access controls (withvalidation systems for customers if freeparking is provided). Such a systemprevents non-shoppers from using thefacility entirely or charges them aprice.

2) For worksites, employees can:

• establish a hang tag or sticker systemfor employee parking. Existingsecurity personnel give warnings, postnotices, and if necessary arrange fortowing.

• use a validation system that ensuresthat parkers are those intended to usefacility. For example, workers entertheir parking space number on avalidation machine within theirworkplace.

• use gate arm access controls andaccess card systems for employees.Such a system prevents non-employeesfrom using the facility entirely, oralternatively charges them for parking.

� � Enforcement. Simple information andenforcement programs can be surprisinglyeffective. Such regulations include timelimits or restrictions on who can use theparking. Security and parking controlofficers can assist with enforcement.

� � Employer programs. Employers canprovide incentives for employees to userideshare, transit, or non-automobile travelmodes. Incentives include use ofCommuter Choice tax provisions,guaranteed ride home programs, providingvanpool start up costs, etc. Rideshareprograms can also provide information onalternative travel modes and ridematchingassistance. All these programs reduce thenumber of cars driven to work for eachemployee, thereby lowering parkingdemand. Employers can also createprograms that relocate employee parking toremote parking locations that have excesscapacity, e.g., employees of a shoppingmall during the holiday peak shoppingperiod.

� � Time limits and time-based userestrictions. Time limits are a simple wayto control the use of off-street parkingfacilities. The time limit for spaces can beadjusted to reflect the particular purpose

for the parking. These time limits can beestablished on a differential basis to directall-day parkers to underutilized spaces(e.g., the top levels of a parking structure).

Time-based use restrictions can prohibitparking for certain periods to reserveparking resources for a user group. Forexample, early morning parkingprohibitions reserve parking resources formid-day parkers.

� � Signage/ITS/Design. Good signagedirects parkers quickly and efficiently toavailable spaces. In the case of parkingstructures, the challenge is to get the upperstories of parking structure occupied.Sometimes the problem is as simple asproviding information. IntelligentTransportation Systems (ITS) offersophisticated ways of guiding drivers toavailable parking. Finally, parkingstructures designed with good passivesafety and logical circulation are morelikely to be fully used than those thatappear unsafe.

� � Shared parking. If the time of peakparking demand varies among uses, sharedparking strategies can use existing parkingwith greater efficiency. Shared parkingreduces the need to add more parking byrecognizing that each land use has adifferent peak parking utilization period. Ifthose peak periods do not overlap, then atleast a portion of the parking facility can beshared. For example, an office building


has low parking demand in the evening,which is the peak demand period for arestaurant. These two uses could share aportion of the parking.

Shared parking is normally thought of foran individual mixed-use site. But uses onseparate sites can share parking. Forexample, BART has an arrangement at theColma station where BART users use aportion of a bowling alley's parking duringthe day. The concept can be furtherexpanded to include the sharing of parkingon a station area basis. Shared parkingreduces the cost of development andincreases convenience for parkers.

Shared parking is normally used as astrategy for new development, but existinguses can develop shared parkingarrangements with nearby property owners.Such arrangements can be privatelyinitiated and implemented or carried out incooperation with a city.

Although parking requirements for newdevelopment are not a focus of this toolkit,the use of in-lieu programs (where adeveloper makes a cash payment instead ofproviding a parking space) can facilitateshared parking concepts.

� � Parking cash-out. Employers cancash-out parking charges. Under a parkingcash-out program, the employer offersworkers the cash value of the cost of theparking space that is provided. Many

employees choose to trade their parkingspace for the cash and commute to workusing another travel mode. The cash outoffer costs the employer nothing because itreduces expenditures on employee parking.

� � Parking charges. Research showsthat parking charges at workplaces are themost effective tool for encouragingtravelers to use efficient travel modes.Parking charges increase the level of transituse and ridesharing. Greater transit useand ridesharing, in turn, reduces parkingdemand.

