Request for Proposals Town of Middlebury, Vermont
RFP
Mixed Use Development
Mixed Use Development Request For Proposals Issued: May 18, 2015 Town of Middlebury, Vermont 94 Main Street Middlebury, VT 05753 802.388.8100 Ext. 500
R
Subject Property
1
Project Summary TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT The Town of Middlebury is seeking proposals from qualified developers (individuals or firms or teams) interested in presenting a viable design and development concept for a mixed-use development on two parcels of real estate located in downtown Middlebury, Vermont and controlled by the Town of Middlebury (“Site”).
SITE INFORMATION Tax Parcels 24:251 and 24:254 and 24:255 Acreage: approximately 1.42 Controlled By: Town of Middlebury, Vermont Address: Bakery Lane
SITE CONDITION The Site is located on Bakery Lane in downtown Middlebury and contains sections of three parcels referred to as Lots 24:251 and 24:254 and 24:255 on the Town tax maps comprising 1.42 acres. The land contains a roadway (Bakery Lane) and municipal parking lots.
ZONING The site is zoned (CBD) Central Business District. See Middlebury Zoning and Subdivision Regulations Section 610.
CONTACT Jamie Gaucher Director of Business Development & Innovation Middlebury Business Development Fund Town of Middlebury, Vermont jgaucher@TownOfMiddlebury.org
2
PURPOSE The Town of Middlebury is seeking proposals from qualified developers (individuals or firms or teams) interested in presenting a viable design and development concept for a mixed-use development on two parcels of real estate located in downtown Middlebury, Vermont and controlled by the Town of Middlebury (“Site”). The Site is currently used as a surface parking lot. This RFP is in response to fulfillment of the Town of Middlebury RFQ process.
BACKGROUND The Site is located on Bakery Lane in downtown Middlebury and contains three parcels referred to as Lots 24:251, 24:255 and 24:254 on the Town tax maps comprising 1.42 acres. The land contains a roadway (Bakery Lane) and municipal parking lots. The parcels are currently situated between the Ilsley Library and the future site of the Middlebury Town Office Building to the west and Otter Creek to the east. This Site represents one of the last large development opportunities in the downtown area. Noting that the larger Middlebury community has entertained options around the development of this Site over the past decade, it is only recently that the entire property has come under the Town of Middlebury’s control and consequently, this RFP is the first formal effort to move forward with a plan that will positively alter our municipality for the foreseeable future.
REQUIRED ELEMENTS Interested developers must present clear plans for replacing publicly available parking and provide parking spaces as required by current zoning that result from a proposed development on the Site. Interested developers must incorporate a vertical mixed-use development that recognizes the value of the Site as one of the few remaining undeveloped sites in the downtown area. Interested developers must procure funds for the purchase/ financing. Interested developers must outline and provide necessary documentation with regard to how they will secure financing of the site. Documentation of the developer’s financial strength, such as bank letters, financial support from funding agencies, etc., is required. Interested developers must demonstrate an appreciation for the dynamics inherent in the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) certification program and incorporate into their proposals their qualifications and experience in sustainable development.
3
GUIDING PRINCIPLES •
The Town is interested in receiving proposals from developers having the financial resources and vision to create a unique addition to the downtown cultural & business district.
•
The Town is interested in competitively-priced purchase offers for the Site. The Town may also consider long-term lease arrangements (the maximum lease term would be 40 years). If the Middlebury Select Board determines that a lease of the Site is in the best interests of the Town, the Town will solicit bids for the lease through a competitive process outside of this Request For Proposals.
•
Proposals should describe in general terms the anticipated schedule for the project and specifically when the following milestones could be obtained: (a) review of a final site plan via the Middlebury Planning Commission; (b) approval from the Middlebury Development Review Board and all other required Town approvals; (c) commencement of construction; and (d) completion of project with certificate of occupancy issued.
•
Developers may seek additional agreements with neighboring property owners in an effort to assemble more land to better accommodate the requirements of this RFP. Any such agreements must be stated in the response and verified with a letter of consent from the property owner(s).
•
The Town seeks a developer willing to accept the site as-is, who will address environmental issues and clean-up as part of the development.
•
The Town is interested in a proposed development that generates or contributes to the overall economic, cultural and social well being of our community.
•
Proposals shall demonstrate an understanding of the historic development pattern of Middlebury’s village center and translate that understanding into a vision that is “context sensitive”. Proposals shall further evidence superior urban design, site planning and building design that reinforces existing elements of local character and incorporates the development “organically” as part of the village center and not as an isolated or independent urban form.
•
Proposals shall demonstrate an understanding of “place making” that engages the pedestrian through interior use, connections and human scale detailing and recognizes the significance of integrating public space as a defining element of urban design.
•
Proposals shall integrate the natural environment and landscape elements as integral to the project’s social function and environmental performance.
4
PROCESS/ PROCEDURE Interested developers will be asked to follow a specific process in preparing and submitting proposals for consideration: •
Information Gathering: In addition to reviewing applicable provisions of Middlebury’s Town Plan, Zoning Ordinances and design guidelines, applicants should familiarize themselves with the layout and history of the Site.
•
Submission of a Proposal: Proposals are due by 5:00pm on Monday, August 3, 2015.
•
Evaluation of Proposals by Town: The Town will review development proposals received and may select one or more developers whose professional and financial qualifications and proposal are deemed meritorious. The Town will then explore the development proposal through further discussions with the selected developer(s). Upon request, any developer selected at this stage shall provide any additional information requested by Town staff to allow a thorough investigation of the developer’s ability to fully complete the proposed development and the business integrity and reliability necessary to assure good faith performance.
•
Final Selection: In the event the Town identifies a proposal that it deems to be in the best interest of the Town, Town staff will enter into negotiations with the selected developer, toward the end of developing a written sales contract or lease agreement for the Site. Any contract or agreement negotiated between a developer and Town staff shall be subject to the final approval of the Middlebury Select Board. The Town reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and retain indefinite ownership of the site.
EVALUATION CRITERIA In addition to the preferences identified in Section 2, above, the following factors will be of priority for the Town in reviewing development proposals for this Site: •
Whether the proposal is likely to achieve a high quality mixed-use development that allocates sufficient space for a multi-dimensional asset that enhances the architectural/physical character and the economic viability of the Town (e.g., tax revenues, jobs provided on-site, public parking offered on-site, etc.).
•
Whether the proposal is likely to achieve substantial financial and cultural benefit to the Town of Middlebury; both in the short term, through compensation received from a sale or lease of the Site, and longer term, whether through various tax revenues or other means. Compensation offered by a developer shall be evaluated by the Town in comparison with a current appraisal that may be obtained by the Town. 5
•
Proposals that incorporate princples and design elements of LEED-Neighborhood Development will receive preference.
•
Qualifications and experience of the developer and his/her team, including investors, designated project managers, etc. Such experience may be demonstrated through references and a description of successfully completed mixed use projects of similar scope and size.
•
The developer’s financial ability to complete the project in a timely manner. Such ability may be demonstrated by presenting recent financial statements or through a statement of financial sufficiency from a known and established bank that demonstrates the financial capacity to carry out the project.
CONTENT OF PROPOSALS In order to be considered for selection, respondents must submit a complete response to this RFP. One (1) original and three (3) copies of each proposal along with an electronic copy of the proposal on CD or flash drive either in Microsoft Word or PDF format must be submitted to the Town as a complete sealed proposal. Each proposal submitted in response to this RFP must contain, at a minimum, the following information: Concept: The respondents should present a concept of the project that demonstrates their understanding of the Town’s goals, the requirements listed herein, and will address the following issues: 1.
Programming needs including:
Parking requirements • Clearly state – # of publicly available parking spaces available in the proposed project. • Clearly state – # of private parking spaces available in the proposed project. Mixed-use development • • •
Clearly state – Total building(s) size (GSF) Clearly state – The amount of street level commercial space (GSF) Clearly state – A breakdown of all proposed uses and their individual percentage of total building size (GSF)
2. Environmental issues including but not limited to access/impact on Otter Creek and energy consumption/efficiency planning.
6
3. Urban design is the comprehensive and cohesive combination of buildings, streets, and open space which has, as its objective, the creation of memorable public space. The essence of good urbanism is determined by the relationship between the public and private realm at the street level. Proposals should clearly articulate the following elements of urban design: Buildings and Architecture Building placement, height, massing, proportion, articulation, and materials of new structures shall be designed in response to their context and shall be compatible with surroundings. Buildings that front public open space shall be developed in accordance with appropriate heights, scale, and stepbacks, particularly along or adjacent to the Otter Creek. Scale and stepbacks are very important as they allow more light and air into the public open space and allow the space to feel non-privatized. Buildings shall be sited and designed to create welcoming frontages and encourage street vitality, visual interest and safety. This includes transparent shopfronts where public and private realms meet. Good transparency is when interior (private) uses are visible from, and can even spill out onto, the (public) sidewalk, and further, when the use of public space is visible from inside buildings to allow for casual sur-viellance. Buildings shall be designed with the human-scale in mind. Human scale refers to the use of architectural features, details and site design elements that are human proportioned and clearly oriented towards pedestrian activity. A building has good human scale if its details, elements and materials allow people to feel com-fortable using and approaching it.
• •
•
•
Open Space and the Public Realm •
The character of public streets and sidewalks is the primary determinant of the quality of the public realm. The public realm is further defined and enhanced by the incorporation of quality open spaces. The proposal shall create comfortable, safe, accessible, and appropriately located open spaces to provide pedestrian interest and convenience. Open spaces can range in scale from building forecourts, to public trails, to public plazas and public parks. All open spaces should be accessible and barrier free wherever possible. Landscaping, pedestrian amenities, outdoor furniture and lighting should be incorporated where appropriate. Opportunities for public art and historical references are encouraged.
Trees and Plantings •
Trees are vital to the urban form of cities and function as living building materials that frame space and humanize the urban environment. Proposals shall recognize landscape elements as an integral part of the project’s composition and shall appropriately plan for physiological requirements. Trees and other plantings should be selected and located so that their functional and aesthetic qualities can be maximized. 7
4.
Provide site plan sketch and illustrations of site development concept.
5.
A narrative statement addressing zoning or design review issues.
6.
An offer to purchase the Site, including the purchase price offered by the developer or proposed annual lease amount and desired terms.
7.
A proforma financial analysis that demonstrates the feasibility of the proposed project.
8.
Each proposal should include the name, address, phone number and type of project for at least four references.
GENERAL CONDITIONS All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the Town of Middlebury. The cost of preparing, submitting and presenting is the sole expense of the applicant. The Town reserves the right to reject or modify any and all proposals received as a result of this solicitation, to waive any formality and any technicalities, to negotiate with any and all consultants or to cancel this RFP in part or in its entirety if it is in the best interest of the Town. This request in no way obligates the Town to award a contract.
ADDTIONAL INFORMATION
The attached summary of public meetings (included as appendix A), represents the sum of four separate events that allowed concerned citizens to share ideas and express opinions around the forthcoming development of the site. It is expected that interested developers will familiarize themselves with this summary and that this document will provide continued insight to the Town and any committees that are involved in evaluating proposals. The attached Engineering Site Assessment from 2007 (included as appendix B), represents the most recent evaluation of the site. It is expected that interested developers will familiarize themselves with this document as they prepare responses to this RFP. The attached Downtown Parking Study (included as appendix C) represents the most recent analysis of parking options in Middlebury. It is expected that interested developers will familiarize themselves with they dynamics outlined in this report as the respond to this RFP. The attached survey (included as appendix D), approximates the dimensions of the site.
QUESTIONS/ CONTACT
PROPOSAL INQUIRIES All inquiries should be submitted in writing via email by 5:00PM August 3, 2015. The Town will post written responses to the Project by June 8, 2015. Please email your questions to: Jamie Gaucher Director of Business Development & Innovation Middlebury Business Development Fund Town of Middlebury, Vermont 8 jgaucher@TownOfMiddlebury.org
Town of Middlebury EDI Public Meeting Summary 4/11/2015; 4/13/2015; 5/4/2015; 5/13/2015 In preparation for the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to pre-qualified firms for the development of the property behind the Ilsley Library and adjacent to the Otter Creek (the so-called Economic Development Initiative (EDI) property), the Town of Middlebury recently organized a series of public input sessions to inform the development of the RFP. The meetings were held on April 11, April 13, May 4, and May 13 and produced the following suggestions from those in attendance: I.
Attendees felt strongly about incorporating these elements into any potential development of the property: A meeting space for professional events “starter apartments.” A live-work campus setting for technology-based businesses Attractive architectural design An increase to the Town’s grand list A fossil fuel free building/ set of buildings Design that allows for Otter Creek-based recreation (paddle sports) Design that allowed for robust pedestrian activity A “useful retail” component Utilization of parking and/or underground parking A financing structure that enabled the Town to retain ownership of the land A public park/ ample green space Design that is harmonious with the existing built environment in Middlebury A “green/ living” roof Housing for young professionals A mixed-use development A “family-friendly” space Incorporation of “transit-friendly” space Increased employment opportunities for Middlebury Wage restrictions/ minimums for any business that might utilize the expected development Multi-level parking Recognition of any development as a new gateway to Middlebury A development should be unique to the site and not viable elsewhere in Middlebury Any concerns that Ilsley Library might have
Appendix A
II.
Attendees felt mildly or somewhat interested in incorporating these elements into any potential development of the property: A convention center with hospitality-based businesses Affordable apartments Underground utilities Establishment of paid parking Being interconnected to downtown (not an island) Additional space for retail entities Solar panels and sources of alternative energy An educational and creativity-focused space Sustainability Design that is harmonious with the existing built environment in Middlebury A “family-friendly” space Access to a train station across Otter Creek A space for outdoor performances
Attendees shared the following overarching goals for any potential development of the property: Any proposed development should serve as a resource for young families and those with school-aged children. Any proposed development should embrace education and lifelong learning as cultural infrastructure. Any proposed development should have a multi-generational appeal and have varied uses. Any proposed development should address safety via Otter Creek. Any proposed development should be affordable and aesthetically pleasing. Any proposed development should address energy efficiency issues. Any proposed development should include public space both inside and outside given Middlebury’s seasonality. Any proposed development should address/ improve expected vehicle access to the area. Any proposed development should enhance Ilsley Library and the forthcoming Town Office Building. Any proposed development should allow for additional public input. Any proposed development should retain the existing quaintness of downtown Middlebury. Any proposed development should incorporate elements that allow for resilient and flexible uses. Any proposed development should support economic diversity and not lead to gentrification of Middlebury. Any proposed development should incorporate a mixed-use approach (live, work, play). Any proposed development should draw people into Middlebury's downtown district.
III.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Appendix B
Town of Middlebury, VT
Downtown Parking Study
Final Presentation Prepared for: Town of Middlebury and Downtown Improvement District Commission 10/26/2012
Appendix C
Presentation Outline Project Description Study Area How much parking is actually being used? Notable Observations Identified Issues and Discussions Recommendations 2 Appendix C
Project Description Parking Study Need: Vibrant commercial, residential, and visitor community needs to balance parking supply and demand Update to the Downtown Parking Management Plan
Parking Study Goals: 1. Inventory current supply 2. Analyze utilization patterns 3. Identify deficiencies and opportunities 4. Recommend management techniques 3 Appendix C
Study Area – Downtown Middlebury Parking Inventory Public and Private Parking Inventory Study Area Marble Works Lots Main Street
Merchants Row Frog Hollow Lot
Town Hall Lot
Downtown Municipal Lots
On Street Parking
Off Street Parking
Total
Public
242
210
452
Private
25
495
520
Total
267
705
972
4 Appendix C
Study Area – Downtown Middlebury Parking Inventory
I
Parking Restrictions and Accessible Spaces
Restrictions ADA Spaces
5 Appendix C
Parking Utilization Rates – Average Rate, 10 AM – 6PM
I
Percent Utilization <30% 30% 60% 60% 75% >75% Study Area
6 Appendix C
Parking Utilization Rates – Average Rate, 10 AM – 12 PM
I
Percent Utilization <30% 30% 60% 60% 75% >75% Study Area
7 Appendix C
Parking Utilization Rates – Average Rate, 12 PM – 2 PM
I
Percent Utilization <30% 30% 60% 60% 75% >75% Study Area
8 Appendix C
Parking Utilization Rates – Average Rate, 2 PM – 4 PM
I
Percent Utilization <30% 30% 60% 60% 75% >75% Study Area
9 Appendix C
Parking Utilization Rates – Average Rate, 4 PM – 6 PM
I
Percent Utilization <30% 30% 60% 60% 75% >75% Study Area
10 Appendix C
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns The peak parking demand
70%
came in the 12-2 observation period
60%
Occupancy Rate
1.
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10-12
12-2
2-4
4-6
Observation Period Average Off Street Occupancy Average On Street Occupancy
11 Appendix C
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns 1.
<30%
The peak parking demand
30% 60%
came in the 12-2 observation period
60% 75% >75%
2. Highly desirable downtown
Study Area
street parking was near capacity, while some nearby street parking was underutilized Main Street at capacity, Seymour Street with unused supply
Eastern College Street at capacity, western College Street, southern Main Street with unused supply
Average Occupancy, 12 PM â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2 PM Appendix C
12
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns 1.
The peak parking demand
10 AM – 12 PM
12 PM – 2 PM
2 PM – 4 PM
4 PM – 6 PM
came in the 12-2 observation period
2. Highly desirable downtown street parking was near capacity, while some nearby street parking was underutilized
3. Downtown municipal lots
Occupation Rate
were heavily utilized during the business day, particularly in the 12 - 2 hours 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Percent Utilization <30%
10-12
12-2
2-4
30% 60%
4-6
60% 75%
Observation Period
>75%
Upper Municipal Lot Lower Municipal Lot South Municpal Lot
Study Area
13 Appendix C
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns 1.
The peak parking demand came in the 12-2 observation period
2. Highly desirable downtown street parking was near capacity, while some nearby street parking was underutilized
3. Downtown municipal lots
4. The Frog Hollow Lot was underutilized throughout the day
90% 80%
Occupancy Rate
were heavily utilized during the business day, particularly in the 12 - 2 hours
100%
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10-12
12-2
2-4
4-6
Observation Period Frog Hollow Lot
14 Appendix C
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns 1.
Farmer’s Market Wednesday, 10 AM – 12 PM
The peak parking demand came in the 12-2 observation period
2. Highly desirable downtown street parking was near capacity, while some nearby street parking was underutilized
3. Downtown municipal lots were heavily utilized during the business day, particularly in the 12 - 2 hours
Marble Works south lot at capacity
4. The Frog Hollow Lot was underutilized throughout the day
5. Special events, like the Farmer’s Market on Wednesday AM, can cause high localized demand for a short period of time Marble Works south lot with capacity Friday, 10 AM – 12 PM 15 Appendix C
Notable Observations and Parking Patterns 1.
The peak parking demand came in the 12-2 observation period
2. Highly desirable downtown street parking was near capacity, while some nearby street parking was underutilized
3. Downtown municipal lots were heavily utilized during the business day, particularly in the 12 - 2 hours
25 spaces reserved for Jackson’s were generally unused
4. The Frog Hollow Lot was underutilized throughout the day
5. Special events, like the Farmer’s Market on Wednesday AM, can cause high localized demand for a short period of time
6. Reserved spaces in public lots remained empty, although the adjacent demand was high, notably the reserved Jackson’s spaces in the Lower Municipal Lot
Lower Municipal Lot was at or near capacity most of the day
16 Appendix C
Identified Issues 1.
Highly desirable downtown parking spaces were utilized at or near capacity during the peak periods; nearby streets and lots remained under-utilized 2. Frustration to not finding a space quickly and easily led to unsafe parking practices 3. The time limit restrictions were often ignored or misunderstood, resulting in the need for enforcement 4. Enforcement is seasonal; compliance is reported to drop when parking restrictions are unenforced 17 Appendix C
Identified Issues 5. Competition for street space between parking and transit on Merchants Row led to bus queues that block parked cars and limit sight distance at the crosswalk 6. The parking citation fee ($5) is low and is not an effective deterrent to repeat offenders 7. Parking regulation signs should be placed consistently following the latest MUTCD guidance
18 Appendix C
Potential Solutions Improve communication to local residents and business owners of availability of parking in underutilized locations Improve visibility, accessibility, and awareness of Frog Hollow Lot – Commit to consistent winter shoveling, sanding, and salting – Improve pedestrian connectivity, provide handrails up the hill
Implement a real-time parking availability status system – Direct motorists to available spaces – Requires infrastructure: parking sensors, LED wayfinding, mobile application programming
Increase enforcement through all seasons – Parking enforcement position acts as a community ambassador – May be just as effective if enforcement is sporadic, such as a rotating week per month or day per week
Designate a transit center with adequate bus queuing and staging; reduce vehicle / pedestrian / transit conflicts Increase parking citation fees or institute a progressive fee structure that increases with repeat offenses – $5 fee is ineffective as a deterrent to repeat offenses
Increase the desirability of underutilized parking locations by metering highly desirable locations – Requires maintenance, enforcement, and new infrastructure – Complications with quick trips, such as the bank and post office
19 Appendix C
Summary Recommendations Send results of study to area businesses, reinforce request for employee parking in underutilized areas, particularly the Frog Hollow Lot. Improve visibility and accessibility to underutilized parking locations, particularly the Frog Hollow Lot â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Advanced parking occupancy / demand management tools may be implemented; challenges with cost, climate, and effectiveness if pricing is not included
Consider increasing parking citation fee from $5 per offense to $20 per offense. Progressive fee structure is recommended, but the required capital expense may not be justified. Provide enforcement all year. During off-peak seasons, consider enforcing at random times, such as alternating days of the week. Consider implementing meters at identified locations, ensuring free 15minute spaces are provided as appropriate and enforcement is continuous. 20 Appendix C
Advanced Parking Occupancy Tools Occupied spaces are tracked using: – In-pavement sensors to detect vehicles in parking spaces
Case Study: San Francisco - sfpark.org -
Motorists are directed to unoccupied spaces – Reduces “cruising” for open spaces, less congestion – Changeable message / LED signs on street – Web / mobile apps
Rate can be modified based on the availability of parking to encourage one open spot per block – Demand management is related to pricing
Cost of implementation, programming, and maintenance – Cost for large cities is approximately $1,000 / space – Costs may come down over time
Availability
Rate
iPhone and Android parking apps Demand responsive pricing Used in eight pilot areas of the city – 7,000 metered spaces – 12,250 garage spaces
Funded with a $19.8 million dollar grant from USDOT More information: http://vimeo.com/13867453 21
Appendix C
Parking Citation Fee Discussion $5 flat rate fee provides little deterrent to repeat offenses. Options: Increase flat fee from $5 to $20. Disproportionately impacts first time offenders and visitors.
Institute a progressive fee system, such as: â&#x20AC;&#x201C; $5 for first offense in a year, $20 for second, and $50 for additional offenses May be complicated to enforce, may require new ticketing software and hardware that tracks offenses.
Institute a permit-reward system, such as: â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Employer pays $100 for employee parking permits, parking offenses from these permitted vehicles are deducted from the permit fee, employer receives remaining permit fee towards next year permits. Shifts responsibility of parking compliance to employer from employee May be difficult to track and enforce 22 Appendix C
Metering Options Traditional coin meters
- vs -
Multi-space kiosks
Potential pay parking zones
Dwight Burdette (cc)
www.pom.com
Many options: Coin only Electronic / card reader
Generally quicker and easier use Requires meter at every space, no additional signs
2 hour pay parking, street
2 hour pay parking, lot
15 minute free parking
All day pay parking, lot
Appendix C
Solar or wired options Greater flexibility and data collection possibilities Pay and display or assigned space Requires additional signs 23
Metering Discussion Meters would require all-year enforcement Metering may discourage quick trips – Free, 15-minute spaces should be provided as appropriate
Meters would require maintenance and revenue collection Meters should be accompanied by additional or supplementary signage to direct motorists to free, long term parking locations Traditional coin meters
- vs -
Approximate Cost: $1,500 each $250 / unit / year Units at every space $750 – $1,500 / space
www.pom.com
Dwight Burdette (cc)
Multi-space kiosks Approximate Cost: $13,000 each $2,000 / unit / year Units should be reasonably close to spaces: 1 Unit / 6 – 10 street spaces 1-2 Units / Lot $450 - $2,200 / space 24
Appendix C
Appendix D