Downtown Parking and Travel Management Plan April 14, 2015 Public Forum

Agenda History – how did we get here? Goals Lessons from November 1 changes Parking Management District Next steps – timeline Feedback from you

History – how did we get here? 2013 – 2014 – over 60 meetings with downtown stakeholders (CEDO and BBA) identified parking as one of the key economic development challenges in our downtown Summer of 2013 – DPW, BBA, and CEDO start meeting weekly to address parking November 13, 2013 – BBA hosts Parking Summit in the Hilton – over 150 attendees with keynote speaker Jeffrey Tumlin of Nelson Nygaard November 13, 2013 – USDN provides funding for CEDO to bring 7 cities’ parking experts to Burlington for a Parking Convening November 2013 – City Council passes resolution empowering BBA, DPW and CEDO to launch the Downtown Parking Improvement Initiative

History – how did we get here? Spring 2014 – Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission and business community fund BBA, CEDO, and DPW to hire experts to complete Downtown Parking and Travel Management Plan Partners create Parking Advisory Committee with local stakeholders June 2014 – BBA and City team hire DESMAN Associates, with support from Stantec, WZHA, UVM and Donald Shoup to complete the Plan November 1, 2014 – City installs smart meters and multi-space parking meters, rolls out pilot pricing and later hourly enforcement, and makes improvements to the garages November 19, 2014 – City and BBA host Parking Forum in collaboration with Residential Parking partners in Contois Auditorium, and launch to gather feedback and educate Winter 2014 – City collects and analyzes data from the pilot, continues work on the study, and continues to gather feedback

We have a parking problem Not enough spaces… Bad way finding… Parking in the wrong places… Accessibility challenges… Poor access control… Can’t get to an open space…

Goals  Deliver a consistently positive customer experience  Achieve a sustainable parking system  Maximize parking and transportation system resources for a vibrant downtown

Project approach 1. Assess current operations 2. Factor in future needs and growth 3. Help make the most of existing assets 4. Recommend immediate actions 5. Develop a long-range plan for management 6. Coordinate planning with Residential Parking and Transportation Demand Management studies 7. Present a plan which is politically, environmentally and fiscally sustainable

Study Area Bounded by Pearl, Union, Maple and Lake Streets Includes four zones 40 total blocks Includes office buildings, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, courthouses, City Hall and residences

Inventory Definitions –On-Street = curbside parking –Public = clearly publically accessible –Private = indicated as exclusive 8,081 spaces in total –1,199 On-Street spaces –2,825 spaces in 13 Public facilities –4,057 spaces in 123 Private facilities –39% (3,160 spaces) in Zone 1 –26% (2,094 spaces) in Zone 2 –23% (1,828 spaces) in Zone 3 –12% (999 spaces) in Zone 4

Parking assets 10

On street assets 11 1,199 spaces Almost 2/3 rds are mid-term meters Fairly even distribution across zones

Public (off-street) assets 12 2,825 spaces Almost 2/3 rds are located in Zone 1 facilities City provides ~ 63% of total public capacity

Weekday observation (Thursday, 9/25/14) Averaged 60% utilization Highest utilization was at 1:00 PM (71%) Average utilization rates: –Zone 1: 57% Zone 2: 73% Zone 3: 52% Zone 4: 57%

Weekdays: private off- street Averaged 58% utilization for the day Highest utilization was at 12:00 PM (69%) Garages were better utilized (67% avg.) than lots (57% avg.) Lots dedicated to employees had strongest utilization Customer & resident lots were ~ 50% utilized

Weekend utilization by zone

Observation conclusions 1.Office uses drive parking demand on weekdays, retail on weekends 2.Areas with complimentary land uses (hotel or residential & office) experienced a more balanced demand profile 3.Zone 2 is consistently subject to greatest localized demand 4.Pricing impacts asset utilization 5.Curbside parking and public lots are in highest demand 6.Public assets are unevenly utilized 7.Large amounts of private parking are going underutilized 8.Majority of motorists are practicing ‘line of sight’ wayfinding 9.Current enforcement efforts appear effective