Parking charges at commercial locationsincrease the rate at which parking spacesturn over. This increases the effectivecapacity of a fixed number of parkingspaces.

� � Provide more off-street parking.Increasing efficiency through restriping,stacked parking, and attended parkingprovides more off street parking spaces peracre. However, if lower cost parkingmanagement options have beenimplemented and there are still shortagesof parking, consideration may be given toconstructing additional off-street parking.

Consideration of this strategy depends onthe broader goals of the city concerningtraffic congestion and auto dependency,improving environmental quality, andachieving livablecommunities.

If adding parking is consistent withcommunity goals and there is availableroadway capacity to serve the parkingfacility, existing surface parking lots canbe converted to higher intensity uses bydecking and the construction of multi-storystructures. However, substantial parkingdemand and a high willingness to pay mustbe present to generate enough revenues tocover the costs of providing additionalparking.

� � Initiate new or enhanced alternativesto driving. This toolkit focuses on parkingmanagement strategies, not the largergroup of transportation demandmanagement measures. However, any off-street parking supply issue can beaddressed by changing parking demandthrough incentives that convince parkers touse other modes, whether that be newshuttle bus services, bicycle lockers,financial incentives. Furthermore,strategies that provide a mix of land uses inan area may reduce automobile ownershipand use.


Step 3: Design andImplement ParkingProgramsParking is important to many members of acommunity. It affects the conveniencewith which they use the transportationsystem, the cost of travel and feelings theyhave about their neighborhoods andcommunities. Because parking is soimportant to many different people,parking policy should be developed andimplemented in a collaborative manner. Inaddition, it should support broadercommunity objectives laid out incommunity visions, general plans, specificplans, redevelopment strategies and otherinitiatives.

Since parking is under the control of manystakeholders--the city, private propertyowners, merchants and employers--it isimportant to involve key stakeholders andfind policies that can help each groupachieve their goals. Stakeholders includethose who own or control parking andcommunity members who are affected byparking policies.

Many groups can take the lead in bringingstakeholders together. The city couldconvene such an effort, but equally could aneighborhood group or merchant group.

Many Bay Area cities have implementedparking management strategies, so there isa substantial body of experience that canbe shared. Appendix C lists some of theapproaches used in BART station areas.

The key steps in designing andimplementing a parking program are asfollows:

1) Collect background information on theissue and complete the "what-when-where-who-why" analysis (see Step 1, page 3).Consult existing parking utilization studiesand conduct any field studies that arerequired. Assemble relevant policystatements from general plans and othercity policies.

2) Review alternative strategies fromTables 1 and 2 (see Step 2, page 7).Assess the most suitable approaches, basedon the strengths and weaknesses of eachapproach and their respective fit with localconditions and local policy. Develop newapproaches if those listed do not respond tolocal conditions.

One the most significant questions thatmust be answered is whether parkingissues will be addressed by managingexisting supplies (in combination, perhaps,with incentives for alternative travelmodes) or whether additions to parkingwill be considered. The answer to thisquestion rests, in turn, with the

community's general plan policies,environmental policies, resources availablefor new programs and its philosophy aboutsustainability, quality of life and otherquestions.

Once the general direction of parkingpolicy is established, more specific criteriacan be developed, including:

• effectiveness in addressing the parkingproblem,

• community acceptability,• compatibility with local plans,• cost and financing feasibility,• time frame for implementation, and• implications for congestion and air

quality.

3) Create a process to identify and workwith stakeholders. Develop formal andinformal processes to discuss the issue, thepotential approaches and implementationissues. Identify local supporters of theprocess who can explain the issues to thecommunity.

4) Take alternative approaches to thecommunity to gain further feedback. Buildconsensus on the preferred approaches.

5) Develop implementation plan(s),including estimates of costs and revenuesassociated with the strategies. For projectswhere there is joint responsibility for theproblem, develop agreements on cost


sharing and implementation responsibility.Present the plan to the appropriate body orbodies for adoption and implementation.

