Rick Williams Consulting



Rick Williams Consulting

Parking & Transportation Demand Management

610 SW Alder, Suite 1221

Portland, OR 97205

Phone: (503) 236-6441 Fax: (503) 236-6164

E-mail: rick.williams@

MEMORANDUM

TO: Wayne Frost, North Gorge Commercial Partners, LLC

Jason Wheaton, North Gorge Commercial Partners, LLC

FROM: Rick Williams, RWC

DATE: March 12, 2011

RE: Review of Parking Need and Format: Kendall Yards Project

I. BACKGROUND

Kendall Yards in Spokane, WA will be an economically diverse, compact and pedestrian-friendly mixed-use residential and commercial community in the west downtown. The project will incorporate environmentally sensitive and sustainable design qualities and spur sustainable social and economic growth, re-energizing the important connection between the West Central Neighborhood and downtown Spokane. It is envisioned that Kendall Yards will become the first in Spokane to obtain a LEED-ND designation in recognition of its integration of smart growth, urbanism and green building principles.

North Gorge Commercial Partners (NGCP) is currently engaged in development planning for the Kendall Yards project for the large parcel of land bounded by College Avenue on the north, the Spokane River (south), Monroe Street (east) and Maple Street (west). This parcel of development area is referenced as the “East Parcel Commercial” component of the Kendall Yards project. Figure A illustrates the proposed development area.

This parcel is primarily commercial in its intended mix of land uses, providing office, retail, hotel and some residential uses that total approximately 705,000 square feet.

To meet and support the vision for Kendall Yards, NGCP is interested in establishing an objective understanding of the dynamics of parking for this project, particularly as regards this development parcel. To this end, Rick Williams Consulting (RWC) was engaged to assist in providing the following evaluation and analysis:

A. To determine the amount of parking necessary to meet demand generated by new uses created within the project;

B. Provide recommendations regarding the relationship of the on-street public supply of parking to private off-street land uses and supply; and

C. Suggest parking management strategies for future implementation that benefit and provide efficiencies to the project and adjacent area(s) and are coordinated across land uses and supply.

This memorandum is intended to provide information as called out in (a) – (c) above.

II. PARKING NEED

Current concept designs prepared by NGCP calls for a land use and parking format that encourages shared and reciprocal parking facilities that will be accessed by a variety of commercial and residential users.

In order to accomplish this, the overall design of the site provides for a combination of below grade parking structures (primarily associated with commercial uses that front the river), surface lots and interior on-street parking. Figure B provides contrasting images of the current development area and the format of the project for that area between the Monroe Street Bridge and the Maple Street Bridge.

As stated above, at build out the East Parcel Commercial development area will provide approximately 705,000 square feet of commercial land uses and residential units.

A. Determining Demand

Parking demand varies by type of land use and by city. Similarly, development of diverse uses in a single area – mixed uses – can create opportunities and synergies to share parking resources in a manner that allows a development to build less parking in total than would be built if each land use were developed as an isolated free standing use. As such, there are numerous ways to approach the question of what is the “right size” for parking at Kendall Yards. RWC will explore three demand approaches.

1. Local Requirements

To start, a look at what NGCP is proposing indicates a total parking estimate of 1,523 off-street parking stalls. This includes 560 stalls on four “shared” surface lots, 100 interior on-street stalls and 863 stalls that would be accessory and/or controlled for specific buildings. Table 1 provides a breakout of NGCP’s proposed parking allocation.

Table 1

Proposed Allocation of the Parking Supply

|Type of Land Use |Estimated Building Size (SF)|Parking Spaces Required |Parking Provided |Ratio of Parking Provided to|

| | | | |1,000 SF |

|PARKING PROVIDED IN SHARED USE FORMAT |

|Grocery |40,000 |40 | | |

|Box Retail |35,000 |35 | | |

|Retail |50,000 |50 | | |

|Restaurant |5,000 |5 | | |

|Commercial Office |125,000 |125 | | |

|Sub-Total |255,000 |255 |660 |2.58/1,000 SF |

|PARKING PROVIDED IN ACCESSORY / CONTROLLED USE FORMAT |

|Residential |117,500 |176 |176 | |

|Retail/ Office Above |83,075 |83 |105 | |

|Hospitality |75,000 |75 |100 | |

|Commercial Office |175,000 |175 |482 | |

|Sub-Total |450,575 |509 |863 |1.91/1,000 SF |

|PROJECT TOTALS |705,575 |764 |1,523 |2.15/1,000 SF |

As Table 1 indicates, NGCP’s format for providing parking exceeds what is required by the Kendall Yards PUD (764 versus 1,523 stalls). The project as a whole delivers parking at a rate of approximately 2.15 stalls per 1,000 square feet, which is a reasonable supply total for an urban site.[1]

Parking will be available at a level adequate to successfully support the project and its land uses. We would also contend that the nature of the size of the project and the diversity of uses within it will create flexibility within the overall supply that result in significant efficiencies. We are made more confident in this assertion given (a) the availability of the shared use facilities and (b) the potential for assignment of parking to commercial tenants (particularly employees) within the controlled supply. This will be elaborated further below in our discussion of parking management strategies.

2. Comparison to other areas

Rick Williams Consulting has conducted parking demand analyses in numerous cities in Oregon, Washington and California. A key component of those studies has focused on the question of “right sizing parking” in development, particularly in mixed use development environments that strive to blend office, retail, residential and hospitality/entertainment into districts and neighborhoods as opposed to isolated single use development. Table 2 below summarizes a number of parking demand studies conducted by RWC over the past several years.

Table 2

Parking Demand in Mixed Use Development – Other Cities

|City |Actual Built Supply/1000 SF | |Gap between parking built and |

| |(Mixed Use Development Area) |Actual Demand/ |actual parking demand |

| | |1,000 SF |(for every 1,000 gsf) |

|Beaverton, OR |4.15 |1.85 |2.3 |

|Bend, OR |3.0 |1.7 – 1.9 |1.1 – 1.3 |

|Corvallis, OR |2.0 |1.50 |0.50 |

|Hillsboro, OR |3.0 |1.64 |1.36 |

|Hood River, OR |1.54 |1.23 |0.31 |

|Kirkland, WA |2.5 |1.98 |0.52 |

|Lake Oswego, OR |2.65 |1.71 – 1.88 |0.77 – 0.94 |

|Lloyd District – Portland, OR |2.00 |1.60 |0.40 |

|Oregon City, OR |2.00 |1.43 |.57 |

|Oxnard, CA |1.70 |0.98 – 1.13 |0.57 – 0.72 |

|Redmond, WA |4.10 |2.91 |0.59 – 1.19 |

|Sacramento CA |2.0 |1.60 |0.4 |

|Salem, OR |3.15 |2.04 |1.11 |

|Seattle, WA (South Lake Union) |2.5+ |1.75 |0.75 |

|Springfield, OR |1.88 |1.11 – 1.28 |0.60 - 0.77 |

|Vancouver, WA |2.5 – 3.0 |1.73 |0.77 – 1.27 |

|Ventura, CA |2.59 |1.50 |1.09 |

|Kendall Yards – Proposed |1.91 – 2.58/1,000 SF (Range of Controlled Use to Shared Use) |

| |2.15/1,000 SF (Project Average – Mixed Use) |

As Table 2 demonstrates, the actual demand for parking in a range of diverse cities and areas generally falls at a level that is less than 2.0 stalls per 1,000 square feet. As the table shows, there is a tendency in many other areas to overbuild parking, which leads to an inefficiency in both land use and cost effectiveness. Many areas are overbuilding by as much as 1.0 or more stalls per 1,000 SF; with an average overbuild of about 0.85 stalls per 1,000 SF. The Kendall Yards project proposal falls a little above actual parking demand totals of other mixed use development areas in other cities.

3. Demand Analysis Comparison – Downtown Spokane

In 2004, RWC conducted an area demand analysis for the east end of downtown Spokane for the Downtown Spokane Partnership. The study sampled an eight block area of the downtown and related actual parking demand (actual total vehicles parked in the peak hour) within the area’s on and off-street parking supply to 1.4 million square feet of land uses within the sample area. Table 3, below, summarizes the findings of that sample.

Table 3

|2004 – Downtown Spokane – Parking Demand Sample |

|Total number of parking stalls “built” in the study zone, |3,437 stalls |

|combining on and off-street parking | |

|Built land use in study zone (office, retail, restaurant, govt., |1,400,000 SF |

|entertainment) | |

|Built parking ratio: All parking (on and off-street) to all built|2.46 stalls per 1,000 SF |

|land use | |

|Total vehicles parked at peak hour (on and off-street) |2,316 |

|Occupied land use in study zone |1,224,740 SF |

|Actual Parking Demand at peak hour |1.89 stalls per 1,000 SF |

As Table 3 suggests, parking demand in the eastern quadrant of downtown, which is a mix of land uses that include restaurants, retail, office and convention uses, derived a “blended” parking demand total of approximately 1.89 stalls per 1,000 SF. Though the study was conducted in 2004, it can still be informative for the Kendall Yards project proposal, particularly when evaluated in tandem with the analyses presented in Sections 1 and 2 above.

Overall, the parking proposed for the Kendall Yards project appears to be a reasonable and sufficient amount necessary to support the land uses that the project intends to attract to the site. The total built supply (1,523 stalls) provides parking at a ratio of 2.15 stalls per 1,000 SF. When viewed as a combined supply, this total exceeds the Kendall Yards PUD requirements and falls on the conservative end of demand for mixed use areas in other cities and somewhat above what has been the demonstrated demand in the east end of downtown Spokane. Given that the supply is formatted in a combination of surface, on-street and garage assets, the supply will very much operate in the context of an urban neighborhood.

III. PUBLIC ON-STREET PARKING AND KENDALL YARDS

Bringing over 700,000 SF of new land uses to the area will bring with it the need to rethink how public on-street parking in the area is managed. The overall objective for the area would be to preserve as much of the on-street supply, both interior to the site and within the overall “commercial district” for customer/visitor access – the area which extends north of the development site to at least Gardiner west of Cedar and east of Lincoln. Another objective would be to simplify the on-street parking system in a manner that provides the user a consistent parking stay option (e.g., standardized time stays). This provides for greater turnover potential in the district, support for street level business development and the transition of longer term customer need and employee demand into off-street facilities. Over time, this also supports the transition of employee commute demand to alternative modes like transit, bicycling, walking and ridesharing.

Figure C provides a map of current on-street parking allocations for the area north of College, between Cedar (west), Lincoln (east) and Gardiner (north). City blocks are numbered (e.g., 331, 332, etc.). The number of stalls on a block face is identified with interior boxes. Metered on-street parking is shown in red and blue numbers, which indicates the actual time stay (e.g., 30 minutes, 2-Hours, 10-Hours, etc.). There are a total of 270 on-street public metered stalls represented in the described area.

Figure C

Current Allocation of Public On-street Supply

As Figure C indicates, there are a variety of time stay options in the metered area, ranging from 30 minutes to 10-Hours. 10-Hour stalls are numerous, which is likely due to the current low level of ground floor uses in the area (i.e., retail and restaurants) and government uses. Given that the Kendall Yards project will be increasing visitor activity in the area it will be important to consider reformatting the on-street metered supply as development triggers are tripped. Such triggers could include letters of intent from prospective tenants, groundbreaking, certificates of occupancy, etc. The area along College is particularly important given the desire to locate a grocery store along what is Blocks 330 and 331 in Figure C.

Table 4 provides a summary of current parking time allocations with recommendations for changes that could be implemented. This would of course require conversations with the City that would develop specific triggers for initiating changes correlated to development sequencing.

The overall concept outlined in Table 4 creates a standardized 2-Hour on-street time stay between College and Mallon between Cedar and Monroe, allowing longer term stays (3 and 10 Hour parking outside of this zone. Over time, as occupancies and demand for on-street parking in the district increase, the standardized on-street time-stay could be uniformly reduced to 2-Hours, which is more consistent with on-street system in the downtown (which has more intense and dense access demands).

Table 4

Current and Recommended On-street Meter Stall Format

|Block # |Block Face |Current Number of |Stall Designation |Recommended Format |

| | |Metered Stalls | | |

|330 |South side of College |13 |10-Hour Meter (All) |90-minute signed (All) |

|331 |South side of College |12 |10-Hour Meter (All) |90 – minute signed (All) |

|332 |South side of College |11 |10-Hour Meter (8) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

| | | |2-Hour Meter (3) | |

|333 |South side of College |4 | 2-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|333 |West side of Monroe |9 |10-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|328 |South side of Broadway |8 |10-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|327 |North side of College |13 |10-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|327 |East side of Adams |7 |10-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|327 |South side of Broadway |11 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|327 |West side of Jefferson |5 | 2-Hour Meter (3) |2-Hour Meter (3) |

| | | |30-minute stall (2) |30-minute stall (2) |

|326 |North side of College |10 |10-Hour Meter (8) |2-Hour Meter (8) |

| | | |30-minute stall (2) |30-minute stall (2) |

|326 |East side of Jefferson |9 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|326 |South side of Broadway |8 | 3-Hour Meter (7) |Same |

| | | |30-minute stall (1) | |

|326 |West side of Madison |7 | 3-Hour meter (All) |Same |

|325 |North side of College |10 | 2-Hour meter (All) |2-Hour meter (All) |

|325 |East side of Madison |5 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|325 |South side of Broadway |10 | 1-Hour Meter (6) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

| | | |2-Hour Meter (4) | |

|325 |West side of Monroe |9 | 1-Hour Meter (2) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

| | | |2-Hour Meter (7) | |

|319 |North side of Broadway |12 |10-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|319 |West side of Adams |6 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|320 |North side of Broadway |13 | 3-Hour Meter (12) |Same |

| | | |30-minute stall (1) | |

|320 |West side of Adams |6 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|321 |North side of Broadway |11 | 1-Hour Meter (6) |2-Hour Meter (10) |

| | | |2-Hour Meter (4) |30-minute stall (1) |

| | | |30-minute stall (1) | |

|322 |North side of Broadway |8 | 1-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|322 |South side of Mallon |3 | 1-Hour Meter (1) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

| | | |2-Hour Meter (1) | |

| | | |3-Hour Meter (1) | |

|322 |West side of Monroe |2 | 2-Hour Meter (All) |2-Hour Meter (All) |

|315 |West side of Adams |12 | 3-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|316 |West side of Adams |9 |10-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|314 |East side of Adams |22 |10-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

|312 |West side of Monroe |5 | 2-Hour Meter (All) |Same |

The changes recommended here would transition approximately 90 current 10-Hour stalls to 2-Hour stalls. This would format the system in a manner that significantly augments the trip capacity of the district in those stalls, assuming 1 trip per day in a 10-Hour stall and the potential for 5 trips in a 2-Hour stall over the course of a typical day.

We believe that this format would also complement the County’s current off-street system, where metered parking opportunities are available to customers in 252 stalls in five County owned lots. Of the County’s total metered stalls, 125 are 2-Hour stalls (@ $0.75 per hour) and 127 are 6-Hour stalls (@$.0.50 per hour).[2]

IV. PARKING MANAGEMENT FOR KENDALL YARDS

When the East Parcel Commercial Development Area is fully built out, it will be comprised of three unique parking types. These include:

A. On-street parking, which is interior to the site and on private streets.

B. Shared use surface lots (allowing both public and restricted access)

C. Restricted access parking (in both below grade structures and some surface facilities)

Parking management strategies for each of these parking types will be needed. Similarly, there will be a need for on-going operational oversight of the parking within the site that allows for transitions from certain restrictions in some facilities, which are relevant to weekday operations, to more flexible access by time of day and day of week (i.e., evenings and weekends).

A key concern for the site will be assuring that priority use of parking is controlled in a manner that assures employees and visitors to businesses within Kendall Yards have unfettered access to parking. In other words, it will be important to minimize “parking poaching” that might occur as non-site employees and/or out-of-district commuters attempt to encroach on Kendall Yards parking resources as a means to avoid parking costs in other areas.

A. On-street Parking

As currently laid out, there will be three public streets within the Kendall Yards site. These include Summit Boulevard, Jefferson Street and Bridge Avenue. To the highest degree possible, these streets should attempt to incorporate parking onto them, both as a means to create a more urban feel and to add overall customer/visitor parking capacity to the site to serve the general site, but restaurant and retail specifically. NGCP has estimated that up to 100 stalls can be added to these streets.

It is recommend that the on-street parking be formatted as 90-minute signed. This would supplement the City supply and create daily trip capacity of a minimum of 660 trips (i.e., 100 stalls at maximum 90 minute stay over a 10 hour operating day).

B. Shared use surface lots

As currently proposed, there would be four shared use surface lots provided in the project. These lots would total 560 and are illustrated on Figure D. They include:

• Lot 1 – 241 spaces

• Lot 2 – 152 spaces

• Lot 3 – 127 spaces

• Lot 4 - 40 spaces

Figure D

Shared Use Lots

Lot #1 (241 stalls)

Located in the NW corner of the project site, between Cedar and Adams on College.

It is anticipated that this lot will be managed to primarily serve the grocery site (with a need for a minimum of 130 stalls). To this end, the lot will need to be managed as 90-minute time restricted and free parking to assure its attractiveness to a potential grocer tenant. Furthermore, because of its size, the lot will need parking management strategies that (a) meet the grocery need and (b) maximizes unused capacity for authorized uses within Kendall Yards.

Parking management strategies for this lot would include:

- Strategically located signage designating parking in the lot for “customers and visitors of XYX grocery or authorized permit holders only.”

- A coded permit (hang-tag) allocation system that would be targeted to (a) employees of the grocer and (b) office and/or residential tenants of Kendall Yards to fill unused capacity during normal grocery operations.[3]

- Potential assignment of permit stalls to periphery area of the lot (west side of lot), to assure that the most proximate stalls are available to grocery patrons.

- Roving enforcement.

Lot #2 (152 stalls)

Located behind the proposed grocery site, between what would be Adams and Jefferson and accessed off of Summit Blvd.

It is anticipated that this site would be actively managed to assign to specific employees of proximate site tenants and provide customer/visitor access. Assignment of employee stalls would generally be limited to weekdays between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., allowing the lot to transition to general access use evenings and weekends.[4]

Parking management strategies for this lot would include:

- Strategically located signage designating parking in the lot for “customer/visitor parking for Kendall Yards and authorized permit holders.”

- A coded permit (hang-tag) allocation system that would be targeted to employees of specific business or residential tenants of Kendall Yards.

- Pay stations, which requires payment or validation for non-permit holders (i.e., customers/visitors). Time stays should be limited to five hours or less to assure visitors are served and the paid portion of the lot does not encourage long-term use by non-site users (i.e., downtown commuters or non-site employees of the area).[5]

- A programmable gate system to control access during various hours of the day.

- Validation program (optional), which would be a token system that businesses could provide to customers for use in pay stations on return trips to Kendall Yards. Tokens could also be formatted for use in on-street meters.

- Routine occupancy counts as a means to determine appropriate allocation of permits.

- Roving enforcement.

Lot #3 (127 stalls)

Located between Jefferson and Monroe Streets, south of Bridge Avenue with access off of Summit Blvd.

It is anticipated that this lot would be actively managed to assign to the private buildings adjacent to it and to serve customer needs for the buildings clustered near it. Like Lot #2, assignment of employee stalls would generally be limited to weekdays between 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., allowing the lot to transition to general access use evenings and weekends.

- Strategically located signage designating parking in the lot for “customer/visitor parking for Kendall Yards and authorized permit holders.”

- Pay stations, which requires payment or validation for non-permit holders (i.e., customers/visitors). Time stays should be limited to five hours or less to assure visitors are served and the paid portion of the lot does not encourage long-term use by non-site users (i.e., downtown commuters or non-site employees of the area).

- A programmable gate system to control access during various hours of the day.

- Validation program (optional), which would be a token system that businesses could provide to customers for use in pay stations on return trips to Kendall Yards. Tokens could also be formatted for use in on-street meters.

- Routine occupancy counts as a means to determine appropriate allocation of permits.

- Roving enforcement.

Lot #4 (40 stalls)

Located to the east of the proposed grocery site, off of College.

It is anticipated that this lot would be operated as a visitor parking facility, available generally to stays of less than 5 hours.

- Strategically located signage designating parking in the lot for “customer/visitor parking for Kendall Yards.”

- Pay stations, which requires payment or validation for non-permit holders (i.e., customers/visitors). Time stays should be limited to five hours or less to assure visitors are served and the paid portion of the lot does not encourage long-term use by non-site users (i.e., downtown commuters or non-site employees of the area).

- A programmable gate system to control access during various hours of the day.

- Validation program (optional), which would be a token system that businesses could provide to customers for use in pay stations on return trips to Kendall Yards. Tokens could also be formatted for use in on-street meters.

- Routine occupancy counts as a means to determine appropriate allocation of permits.

- Roving enforcement.

C. Restricted Access Parking

Once operational, the East Parcel Commercial Development Area of Kendall Yards will contain approximately 773 parking stalls located in lots or below grade facilities that will be restricted to specific buildings or users. Ideally, each of these sites would be gate access controlled during appropriate business hours to assure their availability to intended users. Gate access cards would be strategically distributed, with access programmed into specific sites. This would require attention in design to limit entry and egress points into these facilities to minimize the amount of equipment necessary to control access points. Over time, gate systems in some facilities, particularly surface lots, could be programmed to rise after hours or on weekends to allow more general access and use of these sites in a shared manner. If this type of flexibility is desired, placement of pay stations in these sites should be evaluated. This could occur at a later point in the development as measures of future after hours parking demand and potential for revenue generation are better understood.

V. IMPLICATIONS OF PARKING MANAGEMENT

The desire to fully maximize parking resources in a project area will require a commitment to a higher level of management. The fact that Kendall Yards is adjacent to an existing parking meter district and to land uses that already have high employment parking demand and off-site pricing necessitates an active parking management approach.

To this end, the allocation and distribution of parking permits, routine occupancy reporting, billing and collections, enforcement and communications should be provided through a centralized and coordinated management office. Many large projects contract out such services to local, private parking operators, who are adept at all phases of parking management and have systems in place for the coordination of monthly tenant pass programs, support of revenue collection systems (meters/pay stations), enforcement and reporting. Private parking contractors can be procured in agreements that are structured to pay a flat management fee or in agreements that share revenue generated (after expenses). Other large projects house parking management functions within site-based property management offices, allocating such functions to building maintenance staff(s) and/or contracts for site and building security. Finally, Kendall Yards may have an opportunity to partner with the City in the area of on-street enforcement or use/operation of the shared use lots.

VI. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

A. Parking District

The City, Kendall Yards and adjacent properties may want to explore formation of a parking district in this area. A parking district would bring consistent management of the supply to a larger area, allow for consolidation of revenue streams to support growth and vitality in the area and establish an active public/private partnership to manage and promote this area of the downtown. The intricacies of such a relationship between the public and private sector would need to be worked out, but benefits include:

• Coordinated district oversight

• Active management of shared use opportunities (public and private parking)

• Strategic enforcement

• Mitigation of parking constraints and issues related to area employee growth and use of on-street.

• Strategic partnerships (e.g., area permit programs, neighborhood liaisons, etc.)

• Revenue generation for district priorities (using public and private parking as generators)

B. Land Use

The current layout of parking for the site is well done. In evaluating the site layout, RWC was intrigued with Lot #2 as a potential future structured parking location. This would be pertinent if in the future, additional growth were desired for the property. The reason Lot #2 is intriguing is that studies have shown that parking facilities that serve mixed use areas generally have an ideal capture area of approximately 750 feet.

Figure E, though not a perfect representation of scale, provides a sense of how much of the East Parcel Commercial Development Area could be served with more parking concentrated at the center of the site, thereby freeing up land for additional vertical development in the future. The Lot #2 site would better serve the area as a district garage than would Lot #1 – another large land parcel – which is at the western edge of the development parcel. A well-designed district garage or underground option could be something to consider in the future, see Figure F.

Figure E

Parking Capture Area – Lot #2

Figure E

Parking Capture Area – Lot #2

Figure F

Example: Underground Garage Concept and Above Grade “District” Garage

VII. SUMMARY

The Kendall Yards proposal for parking is reasonable from the perspective of both demand and lay out. Parking need as proposed by NGCP is consistent with other measures of demand that include local requirements and demand as well as comparisons to mixed use parking demand in other cities. The lay out of the site and the intent to manage a large portion of the supply in a shared use format provides flexibility to the site and will be an element to attract tenants.

Given that the project is taking place in a district that already has paid parking (on and off-street); it will be important to create seamlessness in the management of parking, particularly on-street. The recommendations contained in this memorandum would suggest an agreement between the City, NGCP, the County and other affected stakeholders that would simplify the current on-street parking format in a manner that standardizes on-street time stays to the highest degree possible and favors shorter-term, higher turnover use of the on-street supply. This would add trip capacity into the system and better facilitate off-street use by employees, both in the existing district and within Kendall Yards.

The large nature of the Kendall Yards site, along with issues related to parking encroachment and the unique needs of the desired grocer tenant will require a commitment to more active and coordinated parking management. This can be accomplished through signage, enforcement, permit assignment, pay stations and strategic balancing of shared versus restricted access. Accomplishing this necessitates a centralized management function. Options can include internal management, contract management, partnership with the City of Spokane through formation of a parking district, or a combination of each.

Finally, the overall layout of the site presents opportunities for the consolidation of parking in the future as a means to recapture land in surface use for denser vertical development. Keeping this in perspective in the early design phases of the site could create efficiencies in the future that are more cost effective because they were anticipated in advance.

-----------------------

[1] Similar mixed use projects in suburban areas would likely provide parking at higher rates (e.g., 3.0 – 4.0/1,000 SF).

[2] If the City were to agree to standardizing time stays at 3 Hours on-street, the County may want to consider converting its 2-Hour meters to 3-Hours to create a very consistent system on and off-street throughout the area (which includes Kendall Yards).

[3] A “coded permit” system generally assigns hang tags by color designation, which limits where an employee can park to a specific lot. For example, Lot #1 could be the RED lot and Lot #2 the GREEN lot. As such, employees are specifically assigned and management can control the balance of parking mix and capacity through allocation of the coded permits. Lot signage, way finding and lot “branding” could reflect a coded system.

[4] Exceptions to this would be made for tenants with evening/weekend employee needs and residential tenants as appropriate.

[5] In-lot pay stations are similar in cost to on-street pay stations, though their higher end is closer to $15,000. The number of pay stations per lot is a determinate of lot size, pedestrian design and signage.

-----------------------

Figure A

East Parcel Commercial Development Area

Figure B

Current Parcel and Proposed Land Use to Parking Format

Example: Good Design for On-street signage (Springfield, OR)

Lot 4

Example: Surface Lot Pay Station

Example: Programmable Gate System

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download