memorandum
Date:
August 22, 2011
To:
Ms. Loreli Cappel
PMC
Subject:
Whitlock & Weinberger
Transportation, Inc.
From:
Mark Spencer
Tony Henderson
Zack Matley
490 Mendocino Avenue
Suite 201
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
Project:
SRO300
voice (707) 542-9500
fax (707) 542-9590
Santa Rosa North Station Area Plan Parking Analysis
website www.w-trans.com
email zmatley@w-trans.com
The following memorandum summarizes parking-related issues for the North Santa Rosa Station Area
Plan (NSRSAP). The memo is organized into the following four sections:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Existing Parking Conditions
Future General Plan Buildout
North Santa Rosa Station Area Plan
Parking Strategies
1. Existing Parking Conditions
Currently parking within the plan area consists of a mix of on-street parking and off-street private
parking lots. On-street parking is prohibited on most major streets (e.g., collector roadways and
arterial streets that service commercial centers), but is allowed on many local residential streets. Offstreet parking is provided solely in the form of private parking lots. Where available, on-street parking
is generally unrestricted, other than a citywide 72-hour limit on on-street parking. While the City of
Santa Rosa has six residential parking zones where a permit is required to park long term, none of these
zones are located within the plan area.
Coddingtown Mall
Coddingtown Mall is the largest parking generator and also supply of parking in the study area, and
understanding its potential parking characteristics at full occupancy will be important to consider in the
context of the Station Area Plan. Because the mall is currently underutilized (though undergoing plans
for revitalization and re-tenanting), a full parking demand analysis of current operations would have
limited use. Instead, a parking demand analysis that examines theoretical conditions with full occupancy
of the mall has been conducted, including consideration of temporal data such as time of day, whether it
is a weekday or weekend, and the month of the year. Methodologies provided in the Urban Land
Institute (ULI) publication Shared Parking, 2nd Edition, 2006, were used for this purpose.
The highest demand at regional shopping centers like Coddingtown Mall occurs on Saturdays between
2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m., with a peak that is about 15 percent higher than that experienced on weekdays.
During the peak December shopping season, weekend parking demand is about 43 percent higher than
the remaining months’ average. As would be expected, parking demand at regional shopping centers is
negligible between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 2
August 22, 2011
Coddingtown Mall currently has approximately 857,500 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA), and is
surrounded by approximately 3,460 parking spaces. The theoretical parking demand characteristics for
the mall at full occupancy are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Theoretical Mall Parking Demand at Full Occupancy
Based on this analysis, the parking demand associated with a fully-occupied mall has the potential to
exceed the available parking supply on several weekend days in December, though would remain within
the available supply on December weekdays and the remainder of the year. During the average month
of June, it is expected that just under 1,000 unoccupied spaces available for use would exist at the mall
during the highest demand hour of the week (Saturdays at 2:00 p.m.).
Commercial Uses in the Plan Area
Existing retail and office land uses provide their own onsite parking supplies at quantities generally
meeting or exceeding City code. There are no known businesses in the study area that have a
significant parking shortage.
Residential Uses in the Plan Area
Generally residential parking is provided in both on-street and off-street parking. Some older residential
areas (mainly south of Coddingtown Mall) were developed when the area was rural and lacked on-street
parking. It is anticipated as infill development occurs, the streets would be upgraded to current
standards including on-street parking. Parking for the apartment and condominium complexes within
the plan area is accommodated by off-street parking lots.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 3
August 22, 2011
City of Santa Rosa Parking Requirements
In adopting the 2004 City of Santa Rosa Zoning Code, the City established different parking requirements
in the downtown area versus other areas of the City. Outside of downtown, such as within the plan
area, single-family dwellings are required to provide four spaces per unit. Tandem parking and parking
directly fronting the lot on streets may be included in the parking total. Multi-family residential uses are
required to provide one covered space plus 0.5 visitor spaces per studio or 1-bedroom unit. Multifamily units with two or more bedrooms are required to provide one covered space plus 1.5 visitor
spaces per unit. Visitor spaces may be counted as on-street spaces fronting the development. General
retail and general office uses are required to provide one parking space per 250 square feet of building
space. Some uses including restaurants and medical offices are required to provide a higher amount of
parking, while some uses such as furniture-type stores and clinics are required to provide less parking.
Parking Reductions
The City’s parking requirements allow for various reductions in minimum parking standards. This
includes mixed-use development when it can be demonstrated that these uses can share a common
parking area. Other reduced parking standards have been adopted for downtown and the Downtown
Station Area Plan, although neither of these apply to the North Santa Rosa Station Area Plan.
2. Future General Plan Buildout
Full buildout of the Santa Rosa General Plan would result in additional development within the plan area.
Table 1 below shows the total increase in land use that would occur with full buildout of the General
Plan. The City’s Code has parking rates established for types of developments within each General Plan
category. Since the General Plan allows for a wide range of development within each category, a midrange parking rate was applied to each category with the intent of showing an average parking
requirement, but as sites develop the actual parking requirements may vary slightly (for example a high
turn-over restaurant requires considerably more parking than a furniture store, all of which would fall
under “commercial” land uses, so the mid-range “shopping center” requirements were applied to all
commercial uses). Assuming that all development would fall under existing zoning code requirements
and that no reductions would be made for shared parking or mixed-use developments, as currently
allowed in City’s Code, the full buildout of General Plan in the plan area would result in the need for
nearly 4,000 additional parking spaces. It is expected that the additional parking supply would be
provided in off-street parking lots. It should be noted that full implementation of Alternative B would
result in a net reduction in single family detached residential units, therefore resulting in a reduced
parking demand. New single family detached homes would still likely be constructed in some areas of
the Plan, but overall, redevelopment of some existing single-family units to higher-density multi-family
complexes would be expected to result in a net reduction.
This analysis does not include educational or recreational uses because parking requirements for these
uses can vary dramatically depending on how they are developed, and overall they represent a small
portion of the total development. Because of this, the actual parking supply required may slightly differ.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 4
August 22, 2011
Table 1
General Plan Buildout Parking Requirements
Land Use
Single Family Residential 1
City Code
Parking Requirement
Incremental Development
Potential Increase
Net New
Parking
4 per du
-47 du
-188
Multi-Family Residential 2
1,406 du
Reserved
Guest
Office
Retail – Strip Commercial
3
Retail – Shopping Center 4
Light Industrial
5
Industrial Warehouse
Institutional 6
1 per du
1,406
1.5 per du
2,109
1 per 250 sf
4.1 ksf
17
1 per 250 sf
19.1 ksf
76
1 per 250 sf
4.0 ksf
6
1 per 350 sf
180.6 ksf
516
1 per 1,000 sf
2.4 ksf
3
1 per 250 sf
4.4 ksf
18
Total New Parking Required
Notes:
3,963
1
Single family residential units are required to provide at least one on-site parking space and the
remaining must be onsite or directly in front of the lot; 2 Multi-Family Residential rates are based on units
with 2 or more bedrooms; 3 Shopping Center; 4 Shopping Center; 5 Less than 50,000 sf per site; 6 All
service uses; du = dwelling unit; sf = square feet
3. North Santa Rosa Station Area Plan
The proposed Station Area Plan includes two alternatives. Based on current City standards, full
development of Alternative A would result in a need for approximately 9,045 new parking spaces and
the more intense Alternative B would need 13,054 new parking spaces. The increase in parking
requirements for Alternative B is largely driven by the intensification of multi-family housing and office
buildings. A summary of the parking requirements under each alternative is provided in Table 2.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 5
August 22, 2011
Table 2
City Parking Requirements – North Santa Rosa Station Area Plan Alternatives
Land Use
City Code
Parking
Requirement
Single Family Residential 1
4 per du
Multi-Family Residential 2
Alternative A
New
Development
Size
Additional
Parking
New
Development
Size
Additional
Parking
452 du
1,808
275 du
1,100
1,417 du
Reserved
Guest
Office
Alternative B
2,527 du
1 per du
1,417
2,527
1.5 per du
2,126
3,791
1 per 250 sf
622.3 ksf
2,489
951.3 ksf
3,805
1 per 250 sf
162.1 ksf
648
230.2 ksf
921
1 per 250 sf
143.4 ksf
574
144.5 ksf
578
1 per 350 sf
-14.4 ksf
-41
-24.3 ksf
-69
Warehouse
1 per 1,000 sf
-123.4
-123
-52.2
-52
Institutional 6
1 per 250 sf
36.8
147
113.2
453
Retail – Strip Commercial 3
Retail – Shopping Center
Industrial
4
5
Total Parking Required
Notes:
9,045
13,054
1
Single family residential units are required to provide at least one on-site parking space and the
remaining must be onsite or directly in front of the lot; 2 Multi-Family Residential rates are based on units
with 2 or more bedrooms; 3 Shopping Center; 4 Shopping Center; 5 Less than 50,000 sf per site; 6 All
service uses; du = dwelling unit; sf = square feet
4. Parking Strategies
While both alternatives are fully analyzed in other parts of the transportation study, only the more
intense Alternative B, was analyzed further for the parking analysis. This is because strategies are
expected to be similar for both alternatives, and analyzing the more intense alternative represents a
worst-case scenario because it requires more parking. While implementation of Alternative B would
generate a greater parking demand than Alternative A, the parking strategies and appropriate TOD
parking ratios would be very similar.
Parking Demand Methodologies
Traditional Parking Demand Methodology
Parking demand for new development is typically projected using empirically-derived rates developed by
organizations including the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and Urban Land Institute (ULI). In
many cases parking demand studies are not conducted, with parking adequacy instead being gauged
solely on whether or not the project meets the supply required by the jurisdiction’s zoning code.
There can be several major shortfalls to relying on standardized rates without consideration of the
surrounding built environment. First, standardized parking demand rates have typically been developed
based on studies of sites in suburban areas. This has been done largely out of necessity, as the “purest”
sites are those with single uses and their own isolated parking lots. The problem with using data from
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 6
August 22, 2011
suburban sites is that the resulting rates tend to reflect a very auto-dependent condition in which there
is a lack of travel made by transit use, bicycling, or walking. Suburban sites also have very limited
potential for “captive” uses, where a driver parks once but visits more than one use. Research
conducted in the Bay Area by John Holtzclaw1 and the Institute for Location Efficiency indicates that
residents of lower-density neighborhoods have higher vehicle ownership rates than residents of higherdensity urban areas, with a 16 percent reduction in auto ownership for every doubling of housing
density.
A second shortfall of using standardized, single-use parking demand rates is that the potential of “shared
parking” is not considered. The concept of shared parking is based on the fact that different land uses
often experience peak parking demand at different times, be it by time of day or even month of the year.
A classic example is that of office and residential uses. The office uses create the highest parking
demand during the daytime on weekdays, which also happens to be the time when residential parking
demand is at its lowest. If these two land uses were able to share a common parking facility, or exist
within a proximate area such as a dense, mixed-use core the actual number of parking spaces needed to
accommodate the combined demand at any given time would be considerably lower than the individual
sums of the projected residential and office demand. Focusing on a shared parking approach when
considering future development, whether mixed-use or located in a diverse urban environment, can
substantially improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the project. The costs associated with
providing excessive parking are extreme when considering the space required and costs of structured
parking that can range from $15,000 to $30,000 per space.
Third, the use of traditional parking demand rates and/or suburban-oriented parking requirements can
adversely affect other goals of the community including the creation of transit-oriented development,
development patterns that support other non-automobile modes like bicycling and walking, improved
housing affordability, and a more efficient use of urban land that focuses on urban infill rather than
suburban expansion. Progressive parking demand policies would support goals of the North Santa Rosa
Station Area Specific Plan.
Shared Parking Methodology
As described above, a parking demand methodology that considers “shared parking” principles can
significantly improve the efficiency of providing parking in an urban mixed-use environment, and help to
avoid an unnecessary oversupply of parking. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) publication Shared Parking,
2nd Edition, 2006, includes state-of-the-practice methodologies for determining parking demand in a
mixed-use environment.
The ULI shared parking methodology focuses heavily on temporal data, determining when the overall
peak demand for various land uses occurs, including what time of day, whether it is a weekday or
weekend, and what month of the year. The recommended parking supply is then tied to that maximum
demand period. The base input data includes the proposed mix of land uses, including quantities of each
type of use. If reserved (non-shared) parking spaces are to be included for any of the land use types,
those values are also input. The methodology then requires the input of “mode adjustment” and
“noncaptive ratio” values.
1
As cited in Parking Management Best Practices, Todd Litman, 2006, page 32
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 7
August 22, 2011
Mode adjustments are applied to the default parking demand ratios, which are based on auto-oriented
suburban developments, to reflect conditions where auto ownership is expected to be lower, transit
usage higher, and other non-automobile modes of travel such as walking and bicycling higher. Several
elements need to be considered when determining vehicle ownership trends for transit-oriented urban
areas such as that envisioned for the Specific Plan Area. A Caltrans-funded study (Travel Characteristics of
Transit-Oriented Development in California, 2005, Lund, Cervero, and Willson) indicates that vehicle
ownership at California TODs has been found to decrease over time as density and transit service
increase. The July 2006 publication MTC’s Resolution 3434 Transit-Oriented Development Policy: Interim
Evaluation indicates that the average automobile ownership at transit station area developments in
California is 1.4 vehicles per household. This is 26 percent lower than the 1.9 vehicles per household
reported for the central Sonoma County area in the 2005 Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) data summary publication Vehicle Ownership Forecasts for the San Francisco Bay Area: 1990-2030
(November 2005). Over time as the Specific Plan area experiences increasing TOD activity, it is
expected that vehicle ownership (and the total number of vehicles owned per household) will decrease.
Separate mode adjustment factors can also be made for employees within the Specific Plan area. Travel
mode data for Santa Rosa employees obtained from the 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package
(CTPP) “Journey to Work” tabulations indicate that 83 percent of all home-to-work trips in Santa Rosa
are completed in single-passenger private autos, 12 percent regularly carpool, 2 percent by transit, and
3 percent walk or bicycle, as summarized in Table 3. These statistics are very similar to more recent
data for Sonoma County overall in the year 2006, as shown in MTC’s Data Summary publication Travel
Forecasts for the San Francisco Bay Area: 2009 Regional Transportation Plan: Vision 2035 Analysis (November
2007). This data was used to develop appropriate automobile usage assumptions when adjusting
employee travel modes in Santa Rosa.
Table 3
Travel and Demographic Characteristics Affecting Parking Demand in Santa Rosa
Journey to Work Travel Modes
Residents
Employees
Drive solo
83%
82%
Carpool
12%
13%
Transit
2%
2%
Walk or Bike
3%
3%
The noncaptive ratio adjustments in the Shared Parking methodology are based on the concept of a
“captive market,” which refers to customers who visit more than one establishment or type of land use
without making a separate trip, or in this case, parking their vehicle more than once. This can also apply
to employees in a core environment who park in a garage or at work, but visit nearby businesses during
breaks or at lunch, or core residents who shop, dine, or work nearby.
Role of Shared Parking Methodologies in Developing Standards for Santa Rosa
For the North Santa Rosa Station Area Specific Plan parking analysis, shared parking methodologies can
be applied to assess the most efficient means of managing parking demand created by potential
development. Shared parking would only be feasible in areas where complementary land uses are
located in walking distance proximity to each other and the area represents an integrated and connected
development pattern. A sub-area of the plan area where shared parking is likely to be feasible is the
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 8
August 22, 2011
core immediately surrounding the station including Coddingtown Mall and areas south of Coddingtown
Mall where the densest development is expected to occur. For the purpose of the circulation analysis,
the core plan area includes the area bounded by the SMART tracks to the west, Ridgway Avenue to the
south, and US 101 to the east, with the northern boundary formed by Guerneville Road between
SMART and Range Avenue, and by the parcels fronting the north side of West Steele Lane between
Range Avenue and US 101. An example of a location where sharing may not be feasible includes the
business parks along Dutton Avenue, which are dominated by a single land use and are not near dense
residential uses.
Based on a review of the Alternative B land use plan, and to provide a conservative estimate, a portion
of the development within the core area was considered to be shareable: one-half of all new residential
and commercial developments and one-fourth of new office space. If shared parking is fully
implemented in this core subarea of Alternative B, there is potential to reduce the new parking supply
by up to 29 percent within the subarea and 10 percent of the entire plan area. Shared parking
calculations are enclosed for reference. However, it is recognized that not all developers would choose
to designate 100 percent of their onsite parking as “shared” and shared parking may not be feasible for
certain developments due to their location. For this reason, it may be appropriate for the City to
consider different parking requirements for developments that utilize shared parking versus those that
do not.
Sharing of parking also allows for unbundled parking at residential developments that separates the cost
of parking from the housing, meaning that residents with no vehicles would realize a cost savings by not
leasing a space. Correspondingly, residents wishing to lease more than one reserved space could pay to
do so.
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) indicates that the effective parking supply for a given area, whether a
shopping center or a core area like the plan area, is considered to be 85 to 95 percent of the physical
supply that exists. ULI recommends that future parking supplies be planned to include a small “cushion”
over the maximum projected parking demand. This is done to offset the adverse impacts that can occur
when very few to no parking spaces are available, including traffic congestion created by drivers
circulating for spaces and general driver frustration. The additional buffer also helps account for the
need to provide some reserved spaces, such as disabled parking and commercial vehicle loading zones.
For areas within the Station Area Specific Plan, the recommended parking supplies are based on the
assumption that practical supply is reached at 95 percent. In other words, a parking supply that is
approximately five percent higher than the peak demand is recommended. Applying this buffer, shared
parking could result in a 25 percent reduction in parking supply within the core subarea and nine
percent of the entire plan area compared to what would be required by current zoning code
requirements.
Reduced Parking Standards
The City of Santa Rosa has already adopted reduced parking requirements for Transit Oriented
Development (TOD), in downtown, and for the Downtown Station Area Plan. The Downtown Station
Area Plan utilizes different parking requirements for different plan “sub areas,” applying the greatest
reductions to the downtown Courthouse Square sub area. While development associated with the
Courthouse Square sub area of the Downtown Station Area Plan is expected to be denser and served
by more local bus transit options than the NSRSAP, the types of development and levels of transit
service in the Railroad Square and Railroad Corridor sub areas would be fairly similar to the NSRSAP.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 9
August 22, 2011
The parking requirements set by the City of Santa Rosa for these two downtown sub areas were
therefore considered in the context of establishing TOD-appropriate ratios for the NSRSAP.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has completed research titled Reforming Parking
Policies to Support Smart Growth – