City of Edmonton Parking Accessibility Lab by SkillsSociety

Curbside Accessible Parking Project Summary of Findings from a HumanCentred Service Design Project

January 2020

SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF EDMONTON BY:

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Table of Contents Who We Are . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Skills Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Lift Interactive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Social Innovation Lab Stewardship Experience and Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Background & Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 EPark and the Automated Parking Enforcement Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The Provincial Parking Placard Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The City of Edmontonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Designated Curbside Accessible Stalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 EPark Zones and the Gratuity Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Project Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 In Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Out of Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Challenge Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Research & Design Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Human-Centred & Inclusive Service Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A Multi-Stakeholder Exploration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Process Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Project Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Grey & Academic Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Jurisdictional Scan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Citizen Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Online Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Respondent Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

In-context and Telephone Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Parking is an Important Issue to Citizens with Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Strengths of the Current System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Weaknesses of the Current System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

City of Edmonton Stakeholder Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Summary of Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Table of Contents (cont.) Co-Design Workshop with Placard Holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Journey Mapping with Community Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Tech Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 EPark App . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 EPark Website . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Actionables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Accessible Stall Management & Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Improve Parking Session Management Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Explore Opportunities for the Addition of Payment Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Evaluation of Parking Gratuity Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Exploring the Complexity of Accessible Curbside Parking Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

In Depth Exploration of Gratuity Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Option 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Option 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Additional Considerations for the Development of an Alternative License Plate Registration System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Potential for Future Province Wide Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Communications Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 APPENDIX A: Academic and Grey Research Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 APPENDIX B: Jurisdictional Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 APPENDIX C: Jurisdictions Using Tiered Permit System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 APPENDIX D: Recommendations from the Basic Tech Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Who We Are

Skills Society Skills Society in a non-profit charitable organization that supports people with disabilities, their families, and communities. Through projects and collaborations with community partners, Skills Society aims to test new ideas and challenge old assumptions â&#x20AC;&#x201D; pioneering better ways to value and include people with disabilities in our communities.

Lift Interactive Lift Interactive is an Edmonton-based full-service design agency focused on user-experience design, digital strategy, and technology development. Lift is a talented, tightly knit group of strategists, designers, and technologists who provide the best creative solutions possible. Over the years, and through work with a broad assortment of clients and partners, Lift has developed strong knowledge and skills in the areas of user-centered design and inclusive service design.

Social Innovation Lab Stewardship Experience and Expertise Skills Society and Lift Interactive are part of a social innovation ecosystem in Canada that is engaging in collective impact, change labs, and service design processes intended to tackle complex challenges. Over the last 12 years, Skills Society has invested in learning about and stewarding social innovation and service design labs (see www.edmontonshiftlab.ca for an example of this work). A subset of our change projects focus specifically on increasing the inclusion and citizenship experience of people with disabilities. Some of these projects have been recognized nationally and featured in the Stanford Social Innovation Review magazine (see www.projectcitizenship.com for an example of this work). Skills Society, along with partners Lift Interactive, have also been instrumental in the creation of MyCompass Planning. MyCompass is a digital case management platform for social services that is more humanized and ensures the clientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voice is front and center in social service design and delivery (for more info visit www.mycompassplanning.com).

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Background & Context EPark and the Automated Parking Enforcement Program The City of Edmonton’s EPark system was introduced in 2015 as the first major project intended to modernize parking services in curbside parking zones and in City of Edmonton-owned parkade facilities. In 2015, EPark machines replaced existing traditional parking coin meters in Old Strathcona, Downtown, and Westmount/124th street. The next phase of parking services modernization that The City is undertaking is the introduction of an Automated Parking Enforcement Program (APEP). Currently, parking enforcement is performed by patrol officers who observe vehicles and any associated placards or parking passes displayed on their front windshields, and manually write tickets where violators are observed. The Automated Parking Enforcement Program involves the use of cameras mounted to enforcement vehicles that will scan rear-mounted licence plates and identify vehicles not registered as paid on the EPark system. The goal of APEP is to significantly improve the effectiveness and efficiency of parking enforcement, and free up resources for parking patrol bylaw officers to attend to other parking issues that arise across Edmonton - including in school zones, tow-away zones and residential areas where parking is restricted. Because enforcement is carried out via the scanning of rearmounted license plates, the APEP system will not recognize parking placards or hangtags traditionally displayed on a vehicle’s dashboard or hanging from a rear-view mirror. This includes provincially-issued Parking Placards for Persons City of Edmonton EPark Zone street side payment terminals

with Disabilities (Parking Placards). As such, the introduction of APEP has significant implications for drivers who take

advantage of the existing Curbside EPark Accessible Gratuity Program (Gratuity Program) that the City of Edmonton has historically provided for drivers displaying Parking Placards. In this program, drivers displaying a Parking Placard in a curbside EPark zone can receive 2 hours of free parking. In spring of 2018, The City of Edmonton’s Accessibility Advisory Committee and Parking Placard holders provided feedback to city administration regarding implications of the APEP launch to the Gratuity Program - Feedback provided has resulted in the postponement of the launch of APEP until a modernized parking management policy and program can be developed that balances the requirement to launch APEP and effectively manage curbside parking supply, with the equitable delivery of curbside accessible parking for Parking Placard holders.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

The Provincial Parking Placard Program The management and distribution of Parking Placards for residents and visitors to Alberta is under the jurisdiction of the Province of Alberta. Applications for Parking Placards are approved by an authorized healthcare provider on the basis that the recipient is not able to walk more than 50 metres without assistance. The category of Parking Placard issued is dependent upon the length of time the individual experiences an impairment that prevents them from walking 50 metres without assistance (e.g. if someone breaks their leg but it is anticipated their leg will heal within 3-12 months and they will return to walking, then they would be issued a temporary placard.) There are three categories of provincially issued parking placards: • Temporary placard, issued for a period between three and twelve months; • Long term placard, issued for five years; and • Permanent placard, that can be renewed every five years by the client without additional medical certification. Parking Placards can also be issued to organizations that provide transportation services to persons with disabilities, where the drivers are employees and not volunteers. Alberta Health Services is an example of an organization which obtains large quantities of Parking Placards for transportation purposes. It is important to note that the Province of Alberta’s policy is to issue Parking Placards to an individual or organization, and not to a specific vehicle or against a licence plate. It is common practice for Parking Placard holders to use their placard in multiple vehicles, both their own and those owned by others who may be transporting them. A small subset of Parking Placard holders (typically Permanent Placard holders) opt to also mount a provincially-issued license plate which includes the international symbol of

Province of Alberta Accessible Parking Placard types

access, but outside of this, placards are not

associated with specific license plates. Currently, there are approximately 39,000 Placard holders registered in the Metro Edmonton region. As part of this work, the project team and Alberta Registries have been in contact regarding future possibilities for the provincial Motor Vehicle System (MOVES) to capture and share with the City of Edmonton the licence plate data of Parking Placard holders. Although there are no immediate provincial plans for an upgrade to MOVES that would make this possible, City of Edmonton’s Parking Services will continue to collaborate with Alberta Registries on opportunities for efficiencies between the Parking Placard program, the APEP system, and MOVES.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

The City of Edmontonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Role DESIGNATED CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE STALLS The City manages curbside designated accessible stalls on the public road right-of-way and aims to ensure that drivers with Parking Placards have safe and equitable access to curbside parking. Designated accessible parking stalls have historically been installed through a demandbased program where business owners advise the City of locations that will have the greatest impact in supporting equitable access for Parking Placard holders to their businesses. Designated accessible stalls exist separately from the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s paid EPark zones, and are free to use. EPARK ZONES AND THE GRATUITY PROGRAM In addition to the provision of free curbside designated accessible stalls, Parking Placard holders can currently also park for up to 2 hours free of charge in any curbside paid EPark zone. Although the project team was unable to source official documentation related to the origin or purpose of the Gratuity Program, it appears as though the curbside parking Gratuity Program in paid parking zones (now EPark zones) was originally introduced in the 1970s as a stop-gap to compensate for a lack of designated accessible parking stalls at the time, and to reduce physical barriers that some Parking Placard holders were experiencing while physically being required to return to make payment at traditional coin meters. Currently, there are approximately 140 curbside designated accessible stalls in commercial locations throughout Edmonton.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Project Scope IN SCOPE The primary scope of this project was to gain a deeper understanding of Parking Placard holder experiences parking in curbside paid EPark zones, with the goal of creating an accessible parking program that balances the effective management of curbside parking with the equitable delivery of accessible parking for Edmontonians. However, once the design research was underway, it became clear that Parking Placard holder experiences using curbside designated accessible stalls was also important and interrelated to the primary project scope. Given this, options related to both how accessible parking can be accommodated in EPark zones as well as in curbside designated accessible stalls are included in this report. • EPark zones (Primary) • Designated Accessible Stalls (Secondary) OUT OF SCOPE Any parking experience or facility that does not fall into the two major categories of cityowned and operated curbside parking described above is out of scope for this project. This includes, but is not limited to: • Designated accessible stalls in City of Edmonton owned parkades or surface lots. • Designated accessible stalls in privately owned parkades or surface lots - Impark, Diamond Parking, Precise Park Link, etc. • Designated accessible stalls in parkades or surface lots owned or operated by hospitals or other healthcare facilities • Designated accessible stalls in parkades or surface lots owned or operated by strip malls, shopping malls, retail outlets etc

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Challenge Statement As part of the original implementation plan of APEP in spring 2018, a decision was made by the project team to terminate the Gratuity Program, due to the inability of the new technology to recognize Parking Placards displayed on dashboards or hung from rear-view mirrors. It was thought that terminating the Gratuity Program in EPark zones for Placard Holders would be a simple way to eliminate the following enforcement challenge: When Parking Placard holders use the two-hour parking gratuity, they do not pay for parking and therefore are not registering their licence plates in the EPark system. With the introduction of APEP, these vehicles would then be wrongfully ticketed as the enforcement vehicles are only able to read rear-mounted licence plates, and are unable to recognize the Parking Placard displayed at the front of the vehicle. Feedback regarding this change received from The City of Edmontonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Accessibility Advisory Committee, and Parking Placard holders has resulted in the postponement of the launch of APEP until a new parking management policy and program can be developed that balances the requirement to launch APEP with the equitable delivery of curbside accessible parking for Parking Placard holders. To support and inform the development of a new parking management policy and program, a design research process was undertaken to: 1. Gain a deeper understanding of the experiences of provincially issued Parking Placard Holders within the current parking management system 2. Present options related to both how accessible parking can be accommodated in curbside paid EPark zones as well as in curbside designated accessible stalls. The ultimate goal of the project is to inform the creation of a modernized curbside accessible parking program that balances the effective management of curbside parking with the equitable delivery of accessible parking for Edmontonians.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Research & Design Approach Human-Centred & Inclusive Service Design

HUMAN CENTRED DESIGN IS GUIDED BY:

The project team undertook a Human-Centred Design process drawing on principles of Inclusive Service Design. Human-Centred Design begins with empathy and strives to dig deeper into the needs and motivations

Empathy

of the people facing a challenge or using a program or service. The

Collaboration

project team’s approach incorporated:

Experimentation

• Convening diverse perspectives of those who know about the

Testing assumptions

challenge and use accessible curbside parking.

Making ideas tangible

• Drawing on Inclusive Service Design approaches to recognize diversity

Action

and uniqueness, ensure processes and tools are inclusive and focus on broader beneficial impact. • Being careful not to jump to solutions too quickly.

• Mixing qualitative and quantitative research to understand people’s needs in context and learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions. • Gaining insight from engaging directly with people who experience the challenge. • Designing possibilities with people rather than for people. • Using visual communication to clarify and create a shared understanding. • Embracing complexity and ambiguity. • Understanding our biases and assumptions and how they affect problem-solving. Human-Centred Design is well suited to tackle complex challenges where there is often: • not much agreement on the nature of the problem • not much certainty around what to do about the problem, and • a high degree of unpredictability

THE COMMON (OFTEN SHORT SIGHTED) WAY OF LEADING CHANGE

Convene Senior Leaders and Policy Makers

HUMAN-CENTRED DESIGN APPROACH TO LEADING CHANGE

Prototype and test intervention. Small bets before big bets

People first. Check multiple perspectives What could trigger change? What is deeply needed?

Experts give opinions and we make new program interventions

Scale out, scale up, scale deep

Policy change/champions along for the ride the whole way. Unleash on people and hope the plan/strategy works

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

A Multi-Stakeholder Exploration This was a multi-stakeholder exploration, where a diverse set of people were engaged at different points throughout the project to gain learnings and perspectives from a variety of people with a stake in the challenge. It was important to the project team that the voices of people with lived experience of the challenge were never lost. That is why Parking Placard holders, their supports, and the Accessibility Advisory Committee were engaged at various points throughout the process.

KEY STAKEHOLDERS

The Province of Alberta Service Alberta Registries

Local disability support and advocacy groups

The City of Edmonton City Operations Parking Services

Parking Placard holders Transportation services for Persons with Disabilities

The City of Edmonton Accessibility Advisory Committee

Family members, caregivers, and others who support Parking Placard holders

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Methods We triangulated insights from research, users, and adopters (see diagram below). During the project planning and initiation phase, in planning meetings with the Accessibility Advisory Committee Chair and in a workshop with members, it was identified that equity and safety were the two primary concerns of the Committee, and as such became a focal point in further project work. Accessibility was a key consideration in the design and execution of the engagement process. Offering a variety of engagement opportunities enabled Parking Placard holders to participate in a way that worked for them (i.e. if telephone or in-context interview were not possible or desirable they could participate through the online survey). In-context and telephone interviews were carefully selected as methods of engagement for their ability to provide rich contextual insight into people’s lived experience of a challenge. Through the collection of ‘thick’ data such as this, it is possible to uncover more powerful leverage points for design that ring true to people’s experiences. In-context interviews in particular, allow for insights that might not otherwise emerge. This is because when you are actively engaged (versus passively reflecting) in a task such as parking, different insights surface and unexpected opportunities for probing and discussion emerge. During interviews, Parking Placard holders were asked to ‘try out’ (contextual interviews) or ‘imagine’ (telephone interviews) what aspects of the parking process would pose challenges to them.

RESEARCH

Research

PLACARD HOLDERS AND THEIR SUPPORTS • Review of Citizen Feedback received in May 2018 • Consultation with Accessibility Advisory Committee • In Context and Telephone Interviews • Online Survey • Co-Design Workshop

Users

• Jurisdictional Scan • Literature Review • Tech Review • Review of the Parking Placards for Persons with Disabilities program with Service Alberta

Adopters

CITY OF EDMONTON • Workshop with City of Edmonton Parking Services, Parking Enforcement, and other key stakeholders

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Process Overview Project planning and initiation with the Accessibility Advisory Committee

Survey distribution to Placard Holders and their Supports at Engage Edmonton sessions

Literature Review Jurisdictional Scan

Workshop with the Accessibility Advisory Committee

Review of Citizen Feedback (Received by Parking Services in 2018 in response to the launch of the Automated Enforcement Program)

Tech Review Of current Parking Services Payment Technology and Options

Workshop with City of Edmonton Stakeholders

Online Survey Edmonton Insight Community & Targeted Survey Distribution to Placard Holders and their Supports

Telephone and Contextual Interviews and observations with Placard Holders, their Supports, and Allies

Co-Design Workshop with Placard Holders and their Supports

Meeting with Donald Shoup re: Considerations for Cities Managing Curbside Accessible Parking

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Project Findings Section Outline

1. Grey & Academic Literature Review 2. Jurisdictional Scan 3. Citizen Feedback 4. Online Survey 5. In-Context and Telephone Interviews 6. City of Edmonton Stakeholder Workshop 7. Co-Design Workshop with Placard Holders 8. Tech Review

Grey & Academic Literature Review Through a review of grey and academic research (see appendix A), the following themes emerged: • Placard abuse for the purposes of securing free parking or more desirable stalls is a significant issue for many North American municipalities, with economic impacts beyond lost parking revenue. • Many North American municipalities do not provide a gratuity program for placard holders in paid curbside areas, but for those who do, there is a negative impact on that jurisdiction’s ability to effectively manage the supply/demand constraints of curbside zones.. • An overwhelming majority of persons with disabilities, when surveyed, say that parking availability is vital to their independence. • Lack of adequate designated accessible parking has historically led to many North American jurisdictions offering free curbside parking in paid zones to placard holders as a stop-gap measure. • The process of parking and payment for persons with disabilities is a unique experience and presents different requirements and barriers than for other drivers. • In cities where planners and policy-makers are attempting to navigate curbside accessible parking challenges, there is reason to question whether the subsidy of parking for persons with disabilities is an effective solution to the physical accessibility challenge (i.e. offering a subsidy does not make stalls or pay machines more physically accessibility for a range of users).

is a human rights issue as this “ This change goes against protecting individuals with mobility challenges.” PETE, EDMONTON CITIZEN

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Jurisdictional Scan A review of North American jurisdictions and the methods in which they deliver equitable and safe accessible parking was undertaken (See Appendix B). The following themes were identified: • Provincial or State Regulation vs. Municipal Parking Management: In most instances, the policy and regulation of Parking Placard programs is administered by State or Provincial governments, with the implementation of curbside management and parking enforcement programming managed by municipal government. This mirrors the current situation in Edmonton, where the placard program is administered by Service Alberta (provincial), but street parking is managed by the City (municipal). • Challenges Related to Equitable Access for Persons with Disabilities: The majority of municipalities researched have or are currently experiencing challenges related to accessibility and paid on street parking related to the literature review themes noted above. This includes jurisdictions anticipating challenges in advance of the implementation of their own APEP programs, or looking to reform their gratuity programs in efforts to curb placard abuse. • Focus on Increasing Accessibility Rather than Eliminating Costs: In many cases, efforts to provide safer and more equitable access for Parking Placard holders is focused on resolving the physical accessibility challenges by allowing for a longer maximum parking stay, improving design of designated stalls or reducing physical barriers

with mobility challenges are now “ Those forced to rush because they are concerned about their parking time running out. This change adds nothing but stress to their lives.” EMILY, EDMONTON CITIZEN

to payment - rather than the provision of gratuity programs. • Tiered Permit System: In some jurisdictions where the state controls both the distribution of the placard and the management of curbside parking, there is a ‘tiered’ permit system that ensures permits for free parking are only distributed to persons with disabilities who have an impairment that prevents them from performing payment (i.e. not all persons with disabilities will experience barriers in performing payment, these individuals would therefore not be eligible for free parking). See Appendix C for more information on this approach. GAPS • Limited Information on the nature of this specific challenge: The project team was unable to locate a jurisdiction actively utilizing APEP technology while simultaneously upholding a Gratuity Program for accessible parking.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Citizen Feedback The City of Edmonton received a substantial amount of feedback in the summer of 2018 following the announcement that Parking Placard holders would no longer have access to free parking in EPark zones as a result of the launch of APEP. This feedback highlighted various citizen concerns including: • The perception that The City was taking away a ‘right’ from persons with disabilities. • The difficulty or inability that many users have using the MyEPark mobile app and the pay machines. • A lack of availability and perceived low volume of designated curbside accessible parking stalls. • A lack of consistent and transparent information related to the existing 2 hour accessible curbside parking courtesy program. • The inability to pay for parking due to financial circumstances. • The requirement for additional time over and above the standard two hour maximum limit, due to accessibility factors.

Online Survey The project team surveyed approximately 700 Parking Placard holders and their driver supports. The survey was distributed in three forms: • In person, at 6 Engage Edmonton events across Edmonton in October and November 2018. • Via the City of Edmonton’s Insight Community monthly survey in July 2019. • Through direct distribution to the contact lists of a number of local disability support organizations, facilitated by the City of Edmonton’s Accessibility Advisory Committee.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RESPONDENT THEMES • The majority of respondents were ‘Permanent’ placard holders (roughly 65%) • 18% of respondents noted that they often require more than the standard 2 hours maximum to complete the purpose of their curbside parking • When asked to describe the most important features of a designated accessible curbside stall, respondents noted that a flexible maximum time allowance and the presence of curb ramps/lowered curbs is most important to them. • 36% of total respondents noted that they had taken advantage of the Gratuity Program curbside EPark zones in the previous year. Of those who had taken advantage of the Gratuity Program, 58% reported total household income of $50,000/year or more - with 24% of those respondents reporting $120,000 or more annual household income • Of those who had not taken advantage of the curbside Gratuity Program in the previous year, roughly 40% were not aware of the opportunity. • 69% of respondents noted that they had never used the MyEPark App. to make payment for curbside parking. Of those 399 respondents, 51% noted that they had not used the technology due to not having a smartphone, not having a data plan that allowed for the use of mobile apps for this purpose, or having a dexterity or vision challenge that prevents them from using a smartphone.

parking for 2 hours for placard holders “ Free was a huge weight lifted off of those of us who need to be able to park, and are on a fixed disability income or AISH.” SABITHA, EDMONTON CITIZEN

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

In-context and Telephone Interviews In-context interviews and telephone interviews were conducted with Parking Placard holders and private transportation service providers. Participating Placard holders reported a wide range of impairment experiences (e.g. Paraplegia, Spina Bifida, Visual Impairment, Multiple Sclerosis) resulting in a variety of challenges with vehicle payment and registration. Outlined below is a summary of key insights gained through interviews. PARKING IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES Through the in-context and telephone interviews, the project team heard from Placard holders and their supports that parking is an important issue to them. Participants reported when they are not able to park easily and safely it means:

In-context interview participant, experiences quadriplegia and therefore does not have the dexterity in her fingers required to manipulate the buttons and card/coin slots as they are currently designed.

•

Missing important commitments

•

Not having access to certain areas of the City

•

Changing where they go for errands/appointments

•

Being put in situations that feel unsafe, precarious, or risky

•

Having to exert extra time and energy to get places

“Council needs to see things from an end user standpoint. Visually they need to see what we experience ...they need to see it is an undue burden how parking has evolved in the City” (In-context Interview Participant) STRENGTHS OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM The following were identified by participating Placard Holders as strengths to the current system in terms of accessibility: Presence of More than One Way to Pay The availability of payment via either the MyEPark App. or payment terminals increased the likelihood that a person could find a payment system that worked for them, and the introduction of the EPark App. eliminated a pre-existing barrier for many users who previously had difficulty returning to a coin meter to top up parking session payment. Designated Stalls

In-context interview participant in front of an Epark payment terminal she cannot access due to uneven and muddy ground surrounding it.

The presence of marked accessible curbside parking stalls enabled some Placard holders to be able to safely park and exit their vehicle when stalls in EPark zones did not.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

WEAKNESSES OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM MyEPark Smartphone App. Inaccessible to Some Users While some participating Parking Placard holders preferred payment using the MyEPark App. because it enabled them to pay without making their way to a payment terminal, others found it inaccessible. Placard holders we spoke to found the MyEPark App. inaccessible for the following reasons: •

They did not own a smart phone, have access to data on their phone, or have a phone that was compatible with the MyEPark App.

•

They did not know how to use a mobile app.

•

They were unable to physically navigate the MyEPark App. due to a physical impairment or limitation (e.g. decreased finger dexterity due to arthritis).

•

They found the app to be confusing, difficult to navigate, and unintuitive (see further discussion of this in the ‘Tech Review’ section below)

EPark Payment Terminal Inaccessible to Some Users “So you’re only able to be disabled until 6pm?” - In-context Interview Participant. Parking sign located in front of Sunlife Place indicating restricted accessible parking.

While some participating Parking Placard holders preferred to pay via the EPark payment terminal because they did not have access to the My EPark App. or did not know how to use it, others found the payment terminals inaccessible for the following reasons: •

They were unable to use the terminal due to a physical impairment or limitation (e.g. decreased finger dexterity due to arthritis, use of a prosthetic limb, or visual impairment).

•

They were unable to reach/access the terminal due to a physical impairment or limitation (e.g. short stature, power or manual wheelchair user, limited endurance).

•

They were unable to reach/access the terminal due to an environmental barrier (e.g. mud, grass, or gravel surrounding the terminal base, lack of nearby curb cut, snow pile).

Payment terminal features identified as limiting accessibility by participating Placard Holders included: In-context interview participant demonstrating the extra space they require when transferring out of the driver seat into their wheelchair. They must be able to swing their driver’s door all the way open to maneuver their wheelchair out from the backseat and onto the street.

•

Screen: difficult to read due to brightness/contrast, glare, or angle of screen.

•

Buttons: small and difficult to push.

•

Interface: difficult to understand and navigate.

•

Payment: coin and credit card slot difficult to maneuver, no tap payment.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

EPark Curbside Parking Stalls Inaccessible to Many Users Placard Holders we spoke to expressed the inaccessibility of curbside parking stalls as a major barrier. Many Placard holders we spoke to discussed feeling unable and/or unsafe parking and exiting/entering their vehicle in curbside parking stalls as they currently exist. The following features of the stalls were reported by participants to make stalls inaccessible: •

Too narrow to allow for driver’s side door to be opened all the way.

•

Too short to allow for a rear entry lift to be lowered and a wheelchair to exit.

•

Too far from the EPark payment terminal.

•

Curb cut absent or too far away (e.g. at end of block only).

•

Part of stall physically obstructed by environmental barriers such as construction signs, flower planters, bike lanes, street furniture, or snow windrows.

•

Sidewalk next to stall physically obstructed by environmental barriers such as local shop signs/sandwich boards, construction

Flower boxes placed along places such as 106 street downtown create a physical barrier to getting out of the driver side of the vehicle for people who experience disability.

signs, flower planters, bike lane curbs, or snow windrows preventing passenger side door from opening all the way or a side entry lift from lowering down.

Feedback Regarding Accessible Curbside Designated Parking Stalls Placard Holders we spoke to expressed that designated stalls often enabled them to park and exit their vehicle more safely and easily. However, they reported frequently finding: • There were not enough designated stalls to meet demand. • Designated stalls were not close enough to or did not include a curb cut to enable access to the sidewalk. • Designated stalls did not exist in all the places they needed to go. “I’m always thinking to myself where can I park...where can I get my lift out?” (In-context Interview participant) Cost/Affordability is a Barrier for Some Users Cost is a barrier to parking for some Parking Placard holders we spoke to, particularly those who live on a fixed income (e.g. seniors accessing CPP, individuals accessing AISH). Some Parking Placard holders we spoke to felt that if they had to start paying for parking that it would prevent them from going places where they had to park curbside and pay. Additionally, people discussed having to park at higher frequency in places that require payment (e.g. hospitals). “Having a disability is harder because of the built environment - if we can alleviate some of the stress associated with inaccessible built environments then why wouldn’t we?” (In-context Interview Participant)

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

“I’m all for sliding scale payment options….I think people should be allowed the dignity of paying what they can pay...with minimal proving of income” (In-context Interview Participant) Feedback from Transportation Providers Transportation providers such as Driving Miss Daisy are an important stakeholder in this challenge. We spoke to one transportation provider as part of the design research process and they communicated how changes to the current parking subsidy that allows Parking Placard holders to park for free for up to two hours would negatively impact their business. Most customers of these services are seniors and rely on the service due to its convenience and affordability. The transportation provider’s priority is to be able to get as close to the doors of their destination as possible due to the limited mobility of their customer, who is typically unable to use DATS and cannot rely on taxi transportation due to the additional support they require in getting to and from the door. The service provided by these providers consists of parking as close to the doors of the destination as possible, aiding the customer out of the vehicle and into the destination, and then returning to the vehicle and departing. Pick-up is much the same process. The majority of parking periods are in the 10-15 minute range, with occasional longer waits. To transfer in and out of her car this participant needs to open her door all the way often into oncoming traffic. She relies on drivers noticing her and moving over. Her transfer takes several minutes due to stiff, sore joints.

Feedback received from transportation providers suggested that the use of designated accessible stalls is often not the best option, with EPark stalls typically providing access that is closer to the destination or entry door. In some cases, there are passenger and commercial loading stalls available, and the vehicles in the providers’ fleets

often do have commercial plates, so these can be used when available, but the volume of available commercial zones doesn’t align with the needs of the customers. In many cases, transportation providers such as Driving Miss Daisy are using the Parking Placards to facilitate pick-ups and drop-offs of their customers in paid curbside EPark zones. If a requirement to pay was imposed on these transportation providers, the impact to the service would be noticeable in the following ways: • Increased time for the completion of the transportation service, because drivers would need to handle payment. • Increased cost burden to the business that would be passed on to customers, most of whom are operating on a limited fixed income. Mapping Placard Holder Parking Experiences The accompanying document titled “Mapping Placard Holder Parking Experiences” summarizes the parking journey, including pain points and opportunity areas, of five Parking Placard holders who participated in in-context interviews. This illustration reflects both the complexity of the challenge and the fact that no two experiences are exactly alike.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

City of Edmonton Stakeholder Workshop The Internal Stakeholders Workshop took place at the Skills Society Action Lab - convened by Skills Society Action Lab, Lift Interactive, and The City of Edmonton. This workshop brought together key stakeholders who work within The City of Edmonton and are responsible for the delivery of parking services to Parking Placard holders. Through participation in group discussions as well as a journey mapping exercise, participants had the opportunity to both surface and explore assumptions about the experience of curbside parking in Edmonton for Parking Placard holders. The goal of the workshop was to: 1.

Learn from City of Edmonton what their staff perspectives were related to the challenge area

Align and educate on the research approach - Human-Centred and Inclusive Design principles, and manage expectations related to the final project findings.

Surface assumptions, hopes, and considerations for the remainder of the project.

Workshop participants surfacing and exploring assumptions about curbside parking experiences in EPark zones, and mapping out the parking journey of an Accessible Parking Placard holder.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS What’s working well in the context of the current Gratuity Program and EPark parking programs at the City? • Manual Enforcement: In many ways, key stakeholders felt that the current status quo, manual enforcement of parking is working well. They discussed five customer-experience focused checks officers use in determining exemption need. • Exemptions for Other Groups Have been Phased Out: Stakeholders discussed how parking exemptions for other groups (e.g. veterans) have been slowly phased out. The general sentiment of stakeholders in the workshop was that ‘everyone should pay to stay’. Stakeholders discussed some of the tensions that arise related to determining who receives an exemption and who does not. What’s not working well in the context of the current Gratuity Program and EPark parking programs at the city? • Lack of Data: Limited data related to Parking Placard holder’s parking stays makes tracking how much and where Parking Placard holders are using the system (i.e. volume, location, patterns of usage) difficult and challenging to legitimize efficacy of the program. There is also uncertainty around how many tickets are being issued to placard holders in error. • No Checks & Balances for Placard Abuse: There is limited ability and resources for municipal enforcement of fraudulent passes or abuse of use (e.g. individuals using placards that belong to someone else). • Misinformation/Unclear Communication: Externally there continues to be confusion about the Gratuity Program amongst Placard holders as well as about proper placard usage itself. Information is not readily available to the public (i.e. online and otherwise). Internally there are also inconsistencies in understanding of specifics related to the parking program and a lack of documentation related to the origins of the Gratuity Program. • No Policy re Exemptions: There is no current City of Edmonton policy related to whether Parking Placard holders should receive exempted parking. The gratuity program continues to operate on historic rules of unknown origin. The Gratuity Program is also not extended to additional groups such as verified low income earners, AISH recipients etc. • Poor Accessibility of Current Curbside Zones: Existing curbside paid EPark zones, as well as curbside designated accessible stalls often do not meet Access Design guidelines, and retrofitting is difficult and costly (often times impossible due to road and sidewalk width).

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Co-Design Workshop with Placard Holders On the evening of July 17, 2019, Parking Placard holders and their supports gathered in the Skills Society Action Lab to participate in a co-design workshop. Invitations to participate went out to all Placard holders who had expressed interest in the project when Parking Placard holders were first surveyed by The City in 2018, as well as participants in the telephone and contextual interviews, members of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, and people supported by Skills Society. JOURNEY MAPPING WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS Journey Mapping was facilitated to generate input from community members on the pros and cons of possible alternatives to the current way in which Parking Placard holders interact with curbside parking. The following three questions were explored with participants based on their significant impact to the operation of the EPark system, and their effect on Parking Placard holders: 1.

Should Parking Placard holders be exempted from paying for parking? What are the implications of this decision? An exploration of whether or not Parking Placard holders should pay for parking in paid curbside EPark zones was undertaken.

How could vehicles with Parking Placards be recognized in the context of the APEP launch? An exploration of methods for allowing Parking Placard holders to register their license plate(s) was undertaken.

What payment solution(s) could be implemented that would be effective and usable for any motorist, including those with disabilities? An exploration of current payment methods to uncover known accessibility challenges was undertaken. This information can be used to facilitate easier payment in the future for a broader group of users (if required).

Placard holders exploring the parking journey and providing possible solutions from their perspective.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Key Insights Generated from Journey Mapping with Community Members • Many placard holders were not aware of the option for a provincially issued license place that displayed the universal symbol of access • Winter accessibility in Edmonton was highlighted as a significant challenge, not just in parking, but in terms of general mobility as well • There isn’t an expectation of “perfection” from the accessibility community, but looking to see that there is ongoing work to make things better • Participants felt that accessible parking regulations should be managed provincially in order to create a consistent experience in all cities in the province • Some feel there is a lack of clarity around parking duration both in EPark zones and in designated accessible parking locations • Due to specific needs, such as access to curb cuts, the time it takes for a Placard Holder to find a parking spot can be significant • Some felt that the move away from individual meters has made paid parking less accessible

Placard holders exploring the parking journey and providing possible solutions from their perspective.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Tech Review EPARK APP Though the focus of this project was not to conduct a full user experience and design audit of the MyEPark App., the project team did gather feedback from participants regarding the current usability of the MyEPark App. The following is a basic overview of some of the challenges highlighted by participants related to accessibility and general usability of the MyEPark App.: • Discrepancies in information presented in various areas of the app: - Example: the app claims to provide auto top-up of funds, but states that it doesn’t store credit card information • When starting a session, the MyEPark App. recognizes user location, but when the user presses the “Start Parking Session” button, the zone sometimes changes to 7000 regardless of actual location of the user. • Auto opt in to marketing material in account settings without being presented the option • Map interface used for zone selection is not intuitive, especially given the large “Start Parking Session” button below that leads the user to assume their zone is correct based on location. • Map points are quite small and often tightly grouped, making it challenging from a dexterity perspective. • When a zone has not been selected on the map, the user must remember the zone or be in view of a sign in order to correctly input the number. Otherwise, the user may need to exit the vehicle to find a sign, or try to return to the map screen to check the zone numbers presented there. • The purpose of the ‘Park a Friend’ feature is unclear for those looking to pick a static period of time to park for, as opposed to using the ‘start/end’ method. This is particularly poignant for those Parking Placard holders who use their placard across multiple vehicles • Contact numbers on the “Contact Us” page aren’t hyperlinked for direct access to call.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

EPARK WEBSITE The EPark system includes a website that allows users to manage an account for parking, which can also be connected to the MyEPark smartphone App. Interactions with stakeholders, primarily interview and workshop participants, uncovered that some users were aware that a MyEPark App. was available, however, awareness of the online EPark website was low. Functionally, the EPark website allows a user to manage their account, however there are several aspects of use that are not intuitive or optimized for a friendly user experience: • Each time a user wants to add funds to their account, they must enter payment information (i.e. payment information is not saved to their account). • Payment is accepted through a secondary URL that is not clearly branded (https://www. beanstream.com/scripts/payment/payment.asp?) which causes some users to feel the process is not safe - it should be noted that the payment page also shows Copyright 2007 - Calgary Parking Authority. • The “Cancel Payment/Go Back” button on the page does not function. • The site is designed to be mobile friendly, but as a result, the layout on desktop devices is

like this make me, as an individual “ Changes with mobility challenges, feel like I am treated as a second class citizen in my own city.” CARSON, EDMONTON CITIZEN

lacking and not appropriately friendly for the types of tasks that might be a priority on desktop - including account and parking session management for Parking Placard holders who are unable to use the MyEPark App.. • When looking to start or end a session, a user must know the Zone Number they are parking in. This includes sessions which can be “scheduled” as events through the system. Unfortunately, the website does not provide any method for a user to find Zones, and users must search for the EPark map outside of their EPark account in order to do so. • Labeling of scheduled parking and other parking session management tools is not clear. In order to schedule a parking session, the user must go to “More Options” and select the “Online Activation” option from the provided list (which includes Park a Friend, Online Activation, Change Password, and Update Profile). Session management tool options are not titled in self-explanatory ways that allow users to easily identify their functionality. A more robust UX review of the MyEpark App. and website using Inclusive Service Design principles is warranted based on the findings of this basic tech review. Incorporating Inclusive Service Design principles into a more robust UX review has the potential to improve the EPark App. not just for Parking Placard holders, but for all other users as well (i.e. everyone benefits when something is user friendly).

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Recommendations SECTION OUTLINE 1.

Actionables a. Accessible Stall Management and Design b. Parking Session Management Interfaces c. Opportunities for Additional Payment Methods

Evaluation of Parking Gratuity Options

Potential for Future Province Wide Solutions

Communications Plan

Actionables Regardless of what is determined regarding the Gratuity Program, there are benefits to taking steps to improve the accessibility of curbside parking. For example, improving the accessibility of curbside parking would also benefit seniors without Parking Placards, people with temporary disabilities (e.g. those using crutches for a broken bone), Parking Placard holders who are unaware of the gratuity, and those with accessibility challenges who do not identify as having a disability. The project team has identified tangible changes that can be made at the operational level to improve equity and safety for parking for Parking Placard holders. Recommended changes have been grouped into three sections: (1) improvements to accessible stall management and design, (2) improvements to parking session

isn’t the largest issue - physically “ Paying getting to and being able to use the pay

management interfaces, and (3) opportunities for

boxes is.”

the addition of payment methods.

BRYNN, EDMONTON CITIZEN

ACCESSIBLE STALL MANAGEMENT & DESIGN MOVE PAYMENT TERMINALS CLOSER TO CURB CUTS

EPark payment terminals are not always beside curb cuts, making it more onerous for some Parking Placard holders to access them. ADD IN ‘MID BLOCK’ CURB CUTS

Currently curb cuts are located most often on sidewalk corners (i.e. ‘end of block’). Additional curb cuts could be added to provide access to sidewalks ‘mid block’ or wherever a designated accessible stall is located. INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DESIGNATED ACCESSIBLE STALLS

Placard holders reported being frequently unable to find an available designated stall at their desired location, therefore preventing them from parking, or requiring them to park in an EPark zone. The number of designated stalls could be increased, particularly in high volume areas.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

PAINT DESIGNATED STALLS IN THEIR ENTIRETY FOR CLEARER INDICATION

Design research revealed some Placard holders have difficulty identifying which stalls are designated. The entire designated stall could be painted to make identification easier. CONDUCT A THOROUGH ASSESSMENT OF DESIGNATED ACCESSIBLE CURBSIDE STALL FEATURES AND PLACEMENT

Design research revealed several features of existing stalls that made them inaccessible to some Placard holders. A thorough assessment of curbside stall accessibility could be conducted to determine (1) possible changes to stalls to make them more accessible and (2) financial feasibility of these changes. UTILIZE MODERNIZED CURB AND CURB CUT DESIGNS THAT ARE EASIER TO NAVIGATE WITH AN ASSISTIVE DEVICE

Current curbs and curb cuts are challenging to navigate when using an assistive device (e.g. wheelchair, crutches, walker) due to their height and steep grade. Accessible curb designs such as those that are sloped or lowered could be used in areas where renewals are taking place, or in areas of new development. INCREASE SIZE AND LEGIBILITY OF PARKING SIGNAGE

Design research revealed existing parking signage is difficult to read and understand. In consultation with the Accessibility Advisory Committee, alternative designs for parking signage with larger print, higher contrast, and clearer instructions could be created. IMPROVE PARKING SESSION MANAGEMENT INTERFACES PAY TERMINALS

As discussed in the Project Findings section of the report, accessibility challenges related to the EPark payment terminals interface were identified in the research. If an effort is made to evaluate the accessibility of pay terminals, the following questions should be considered: • How can the interface be made more accessible to all prospective users? • Is the current user flow appropriate for the task required? • Can tap functionality be added to simplify the credit card or debit card payment process? MYEPARK APP.

Similar to challenges identified with the EPark payment terminals, the research has also revealed that the MyEPark App. is inaccessible to some Parking Placard holders. A full user experience review and redesign of the application would be a worthwhile exercise, not only to provide better accessibility for individuals with disabilities, but for all application users. We’ve put together some early recommendations that could likely be implemented in advance of a full user experience review of the MyEpark App. (see Appendix D).

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

EPARK WEBSITE

A user experience review and redesign of the EPark website, accompanied by clearer communication to the community regarding its use, could make this platform much more useful for all City of Edmonton EPark customers. This platform could be used not only for managing payments, but also tied into systems for license plate registration for placard holders. PHONE

For users who already have an EPark account through the MyEpark App. or online website, paying by phone or text message is an option. This is a non-monitored service which does not provide a live operator, but instead utilizes automated systems to process payment from a user’s account associated with a phone number. While this system is potentially useful for some users, the limitation of needing to establish an account through other channels which are currently not optimized for user experience presents a challenge. It’s also somewhat problematic that reloading of credits cannot be completed via a phone system, so for a user who is not tech savvy, the ability to establish an account and manage payment is less viable. A staffed telephone service where customers can initiate parking payment with an operator could provide an option that is more friendly to those less comfortable with the use of technology, including smartphones or desktop computers.

you are on a limited income, it can be “ Ifdifficult to get phone access - data plans are not always affordable.” GEORGE, EDMONTON CITIZEN

EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ADDITION OF PAYMENT METHODS In addition to improving existing payment methods, it would also be possible to explore opportunities for creating additional payment methods. This would increase the overall accessibility of the parking payment system, particularly for those Placard holders that are unable to use either the MyEpark App. or payment terminals. MONTHLY OR ANNUAL PASS

For Parking Placard holders who require parking on a regular basis in EPark zones, a monthly or annual pass could be considered. At the time of registering their license plate(s), users could sign up for a pass which would allow them to park in EPark zones as required throughout the month. If this option were to be pursued, the following are some key considerations: • How would limits on the number and duration of parking sessions be set to avoid having users treat EPark zones as an unlimited parking option in busy areas? • Would it be possible to establish ‘tiers’ for pricing based on the number of expected sessions a user requires?

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

• What would be the administrative costs associated with running a monthly parking program? • What would it take to establish regular invoicing (monthly or annually) or other payment methods for users? • What would a system for monitoring abuse of the program look like? MONTHLY CALCULATED BILLING

An option that was generally well received by research participants was the concept of monthly billing. In this option, each time a registered Placard holder’s license plate is captured in an EPark zone by the APEP camera, a base charge would be applied to the Placard holder’s account. At the end of each month, the city would send out an invoice to the Placard holder with the accrued total of their usage charges, to be paid in the same methods that other City of Edmonton invoices are paid. There are several questions that would need to be addressed in order to implement a system like this, including: • What is the frequency in which each EPark zone will be monitored by APEP vehicles in order to capture license plates? • What is the right amount to charge for each parking instance captured? • How does the system determine the amount of time that a vehicle has been parked in a zone so as not to either undercharge for long sessions, or overcharge for short sessions? • How does the system recognize that the plate belongs to a registered Parking Placard holder?

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Evaluation of Parking Gratuity Options In addition to exploring the operational level actionables outlined above that would deliver benefits to all users, the project findings suggest that a policy-level decision regarding the continuation of the existing Gratuity Program is required in order to meet the objective of launching APEP and effectively managing curbside parking supply while delivering equitable curbside accessible parking for Parking Placard holders. Each of these options have unique considerations and require different actions. See a quick overview followed by an in depth look at each option below: 1.

The existing Gratuity Program is removed and Parking Placard holders pay at the same rate as other drivers. If this option is selected, it is recommended that the above listed operational-level actionables are considered and implemented where possible, including a strong focus on the enhancement of current payment options to make them more accessible.

A revised accessible parking accommodation plan is implemented: In this scenario, Parking Placard holders benefit from one of the following two forms of accommodation: a.

The existing 2 hour curbside EPark gratuity is maintained: In order to enable the deployment of APEP while ensuring Parking Placard holders arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t ticketed, Parking Placard holders must proceed through an administrative program to ensure the vehicle they are travelling in has its licence plate registered in the EPark system. If this option is selected the following actions are recommended: i. continued consideration and implementation of the above listed actionables to resolve the physical accessibility challenges identified in the research, and ii. a strong focus on developing and implementing multiple (including nontechnology based) accessible methods for Parking Placard holders to register a license plate.

A revised parking gratuity or variable fee structure is developed: Placard holders pay for parking in some form, but are provided an alternative fee structure or additional benefits such as increased maximum time allowance. If this option is selected the following actions are recommended: i. continued consideration and implementation of the above listed actionables to resolve the physical accessibility challenges identified in the research and, ii. design and implementation of an administrative program to identify Parking Placard holders and manage a variable fee structure or additional accommodations such as increased maximum time allowance.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

HIGH LEVEL DECISION TREE FOR GRATUITY OPTIONS

Option 1: Parking Gratuity Removed

Option 2A: Parking Gratuity Maintained

Option 2B: Parking Gratuity Revised

Placard Holders register their plates the same way as other drivers

Placard Holders register their plates using a secondary license plate registration process

EXPLORING THE COMPLEXITY OF ACCESSIBLE CURBSIDE PARKING MANAGEMENT In tackling a complex challenge such as improving the accessibility of curbside parking within existing City infrastructure, there are many paradoxes and tensions to be navigated. When a challenge is complex, simplistic or rigid approaches are unlikely to work. Effective approaches need to allow space for tensions to surface and for decision makers to reflect on their implications. Below are some of the tensions surfaced by the project team. TENSION Free parking for all persons with disabilities as a perceived right vs Free parking only for persons with limited income On the One Hand

On the Other Hand

Some people with lived experience believe that persons with disabilities should be entitled to free parking regardless of their income status, because of the additional hardships they face related to their disability.

Others with lived experience believe that offering free parking to persons with disabilities inappropriately assumes they are low income by default, and is insulting to those with disabilities who don’t require income supports.

Resulting Considerations • Pathways and solutions will likely not please everyone because there are a diversity of perspectives on the issue. • Strategic Communications will be essential to conveying messages to the public about this issue.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

TENSION Unique user needs vs System’s need for standardization and efficient operations On the One Hand

On the Other Hand

Each user has a unique experience and requires specific and nuanced accommodations to enhance their parking experience.

The system cannot realistically effectively cater to every person’s unique needs

Resulting Considerations • A balanced approach is required - one that considers the unique needs of users and creates equity, while also recognizing the financial, operational, and technical limitations. • Ensuring that human-centric design approaches are employed and including people with a diversity of experiences in the designing of solutions is critical.

TENSION The perception of the challenge by those without lived experience vs People with lived experience’s perception of the challenge On the One Hand

On the Other Hand

Those without lived experience of the challenge (e.g. City of Edmonton employees, non disabled citizens) commonly assume accessing payment is the primary barrier to parking for persons with disabilities, and that a simple technology solution will resolve the challenge

Design research uncovered that many people can’t even get to the payment stage of parking due to the physical inaccessibility of stalls, and that where additional technology solutions could come into play, that those technologies would remain inaccessible to some users

Resulting Considerations • In addition to solving for barriers to payment, physical features of the stalls and surrounding ` built environment must also be addressed to solve systemic barriers to parking for persons with disabilities.

Accessibility vs. Affordability Decisions-makers should be aware of complexities related to the provision of gratuities for Parking Placard holders in curbside zones. Design research conducted as part of this project surfaced that there is a subset of Parking Placard holders that not only experience physical accessibility barriers to parking, but also affordability barriers to parking - and that these barriers and their solutions have historically been conflated.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Placard holders often face physical barriers to parking in their journey from planning through to completion of their parking stay. The act of planning, travelling, parking, and processing payment often takes longer for Placard holders due to the nature of their impairment but also due to barriers in the environment (e.g. lack of curb cuts on the sidewalk, distance of an EPark machine from a curb cut). Additionally, for the subset of Parking Placard holders living on a fixed or low income (seniors, AISH recipients), the cost of curbside parking is a barrier. It is important, however, to be mindful that not all Parking Placard holders are low income, and that the eligibility requirement for obtaining the provincially-issued Parking Placard is a demonstration that the individual is unable to walk more than 50 meters unassisted. A gratuity has been used in some jurisdictions to help compensate for the additional hardship Placard holders experience as a result of inaccessible environments, but should not be taken as an ideal alternative to physical improvements to the parking system. The provision of a parking gratuity to Parking Placard holders could be used by the City of

not just individuals who are placard “ It’s holders. Services such as ‘Care for a ride’ ride providers for persons with disability - need placards in order to be able to get people to the places they need to go.” HARVEY, EDMONTON CITIZEN

Edmonton to address affordability barriers to curbside parking for those Placard holders that could verify low-income status. However, research reviewed in this project suggests that the subsidization of parking costs via Parking Placards is not the most effective means of addressing accessibility issues or income inequality (see Grey & Academic Literature Review and sources). Any consideration of a gratuity for placard holders on the basis of affordability opens up questions as to why Placard holders living on a low income are eligible for a parking gratuity whilst other citizens living on a low income are not. Key Considerations • Regardless of whether Placard holders are required to pay or not, it is necessary to take steps to increase the accessibility of all aspects of the parking process (i.e. planning through to departure after a parking session is complete). • What is the intent behind offering a parking gratuity: Is it being offered to address the physical accessibility or the affordability barrier? • Is a gratuity the most effective means of addressing affordability and/or accessibility barriers for Parking Placard holders?

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

In Depth Exploration of Gratuity Options OPTION 1: THE EXISTING GRATUITY PROGRAM IS REMOVED AND PARKING PLACARD HOLDERS PAY AT THE SAME RATE AS OTHER DRIVERS This Option Involves: • Discontinuing the existing 2 hour parking gratuity for Placard holders • Placard holders beginning to pay for parking at the same rates as other drivers • Making improvements to accessible stall management and design • Making improvements to parking session management interfaces • Exploring opportunities for the addition of payment methods Considerations On the one hand, charging Parking Placard holders the same rate for parking as all other motorists is perhaps technologically the simplest solution in the move towards implementation of the APEP system for enforcement. However, on the other hand, past experience has shown this to be a highly unpopular path, and given public reaction and awareness surrounding this issue since summer of 2018, it is likely to be equally unpopular at this time. If decision-makers choose to explore this option, the following should be considered: • Is the proportion and design of designated accessible stalls (located outside of EPark zones, and provided free of charge) adequate for the provision of safe and equitable access to curbside parking for Parking Placard holders? • What actions will be taken to improve the physical accessibility of parking session management tools and payment methods? PROS

CONS

Curbside Management

As Parking Placard holders would now be registering their license plates like every other customer, parking occupancy data is more accurate and supply/demand-based pricing programs are more effective.

Public Relations/ Reputational Risk

Movement forward with the implementation of the APEP program, and the net positive impacts on other parking user groups.

Likely to be unpopular with low or fixed income Parking Placard holders and their supports.

Affordability vs. Accessibility

Addresses the accessibility and affordability barriers to parking separately. Avoids operation of a program that adds an income subsidy at the municipal level to the physical accessibility policy mandated at the provincial level.

Does not address the affordability barrier to parking that some Parking Placard holders face.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

PROS Resourcing/ Financial

CONS

• Parking revenue would be gained from Parking Placard holders who were previously not paying for parking sessions. • Implementation of APEP program could proceed immediately, allowing for efficiency gains of the program to be realised sooner and ceasing project management costs. • Anticipated revenue increases from launch of APEP, and additional revenue realised by Parking Placard holders paying into EPark could be mobilized for infrastructure projects to improve physical accessibility gaps identified in the design research. • No need to develop additional administrative program and corresponding technology that would be required in alternate scenarios where Parking Placard holders would be required to register their licence plates with The City in order to receive some type of accommodation.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

OPTION 2: A REVISED ACCESSIBLE PARKING ACCOMMODATION PLAN IS IMPLEMENTED OPTION 2A: THE EXISTING 2 HOUR CURBSIDE EPARK GRATUITY IS MAINTAINED This Pathway Involves: • Maintaining the 2 hour parking gratuity for Placard holders • Introducing a secondary license plate registration process for Placard holders • Making improvements to accessible stall management and design • Making improvements to parking session management interfaces • Exploring opportunities for the addition of payment methods Considerations In this option the existing 2 hour parking gratuity is maintained and therefore, Parking Placard holders are not required to pay for parking unless they exceed 2 hours within a designated EPark zone. In order to enable the use of APEP, a secondary process for Placard holders to register their license plates is required. This will enable the APEP to recognize that the vehicle is registered and avoid giving tickets incorrectly. See the section titled “Additional Considerations for the Development of an Alternative License Plate Registration System” for a discussion of possible license plate registration options. PROS

CONS

Curbside Management

Though the gratuity will continue to exist, Parking Placard holders will be required to register their plates in order to take advantage of that gratuity. Data related to the volume of Parking Placard holder parking can be collected for the first time.

As license plates of Placard Holders are not registered at the time of payment, the EPark system is not able to determine the true start and stop time of the parking session - resulting in inaccurate occupancy data for EPark zones and gaps in efficacy of supply/ demand-based pricing programs.

Public Relations/ Reputational Risk

The majority of Parking Placard holders and their supports are unlikely to take issue with the continuance of some type of gratuity or accommodations plan.

• Design research has identified that some Parking Placard holders take offence to the suggestion that they are low income individuals and require a subsidy. • Parking user groups who have been negatively impacted by the delay in APEP launch, or are awaiting efficiencies to be gained through the APEP program are likely to perceive further delays as a negative outcome.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Affordability vs. Accessibility

PROS

CONS

Addresses the affordability barrier for Parking Placard holders in the low or fixed-income group.

Does not address affordability and accessibility barriers to parking separately. Under this option, affordability and accessibility barriers remain conflated and primary focus is on gratuity as opposed to physical accessibility.

Resourcing/ Financial

• Development and implementation of an administrative program and corresponding technology would be required in order to facilitate Parking Placard holders’ license plate registration. This option would also require additional consultation and co-design work with placard holders in order to ensure intake process is accessible. • Loss of revenue opportunity into the EPark system that could have been used for accessibility infrastructure improvements. Research suggests that significant percentage of Parking Placard holders are financially able to pay, but would still be eligible for free parking under this option. • APEP launch continues to be delayed until administrative program could be set up to facilitate intake of Parking Placard license plates.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

OPTION 2B: A REVISED PARKING GRATUITY OR VARIABLE FEE STRUCTURE IS DEVELOPED This Pathway Involves: • Developing a revised parking gratuity or variable fee structure for Parking Placard holders • Enhancing the accessibility of curbside stalls, EPark Website, MyEPark App., and payment methods (based on recommendations outlined in the “Actionables” section of this report) While there are many possible variations of a revised parking gratuity, below is an example of a revised parking gratuity that could be provided by the City of Edmonton: Parking Placard holders with a license plate registered with the City of Edmonton receive double the number of minutes per dollar paid as compared to other motorists. This takes into account that many Parking Placard holders have mobility and dexterity issues which cause the parking process to take substantially longer than other motorists. Considerations In order to enable a revised accommodation program such as providing additional time or modifying the hourly rate for Parking Placard holders, the APEP system will require license plate information of those Parking Placard holders in order to provide those accommodations and avoid Parking Placard holders receiving violation tickets while parking in EPark zones. This option would involve the most complexity as it would require not only the development of an administration program and technology solution for license plate registration (as described in option 2a), but additional technology development surrounding modification of hourly rates, maximum time allotments etc. that would apply specifically to the parking sessions of those Parking Placard holders. • Is providing extra time for the same dollar amount the right way to provide additional time for Parking Placard holders to complete their curbside parking needs? • How will payment systems recognize that a user is a Parking Placard holder and therefore can access different rates or maximum time allowances? • What measures need to be in place to avoid further abuse of the program by those without Parking Placards, or for those whose Parking Placards have expired?

Curbside Management

PROS

CONS

As license plates of Placard Holders are not registered at the time of payment, the EPark system is not able to determine the true start and stop time of the parking session resulting in inaccurate occupancy data for EPark zones and gaps in efficacy of supply/ demand-based pricing programs.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Public Relations/ Reputational Risk

PROS

CONS

• This option suggests a ‘middle ground/compromise’ that would provide some type of accommodation for Parking Placard holders outside curbside designated accessible stalls.

• Design research has identified that some Parking Placard holders take offence to the suggestion that they are low income individuals and require a subsidy.

• Parking Placard holders who previously had to take no action to receive accommodation & gratuity in EPark zones may respond negatively to an added administrative step that they would need to interact with.

• Parking user groups who have been negatively impacted by the delay in APEP launch, or are awaiting efficiencies to be gained through the APEP program are likely to perceive further delays as a negative outcome.

Affordability vs. Accessibility

Addresses the affordability barrier for Parking Placard holders in the low or fixed-income group.

Resourcing/ Financial

This option sees some added EPark revenue from Parking Placard holders who previously qualified for the gratuity but under the new system no longer do

• As with option 2a, development and implementation of an administrative program and corresponding technology would be required in order to facilitate Parking Placard holders’ license plate registration. In addition to the intake program, this option would also involve additional technical development surrounding modification of hourly rates, maximum time allotments etc. that would apply specifically to the parking sessions of those Parking Placard holders. • This option would also require additional consultation and co-design work with placard holders in order to ensure intake process is accessible. Loss of revenue opportunity into the EPark system that could have been used for accessibility infrastructure improvements. Research suggests that significant percentage of Parking Placard holders are financially able to pay, but would still be eligible for free parking under this option. • APEP launch continues to be delayed until administrative program could be set up to facilitate intake of Parking Placard license plates.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ALTERNATIVE LICENSE PLATE REGISTRATION SYSTEM If scenario 2a or 2b are selected as future directions consideration surrounding the development of an alternative license plate registration system will need to be explored. In order to be able to implement and effectively manage the APEP solution that includes an exemption or alternative payment structure for Parking Placard holders, The City must have a method of knowing whether a particular vehicle is associated with the Parking Placard holder. As provincial policy dictates that Parking Placards are registered to persons, and not to vehicles, and the use of one placard among many vehicles is relatively common - there is no current mechanism for the automation of the collection of license plate information from Parking Placard holders. As such, an administrative system, including business rules around use and the inclusion of intake methods by which Parking Placard holders can register, would need to be developed in order to proceed. Importantly, the EPark system does have a module which allows for a database of license plate numbers to be utilized for the application of specific parking rules. It is thought this could be adapted to manage a list of registered license plates associated with placard holders. In addition to recognizing Parking Placard holder license plates registered directly with the City of Edmonton, if a no-charge parking option is provided, it should be extended automatically to any license plate that is issued by the province with the international symbol of accessibility on it. HOW MANY LICENSE PLATES OR VEHICLES SHOULD EACH PLACARD BE ALLOWED?

Placards are issued to individuals and not to vehicles, and are allowed to be used in any vehicle in which the registered placard holder is traveling, either as a driver or passenger. As such, in order to implement an APEP, parameters would have to be established for how many vehicles each placard holder may register within the parking program. In our interviews, workshops and discussions with stakeholders, most felt that the ability to associate 2 license plates for each placard holder would be sufficient. PLACARD TYPES AND RENEWAL REQUIREMENTS

Each placard issued has an expiry date, typically expiring on the last day of a specified month and year. Any registration system should take into account the expiry of the placard and if not renewed prior to expiry, remove associated license plates from the system. Beyond this most basic level of including an expiry, other considerations for a registration program include: â&#x20AC;˘ Should temporary placard holders be given the opportunity to participate in the program? â&#x20AC;˘ For long-term and permanent placards, should renewal of registration be required more frequently than every 5 years? VERIFICATION OF PLACARDS

Each placard issued has a unique number and is registered to an individual. At the time of registration, the system should be ensuring that:

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

• The ID of the person registering matches that of the placard holder • The ID number on the placard matches the provincial registration document • The expiration date of the placard is not in the past For the verification of the validity of a given plard ID, it may be possible to work with Service Alberta to confirm against their database of placard holders. OUT OF TOWN PLACARD HOLDERS

Because the provincial placard system does not include registration of license plate numbers users who do not register their license plates with the City of Edmonton will be required to pay for parking in EPark zones. This may include placard holders who live outside of Edmonton area (or outside of the province) that are not familiar with the program, but may also include residents in Edmonton who have not been well informed. For those that are outside of the Edmonton area, or are new to the City, they may also be coming from a jurisdiction with different parking options for placard holders. It will be critical that communication efforts provide clarity with regards to how the parking enforcement system works and what placard holders should expect. This may include a need for signage in EPark zones that speaks to the specifics of the various options available for placard holders. REGISTRATION METHODS / OPTIONS

In order to accommodate the variety of accessibility challenges placard holders deal with, a variety of registration options should be considered: • In person registration with a City of Edmonton representative and paper forms • Online registration that does not necessitate logging into system • Online registration within the EPark website • In App registration inside of the EPark app • Registration by phone • All registrations should ultimately end up in the same database once they have been verified, but a workflow will need to be determined for each.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Potential for Future Province Wide Solutions As identified through the jurisdictional scan, there are some locations where parking regulations for Placard holders are managed at a state level. This provides an opportunity to include consideration of the impacts of specific accessibility challenges on a driver’s physical ability to utilize payment methods available to pay for parking. By assessing the type of disability and the corresponding limitations to ability to make payment, distinct placard options can be provided, including the potential for a distinct provincially issued license plate (see Appendix C).