Possible solutions CHALLENGES Balancing existing supply & demand Reducing demand for on-street spaces Improving use of underutilized assets Unlocking underused private reserves Reducing parking demand at peak periods Restoring the supporting fund Improving service delivery REMEDIES Promoting complimentary mixed-use development Expand Improving wayfinding Creating a central parking & transportation resource Establishing differential pricing Establishing Shared Parking protocols Developing more effective management procedures/structures Promoting transportation options

Meter Pilot

Objectives of Meter Pilot 1. Manage occupancy towards an 85% target 2. Improve compliance (i.e. voluntary payment of fees) 3. Introduce flexibility into the program 4. Create turnover for curbside spaces 5. Generate revenues for system improvements

April 2015 Occupancy 204/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum

Comparison to Sept /14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum21

Impact on Abutting Areas 4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum22

Length of Stay Analysis Reviewed meter reports for 12/15/14 – 1/15/15 ~285 meters with transactions per day 70% of transactions were credit/debit card Purchases ranged from 30 minutes up to 6 hours Average minimum purchase was ~ 0.5 hours Average median purchase was ~ 1.5 hours Average maximum purchased was ~ 3.0 hours 4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum23

Increase in Meter Revenues Data based on total system revenues Actual meter revenues, 11/13-3/14 = $419,302 Projection with 50% rate increase = $628,953 Projected improvement = $209,651 Actual meter revenues, 11/15-3/15 = $712,186 Actual improvement TYD = $292,884 40% increase over YTD revenues 4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum24

Parking Meter Revenues 4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum25

Parking Ticket Increases

Upcoming efforts Determining prioritization of capital reinvestments Strategy for Parking Management District Coordination with other initiatives Finish the planning effort

Capital reinvestments New elevators in Marketplace Garage this year Resurfacing, deck repairs, and drainage upgrades in College Street garage this year New signs and wayfinding New lighting in College Street garage Mall redevelopment – Town Center More development projects downtown Transit center – St. Paul Walk/bike masterplan Capital reinvestments Development influencing the plan

What is a parking management district? A comprehensive system of managing both public and private parking assets collaboratively. What are some examples? Downtown improvement districts Parking authorities Private management entities Examples: Boise, ID; Ann Arbor, MI; Boulder, CO

PMD principles Collaborative governance Unified parking system Measured implementation

Parking management district (PMD) Provide high quality parking services at a fair market price Promote the use of all transportation modes Support the parking and transportation needs of existing and new development in downtown Burlington Maximize the operational efficiency of our parking and transportation assets and systems Create collaborative agreements with public and private downtown parking and transportation owners and operators – brings private parking spaces into the public system Collect data on system usage and use that data to inform parking and transportation policy Maintain fiscal stability and self sufficiency Support branding, marketing and programs that increase downtown vitality Integrate our parking and transportation efforts into a larger initiative which supports the vitality of our Downtown, preserves our natural resources, and supports the quality of life in downtown neighborhoods.

PMD Think About… Operations versus ownership – public and private assets, on-street and off-street Public voice – private stakeholders, users, employers, employees Cover of all modes of transportation How is it funded? Who governs? Other areas of responsibility – branding, signage, online interfaces, marketing, “parking broker,” etc.

Next steps Get more feedback Make recommendations – use data! Capital reinvestment and new investment Parking management district Policy changes – pricing, operations, etc. Zoning – data and best practices analysis Coordination with TDM and Residential Parking Come back with final plan from consultants in June

Next steps: public timeline Continue meeting with PAC – April and May mtgs May Meet with stakeholder groups – seniors, arts, faith, employees, NPA’s, walk/bike advocates, business groups, city committees and commissions, transportation partners May 18 – City Council meeting May 20 – CSM Commission; DPW Commission Late May – Final changes to the plan June DPW Commission endorsement TEUC endorsement City Council action

Get your feedback For more information, visit: