Parking Studies

[Patrick the Planner]

Howdy Cyburbia!

I am researching commercial parking demand for my community. Anyone know of any studies on the temporal nature of specific land uses (within the context of parking demand)?

Although I have found an abundance of information on TDM, for this query, I am not interested in shared parking, on-street parking, bike, pedestrian, etc.

Our zoning code does not take into account the amount of time a specific user or shopper will be in the store. That is, a car parked at a hardware store may not occupy the stall as long as the car that parks at a grocery store, which assumes that buying bread, milk, fig newtons, etc. takes longer than buying a new plunger.

Rather than requiring the expansive sea of asphalt based on square footage, I am interested in any studies that look at the temporal nature of parking stalls and interested if any parking standards have been developed based amount of time a parking stall is actually used.

I have looked through the ITE’s Parking Council and the APA/PAS report on Parking Standards (PAS Report No. 510/511). Neither really addresses my question.

Any suggestions on where else to look would be greatly appreciated.

 

[PlannerGirl]

Serious question, what happens when the use changes and the plumber turns into say a food store?

 

[ludes98]

That was my thought exactly. A myriad of different uses could occupy the building over its lifetime.

 

[Patrick the Planner]

Parking

When does considering a future, unknown use, end?

I agree that thinking of future users is what we should be doing, but I am cautious about requiring a developer to construct (and pay for) additional parking for some unknown user that may require more parking.

This has other applications: namely that through NPDES, we're all required to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff. Paved parking is still cheaper to develop than new, pervious lots and I would rather see landscaping rather than more parking surface (that may or may not ever be used)

My original question has to do with the fact that our code stinks. I am interested in somethign other than the traditional suburban parking desert.

 

[Tranplanner]

Well, I think there probably are parking turnover studies somewhere out there and that is also probably how many parking standard requirements are developed in the first place.

However, PlannerGirl and ludes98 are correct - you need to allow for all the possible uses permitted under the current zoning for a property (that is where your "future use" question should end). I guess it depends how how specific your zoning code is - are food stores and boutique retail allowed in the same zone? Both have very different turnover and trip generation rates.

I don't know your specific situation, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss shared parking - it can be a useful tool to reduce total parking requirements in mixed use areas. Payment-in-lieu to go towards providing off-site parking options (e.g. public parking facilities) is another option, again depending on your situation.

 

[michaelskis]

I would recommend looking at your zoning ordinance, and the intensity of the business permitted. For my community, we have several different business zones, and each has different parking requirements. That would be one way to limit future use intensity. In some situations, if a business moves into a building that has substandard parking requirements, they need to go before the zoning hearing board, and make other conditional "improvements" to the property.

But I agree with Planner Girl. Businesses change, and we need to take that into consideration

 

[Cardinal]

A few years ago an office supply box signed a 20-year lease on a new building in my community. Technically, they do meet the requirements for parking by sharing a combined lot with the fast food place next door. In some ways, it is nice because there is only a single row of parking in front of the building. The retailer closed after just two years, though. The building has been empty since, and one of the overriding issues in finding a new tenant is the (actual or simply perceived) lack of parking.

If you are talking about a typical commercial zone, my recommendation might be to retain your parking requirement, but perhaps write a provision that allows the Plan Board to reduce the number of stalls that need to be constructed based on the initial use. The developer would still need to retain the land, and show the location of the remaining parking, which could be constructed if the use changes.

 

[NHPlanner]

We have this provision in the Zoning Ordinance which we use on occasion to reduce the impact of parking lots:

"The Planning Board may allow a reduction in the number of parking spaces actually constructed as long as an area is clearly shown as “reserved for future parking” and a note on the plan indicates a prohibition on any structural improvement in that area. Each plan will be reviewed on individual need."

 

[Jeff]

Re: Parking

This has other applications: namely that through NPDES, we're all required to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff.

You actually know what is required under new NPDES regs? You looking for a job? I know of one

 

[Wulf9]

The best way to reduce the need for parking is to have non-exclusive parking. This is easiest to do in downtowns, but can also be done elsewhere.

With non-exclusive parking and a mix of uses, each space serves a different use at different times of the day. Restaurants peak at breakfast, lunch and dinner. Offices use parking during the day. Entertainment uses parking in the evening. Residents use parking overnight.

I haven't seen numbers, but it takes a lot less parking with non-exclusive parking than with a parking lot for each business.

For stand alone businesses, it is practical to ask for enough parking to serve the normal anticipated use. For example a furniture store needs very little parking, but it would be prudent to require the "normal" parking.