Rethink Parking - Introduction Presentation

Rethink Parking An approach to parking reform in Fayette Co.

Jimmy Emmons

Chris Taylor

Valerie Friedmann

Planner Senior, Transportation Planning

Administrative Officer, LongRange Planning

Planner Senior, Long-Range Planning

Planning Commission Work Session, March 18, 2021

Preview

Foundation for Reform Motivation for Reform Framework for Reform

Foundation for Reform Jimmy Emmons Planner Senior, Transportation Planning

Imagine Lexington Mission Statement The 2018 Comprehensive Plan, Imagine Lexington, seeks to provide flexible yet focused planning guidance to ensure equitable development of our community’s resources and infrastructure that enhances our quality of life, and fosters regional planning and economic development. This will be accomplished while protecting the environment, promoting successful, accessible neighborhoods, and preserving the unique Bluegrass landscape that has made Lexington-Fayette County the Horse Capital of the World.

Goals & Objectives Theme A, Goal 2 Support infill and redevelopment throughout the Urban Service Area as a strategic component of growth.

Theme A, Goal 3 Provide well-designed neighborhoods and communities.

Policies Design Policy #1 Utilize a people-first design, ensuring that roadways are moving people efficiently and providing pedestrian infrastructure that is context sensitive to the vehicle environment and land uses.

Design Policy #7 Design car parking areas so as not to be the primary visual component of the neighborhood.

Sustainability Policy #7 Reduce / discourage vehicle-oriented development patterns, such as drive-through businesses within the Urban Service Boundary, especially in the urban core areas. Reduce parking footprints.

Prosperity Policy #10 Encourage flexible parking and shared parking arrangements.

Parking decisions are based on several factors … and therefore, a personal decision that has a cumulative effect.

• Where would you park in this picture?

• Fight for a close spot?

• In the back?

• Somewhere else and walk?

• In the shade?

• Along the walkway?

• Near the cart return?

• Near the exit door?

Parking regulations within the Zoning Ordinance Article 1: General Provisions & Definitions

Article 7: Board of Adjustment

Article 8: Schedule of Zones

Article 10: Mobile Home Park (M-1P) Zone

Article 11: Interchange Service Business (B-5P) Zone

Article 12: Commercial Center (B-6P) Zone

Article 18: Landscape and Land Use Buffers

Article 22: Planned Unit (PUD) Zones

Article 23: Expansion Area Zoning Categories…

Article 9: Group Residential Projects

Article 16: General Regulations for Parking…..

Article 28: Mixed Use Zoning Categories

Great Moments in Parking History 1929

Nationwide, about 20% of the population owned a vehicle

1930s

Lexington, about 34% of the population owned a vehicle

1930s

Lexington passes the first full Zoning Ordinance

1950

Lexington BOA has the authority to allow uses without parking

1966

The American Planning Association recommends more parking

1969

About 83% of Lexington's population owns a car, and we adopt parking standards that are generally still in effect today.

AND THEN... We amended those regulations again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, All to try and protect residents from the negative effects of automobiles

Years with parking related amendments since the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance -

Great Moments in Parking History 1970 1970 1971 1981 1983

1929

Nationwide, about 20% of the population owned a vehicle

Lexington, about 34% of the population a vehicle 1987 1989 1990 1990 owned 1993

1930s 1930s

Lexington passes the first full Zoning Ordinance

1995 1997 1997 1998 Lexington BOA has the authority to allow 1998 uses without parking

1950 1966

The American Planning Association recommends more parking

1969

About 83% of Lexington's population owns a car, and we adopt parking standards that are generally still in effect today.

1999 1999 2002 2003 2004 2005 2007 2008 2010 2012

AND THEN... We amended those regulations again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again,

2012 2013 2013 2014 2017 2020 All to try and protect residents from the negative effects of automobiles

Article 16-1 Intent

Before now, we have not been “intentional” about the parking regulations within our ordinance, which speaks to why we have not been successful in regulating parking.

 Balance the needs of parking demand and supply  Enhance all place types, prioritizing access to neighborhoods, workplaces and other supportive uses.

livable

 Placement and design of vehicular use areas is essential to create a safe, livable, and environmentally sustainable city  Vehicular Use Areas should be accessory/subordinate to the primary uses, not only in function, but also visually.  Certain parking and loading areas such as, drive-through facilities, automobile service and refueling stations, can have an increased impact on the potential health, safety and welfare of the surrounding community and therefore have additional site requirements.

History of Parking Reform The Bottom Line

Our current parking regulations are preventing us from doing the things that we want to do. Most of the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan are actively discouraged by our current regulations.

Providing purposeful, adaptable and Responsive Parking regulations will make our city more resilient to future disruptions, which will ultimately move Lexington toward a more sustainable future.