Communications Plan Public awareness surrounding the existing gratuity for Parking Placard holders in EPark zones varies. The design research revealed a great deal of uncertainty amongst Parking Placard holders related to the following: • when payment is required and when it is not • how long the gratuity allows a placard holder to park for • what types of parking the gratuity extends to (i.e. surface lots or parkades versus curbside parking) Regardless of the structure of a modernized curbside accessible parking program, strategic communication and public education with Parking Placard holders, their supports, and local stakeholders will be paramount to ensure that as many Parking Placard holders as possible are aware of the change. Communication will be required throughout the cycle of a Parking Placard holder’s experience to ensure consistency in awareness and understanding of the program. Further assessment of available communication channels and techniques should be conducted, but the following are identified as ways in which Parking Placard holders can be reached: • Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) • Information provided through Service Alberta at the time of placard application • Signage in EPark Zones and in designated accessible parking spots • Direct outreach via mail based on placard holder list available from Service Alberta • Ongoing communication directly with placard holders who have registered with the City • Online information provided on City of Edmonton website and EPark website • Information included within the EPark mobile application

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

APPENDIX A: Academic and Grey Research Sources Accessible Parking Coalition. “Let’s Make Accessible Parking More Accessible: A Practical Guide to Addressing Disabled Placard Abuse and Other Parking Issues For People with Disabilities”, Accessible Parking Coalition, 2019, https://accessibleparkingcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/0551_IPMI_AccessPark_2019_F.Web_.pdf

Accessible Parking Coalition. “Resources.” Accessible Parking Coalition, 2019, https://accessibleparkingcoalition.org/resources/

Accessible Parking Coalition. “Draft Legislation - Tiered Parking Meter Exemption”, Accessible Parking Coalition, 2019, https://accessibleparkingcoalition.org/2018/06/draft-legislation-tiered-parking-meter-exemption/

Badger, Emily. “Seriously, We Have to Stop Giving Away Free Parking to the Disabled”, CityLab, The Atlantic Monthly Group, 2013, https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2013/06/seriously-we-have-stop-giving-away-free-parkingdisabled/5946/

Badger, Emily. “Why Chicago is Rolling Back Free Parking for the Disabled”, CityLab, The Atlantic Monthly Group, 2014, https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/01/why-chicago-dramatically-rolling-back-free-parkingdisabled/8129/

Essley, Liz. “Debate Grows Over Free Parking for Disabled”, Washington Examiner, 2012, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/debate-grows-over-free-parking-for-disabled

Jaffe, Eric. “The Case for Eliminating Disabled Parking Placards”, CityLab, The Atlantic Monthly Group, 2012, https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/08/case-eliminating-disabled-parking-placards/3114/

Shoup, Donald & Torres-Gill, Fernando. “The Two-Tier Solution: Ending Disabled Placard Abuse at Parking Meters”, International Parking Institute, 2015, http://www.shoupdogg.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2015/08/ EndingPlacardAbuseTwoTierSolution.pdf

Shoup, Donald. “Ending the Abuse of Disabled Parking Placards”, Access Magazine, No. 39, 2011, http://www.accessmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2016/01/access39_almanac.pdf

Sharp, Sonja. “L.A. Quadruples the Fine for Disabled-placard Fraud, But Will it Help?”, Los Angeles Times, 2019, https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-disabled-placard-fraud-los-angeles-20190421-story.html

“Unfair to the Disabled”, The Star, Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd., 2007, https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2007/02/14/unfair_to_the_disabled.html

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

APPENDIX B: Jurisdictional Summaries State of Virginia Source: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12026/fhwahop12026.pdf

In the late 1990s, Arlington County in Virginia witnessed a low availability of parking space due to the high level of parking placard abuse and fraud. The Arlington Disabled Commission suggested to Arlington County to eliminate free metered parking. Local officials gathered community support and proceeded to engage state officials to review state disabled parking ordinances because the “Virginia State law limited local jurisdictions’ power in managing disabled parking.” This brought about the “All May Park, All Must Pay” law in all Virginia municipalities in 1998. However, the state offered double the amount of time on meters for disabled drivers with a placard, effectively providing a 50% cost subsidy for accessible parking in metered zones.

State of Washington Source: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12026/fhwahop12026.pdf

In 2012, the Washington District Department of Transportation (DDOT) developed a disabled parking pilot program which provided a total of 400 parking meters, the domes of which are painted red to be visibly different from regular meters to specifically be available for disabled drivers. They also provided two spaces per street block for better access for disabled drivers in commercial zones. The previous policy allowed disabled drivers to park on metered parking spaces at no cost. Under this new program, a disabled driver with an official placard pays to park on the reddomed meter but receives double the amount of parking time. This is another instance of providing a subsidy in the form of time received for the same cost.

State of Michigan Souce: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12026/fhwahop12026.pdf

The State of Michigan enacted a new law that sees only individuals with severe disabilities (in a wheelchair or unable to operate street meters) qualify for free metered parking (3). This represents a complete waiver or subsidy on parking charges for only drivers with a severe disability. Other drivers with disabilities can park in handicapped spaces in off- street facilities at no charge, or are required to pay regular metered rates. Prior to the enactment of the law, about 500,000 individuals with disabled parking placards were parking for free. However, after the law was enforced, only 2% (10,000) of those with disabled parking placards were allowed to park for free at metered parking. Under the new law, individuals with severe disabilities require a doctor’s certification to apply for a differentiated yellow placard, which distinguishes their vehicles from the traditional blue placard holders.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

City of New York Source: https://dmv.ny.gov/forms/mv6642mp.pdf

Section 1203-h of New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law provides a metered parking waiver to drivers with a “severe disability that makes it extremely difficult to put a payment into a parking meter.” The parking waiver exempts the holder from paying the normal parking fee even if they park in a metered parking space that is necessarily reserved for those with disabilities. This effectively means a total subsidy on parking charges for only drivers with a severe disability. However, the conditions to activate the waiver include the following: • The placard holder must be the driver of the vehicle. • The placard holder must not be accompanied by a person capable of putting a payment into a meter. • The placard holder must observe the time limit of the parking space. • When parking at a metered parking space, the parking placard and the metered parking waiver must be displayed on the vehicle.

City of Portland (State of Oregon) Source: https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2013/12/disabled_pass_wont_equal_free.html

In 2008, a change in state law “began distinguishing between Oregonians who use wheelchairs and those with other kinds of disabilities.” The new law mandates Portland and other jurisdictions offer free parking benefits to disabled drivers in a wheelchair, but does not require the same provision for all other disabled individuals. In Portland, free parking benefits were previously offered to all disabled drivers, However, in 2013, a “tally of use downtown and near the Rose Quarter by the city found that vehicles with placards occupied 1,033 of 8,753 parking spaces — or nearly 12 percent. Of those, people with wheelchairs parked in just 21 spaces.” As a result, City Council amended parking rules for placard holders to allow only disabled persons in wheelchairs to park for free. City officials also provided “30 wheelchair only, right-side parking spaces at strategic locations” in the city. They also planned to provide up to 50 additional disabled parking spaces for other disabled drivers to improve accessibility to key locales, but at meter rates.

United Kingdom & European Union Source: https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/rights-and-responsibilities-blue-badge-holders

Placard holders may park free of charge at all on-street pay and display areas. If an area has a local traffic order that specifies a time limit, placard holders must also abide by that time limit for parking in a particular zone. Placard holders also have access to disabled parking bays in Council owned off-street car parks, however payment is required. Placard holders are also responsible to ensure that they are parked wholly within the markings of the parking spot or they may be issued a penalty notice.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

California Source: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr07

Drivers with a valid DP placard or Plate, or a DV plate may park at no charge in various parking zones with relaxed rules to those of regular drivers. This includes parking spaces marked with the International Symbol of Access (wheelchair symbol), blue curb zones (indicating parking authorized for persons with disability), green curb zones (indicating time limited parking) with no limit on time allowed, in on-street metered zones, and in areas that require resident or merchant permits.

Victoria, BC Source: https://www.victoria.ca/EN/main/residents/parking/disabled.html

The City of Victoria issues monthly parking permits that are available to persons with disabilities who work or attend school in the downtown core. The permits are issued for a rate of $60 per month. These permits allow for unlimited parking at any on-street metered spaces, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. There are a couple of exceptions, 20-minute meters and 28 specifically designated meters for placard holders are excluded from the permit. A periodic all-day permit can also be purchased for a cost of $4 per day. The same restrictions apply for 20-minute and disability designated meters.

Charlottetown, PEI The Designated Parking Permit Program is offered by the Council of People with Disabilities. A designated parking permit allows eligible permit holders to park in specially designated parking spots. These parking permits are for those unable to walk more than 75 meters without serious difficulty or danger to safety or health. To apply for a permit, you must have the written approval of your doctor and fill out an application form. The parking permit costs $15. It is valid for one calendar year. Temporary permits are also available.

Montreal, QC In QuĂŠbec, a permit allows access to parking space reserved for disabled persons who have limited walking ability or cannot move about independently without risk to their health or safety. The permit allows a disabled person, whether a vehicle driver or passenger, to use a handicapped parking space. You can park at standard meters, however you pay the same as a non-handicap user.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Winnipeg, MB Permit holders with a disability may use spaces designated with the international access symbol, OR any other meter stall as available. Parking is offered on a “pay as you go” daily or hourly basis provided they display their permit. Allows motorists displaying handicap permits to park for 4 hours in on-street spaces restricted to 1 or 2 hours. Allows motorists displaying handicap permits to park for 4 hours at 2 hour on-street pay stations. If a vehicle with a placard parks at a 2 hour paystation and pays with coins or credit card for 2 hours of parking, they may park for up to 4 hours at no additional cost, and without penalty. Payment for the full period of parking is required if: • parking at a 4 hour paystation, • parking near Health Science Center or St. Boniface Hospital • parking at a 2 hour pay station and using payment methods other than coins or a credit card • parking in a Surface Lot

Vancouver, BC In Vancouver, holders of a valid SPARC permit (available for an annual cost of $20) may: • Park in Resident Permit Parking and Resident Parking Only 3 Hour zones without a residential parking permit • Regular loading zones for 30 minutes while actively loading or unloading people or materials • Passenger zones 30 minutes while actively loading or unloading people or materials. • No Parking zones 30 minutes while actively loading or unloading people or materials.

Toronto, ON A valid permit holder in the City of Toronto may park in signed prohibited parking areas incluidng time restricted zones and rush hour restricted zones. They may also park in signed permit required areas without a designated on-street parking permit. Holders are also allowed to exceed posted time limits and may park at on-street meters without paying during hours in which parking would regularly be charged. The exemption does not apply to off-street parking meters, privately managed lots or private property, or Green P parking lots.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

Ottawa, ON Disability parking permits are available for a cost of $23. With a valid permit, time limits in any zone are extended to 4 hours, regardless of the posted time limit. Parking at meters is free, and additionally, permitted vehicles may park in no parking zones for up to 4 hours. Permit holders may be picked up and dropped off in “no stopping” and “loading” zones, as well as in reserved bus lanes and reserved bicycle lanes as long as it doesn’t create traffic issues. Drivers are NOT permitted to wait for permit holders to return after they are let off in these locations. These parking privileges do not apply to off-street parking facilities such as those at Federal Government buildings and Private Institutions (i.e. Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport, hospitals, etc.).

Regina, SK A disability parking permit can be obtained for $75/year or $6.25/month. The permit allows the holder you to park up to 3 hours at any 1 or 2 hour parking meter without depositing any coins. However, you can only park for 15 minutes in a red capped 15 minute parking meter.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

APPENDIX C: Jurisdictions Using Tiered Permit System Hawaii and Michigan are two jurisdictions that use a form of a ‘tiered’ permit system.

Hawaii Draft legislation from Hawaii can be viewed at the following link for more information: https://accessibleparkingcoalition.org/2018/06/draft-legislation-tiered-parking-meter-exemption/

The draft legislation from the state of Hawaii would restrict the parking payment exemption or gratuity to only those drivers who are medically certified to be unable to reach or operate parking meters due to disability. The current regulation allows for a Parking Placard holder to park for 2.5 hours or the maximum time allowed on the meter, whichever is longer.

Michigan Source: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12026/fhwahop12026.pdf

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

APPENDIX D: Recommendations from the Basic Tech Review

LEFT SIDE MENU - START/END PARKING ZONES: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED

• Not knowing what zone i am in

• Device location-services could be used to identify what

• Payment system hinges on ‘zones’

zone you are in currently?

• High possibility of not understanding

• Display the current zone subtly above ‘start’ button

• Where you park is not always accessible to seeing the

• If not in a zone then no message?

zone sign while in your vehicle

• Change the color if user no longer in epark zone?

• There might be user-fear to press the ‘start’ button

• Indication of zone change for special event parking -

just to find out what zone they are in. Fear of being

change zone color to red? Popup that says your current

committed already

zone is unavailable

• How do i know if the enforced payment hours are over

• Popup indicating the current zone’s rate - or on next

if i can’t see the sign?

screen the rate is more pronounced, including if it is

• No indication of changing zone parameters ie special

past hours and now free.

events.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - START PARKING SESSION BUTTON DEFAULT ZONE: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED

• IF not currently in a zone, the default is zone 7000

• App should interpret user as not in a zone

(city hall)

• Popup action should be a message indicating they are

• This zone has a 48hr max time limit

not currently in a parking zone

• Not common or reasonable

• Option to type/enter a zone

• 48Hr max time limit requires significant fund balance

• Full zone info is populated as typed (anticipated result,

• What is the common fund balance? If your fund balance

was in original iteration)

is insufficient, you receive a popup warning

• Useful if I need to start parking on behalf of a different

• This warning is a barrier to use, particularly when its

vehicle/plate on my account

irrelevant to the user’s current situation (using app while not in a zone)

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - MAP MARKERS HARD TO USE:

LEFT SIDE MENU - START PARKING SESSION BUTTON REMEMBERS LAST ZONE:

PAIN POINTS

• Zone map markers (“P”) are same size as all other map

• IF not currently in a zone, and the app was recent in

markers generated.

device memory, the default is last zone 7000 used.

• Hard to get an accurate tap first try

• Example: I last checked zone 5023 at 12:30

• Zooming on map doesn’t increase size

• Re-opened app 1:12

• Creates user frustration - expectation is zooming

• Click button, get 5023 details still

will help

• Not affecting use, just inaccurate

SUGGESTED

• App regulate size of markers apart from map

• App should only open zone info for a zone it knows

generator?

you are in.

• Markers expand in size as zoom function happens

• Otherwise, provide generic information, option to

• Potentially remove markers altogether

enter a zone.

• They blend with the other inactive markers • Make the colored zones active

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - MAP MARKERS POP-UP:

LEFT SIDE MENU - TAKE A PHOTO:

PAIN POINTS

• Zone map markers (“P”) have to be touched to get zone

• Assumption that I know why I want to take a photo in

information (small).

my app

• Popup is different format than the large “start parking

• Does it save my photos in the app?

session” button

• It freezes for me every time - freezes entire app, have to

• Creates distrust

swipe out of it and swipe it out of memory to get back

• ‘Start session’ link is just text. Not enough? SUGGESTED

• The popup zone information is very small, hard to read

• Check on why it might be freezing? SUGGESTED

• Resolve inconsistency and secondary function/design by rolling to the same details screen as the generic Start/End screen

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - PURCHASED SESSION: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED

• Small text

• Increase text

• Find my car - just goes to zone?

• Link to view photo

• Whatever happened to my photo? Can I not find it in-app? • First view is over-zoomed in. The trace is out of screen • The “navigate” button option - option for other apps why? I have a map here I thought.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - FIND PARKING: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED

• Find Parking > Search bar: possibly under-utilized?

• Could search bar be permanent on opening Start/End

• It just goes back to the start/end screen and adds a

Session screen/map?

search bar at top.

• Could a magnifier glass icon be placed permanently in

• “Enter address” - is this the intuitive desire for “finding

the header of Start/End screen? reveals/hides bar

parking”?

• ** something about this feels incomplete. Typing in an

• Is it knowing the address, or is it wanting to see my

address in advance to plan your parking possibilities

parking options where I am?

seems logical - but then the designated ePark spaces aren’t the only options in most areas.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - PARK A FRIEND: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED

• Same screen as initial start/end session, only text

• Change the color of the start button - to differentiate

in button changed (users might miss this and be

from general start/end screen

confused)

• Clean up the details that are confusing, which are

• If I click this button I get the same default 7000 zone

similar to the general start/end session

details, which gives the same popup warning of account

• Provide an initial popup/overlay which provides context

funds because its a 48hr max zone, etc

for using the app to park a friend

• Very, very confusing

• Do you have to be in the parking vehicle?

• What are the instances I would want to use my app to

• Can you register any license plate anywhere?

park a friend? • Only when I’m in the car with them? • Does use assume I’m in a zone in a friend’s car before I hit that button? • Can i use my account to park a friend if I’m not present in vehicle? This is not intuitively available • Same issues of small “P” map marker

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

LEFT SIDE MENU - FAQ:

LEFT SIDE MENU - CONTACT US:

PAIN POINTS

• Leaves app to open in Safari

• Looks like the CoE website not the app • Sections are so tight, no space to read

SUGGESTED

• The contact data is inside web tables, so they fall out

• Runs risk of confused users who don’t return to app

of screen, it has to have instructions (easily missed) to

• Could this info not be sourced into the app? The

scroll left or right to view full table. This isn’t familiar

Contact page of text is inside the app.

to users.

• Fix the style and formatting to brand (looks different.

• Users looking to contact the CoE about the app are

app loses brand strength)

most often already experiencing barriers or frustration with app use. The contact page should never add to that experience. SUGGESTED

• Embed this data in the app, using an app-sourced stylesheet, not embedding CoE webpage in here (we get the city webpage footer etc) • Make a strong style choice so text has room to breathe, sections are easy to find and differentiate • No boxy style • Don’t lock the contact info in tables

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - ADDING FUNDS SCREEN: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED:

• Text size seems small for anyone with sight issues.

• Increase the size of the text.

• The “?” icon-link pops up window of tiny text.

• Manage the source of the popup text, should be

• The text has “\n” characters - from the code for

uniform to other screen standards for paragraph text within the app.

paragraph ends. confuse users.

• Strip the code bit.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - ADDING FUNDS AMOUNTS: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED:

• No option for single use payment

• Add payment option that user is in control of (amounts)

• Forces investment in the app use of $25 or more.

keep auto-load • Make it obvious that you are storing CC info for next time.

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - ADDING FUNDS TYPES:

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT:

PAIN POINTS

• Only 3 major credit cards.

• No brand style, just white boxes on grey

• No newer tech options (Apply Pay, Paypal) SUGGESTED

• Apply brand style

SUGGESTED

• Add more payment options (Apply Pay, Paypal) • Might open up solutions for one-time users

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT PROFILE:

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT CARD INFO HELP SCREEN:

PAIN POINTS

• Opt-in

PAIN POINTS

• Automatic opt-in to receive marketing material

Help screen • Same as Add Funds screen, popup has tiny text and

SUGGESTED

code characters inserted. No line breaks.

• Opt-in should be part of registration, or by default be opted-out

SUGGESTED

• Fix text size, input source should be uniform to app

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT PHONES SCREEN:

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT PLATES

PAIN POINTS

SCREEN:

Help screen

• Same as Add Funds screen, popup has tiny text.

• Available plates are Canada/US only. No option for small percentage european or mexican.

SUGGESTED

• Fix text size, should be uniform to app

SUGGESTED

• Address option

CURBSIDE ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROJECT

RIGHT SIDE MENU - MANAGE ACCOUNT HISTORY SCREEN: PAIN POINTS

SUGGESTED:

Confusing History page:

• Its a History page - users expect to see their history.

• Screen looks terrible - large grey, small icon, small text

Display it here or close the section

at top

• If directing users to option of a PDF download, bring

• Text across top is hard to notice at first

that text down into a more obvious location of the

• Message for everyone is negative: “No Activity For

screen, and place the Export link in a button, relatively

This Account”

associated with the text.

• Not accurate (I have a long history of use) - lose trust in app • Instructed to use Export button, which is at top right in the header area.

City of Edmonton Parking Accessibility Lab

Articles inside

APPENDIX C: Jurisdictions Using Tiered Permit System

APPENDIX B: Jurisdictional Summaries

Project Findings

Recommendations

Background & Context

APPENDIX D: Recommendations from the Basic Tech Review

Challenge Statement

Table of Contents