Secure funding and assign organizationalresponsibility for carrying out programs.Create institutional structures (e.g., parkingauthorities, oversight bodies) and hire orassign staff to work on the project.

Develop marketing and public informationprograms to inform residents, the businesscommunity and commuters of the changesthat are planned.

6) Implement the strategy andmonitor its success,considering conditions beforeand after its implementation.Make adjustments after the initial period ofimplementation to make sure that theprograms are working as intended.

Notes:


Parking ResourcesBarr, M. (1997) Downtown Parking MadeEasy. New York: Downtown Research andDevelopment Center.

Chrest, A, M. Smith, S. Bhuyan (1996) ParkingStructures. New York: Chapman and Hall.

Federal Highway Administration (1981)Parking Management Tactics, Volume IIIAReference Guide. Washington D.C.: USDepartment of Transportation.

Kodama, M., R. Willson and W. Francis (1996)Using Demand-Based Parking Strategies toMeet Community Goals. Los Angeles: MobileSource Reduction Committee.

ITS International (1997) “Parking Control.” InITS International. November/December 1997,pp. 35-36.

Shoup, D. (1997) Cashing in on Curb Parking.Access. pp. 20-26.

Shoup, D. (1999) "In Lieu of RequiredParking." Journal of Planning Education andResearch. 18: 307-320.

Weant, R, and H. Levinson (1990) Parking.Westport, Connecticut: Eno Foundation forTransportation.

Willson, R. (1997) "Parking Pricing WithoutTears: Trip Reduction Programs."Transportation Quarterly, 51: 79-90.

Willson, R. (2000) "Reading between theRegulations: Parking Requirements, Planners'Perspectives, and Transit." Journal of PublicTransit. 3: 111-128.

Wright, James (1996) “ITS Projects in St. Paul:DIVERT and Advanced Parking InformationSystem.” In ITE Journal. September 1996, pp.33-34.


Appendix A:WorksheetsThe blank worksheets that follow are foruse in community meetings andworkshops. Publicofficials and communitymembers can exploreissues and strategies byfilling the appropriateboxes.

The worksheets can be used in a number ofways. They can be filled out byindividuals and then tallied for the group toindicate areas of commonality.Alternatively, small groups can discuss theissues raised in the worksheets and developa consensus around the issues andstrategies.

The worksheets include the following:

• The What-When-Where-Who-Why ofParking Management

• On-Street Parking Issues andResponses

• Off-Street Parking Issues andResponses

Notes:


Appendix B: PermitParking ProgramsResidential parking permit parkingprograms are designed to providereasonably available and convenient on-street parking for residents when parkingdemand from nearby uses would otherwiseoccupy that parking. Cities generallyestablish permit parking districts that aredesignated on a map and for which specificparking regulations apply. Many of thecommunities around BART stations haveimplemented residential permit parkingprograms (See Appendix C)

Permit parking districts regulate timeaspects of parking for non-residents. Forexample, a district may restrict parking fornon-residents to 2 hours, allowing forvisitors but not all-day parking. Residentsof the district are entitled to a permit thatreleases them from the particular parkingrestrictions. Residents may also requestguest permits for visitors. Residents mustprovide proof of residency, complete anapplication, and in most cases pay a smallfee, which pays for the administrative costsof operating the program. The ordinanceestablishing such a program should includeprovisions for appeals.

Cities usually set thresholds for thecreation of a permit parking programs. Forexample, the establishment of a program

could require a petition signed by a certainpercentage of residents residing within thezone, or could be based on the initiative ofthe city. Most cities then require a studyby the City traffic engineer or planner,followed by a recommendation to the CityCouncil.

Many programs include policies regardingthe number of parking permits to be issuedto guests. The rules prohibit the sale, rentor lease of any permit to any otherindividual. Generally, permits are nottransferable between areas.

In the case of BART, it would be prudentto involve the community in the planningprocess before BART SFO Extensionbegins revenue service. Permit parking is asubstantial change from normal parkingpolicies, so community buy-in is a must.

Effective enforcement and appropriatefines must accompany permit parkingprograms. That is a key to maintaining thecredibility of the program. Police supportis a must.

Finally, the parking district must be sizedso that spillover effects on otherneighborhoods are limited. Too small anarea will displace parkers. Too large anarea will undermine the need for theprogram. Threshold criteria should beestablished for determining areas that areeligible.

Notes:


Appendix C: Bay AreaExperience withTransit-Related ParkingManagementThe table on the following pagesummarizes the experience of a series ofBART and Caltrain station areas in the BayArea where parking management has beenan issue, as compiled by BART staff.These stations tend to be those with highparking demand. Since parking policiesare subject to change, please contact therelevant local jurisdiction for the mostcurrent information.

The following are some specific examplesof innovative parking programs in the BayArea:

• The City of Lafayette has developed aprogram to charge BART users foravailable on-street parking on threestreets in the vicinity of the stations.Parking on the two streets closest tothe station is $3 per day. Signsindicate the restrictions on parking.Each space is numbered and paymentboxes are provided at the entrance tothe station. These are spaces that werenot previously used by residents. Theprogram benefits BART riders and

provides about $35,000 in revenue tothe city.

• Private off-street lots are providingparking for BART users on a paidbasis in the West Oakland and ElCerrito del Norte stations. BARTpatrons pay up to $5 per day for thisparking.

• Shared parking is used for overflowBART parking at the Colma station.In this case, SamTrans pays theproperty owner for the right of BARTto use a portion of the Sierra Bowlparking lot. The parking is providedfree to BART riders.

• Spillover parking from the OaklandColiseum is allowed to use BARTstation parking on a paid basis.

• Many cities institute various forms ofon-street parking control systems in thevicinity of BART stations, rangingfrom parking meters, to time limits, topermit programs. Examples BARTstations with permit parking programsinclude Daly City, Balboa Park,Concord, Pleasant Hill, Rockridge,West Oakland, El Cerrito Del Norte, ElCerrito Plaza, North Berkeley,Downtown Berkeley and Ashby.

• Caltrain uses a $1 per day parkingcharge in many of its commuter railstations.

• Numerous owners of private parkinglots use parking signage, validationprograms, management andenforcement to ensure that parking isavailable for their customers.Strategies range from posting signs, tochaining off the parking facility beforethe stores open, to enforcementactivities. Examples include theHillsdale Shopping Center (Caltrain),the El Cerrito Plaza, the EmbassySuites in Pleasant Hill, and others.


Appendix Table C-1: Example Bay Area Parking Management Strategies

Signage forprivate off-street lots

Parkingmeters

On-street parkingtime limitations

EnforcementResidential

parking permitprogram

Validationsystems

BART San Francisco Stations Yes Yes Yes--varies City police Yes Varies

BART Bay Fair Station Yes Yes--four hour limit BART police, shopping centersecurity, city police

BART Colma Station Yes Yes--four hour limit BART police, city policeBART Lafayette Yes--for

BART usersYes BART police, city police

BART Concord Station Yes--four hour limit BART police, city policeBART Daly City Station Yes--four hour limit BART police, city police Yes

BART El Cerrito Plaza Station Yes Yes--four hour limit BART police, shopping centersecurity, city police

BART Pleasant Hill Station Yes Yes--two hour limit BART police, city police Embassy SuitesBART Rockridge Station Yes Yes--four hour limit BART police, city police

BART West Oakland Station Yes--four hour limit BART police, Caltrans personnel,city police

Yes

Caltrain Hillsdale Station Parking lot personnel, city police Yes

Caltrain Millbrae Station Yes, various

This page intentionally left blank.

july bart to livermore extension project … deir...parking management toolkit: strategies for bart...

Documents