Edmonton (Alta.) - 1978 - Parking study (1978-04-25) by Edmonton Tower Resource Centre Online Library

SD L BRARY

2824

il 11111

1054/6925/1978 PARKING-STUDY, EDMONTON, 1978 EDMONTON-PLANNING

ixiing

Departmen)

L13 11.i.'7:..13.Y. Th

City of -2A-m.0-aton

PARKING STUDY

HE CITY OF

monton Trattsportation Planning

000.1 al . E3 E386 i78

F. 1.o,

'.o.

Parking Study RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. That the enclosed study be received as information by City Council and referred to the Legislative Committee for consideration. 2. That the following items listed on the Appendix to the Agenda of City Council be referred to the Legislative Committee for consideration in conjunction with the Parking Study: Utilities and Engineering Committee 4. Letter dated July 21, 1977, from J. E. Barry, President, Edmonton Chamber of Comuerce, 9905 - 101A Avenue re: Downtown Parking (B.1.(1) July 12, 1977) Economic Affairs Committee 2. Alderman Olsen re: Parking rates for Underground Parking (E.3.e. Feb. 9, 1977) (CB)

HISTORY Over the past number of years, both City Council and the Administration have expressed concerns regarding parking. For approximately two years, the Planning Department has been collecting information and evaluating the parking situation. JUSTIFICATION 1. The enclosed Parking Study is recommended for referral to the Legislative Committee. The Study deals with both parking policies and organizational responsibilities and, therefore, should appropriately be considered by the Legislative Committee. 2. The two outstanding items listed in Recommendation 2, of this report are relevant to the Parking Study. It is therefore recommended that they also be referred to the Legislative Committee for consideration with the Study. ENCLOSURE: I Parking Study

Prepared by: Executive Services Department

April 25, 1978

COMMISSION BOARD: Mayor C. J. Purves Commissioner A. H. Commissioner P. H. Commissioner T. E. Chief Commissioner Chairman

63.

Savage Walker Adams D. F. Burrows,

claiming Departmeni

LIBRARY. The City of Edmonton

PARKING STUDY

CITY PLANNING March, 1978

PARKING STUDY

INTRODUCTION

The dependence upon the automobile as a convenient and flexible mode of transportation has resulted in a number of adverse impacts on transportation system components and adjacent land uses. One of the problems associated with automobile usage is that of storage at the end of each trip. The types of problems that are normally associated with vehicle storage are inadequate parking supply, excessive land used for provision of parking, reduced roadway capacities, and increased accident potential.

1.1 Relation to Land Use and the Transportation System

Since parking is one portion of an overall vehicle trip it must be considered as part of the overall transportation system and objectives related to parking must be consistent with overall transportation goals and objectives. Thus, parking cannot be considered in isolation and solutions to parking problems are frequently very complex, requiring consideration of parking demand, land use impacts and impacts on other components of the transportation system.

In order to develop an appreciation for the overall framework within which parking must be considered, it is necessary to understand the intent of the policy statements in both the General Plan and the Transportation Plan - Part I. The overall philosophy of the General Plan could be summarized as follows:

To ensure the economic and social viability of the City and its residents through sound land use planning.

The overall philosophy of the Transportation Plan - Part I could be summarized as:

To maximize the usage of public transit.

In summary the study concludes that while no single policy or set of policies will solve the parking problems, the present procedures being used by the City to deal with parking issues will not met parking requirements in certain areas of the City in the future. Therefore the establishment of a new agency with objectives consistent with overall land use and transportation goals and objectives is essential for solving parking problems in specific areas of the City.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE SUMMARY 1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Relation to Land Use and Transportation System 2.

PARKING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

2.1 Goal

2.2 Objectives

2.3 Implementation of Objectives: Policies

EXISTING SITUATION

3.1 Downtown Parking Supply and Demand

3.2 Current Responsibilities Regarding Parking 10

3.3 Current Parking Standards

3.4 Summary of Implementation Problems

PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

4.1 Description of Proposed Implementation process

4.2 Parking Agency Responsibilities

ALTERNATIVE PARKING AGENCIES

5.1 Parking Authority

5.2 Assignment of Parking Implementation to One Civic Department

5.3 Assignment of Responsibilities to Two Civic Departments

5.4 Appointment of a Parking Advisory Board

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES

6.1 Guidelines

APPENDICES Existing Parking Policies II Justification of Parking Schedule and Parking Schedule - Zoning Bylaw III Parking Standards in Other Cities

-1-

REPORT SUMMARY

The central purpose of this study has been to formulate a series of parking objectives and procedures that are consistent with the City's overall transportation and land use policies. Parking and parking related problems cannot be considered in isolation as parking is a function of the urban environment and must relate to the land use being served by parking facilities and the transportation system used to get there. Therefore, no single policy or series of policies by themselves will solve all parking problems. This report defines parking goals that serve the existing land use and transportation policies. Through a review of current methods of handling parking related issues, a series of procedures are formulated to better met the goals.

A review of the existing methods of handling parking situations finds that the City is capable of managing existing facilities and doing studies on problem areas but no mechanism exists for improving the situation. An analysis of parking requirements indicates that more parking facilities will be required in certain areas such as the Downtown and that solutions to parking problems in such areas as commercial strips must be implemented.

The major problem identified by the Study is the requirement for a new agency to facilitate the implementation of parking objectives and devise practial solutions to existing parking problems. Four possible alternatives for a new agency are reviewed. These alternatives centre on either a parking authority or the assignment of new responsibilities to Civic Departments. The advantages and disadvantages of all four alternatives are reviewed with the major differences being in the area of the control over parking and its relationship to the overall transportation and land use system.

To offer a new agency some guidance a series of procedures and guidelines are documented in attacking parking problems. These guidelines address the areas of the Downtown, commercial strips, major spectator events, and transit change of mode facilities.

-22.

To maximize the operational efficiency of the existing transportation system.

To minimize the adverse impact of transportation facilities on adjacent land uses.

In looking at these statements as related to parking it is evident that parking policies, objectives, and standards must be considered very carefully to avoid conflicts with the City's overall land use and transportation philosophy. The types of conflicts that must be considered are:

Economic viability for businesses may require adequate customer parking which in turn may have adverse impacts on adjacent land uses and on transit ridership.

Maximizing the operational efficiency of existing streets may necessitate parking bans which could adversely affect adjacent businesses and could result in an overflow of parking into neighboring areas.

Maximizing transit ridership may require the restriction of parking in some areas which could have adverse effects on business.

The intent of this study is to formulate a series of parking objectives and procedures that are consistent with the City's overall transportation and land use policies.

-3-

2. PARKING GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

2.1 Goal

Recognizing the intent of both the General Plan and Transportation Plan - Part I a general goal for parking could be stated as:

pkovide patking .6acZtitiez which enhance Zand use and comptement the ovetaa tAanomtation 4y4tem and ,i.ts goa,L. 2.2 Objectives

As previously indicated, parking objectives cannot be separated from overall transportation and land use objectives and therefore must form a sub-set of the overall objectives.

In order to be effective the parking objectives should have the following characteristics:

They must be clearly defined.

They must be practical and achievable.

They must be attainable through the provision or control of parking.

They must assist in achieving the overall transportation goals and objectives.

2.2.1

Transportation Plan - Part I

The objectives for parking as stated in the Transportation Plan Part I are as follows:

To provide the minimum amount of parking required to accommodate vehicles in such a manner as to encourage a comfortable and pleasing environment.

To set and enforce a maximum limit on the amount of parking made available in the Downtown and other major activity centres thus creating a regulated, efficient auto storage system.

-4c)

To provide parking policies which vary with type of development and area of City in which the development is located.

Central Area objectives are to regulate the usage of parking and to encourage employee parking on the periphery of the Central Area in close proximity to public transit.

The major intent of these objectives is to limit parking, which in many cases may not be desirable since such restriction may not increase transit ridership or decrease parking demand but merely cause overflow parking in adjacent areas. The objectives are also not clearly stated in some cases which could result in ambiguity as to how the objective could be met.

2.2.2

U.S. Experience

A review of the objectives or "strategies" for managing and controlling parking as part of the overall Transportation System Management requirements for transportation plans in the U.S. has identified the following parking stategics:

Elimination of on-street parking, especially during peak hours.

Regulation of the number and price of public and private parking spaces.

Favoring short-term users over all-day commuters in the provision of parking.

Provision of fringe and transportation corridor parking to facilitate transfer to transit and other high-occupancy vehicles.

Strict enforcement of parking restrictions.

The major intent of these strategies or objectives is to alter the supply or price of parking to improve the overall efficiency of the transportation system. They do not recognize the effect of parking on land uses.

-52.2.3

Objectives Restated

In order to retain the intent of the above objectives or strategies but state them in a clearly defined manner related to both transportation and land uses, the following objectives had been formulated:

a) b) c) d)

To piLovide altetnativez to on-ztteet pakking. To encoutage the uze o6 o66-ztneet panking. To minimize the on-ztteet patking oia-ovet between adjacent land uzez. To give imimity to 'die development o zhoiLt tenm pakking zo az to 6acilitate the zhoppe'i on vizitot and to encounage tnanzit Aidettzhip. To enzune that the piLovizion and piticing (5,6 pakking 6acilitiez Lo conziztent with oveitall tiLanomtation goats o6 encocftaging tnanzit Aideuhip by maintaining tAanzit in a compeve zituation.

2.3 Implementation of Objectives: Policies

A number of different strategies must be developed to reach these objectives since circumstances differ throughout the City. For instance, the Zoning Bylaw and its standards can be utilized in newly developing and some redeveloping areas but it cannot be used to solve problems in existing areas such as commercial strips

Appendix I contains documentation of the existing adopted policies in the General Plan and in the Transportation Plan - Part I as related to parking. These policy statements range from general statements to very specific statements and indicate that the lack of policy has not been the reason for the current concern regarding parking. The major problem with these policy statements is that in most cases there is no mechanism by which many of the parking policies can be implemented. Secondly, many of the policies cannot be met totally through parking but must rely on other transportation initiatives to be achieved.

-6--

Therefore it is necessary to review the implementation process for meeting parking objectives and to develop a process, a mechanism and guidelines by which the stated parking objectives can be met within the adopted policy statements.

-7-

EXISTING SITUATION

At the present time, the parking situation is becoming a more important issue particularly in areas of high activity such as the Downtown and the strip commercial areas. A number of factors have contributed to this situation some of which include:

The rapid residential development outside of the City where transit service is not available.

Employment, business and social activity in the Downtown increasing at a faster rate than parking supply.

Increasing congestion on arterial streets resulting in a requirement for elimination of on-street parking.

3.1 Downtown Parking Supply and Demand

Since the Downtown area is one of the more critical areas in te ws of parking shortage, a review of parking supply and demand was carried out for the area bounded by 92 Street on the East, 110 Street on the West, the CNR tracks on the North and the North Saskatchewan River on the South. A summary of the changes in parking supply and demand between 1971 and 1976 is contained in the following table.

Downtown Parking Supply and Demand 1971 1976 Percent (No. of Stalls) (No. of Stalls) Change Total Supply Total Supply Excluding Residential Available for Monthly or Long Term Parking (1) Daily Employee Parking Demand (2) Estimated Peak Daily Demand (3) Hourly Parking Available during Peak Daily Periods

26,400

29,400

11.4%

23,600

25,600

8.5%

15,300

16,500

7.8%

13,000 15,600

17,000 20,400

30.8% 30.8%

8,000

5,200

-35%

-8-

NOTES

"Available for Monthly Parking" includes free curb, employee lots, miscellaneous lots random employee parking, and 1/2 of the commercial stalls.

Daily parking demand is based on transportation surveys of auto drivers to the Downtown. It does not include space required for company-owned vehicles which are stored in the Downtown area (City, Provincial, Police or private companies). The 1976 demand is estimated based on 1971 and projected 1981 requirements from the transportation models.

In order to allow for company vehicles and for variations in demand, the peak demand has been assumed to be 20 percent higher than the daily employee parking demand.

The major observations that can be drawn from this table are as follows:

In 1971 the all day parking demand could be met within the above area while leaving one half of the commercial stalls plus any customer stalls available for hourly parking.

Since the 1976 daily parking demand is higher than the supply there is a significant overflow of daily parking into the area north of the CNR tracks.

It could also be expected from the shortage of monthly stalls that there is considerable competition for monthly parking stalls by those people parking in free curb and off-street areas.

During periods of cold or inclement weather it would be expected that a significant number of daily parkers in the overflow areas and in free curb spaces would pay hourly rates to park in commercial lots, thereby eliminating most of the available space for hourly parkers.

In order to confiLm the above conclusions, a telephone survey was conducted of 16 agencies operating 56 off-street lots which contain approximately 5,500 monthly stalls in the Downtown area. The results of this survey indicated the following:

-9a)

There are approximately 2,000 individuals on waiting lists for monthly parking stalls.

The average waiting period for a monthly stall is between 2 and 4 years.

Those agencies which also have hourly parking available indicate that this parking is totally occupied nearly every day.

The time at which hourly parking fills is dependent on weather to the extent that most core area downtown stalls are filled by 8:30 a.m. on cold winter days.

It could be concluded from this analysis that many of the policies and objectives of Transportation Plan - Part I are being met since parking is being restricted in the Downtown area. However the net effect of the restricted parking is that monthly or daily parkers are occupying space that could more effectively be utilized by hourly customer and business parkers. The resolution of this problem requires a detailed analysis of the pricing structures and economics of parking operation which consider such aspects as the parking cost that would encourage more employees to utilize transit, the impact of eliminating maximum daily rates in commercial parking structures and the feasibility of providing peripheral parking structures.

In establishing the expected 1981 parking demand for the Downtown area the following calculations can be made:

Daily Employee Parking Demand

20,000 stalls

(Based on results of transportation planning evaluations) Estimated Peak/Daily Demand Hourly Parking Demand (Assumed to be 40% of peak daily demand).

24,000 stalls 9,600 stalls

-10Since hourly parking must be provided in close proximity to activity areas, this parking should be provided within the existing area. This could be accomplished by ensuring that no more than 30% of the 1976 commercial stalls are allocated to monthly or daily parking. The major implication of such an action is that there would be demand for parking in the Downtown which would exceed supply by approximately 9,000 stalls compared to the 1976 situation where demand exceeds supply by approximately 5,000 stalls. It is evident that detailed studies into the feasibility (economic and practicality) of providing long teLia off-street parking in the peripheral areas should be investigated to insure that short teLm customer and business parking is not further restricted.

3.2 Current Responsibilities Regarding Parking

At the present time there are several Civic departments involved in establishing and implementing policies related to parking.

3.2.1.

Planning Department

This department has two major responsibilities in the parking process. The first is recommending parking policies through the transportation planning or land use planning process. Since parking has direct effects on both the overall transportation system and the land use system, parking policies must be considered in this total framework. From a transportation system perspective, the major area of concern is the monthly or all-day parkers since these are employees who travel during peak hours. Land use planning is concerned with parking as it affects the viability of particular land uses and the environment of adjacent land uses such as overflow parking from one activity area to adjacent areas.

The Planning Department is also involved in implementing parking policy through application of the standards contained in the Parking Schedule of the Zoning Bylaw. This implementation is applicable

-11to new development or re-development at the time of application for a development permit. Because of the legal status of the Zoning Bylaw and the legal requirements for a Development Officer to administer the Bylaw it is unlikely that the Parking Schedule outlined in the Zoning Bylaw can be administered by any department or agency other than the Planning Department.

3.2.3

Bylaw Enforcement

Bylaw Enforcement is responsible for administering the Parking Meter Shop and the Off-Street Parking function. These responsibilities were transferred to Bylaw Enforcement from the Engineering Department and the Real Estate and Housing Department in 1977 under the following directive from the Commissioners Office.

... will be responsible for recommendations regarding the management of, the maintenance of, and any other pertinent requirements of parking lots owned by the municipality, operated by the municipality or subject to an agreement with the municipality that are located on lands, other than roadways or where the parking lot is specifically assigned to the operational mode of a unit or facility. In the latter case the development and management of the same should be in concert with the methods and the policy set by the Real Estate and Housing Department."

The directives to Bylaw Enforcement are clear as far as they go. The most significant short coming of this method of operation is that Bylaw Enforcement is given no clear directive as to improving the present stock of off-street parking facilities. The operations of Bylaw Enforcement are purely managerial and operational. The development of additional sites presumes a recommendation for such from another source or Civic department and also presumes budgetary approval from another source.

-12-

3.2.3

Engineering Department

The Engineering Department has the responsibility of managing and controlling the flow of traffic in the City. This responsibility includes the control of on-street parking and involves the placing of meters or other traffic control devices. This department does not have the mandate to actively seek off-street parking alternatives to on street parking which must be removed to improve the efficiency of the existing street network.

3.3 Current Parking Standards

There are a number of standards related to parking which are administered by the various Civic departments.

3.3.1

Zoning Bylaw

The most clearly defined standards are identified in the Zoning Bylaw as the Parking Schedule and are applied to each new development application by the Planning Department. The current Parking Schedule is attached as Appendix II. The original Zoning Bylaw of 1961 contained parking requirements but by 1972 with the changes in the form development and the growth of the City in general it was clear that these requirements were no longer sufficient. The Planning Department in 1972 conducted a study entitled "The Parking Study" which reviewed each land use category and its respective parking requirements and through a research of parking literature, a review of other North American cities, and original research developed a new set of parking requirements which were later adopted by City Council as the current Parking Schedule. A summary of the methodology and justification for these standards is set down in Appendix II.

While there have been minor amendments to the Parking Schedule it is felt that the requirements set out in the present schedule and their justifications are still valid today. A comparison of Edmonton's

- 13-

requirements with the requirements of other Canadian cities is contained in Appendix III and shows Edmonton in a comparable position.

Of particular concern to the 1972 study was what to do with the Downtown area, commerical strips and existing major activity zones (auditoriums, stadiums). The 1972 study recommended a separate agency to operate in these areas. It is apparent that the lack of an implementing agency is still the major problem in these areas.

3.3.2

On-Street Parking Regulations

The Engineering Department is responsible for maintaining standards for use on all roadways. Consequently, with cooperation from other civic departments such as Edmonton Transit, the operating standard of a particular roadway is detetmined and on-street parking is provided accordingly.

It is important to note that this function is not only related to parking but also to traffic operational efficiency and while onstreet parking does serve a significant function, the primary purpose of arterial streets must be for the movement of traffic.

3.4 Summary of Implementation Problems

A review of the current methods of implementing parking policies and standards clearly indicates some operational problems with a number of departments dealing with parking while seeking to achieve different objectives.

The Planning Department is involved in administering the Zoning Bylaw and attempting to use the Bylaw to achieve the objectives set out in the General Plan. The Engineering Department is responsible for maintaining traffic flows on the street system and interested in meeting the objectives of the Transportation Plan. Edmonton Transit is interested in maximizing transit ridership, and therefore,

-14is interested in a variety of aspects of parking, including the restriction of parking on bus routes. Bylaw Enforcement is interested in maintaining and operating the present stock of municipallyowned off street parking facilities.

The major elements missing in this process are that there is no clearly defined process through which parking policies and objectives can be met and more importantly no existing agency has the responsibility for implementing parking policies or strategies. This problem is particularly evident when it is recognized that none of the departments involved in parking have a budget for doing anything more than operating existing parking or studying parking problems.

An earlier review of the standards applied through the Zoning Bylaw to certain types of development such as the Downtown, commercial strips, and activity centres (auditoriums and stadiums) demonstrates that the problems associated with parking cannot be solved by more policies or standards but rather what is needed is a focus for the present policies and objectives. The present flow of activity offers no method for any of the actors to improve on the existing situation. A clearly defined process and the assignment of responsibility to an implementing agency will allow for the proper identification, analysis and resolution of many of the parking problems.

-154.0 PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

As previously indicated the major deficiencies in attempting to solve parking problems are in a clearly defined implementation process and in the assignment of implementation responsibilities to a specific agency. Figure 4.1 illustrates the proposed process and corresponding responsibilities for meeting parking objectives and implementing parking policies. The corresponding implementation phases for roadway and transit facilities are included to provide comparisons and indicate inter-relationships. It should be noted that these phases have been consolidated considerably to simplify the diagram.

4.1 Description of Proposed Implementation Process

The proposed process is divided into two separate streams, one of which applies to newly developing or re-developing areas whereby parking objectives and policies can be met through application of the Parking Schedule of the Zoning Bylaw (Stream I) and the other which is directly associated with the transportation planning process (Stream II). Stream II is specifically designed to address those parking issues which cannot be solved through application of the Zoning Bylaw, primarily due to the complexity of the area being dealt with or the close relationship to other elements of the transportation system( strip commercial, Downtown, transit teiminals).

The term "parking agency" indicated on the chart is intended to illustrate the areas where specific responsibility for parking should be assigned and could range from a unit within a department to a semi-autonomous authority.

The major steps included in Stream II and the activities included in them are as follows:

(A) Parking Policies, Guidelines and Concepts

These are and should continue to be a sub-set of the overall transportation policies, guidelines and concepts. Thus the

iâ&#x20AC;¢-1 OVERALL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND CONCEPTS (Transp. Plan. - Part I)

OVERALL LAND USE POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND CONCEPTS (General Plan)

STREAM I

STREAM II A

PARKING POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND CONCEPTS (Transp. Plan - Part I) LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN AND STATGEY (Transp. Plan - Part I)

LONG RANGE PARKING PLAN AND STATAGEY (Transp. Plan - Part '44 III) (Parking Agency)

ZONING BYLAW PARKING SCHEDULE (Planning)

TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION 5 YEAR PLAN (Transp. Planning)

PARKING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Parking Agency)

CONTROL OF PARKING THRU DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PROCESS (Planning)

-o*

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF OFF STREET FACILITIES (Parking Agency)

ROADVaY IMPLE=TATION PLAN (ENG)

TRANSIT IADLT:7eirMAIION PLAN (TRANSIT)

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTIO-q' OF FACILITIES (Eng.) (Transit)

OPERATION AND CONTROL OF ON-STREET PARKING (Eng.) (Parking Agency)

OPERATION OF OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES (Parking Agency)

MONITORING (All Agencies)

FIGURE 4.1 PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS FOR PARKING

OPERATION OF FACILITIES (ENG) (TRANSIT)

-17review and updating of these policies, guidelines and concepts should be done as part of the City's overall transportation planning process.

(B) Long Range Parking Plan and Strategy

This phase should be carried out simultaneously with the overall long range transportation plan which is presently underway as Transportation Plan - Part III since the effect of different parking strategies on the total transportation system must be evaluated as part of the plan. However since Transportation Plan - Part III is primarily concerned with the home-to-work movement of people, it is necessary to initiate detailed studies and assessments to identify other parking requirements for inclusion in the long range parking plan. These would include customer and visitor parking, parking for major spectator events as well as alternative pricing policies, feasibility studies and implications on business activity.

As part of the Local Policy Plan process co-ordinated by the Corporate Policy Planning Office, each department annually produces a 5 year plan which includes proposed programs and corresponding costs. The Engineering and Transit Departments produce their plans based on guidance from the Transportation Planning Branch. This phase identifies the same process for the Parking Agency and would require identification of parking demand, analysis of parking problems, locational analysis, economic analysis and the establishment of priorities for parking facilities identified in the long range plan. This plan must also recognize areas in which on-street parking is proposed to be eliminated as part of the overall transportation plan, in order that alternative parking can be provided.

- 18 -

(D) Design and Construction of Off-Street Facilities

Once an implementation plan has been approved it is necessary to acquire the necessary land, design facilities and arrange for construction of lots. This could include the development of separate parking facilities or the negotiation with developers to provide for some of the forecasted demand as part of comprehensive developments.

(E) Operation of Off-Street Parking Facilities

This includes the day-to-day operation of the off-street facilities and includes establishment of rates (within guidelines), insuring maximum operating efficiency, allotment of space, budget control and maintenance. Parts of this operation could be contracted if it proved more economical.

(F) Operation and Control of On-Street Parking

Since the primary use of the streets is for the movement of traffic, the overall control must lie with the Engineering Department. However the operation and maintenance of parking meters should be carried out by the Parking Agency.

(G) Monitoring

This phase is the assessment of how the facility, standard or policy is operating in relation to meeting the overall goals, and objectives. The monitoring is carried out at different levels by the different agencies involved. For example overall system monitoring and the effect of parking on the transportation system would be carried out by Transportation Planning and could result in recommended changes to parking policies or to the implementation plan.

-19Monitoring of hourly or short-term parking demand and costs would be carried out by the Parking Agency and could result in recommended charges to the implementation plan or to the overall transportation policies.

This phase also provides the important link between all activities associated with parking including both the land use and the transportation activities.

4.2 Parking Agency Responsibilities

As indicated in Figure 4.1, the parking agency would be primarily responsible for the implementation of parking policies and objectives in those areas where the Zoning Bylaw cannot be effective. The specific areas upon which the agency should focus its immediate attention are:

The Downtown area which is described in the Zoning Bylaw as the area bounded by 95 Street, the North Saskatchewan River, 111 Street, and 104 Avenue. Although this area could be used as the boundary of the agencies responsibilities regarding the Downtown, it will be necessary to expand the area when dealing with employee parking.

Commercial strips which are located throughout the City. Discussions with the Planning Department and the Engineering Department have identified several problem areas which should be considered for inclusion in the responsibilities of any new agency. These areas are graphically illustrated on Figure 4.2. It must be noted that a definite boundary for these areas cannot be established at this time but must evolve over time as a new agency commences work in this area.

Major spectator events have long proven a problem for parking related issues. It is suggested that any new agency will be responsible in co-operation with other departments for making

-20recommendations which reduce the conflicts between parking related to spectator events and adjacent land uses.

With the opening of Light Rapid Transit operations consideration of parking problems related to all transit change-of-mode facilities will become more important. It is suggested that like the major spectator facilities the new agency will be responsible for recommendations which reduce land use conflicts between transit facilities and adjacent land uses.

In order to deal with these areas it will be necessary for the agency to carry out detailed analysis of the problems and participate in the development of both a long range and an implementation plan for the provision of parking.

4.1#15 1.4.1e16, 1

r , rU I r.

.77

111,, ':

:_.

•

k ',Fatao

ii.

(mill,IEIL,IR' I

IET"Rglq, lir -11 ,1q11.47

wt.!

Arilfla `1 11 '.1111Plii 114 11 u .t11 1101 !Dn. :7

I. _ 4..pardurvit

i.:1112f vtglifirtriewirry el II ..E} 1 oil '

r 11, 14, 1 !Mil . '•

Prif QC 1)11111)11

1 1114114 ;NW, IN1,11) 11111_11. , •

1111111 1111 I Nig i 1, Noir!

'I 11-Mblitb.

11111111111)111,1111P 1 1111111111111111111111 111111111.0

di L.; '7'0 N

_LpAn.R24.gli

ABL .- Wirt' IIII LI )

1.1 111

1 i'll

r_,i41.1-401. nb,

iirr

40 EV" 11144m —,atitaEl oLw,....4-71

CO atal WATim- r c' ,..-.! --=." r-•-•`-"il

.--N-to F.,Liklif r _ M Dttilim, te104 m imil-b.. a i6); l'• qiIIIIRMOU& IIIIV ''' ivi-21 1- 111, ttv:s'ZITI.,,..01,4 ' I I

tsi'? „,12111fir"

21/1 1L-- 11!Vi r-1 •■ ...t/ 41

1 ;AN

4,4,

,(-)) Itirzhvi __tt„, •=_A__,_

ffs.„ vr‘

WIS. •••• /

7.13"er r yr, 1'v

c_ ymtair- kr.70-45-1:,11:ext (" 514 1 1 111 771

Rav

34,

imiby,..3 41.4 fra 10 - iwitim;_, v i

Strip Commercial

Downtown

FIG. 4.2 Parking Agency Responsibility

04)

-225.0 ALTERNATIVE PARKING AGENCIES

Having defined the process by which parking objectives and policies can be met it is necessary to investigate the type of agency which should be defined to implement the process. The alternatives that could be considered include:

A Parking Authority.

Assignment of responsibility to one Civic department.

Assignment of the planning and monitoring to Transportation Planning with the detailed design, construction and operation assigned to a separate department.

Appointment of a Parking Advisory Board to supplement (b) or( a) above.

It is evident that the present work load of the various Civic departments would eliminate the possibility of adding the parking responsibilities to any department or combination of departments without increasing staff. Similarly staff would have to be hired by a Parking Authority to carry out its responsibilities so any agency set up to implement parking policy will require additional staff.

5.1 Parking Authority

5.1.1

Structure

The structure of the Parking Authority would be a corporate body responsible for the construction, maintenance, control, operation, and management of all municipal parking facilities. This requires a separate self-sustaining body authorized to receive money in lieu of parking stalls, sale of debentures, collected revenue from all parking meters and collected revenue from off-street parking lots and garages. These monies would be assembled in a fund to be used for the provision of parking facilities where appropriate on commercial strips, where and if appropriate in the central area and possibly at outlying rapid transit stations.

-23The Authority would be comprised of:

An Administration Board of appointed city staff; which would a)

make decisions on management of facilities controlled by the authority such as the hours of operation, staffing and the fixing of parking rates;

provide for new parking facilities that have been approved by Council. This would mean contracting construction, financing through the Authority as a corporation separate from the City, evaluating tenders, and choosing locations and type of parking structures;

make recommendations to City Council for the acquisition of land (leasing or buying) and the construction of new parking structures and surface lots;

conduct and arrange for detailed studies to determine the location of sites, size, and types of parking facilities;

make decisions on the allocation and procurement of funds for the purpose of the Authority.

Technical staff which would be responsible for: a)

revenue collection from on-street meters, metered lots and attendant operated parking facilities;

the supervision and administration of parking structures, parking lots and pedways;

the execution of studies;

liaison with the business community;

the implementation of parking programs.

It would be designated purposefully that City Council must approve certain factors in the Authority's operation in order that the Authority does not work in total isolation from the Civic Departments.

5.1.2

Financing

The financing of an Authority would be arranged such that it would be a self-sustaining organization, yet not profit making or oriented in the same manner as a City owned utility. Rather, any monies

-24realized as a profit would be turned back into the organization to reduce its debt, and further express the aims of the Authority. This is necessary in order that the Authority does not restrict the borrowing power of the City as a result of debts that it may incur and that it is not an additional burden on the taxpayer by increasing the mill rate in order to provide necessary parking facilities.

The accounts and records would be kept subject to an annual audit and open to inspection at any time.

The means of financing the Authority could be through:

Money received by developers in lieu of providing required parking space. The amount of this contribution would be determined by a formula based on land cost and current construction of parking structures;

The sale of debentures;

The collection of revenue from on-street meters, metered lots, and the rent or lease of taxi zones, loading zones and attendant parking garages and lots.

Therefore, after all the operating costs of the Authority are deducted from the revenue provided by the above, the balance should be set aside to establish a fund to finance the acquisition of new parking facilities. Included in the operating costs of the Authority could be the business and realty tax on all off-street facilities. No charge or deficit incurred by the Authority should be included directly or indirectly in the expenditures listed in the bylaw establishing the mill rate for the taxation of the City.

5.1.3

Advantages

The major advantages of a Parking Authority would be:

It would consolidate parking responsibilities in one agency.

It could operate independent of the Civic Administration and would therefore not affect the borrowing power of the City.

-25c)

It could effectively report to and advise City Council on matters related to parking.

5.1.4

Disadvantages

The major disadvantages of a Parking Authority are related to its semi-independent status and include:

It would eliminate certain responsibilities presently carried by Civic Departments.

In attempting to solve parking problems it could develop solutions which conflict with policies related to transportation and land use.

It would add another semi-independant body reporting to City Council.

The current contribution of revenue from parking operations would be removed from the City's general revenue.

5.2 Assignment of the Parking Implementation to One Civic Department

At the present time the Bylaw Enforcement department has responsibility for the management, operation and maintenance of City owned parking facilities. In order to perform the entire implementation process, the present staff would have to be supplemented with technical staff for conducting the necessary economic, demand and feasibility studies to prepare long range and implementation plans as well as to answer requests and inquiries regarding parking. The unit would work in co-operation with the Planning Department to establish both the long range and the implementation plan.

5.2.1

Advantages

The major advantages of assigning the parking responsibilities to one Civic department are:

-26-

Parking responsibilities would be consolidated in one agency.

There would be no loss of existing responsibilities and the management and support staff are available.

It would be unlikely that solutions to parking problems which contradict overall land use and transportation policies would occur.

Funds from parking operations could contribute to general revenues.

The start-up time for initiating activities would be less than for a Parking Authority.

5.2.2

Disadvantages

The disadvantages of assignment to a Civic Department are:

Additional technical staff would be required in the Administration.

A heavy emphasis on parking in the Bylaw Enforcement department could conflict with the other functions of the Department.

The borrowing power of the City could be affected by capital requirements for parking facilities.

There would be no direct reporting to City Council.

5.3 Assignment of Responsibilities to Two Civic Departments

The Transportation Planning Branch of the Planning Department is presently responsible for overall transportation planning. This responsibility could be extended to include the responsibility for establishing an implementation plan and annual budgets. Bylaw Enforcement's responsibilities could be expanded to include the construction of parking facilities. A responsibility split of this nature would place of overall responsibility for control, and development of parking facilities including economic and feasibility studies and recommendations on rate structures in the Planning Department. The Bylaw Enforcement department would be responsible for the construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.

-275.3.1

Advantages

With the exception of consolidating all parking responsibilities in one agency this alternative has the same advantages as those indicated for the previous alternative. In addition it has the advantage of making maximum utilization of existing expertise in both areas and could reduce the number of additional staff required to effectively implement parking policies. It would also minimize the impact of adding all of the parking responsibilities to one department.

5.3.2

Disadvantages

Other than the effect on departmental functions, this alternative has the same disadvantages as those indicated in Section 5.2. There could also be problems with the division of responsibilities from the control point of view and in identifying the total costs associated with the provision of parking.

5.4 Appointment of a Parking Advisory Board to Supplement Civic Departmental Responsibilities

In order to maintain the advantages of retaining control over parking in the Civic Administration but provide an independent body to advise City Council, a Parking Advisory Board could be appointed. Such a board would be composed of representatives from business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, private parking agencies, and citizens at large. The board would be responsible for reviewing policies, identifying parking issues and advising City Council and would operate in a manner very similar to the Air Services Commission.

5.4.1

Advantages

The advantages of supplementing departmental responsibilities with an independent board would be:

-28a)

An independent review of policies could be obtained.

A formalized body would be available for initiating action in particular areas of concern.

Civic control to insure that overall policies are met could be largely maintained.

5.4.2

Disadvantages

The disadvantages that could result with an Advisory Board are:

It would add another independent group reporting to City Council.

Conflicts could arise between the Advisory Board and the Administration.

Changing membership could result in conflicts on the Advisory Board.

-296. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES

In previous sections, it has been indicated that an implementing agency is required.

The Zoning Bylaw will continue to provide parking standards for new and redevelopment proposals. In areas of the City controlled by the Land Use Classification Guide the Development Officer will continue to use the Parking Schedule as a guide and exercise his discretion as required. The Development Officer will be expected to consult with any new agency on parking-related issues, seeking advice on individual developments controlled by the Land Use Classification Guide and seeking suggestions for improvements to the Parking Schedule.

The new agency will have specific responsibilities as outlined in earlier sections of this report. These responsibilities relate predominantly to the Downtown, commercial strips, major spectator activities, and transit change-of-mode facilities. This agency will also be responsible for providing consulting services on parking-related problems in all parts of the City.

6.1 Guidelines

In order to ensure that the new agency meets the adopted objectives for parking, the following general guidelines are suggested:

1) Ptovide 4hoitt tom pakking in ptoximity to majot commekciat

activity akea4. In order to maintain the economic and social viability of commercial areas such as the Downtown and commercial strips, it is essential that customer parking in close proximity to the destination be provided. The agency in considering this guideline must take into account the fact that various commercial activities place different demands on parking.

-30Consideration must include the type of business to be served, the size of the operation and the economics of providing parking.

Encomage the demeopment o4 Zang tekm pa/Eking on the pe/EiphelEy o4 the Downtown atea and e6tabtizh zuch 4acititiez in pnoximity to txamit toute4. The agency in following the priority to establish short-term parking in close proximity to major economic activity areas must therefore investigate alternative locations for the required long-term parking. Factors to be considered by the agency in establishing long-term parking must include, the ease of access to employment centres and the convenience of the site. Convenience is taken to include the quality of the stall, the availability of transit links to place of work the time required to get from the stall to place-of-work and the relative costs involved.

To negotiate,with deveZopeu 4oft the ptovizion o4 joint pa/thing 4acieitiez. Under the present situation the parking provided within individual developments is designed for a limited amount of employee parking. Through their negotiations the new agency should encourage the development of joint parking facilities which can also serve a short term parking function. This allows the flexibility over time of converting employee parking within the core area to customer parking as the development of peripheral long-term lots occurs.

-314) Suppont and maintain qiective en4o/Lcement 4yztem4 q on4tAeet patking te.stitiction4.. The new agency has the ability to encourage the use of offstreet parking facilities through the judicious application of on-street parking restrictions. Therefore, it is critical that the new agency develop a clear understanding of all rules and regulations governing on-street parking and maintain close liaison with the Civic departments enforcing these regulations. With the new off-street parking facilities developed by the new agency there may be opportunity to encourage the use of these facilities by greater application of restrictions governing on-street parking in the area of the new facility.

5) Enzute that att. Adte4 chalLged at any oâ&#x20AC;&#x153;-ztteet pakking 6actie4 maintain ttanzit in a iavoulLabZe economic pozition. It is important that the new agency understand that it is not providing parking for the sake of parking, but rather in the context and in support of the City's overall transportation and land use goals. Therefore, recognizing transit's importance to the City as a whole and to the effectiveness of any transportation system, the new agency must provide parking which in its location and relative cost to the user maintains the relative attractiveness of public transit.

Develop Zimited patking 6acie4 auund and encounage the

toe 04 atteknative methodz 0 tanomtation to majoA. 4pectatoiL event4. The agency must recognize that parking cannot be provided for the entire seating capacity of major spectator facilities. The agency must also recognize that each event will not completely fill spectator facilities. Therefore, the agency

-32-

must attempt to provide parking facilities which will accommodate small crowds. The use of such facilities as park and ride for major spectator events must be encouraged and it may be necessary to apply certain restrictions to the on-street parking stock surrounding major spectator events to avoid land use conflicts.

7) That the agency encoutage the development o6 /Leak yew( patking taated to commetciaZ 4ttip4 whete the Zoning ByZaw peAmi,t.s. The agency must recognize that existing commercial strips are fixed structures and that an immediate solution to all related on-street parking problems is economically impossible. Therefore, incremental solutions must be provided as opportunities arise which attempt to solve the problem over time. To this end the agency must encourage small projects using the existing structures such as rear lanes and yards.

8) That economic ied6ibitity 4tudie4 be undetta(zen to detetmine the meALts outabtizhing municipa q4-4tteet patking

Because of land availability and the high cost of land, the new agency must ensure through feasibility studies that any facility developed in the Downtown and commercial strip areas will serve a definite need and provide a realistic return to the City as a whole.

9) To monitot ttanzit change-oi-mode 6aciatieis to en6ute that the naed o the majonity ttanzit patton4 ate being met thtough patking 6acit.itie6 and tuttictionz. With the increasing importance of transit and the commencement of operations of Light Rapid Transit, transit change of mode

-33facilities offer increased possibilities for land use conflicts brought about by on-street parking. It is critical that the new agency take an active role in discussing future parking facilities related to transit change-of-mode facilities.

10)

That the new agency develop expettize on pakking -1.zzuez thnoughout the City and act az a consuttant to the AdminiztAation on pakking 4.44uez. The agency over time will develop a high level of expertise. Therefore, the agency could act as a focal point for parking problems and issues and must consult with and recommend to other Civic departments solutions to parking problems and issues.

APPENDIX I EXISTING PARKING POLICIES

APPENDIX I

EXISTING PARKING POLICIES

As part of the Parking Study, all existing parking-oriented policies in the City's General Plan Bylaw and Transportation Plan - Part I have been identified in this appendix. The policies have been reviewed to determine their adequacy and implementability.

The General Plan and Transportation Plan - Part I contain many broad policy statements concerning parking and parking-related matters. As this appendix illustrates, many of the parking-oriented policies in the General Plan and Transportation Plan - Part I attempt to deal with, in addition to parking, numerous parking-related issues, such as traffic congestion, traffic safety and vehicle and pedestrian conflicts. Few policies deal exclusively with parking, per se.

It is also observed that none of the policies listed below identify implementation methods or responsibilities. Lack of an effective implementation mechanism combined with the general nature of many of the existing parking policies and the fact that many of the policies have attempted to deal with many issues which cannot be solved by parking have made the implementation of the existing policies difficult.

1. RESIDENTIAL AREA

(a) "Residential area parking policy is to provide adequate offstreet parking. Apartments should provide off-street facilities for residents and visitors alike. On-street parking should be used for temporary parking only and should not restrict traffic flow or infringe on safety standards of residential streets." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(b) "To minimize the hazards of on-street parking in quiet housing areas by encouraging laneless subdivisions which necessitate front-drive garages unless, for some specific reason, it can be shown in a particular area that laneless subdivisions are uneconomical or otherwise undesirable." (General Plan, p. 5.4)

(c) "On-street parking in residential areas having narrow streets should be restricted to one side of a street. Residents should be encouraged to use off-street parking to enhance the appearance of the street for safety and smoother traffic flow." (General Plan, p. 16.4)

2. COMMERCIAL AREAS

Commercial Strips

(a) "Outlying commercial area parking policies are to encourage the provision of adequate off-street parking and attempts should be made to screen such parking from road traffic and pedestrians." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(b) "Off-street parking policies in the vicinity of outlying commercial areas such as planned shopping centres are to provide adequate parking to handle peak loads in an average week. Strip commercial areas will also be encouraged to develop off-peak hour useage and restricted meter parking." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(c) "Adequate off-street parking facilities should be provided throughout the strip commercial area. All parking facilities should be screened from the main street or placed to the rear of the commercial development." (General Plan, p. 6.6)

(d) "Good pedestrian access should be provided from nearby parking facilities and from surrounding residential areas." (General Plan, p. 6.6)

Downtown Area

(a) "Off-street parking will be limited in the Central Area to improve efficiency of land use and pedestrian traffic. Joint use will be made of such parking facilities by providing day time business parking and evening recreational parking." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(b) "A Central Area parking policy shall be developed that will encourage entry and departure from the area during off-peak periods. The policy shall also encourage multi-passenger ridership in vehicles entering the Central Area." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(c) "On-street parking should present minimum conflict with traffic and pedestrians in the Central Area. Such parking will be restricted to short telm parking during off-peak hours." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(d) "In general, the parking policies to encourage off-street parking and to discourage parking in the Central Area to promote more efficient use of transit facilities." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

(e) "Major parking concentrations should provide skywalks and tunnels for efficient pedestrian movement between parking facilities and nearby buildings." (General Plan, p. 10.4)

(f) "The time limit for parking in the Downtown Area is particularly important and should be provided according to the needs and destination of the driver. Short term shopping and business patron parking should be restricted to brief and urgent needs and is desirable within 600 feet of the destination. Long term employee parking should, wherever possible, be located within 1,000 to 1,500 feet of major destinations and outside areas of intense activities. Wherever possible, parking for executives and office patrons should be provided within or immediately adjacent to major office buildings. Parking for major residential buildings should be included on the site." (General Plan, p. 10.4)

(g) "Parking should be designed as an integral part of a building so that it can be associated with the destination of people; placed in the least valuable part of the block; pooled to create larger, more economical parking or converted into storage areas if necessary." (General Plan, p. 10.7)

(h) "Adequate off-street parking should be provided, serving individual buildings or associated groups of buildings. Developers should provide underground or elevated parking structures, leaving open space for use by inhabitants of the buildings." (General Plan, p. 10.10)

(i) "Adequate off-street truck loading and parking space should be provided for each development." (General Plan, p. 10.10)

(j) "Adequate off-street parking (particularly underground parking) should be provided within each development to protect and improve the amenities of this residential area." (General Plan, p. 10.9)

(k) "Surface parking reduces the amenities of an area, therefore, curb-side parking should be severely controlled in certain parts of Downtown Edmonton, particularly in the Civic Centre". (General Plan, p. 16.4)

Outlying Commercial Areas

INDUSTRIAL AREAS

(a) "Industrial area policy is to provide total off-street employee and customer parking." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

SPECTATOR EVENTS

(a) "To devise a policy that will prohibit over-flow parking into adjoining residential areas from the major trip generators such as the University, N.A.I.T. and major sports facilities." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

EDUCATIONAL SITES

(a) "To devise a policy that will prohibit over-flow parking into adjoining residential areas from the major trip generators such as the University, N.A.I.T. Plan - Part I)

.". (Transportation

6. HOSPITALS AND OTHER MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL USES

(a) ". . . prohibit over-flow parking into adjoining residential areas." (Transportation Plan - Part I)

APPENDIX II JUSTIFICATION OF PARKING SCHEDULE AND PARKING SCHEDULE - ZONING BYLAW

APPENDIX II

JUSTIFICATION OF PARKING SCHEDULE

In 1972 the Planning Department prepared a study of parking requirements and made recommendations which resulted in the present Parking Schedule. This 1972 study reviewed each land use category and attempted to define realistic parking requirements for each use.

The 1972 Parking Study determined that with single family and duplex development one parking stall should be provided, with additional land available for a second stall. This was determined by comparing car ownership from the Census to home ownership requirements and comparing the Edmonton situation with other North American cities.

With apartment and multi-family development, the 1972 Parking Study determined that parking requirements should be related to the bedroom mix of the units. It was suggested that the requirements for parking grew with the number of bedrooms provided. Therefore, the study recommended a parking requirement based on the number of bedrooms per unit adding a percentage for visitor parking and the parking of recreational vehicles. This approach was compared with other cities in North America and parking literature and found to be quite acceptable. Other cities have subsequently followed the same method.

The 1972 Parking Study reviewed literature and the experience of other cities and suggested for business, administrative and professional offices parking requirements should be based on the number of employees. For ease of calculation the 1972 study provided an average number of employees per 1,000 sq. ft. thus allowing the Development Officer to calculate the parking requirements from the square footage.

The Study differentiated between retail shops or retail shopping areas under 10,000 sq. ft. and retail areas over 10,000 sq. ft. The study suggested that areas under 10,000 sq. ft. would be convenience and

service oriented thus requiring parking facilities for short durations of time. The retail areas over 10,000 sq. ft. were judged to be more closely related to shopping centres with major retail tenants thus requiring parking facilities for longer durations of time. Consequently the requirements for the smaller areas are lower than for the larger areas.

The actual figures were arrived at from a study of the literature, a comparison with other North American cities and a review of what the private sector was already providing.

Special attention was paid to the Downtown area and existing commercial strip areas in the 1972 Parking Study. The study recommended that the Downtown and commericial strip areas remain under development control rather than being placed under the Zoning Bylaw thus allowing the Development Officer some discretion in detetiaining parking requirements for new buildings. It was understood that the Officer would use the Parking Schedule as a guide but could be open to major innovations. The 1972 study further recolimtended that because of the level of present development in the Downtown and in commercial strips complete parking requirements could not be met by new development alone. Therefore some form of agency that could actively improve parking facilities within the existing setting was needed. To date this has never been acted upon.

There have been some significant amendments to the Downtown requirements since 1972. Foremost among these is the fact that the Development Officer will reduce the parking requirements for developments which tie into the Downtown pedway system and further reductions for development which incorporate rapid transit facilities. These type of standards recognize the complexity of the Downtown and commercial strip areas but only apply to new developments.

The 1972 Parking Study provided recommendations for eating establishments, cocktail bars and motels and hotels that were essentially based on studies and recouilllendations done by the Alberta Liquor Commission.

Parking in industrial areas was based on the number of anticipated employees and again provided a figure suggesting the number of employees per 1,000 sq. ft. based on studies done in other cities.

The 1972 study suggested that the parking facilities for churches should be related to seating capacity and based their figure on a comparison of other North American cities. Discussion in the 1972 report also recognized the possibility that church sites might share parking facilities with other uses.

When considering schools the 1972 report considered the fact that many community facilities such as arenas and pools were located in close proximity to senior schools and made recommendations providing parking for the schools and the associated facilities.

The 1972 Parking Study suggested that based on studies done by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, homes for the aged should be provided with a 25 per cent parking facilities based on a unit or room count.

In providing a recommendation for hospitals the 1972 study considered what parking facilities were being provided in other cities and evaluated existing hospitals in Edmonton.

While considering parking standards for auditoriums the 1972 study did detailed studies on existing facilities to determine the mode of transportation being used and attempted to predict a minimum requirement. The report recommended one stall per 3.5 seats which was seen to meet the Edmonton needs and also compared favourably with other cities. It must be noted that many of the facilities covered by this category such as Clarke Stadium and the Coliseum are already constructed and of such size and attract such crowds that parking standards alone cannot be expected to solve all parking problems. This particular category is one which requires continual monitoring and might best be handled by the new agency.

In summary, the 1972 Parking Study provided the basis for the present Parking Schedule and while there have been minor amendments to the Schedule it may be said that in the majority of cases the justifications and the rationale used in 1972 study are still applicable. A comparison of Edmonton's requirements for new development with other cities shows Edmonton in a favourable light (see Appendix III).

PARKING SCHEDULE - ZONING BYLAW

BYLAW 4140 1. Bylaw 2135 as amended, being the Zoning Bylaw for the City of Edmonton is hereby amended. 2. Section 2 of the Zoning Bylaw is amended by adding immediately after Section 2 (82) the following new Subsection (82A) "tandem parking" means two spaces, one behind the other with one point of access to the manoeuvring aisle. 3. Section 2 of the Zoning Bylaw is amended by adding immediately after Section 2 (44) the following new Subsection (44A)

"gross leaseable area" means the finished floor area of the building which excludes mechanical rooms, service areas outside of the place of business, stairwells and utility cores. 4. Section 12, Subsection 12 (c) of the Zoning Bylaw is struck out and the following is substituted: (c) Access to Spaces Adequate access to and exit from individual parking spaces is to be provided at all times by means of unobstructed manoeuvring aisles and to the satisfaction of the Development Officer except where otherwise indicated in this bylaw. 5. Section 12, Subsection 12 (f) of the Zoning Bylaw is struck out and the following is substituted: (f) Different Uses of the Same Site In the case of the multiple use of a site the Development Officer shall calculate the parking required for each individual use and this shall be deemed to be the required parking for the site, unless the applicant can otherwise demonstrate to the Development Officer that there is a complementary or overlapping use of the parking facilities which would warrant a reduction in the parking requirements. 6. Section 12, Subsection 14 of the Zoning Bylaw is struck out and substituted therefore is a new Section 12 (14) contained in Appendix "A" attached to and made a part of this bylaw.

Section 12 (4) Parking Schedule When any new development takes place or when any existing development is, in the opinion of the Development Officer, substantially enlarged or increased in capacity, then provision shall be made for off street vehicular parking or garage spaces for any development in any district defined in this Bylaw, in accordance with the following standards; provided that exceptions to these standards may be made where the applicant can otherwise demonstrate that the development can be improved by a reduction of the following standards, the Development Officer may reduce the required standards to gain an overall improvement to the development but in no case, with the exception of homes for the aged, shall it be less than one parking space per dwelling unit.

Use of Building or Site

Minimum number of Parking or Garage Spaces Required

RESIDENTIAL One and Two Family Dwellings

1 parking or garage space per dwelling unit plus provision shall be made for 1 additional space on the site, with suitable access and this additional space may be in tandem.

NOTE: Where a front yard driveway provides access to a parking space that is not within the front yard, the Development Officer may consider this driveway as the provision of a second car parking space that is in tandem. Apartment Buildings and Terraced Dwellings

1 parking space per bachelor dwelling unit, 1 parking space per 1 bedroom dwelling unit, 1.5 parking space per 2 bedroom dwelling unit, 1.75 parking spaces per 3 bedroom dwelling unit or larger.

Homes for the Aged (individual unit projects)

1 per 4 units or such ration or number as the Municipal Planning Commission may approve.

Homes for the Aged (lodge-type accommodation)

1 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or such ratio as the Municipal Planning Commission may approve.

(b) Adding to Section 12, Subsection (14), entitled Parking Schedule, the following new category, immediately following after the Residential category:

DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (Area bounded by 95 Street, North Saskatchewan River, 111 Street and 104 Avenue)

Bylaw 5198 1 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, except in the following circumstances: (i) 1 per 2,000 square feet of gross floor area where the development is connected to the downtown pedway system, or (ii) 1 per 2,500 square feet of gross floor area where the development has a direct connection to a light rail transit station."

INDUSTRIAL Manufacturing and Industrial Plants, Warehousing, Wholesale and Storage buildings and yards, Servicing and Repair establishments, Research Laboratories and Public Utility Buildings.

1 per 3 employees on a maximum working shift but not less than 5 spaces per tenant or establishment.

AUDITORIUMS Public assembly auditoriums including 1 per 3.5 seating spaces for the public, theatres, convention halls, gymnasiums, or 1 per 35 square feet used by the race tracks, exhibition halls, labour patrons, whichever is greater. temples, lodge halls, private clubs, ball parks and other sports arenas and other recreational or amusement places. Churches

1 per 15 seating spaces

Funeral Homes

1 per 5 seats for persons attending services plus 1 space per funeral home vehicle. (The Development Officer may allow any suitable arrangement of the required parking spaces without the normally required provision of manoeuvring aisles.

SCHOOLS Public or Private Elementary and Junior High Schools

I space for each classroom.

Public or Private Senior High Schools which DO NOT include an auditorium, gymnasium or swimming pool.

I space for each classroom plus I space for every 33 students.

Public or Private Senior High Schools which DO include an auditorium, gymnasium or swimming pool, either (i) or (ii) or (iii) shall apply, whichever is greatest.

Colleges, Universities, Business or Commercial or Technical Schools

I space for each classroom plus I space for every 33 students Or

I space per 3.5 seating spaces used for assembly in an auditorium, gymnasium, or swimming pool or (iii) 1 space per 35 square feet used for assembly in an auditorium, gymnasium or swimming pool, whichever is greatest. 1 per 10 seats, plus auditorium requirements where applicable.

HOSPITALS AND SIMILAR USES Hospitals, Sanatoriums, Convalescent Homes or similar uses

1 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.

Apartment Buildings and Terraced Dwellings (continued)

Of the total number of parking spaces required 1 space per every 7 dwelling units must be assigned to guest parking, readily available to an entrance of the building to be served, and must be clearly identified as guest parking. The Development Officer may accept tandem parking spaces of a number that is equivalent to the total required parking minus the total number of dwelling units, minus the total visitor parking required.

Lodging House, Fraternity Houses

1 per 2 beds.

COMMERCIAL (Except for DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL, as defined above). Business, Administrative and Professional Offices and Banks

3.2 per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building.

Retail Shops, Personal Service Shops and Equipment and Repair Shops with a gross floor area of: Less than 20,000 square feet 20,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet more than 200,000 square feet.

2 per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area in the building. 3 per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area in the building. 4 per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area in the building.

Eating Establishments

1 per 4 seats

Cocktail Bars

1 per 4 seats

Beer Parlours

1 per 4 seats

Hotels, including Motor Hotels

1 per quest room

Motels

1 per dwelling or sleeping unit.

APPENDIX III PARKING STANDARDS IN OTHER CANADIAN CITIES

A review was conducted of available information regarding parking standards now in effect in other Canadian centres. Table III-1 is a summary of parking standards used by various municipalities in Canada. It should be noted that not all municipalities specify parking requirements for all the major land use classes used in this table and that there may be specific site agreements and bylaws or circumstances where the parking standards required are considerably different from those outlined in the table. Also, the parking standards in a number of municipalities were established more than ten years ago. In many cases, these standards were created from a review of parking-related literature or from parking standards used in other municipalities and as such may not reflect current parking demands. Several cities, such as Calgary and Scarborough, have recently completed studies to review and update standards for specific special land use types such as multi-family housing and commercial and office uses.

The parking standards in Table III-1 vary most significantly by land use type and geographical location within the city. The major difference relates to the level of detail used to differentiate between structure types and land uses. Special use categories arid the basis for parking requirements vary widely between municipalities. Overall, the land use classes associated with the parking standards are very broad and do not always reflect the variation in parking demand that exists within some land use classes. In most municipalities, parking standards apply to the entire city and therefore are not sensitive to special geographical areas of high public transit access such as the Central Business District. In comparison, the City of Edmonton has relatively detailed standards for specific structure types within most major land use classes and has differentiated between commercial uses in the downtown and other areas. In Edmonton, residential uses are not differentiated by geographical area. Finally, it has been observed that none of the municipal bylaws and standards reviewed differentiate between long-term and short-term parking space.

TABLE III - I PARKING STANDARDS IN OTHER CANADIAN CITIES

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

STANDARD

COMMENTS

Calgary

All Residential (R-2) Lodging House

All

City-Wide

1.0 space/d.u. 1.33 spaces/d.u. 1.0 space/3 guest rooms

Presently under review. One visitor space is provided for every three dwelling units. Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 1 space/2 patient beds.

Fredericton

All Multi-family Residential

All

City-Wide

1.25 spaces/d.u.

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 0.25.

Guelph

Apartments

1 - 20 units 20 + units

City-Wide

1.5 spaces/d.u. 1.25 spaces/d.u. 1.5 spaces/d.u.

1 - 39 units/ City-Wide net acre 39 + units/net acre

1.25 spaces/d.u.

CITY

RESIDENTIAL

Townhouse Kitchener

Apartments

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 0.17.

1.0 space/d.u.(min.) 1.25 spaces/d.u. (max.) 1.25 spaces/d.u.

Townhouse Lethbridge

All Residential

All

City-Wide

1.0 space/d.u.

London

Apartments

Walk-up

Central Area

High-rise

Outlying Area Central Area

0.75 spaces/d.u.(min.) 1.0 space/d.u. (max.) 1.5 spaces/d.u. 0.75 spaces/d.u.(min.) 1.0 space/d.u. (max.) 1.25 spaces/d.u.

Outlying Area

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard: Central 0.17 and Outlying 0.25.

CITY

LAND USE

SIZE

Townhouse

LOCATION

STANDARD

Central Area

1.0 space/d.u. (min.) 1.25 spaces/d.u.(max.) 1.50 spaces/d.u.

Outlying Area Niagara Falls

Ottawa

All Multi-family Residential Apartments

3-5 units 6-9 units 10 + units

City-Wide

First 150 Units

Inner-City

Next 150 Units Next 150 Units

Fringe Outlying Area Inner-City Fringe Outlying Area Inner-City Fringe Outlying Area

Townhouse

1.0 space/d.u. 1.0 space/d.u. 1.4 spaces/d.u. 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.0

spaces/d.u.(min.) spaces/d.u.(max.) spaces/d.u. space/d.u. spaces/d.u.(min.) spaces/d.u.(max.) spaces/d.u. spaces/d.u. spaces/d.u.(min.) spaces/d.u.(max.) spaces/d.u. spaces/d.u. space/d.u.

COMMENTS

+ 2 visitor spaces + 3 visitor spaces. All apartment standards are exclusive of visitor parking (0.17 spaces/d.u.).

+ 0.2 visitor parking.

Saskatoon

All Multi-family Residential

All

City-Wide

1.0 space/d.u.

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 0.25.

Vancouver

All Residential

1-2 d.u. City-Wide (with access) 1-2 d.u. (without access) + 3 d.u.

1.0 space/d.u.

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 1.0 space/6 d.u. Low income housing dwelling unit standard 1 space/2 d.u.

Lodging House Victoria

Apartments (Rented) (Owned) Townhouse

All

City-Wide

2.0 spaces/d.u. 1.0 space/725 sq. ft. gross floor area 1.0 space/350 sq. ft. of floor area for sleeping units. 1.2 spaces/d.u. 1.4 spaces/d.u. 1.5 spaces/d.u.

CITY

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

STANDARD

COMMENTS

Winnipeg

All Residential

1-2 family Multi-family

City-Wide

1.0 space/d.u. 1.0 space/d.u. + 1.0 space/5 d.u. for buildings with more than 50 d.u. 1.0 space/4 rooming units.

Senior citizen's dwelling unit standard 1 space/5 d.u.

Business, Administrative, and Professional Offices and Banks

City-Wide

1.0 space/500 sq. ft. of floor area used for business purposes. Not less than 1 space/office.

Retail Stores and Personal Service Shops

City-Wide

1.0 space/500 sq. ft. of floor area used for business purposes. Not less than 1 space/shop.

Shopping Centres-Regional, Sector and Neighbourhood Centres

City-Wide

5.5 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of usable floor area.

Restaurants

City-Wide

1.0 space/10 seats

Cocktail Lounges

City-Wide

1.0 space/3 seats.

Beer Parlours

City-Wide

1.0 space/3 seats.

Hotels

City-Wide

1.0 space/3 guest rooms.

Offices -Banks

City-Wide

1.0 space/500 sq. ft. of gross floor area. 1.0 space/600 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Lodging House

COMMERCIAL Calgary

Lethbridge

-Others

1-10,000 sq. ft. gross floor area. 10,000 + sq. ft. of gross floor area.

1.0 space/500 sq. ft. of of gross floor area.

CITY

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

Retail-Restaurants

Vancouver

COMMENTS

1.0 space/100 sq. ft. of gross floor area. 1.0 space/300 sq. ft. of gross ground floor area and 1.0 space/500 sq. ft. gross floor area on all other floors.

-Others

Scarborough

STANDARD

Service

1.0 space/300 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Bars and Cocktail Lounges

1.25 spaces/100 sq. ft. of of gross floor area.

Hotels

1.0 space/3 guest rooms.

Motels

1.25 spaces/guest room.

District and Community

7-10 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Neighbourhood Commercial

5-7 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Highway Commercial

3-5 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Office

3 spaces/1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

Office Buildings, Retail Establishments, or Other Similar Use

1-3,000 sq. ft.

3,000 + sq. ft.

City-Wide

1.0 space/1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

3.0 spaces + 1 space for every additional 500 sq. ft. of gross floor area in excess of 3,000 sq. ft.

CITY

Winnipeg

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

Restaurants

1-1,200 sq. ft. 1,200+ sq. ft.

STANDARD

COMMENTS

1.0 space. 1.0 space + 1 space for every additional 400 sq. ft. of gross floor area in excess of 1,200 sq. ft.

Premises Licensed as Public Houses and Lounges

1 space/60 sq. ft. of floor area open to public, except washrooms.

Hotels and Motels

1.0 space/d.u. and 1 space/2 sleeping units.

Banks, Other Offices

City-Wide

1.0 space/300 sq. ft. of floor area in excess of 4,000 sq. ft.

Retail Sales and Service

City-Wide

1.0 space/300 sq. ft. of floor space in excess of 3,000 sq. ft.

Place of Assembly, Eating or Drinking Place

City-Wide

1.0 space/4 seats of total capacity.

Hotel

1.0 space/3 guest rooms.

Motel

1.0 space/dwelling unit.

AUDITORIUMS Calgary

Public Assembly Auditoriums

City-Wide

Churches Lethbridge

Public Assembly (with fixed seats)

1.0 space/10 seating spaces or 1.0 space/ 100 sq. ft. used in the service of the public, whichever is greater. 1 space/15 seating spaces.

City-Wide

1 space/10 seats.

CITY

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

Other

STANDARD

COMMENTS

1 space/100 sq. ft. gross floor area.

Vancouver

Churches and Similar Places of Public Assembly.

Winnipeg

Place of Assembly

1 space/4 seats of total capacity.

Churches

1 space/10 fixed seats.

City-Wide

1 space/100 sq. ft. of floor space.

SCHOOLS Calgary

Elementary Schools

City-Wide

1 space/20 children based on projected design capacity. 1 space/20 students based on projected design capacity. 1 space/20 students based on projected design capacity plus 1 space per 10 seating spaces for public assembly auditoriums or 1 space/100 sq. ft. used in service of public, whichever is greater.

City-Wide

2 spaces/3 teaching areas in elementary schools and one and one-quarter spaces per teaching area in secondary schools provided always that in any case where the number of spaces required under the by-law as a result of extension to an existing school would diminish the school playground area the amount of parking required under the by-law shall be reduced so as not to affect the playground area adversely.

Junior High Schools Senior High Schools

Vancouver

School - Public or Private

CITY

LAND USE

SIZE

LOCATION

STANDARD

School Business

1-3,000 sq. ft. gross

City-Wide

1 space/1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. 3 spaces, plus 1 space for every additional 500 sq. ft. of gross floor area in excess of 3,000 sq. ft.

3000 + sq. ft. gross floor area

COMMENTS

HOSPITALS AND INSTITUTIONS Calgary

Hospitals, Sanatoria and Asylums

City-Wide

1 1 1 1

Nursing Homes

space/4 patient beds and space/4 employees and space/staff doctor. space/5 patient beds.

Lethbridge

Hospitals

City-Wide

1 space/3 beds.

Vancouver

Hospitals and Other Institutions

City-Wide

1 space/1000 sq. ft. gross floor area.

Winnipeg

Hospitals

City-Wide

1 space/6 beds plus 1 space/5 employees plus 1 space/2 staff doctors.

Calgary

Manufacturing and Industrial Plants; Public Utility Buildings; Research Laboratories; and Warehousing, Wholesaling and Building and Yards.

City-Wide

1 space/3 employees (min. 5).

Lethbridge

Industrial

City-Wide

1 space/600 gross floor 1 space/700 gross floor

INDUSTRIAL

Warehousing

sq. ft. acres. sq. ft. area.

CITY

LAND USE

Scarborough

Vancouver

LOCATION

STANDARD

Industrial

City-Wide

1 space/1000 sq. ft. gross floor area.

Manufacturing and Industrial Buildings and Uses, Wholesale Distribution, Servicing and Repair Establishments, or Other Similar Uses.

City-Wide

1 space/5 employees on a maximum working shift, or not less than one space for each 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area in the building, whichever is the greater.

Warehouses, Storage Buildings or Yards, or Other Similar Uses.

SIZE

COMMENTS

1 space/2,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building, or not less than one space for each 5 employees on a maximum working shift, whichever is the greater.

Sources: City of Calgary, Transportation Department, 1977, Multi-Family Parking. City of Calgary, 1972, The Development Control Bylaw. City of Vancouver, 1970, Zoning and Development Bylaw. Oldman River Regional Planning Commission, 1971, City of Lethbridge Zoning. Marshall, Macklin and Monaghan, 1977, Bourough of Scarborough Commercial and Office Parking Study. Metropolitan Corporation of Greater Winnipeg, 1964, Bylaw No. 707.