Back to the foundation for parking reform…

• Using the concepts within Imagine Lexington as a foundation for parking reform, in tandem with the plan’s flexible yet focused mission, would: • Simplify regulations • Eliminate limiting and ineffective standards • Give intention to our parking regulations

Motivation for Reform Chris Taylor Administrative Officer, Long-Range Planning

The “Why” Behind a Responsive Parking System • Ensures the health, safety, and welfare of community • Average standards = inaccurate predictions • Creates system that works for all parking users and providers

Heath, safety, and welfare of the community • Does what we regulate really address Public Health, Safety and Welfare?

• Is there a better way to address the issue than the way we’ve always done it?

• Regulating the NUMBER of parking spaces provides an average of 8 parking spaces for every vehicle nationally.

• While not addressing at all the public health, safety or welfare of people.

The Cycle of Creating Sprawl Step 1 Studies by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) surveys peak parking demand at suburban sites with ample free parking, reported in manual as precise Parking Generation rate.

Step 2 Planners require MINIMUM parking from the ITE manual.

Step 3 Provision of ample ‘free’ parking increases vehicle travel.

Step 4 Next ITE manual update surveys sites that have developed under these estimates.

Step 5 Repeat until Planners begin limiting development/density to ‘ease congestion’, therefore: • • •

Spreading uses further apart Increasing vehicle travel Increases parking demand

Source: https://www.accessmagazin e.org/spring-2002/roughlyright-precisely-wrong/

Average standards = inaccurate predictions • Nearly every city uses the same resource for determining parking minimums • Thus, nearly every city has the same standards • An average is illustrative of a broad trend, but fails in nearly every micro-application.

• Very precise numbers, yet based on huge uncertainty!

So, what’s the takeaway?

• Demand for parking, is a not a function of: • • • •

Square Footage Bedrooms Dining Seats Floor Area Ratio

• The demand…the need for parking is determined by many factors, none of them regulated by zoning: • Market demographics • Differing business models between similar uses • Location, Location, Location • Popularity

The Cycle of Creating Sprawl

Responsive Parking for people Parking Users •

•

Motorists, with parking reform: •

Reduce collisions and unclear guidance in parking lots

•

Once parked, every pedestrian should be safer getting to their destination

•

Lower an economic barrier to new businesses. Parking can range from $5,000 to $50,000 a space https://cityobservatory.org/the-priceof-parking/

•

Allowing considerably more flexibility to providers to establish the amount of parking they need lowers costs to businesses and in some cases on down to customers.

•

Reduces maintenance costs

Cyclists, with parking reform: •

•

•

Parking Providers

Ensure that anywhere parking is provided that bicycle parking is also provided and Bicycle parking is designed for being usable and accessible just like it is for cars

•

Transit users, with parking reform:

The zoning ordinance does not provide for the maintenance and care of parking lots.

•

Unused parking requires the same maintenance as highly used areas.

•

Improves the safety of pedestrian routes from street/transit stop

Framework for Reform Valerie Friedmann Planner Senior, Greenspace Planner, Long-Range Planning

Restructuring our regulations – for efficiency and simplicity Article 1: General Provisions & Definitions

Article 7: Board of Adjustment

Article 8: Schedule of Zones

Article 10: Mobile Home Park (M-1P) Zone

Article 11: Interchange Service Business (B-5P) Zone

Article 12: Commercial Center (B-6P) Zone

Article 18: Landscape and Land Use Buffers

Article 22: Planned Unit (PUD) Zones

Article 23: Expansion Area Zoning Categories…

Article 9: Group Residential Projects

Article 16: General Regulations for Parking…..

Article 28: Mixed Use Zoning Categories

Restructuring our regulations – for efficiency and simplicity • Condensing all parking regulations into two locations • Efficiency and ease of use

Article 16: Responsive parking and general regulations for vehicular use areas Complete replacement of existing ordinances.

Article 18: Landscape and Land Use Buffers Changing portions related to Vehicular Use Areas only: •

VUA perimeter landscaping

•

VUA interior landscaping

Restructuring our regulationswith a clear purpose • Focus on the health, safety, and welfare of our community  Reduced vehicle speeds  More predictable circulation  Marked crossings  Pedestrian-scale elements  Reduced heat island

Two major changes 1. Enabling Responsive Parking • No longer regulating the number of required parking spaces.

Two major changes 2. Addition of Site Design Standards • Regulating the number of parking spaces does not protect the health, safety, and welfare of our community.

• Regulating the site design and layout of parking areas does.

Two major changes summary Responsive Parking • No longer regulating the number • Focus on other aspects of development • Dense, compact development is safer and more accommodating for walking, biking and transit • Reduced paved surfaces provide numerous environmental benefits

• Provides choice for parking provider

Site Design Standards • Adding site design and layout standards •

Focused on health, safety, and welfare elements of parking lot design

•

Based on national standards and best practices, adapted to our local culture

• Promotes safety of all users

Site Design Standards – focus on health, safety, and welfare • Nationally, pedestrian deaths on the rise • Parking Design Standards developed to address health, safety, and welfare concerns in parking areas: • Reduce vehicle speeds • Create predictable circulation— for pedestrians and vehicles • Provide marked and illuminated pedestrian paths and cross walks • Include human-scaled elements

Site Design Standards focus on environment • Environmental and climate benefits for our entire community • • • •

Improve urban forest Reduce heat islands Mitigate stormwater Benefits owners, sustainable for LFUCG

• National funding trends prioritize sustainable transit/infrastructure (funding of programs, incentives) Diagram: LFUCG Planning

Site Design Standards – focus on use and place • Lexington’s various types of parking

Site Design Standards – Creation of Parking Types 1-4 Type 1

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Single residential building on lot

Single-family attached

VUA under 3 acres

VUA over 3 acres

Includes singlefamily dwelling, duplex, triplex, and quadruplex

Townhouses

Vehicular Use Areas from 1,800 SF/five spaces up to 130,680 SF (3ac)

Vehicular Use Area over 130,680 SF (3ac)

Site Design Standards Parking Type 1 Single residential detached • Reduce paving in front yards • Driveway widths proportionate to street frontage • Sufficient space between driveways for on-street parking • Encourage deeper setbacks for large garages

Site Design Standards Parking Type 2 Single-family attached (townhouses) • Paired driveways • Sufficient space between driveways for on-street parking • Safer pedestrian experience - fewer individual driveways for the sidewalk to cross

• Shared parking courts (max. 12 parking spaces)

Site Design Standards – Creation of Parking Types 1-4 Type 1

Type 2

Type 3

Type 4

Single residential building on lot

Single-family attached

VUA under 3 acres

VUA over 3 acres

Includes singlefamily dwelling, duplex, triplex, and quadruplex

Townhouses

Vehicular Use Areas Areas from 1,800 from 1,800 SF/five SF/five spaces spaces up to up to 130,680 SF (3ac)

Vehicular Use Area over 130,680 SF (3ac)

Site Design Standards Type 3 & 4 VUA Size Analysis

Site Design Standards Type 3 & 4 VUA Size Analysis

Site Design Standards Type 3 & 4 VUA Size Analysis

Site Design Standards Type 3 & 4 VUA Size Analysis Up to 3 acres Type 3

Greater than 3 acres Type 4

Site Design Standards Parking Type 3 (up to 3 acres)

• Places the majority of parking to the rear or sides of buildings

Diagrams: Franklin, TN Planning

Site Design Standards Parking Type 3 (up to 3 acres)

• Features buildings and open space at intersections instead of parking • Internal Circulation Standards • Perimeter Connection Standards

Diagrams: Franklin, TN Planning

Site Design Standards Parking Type 4 (over 3ac) • Places the majority of parking to the rear or sides of buildings • Features buildings and open space at intersections instead of parking • Internal Circulation Standards • Perimeter Connection Standards • Parking “blocks” no larger than 450’ x 450’

Site Design Standards Parking Type 4 (over 3ac) • Parking “blocks”

Diagram: LFUCG Planning

Site Design Standards Parking Type 4 / Retrofit Study

Diagram: LFUCG Planning

Site Design Standards Type 4 / New Development

Diagram: Imagine Nicholasville Road

RETHINK PARKING Jimmy Emmons Planner Senior, Transportation Planning

Regulating what is most important to the community • Enabling the comprehensive plan • Increasing the health, safety, and welfare of our community • Flexible and Focused regulations that respond to the community as a whole

These changes intend to set a new standard • Setting a new standard for parking that will create gradual change over time • Regulations that are designed for people instead of vehicles • Responsive regulations that provide Balance, Enhance the city, and Enable Opportunities for Everyone.

Next Steps • • • • • • • •

Community parking survey Community (User/Provider) focus groups Surveys Online video presentations Social media outreach Civic group presentations Review with other divisions within LFUCG Coming very soon...Mornings With Planning Webinar with national parking experts • April 7, 2021

Community Parking Survey • Call to community members to submit data on publicly accessible lots in Lexington • Users can pin parking lots on a map and view other submissions • Option to evaluate lot as overcrowded, underutilized, or other • Comments optional, but encouraged • Will be used to help illustrate our community’s need for flexible yet focused reform Imaginelexington.com/rethink-parking

Rethink Parking An approach to parking reform in Fayette Co.

Jimmy Emmons

Chris Taylor

Valerie Friedmann

Planner Senior, Transportation Planning

Administrative Officer, LongRange Planning

Planner Senior, Long-Range Planning

jamese@lexingtonky.gov

ctaylor3@lexingtonky.gov

vfriedmann@lexingtonky.gov

Planning Commission Work Session, March 18, 2021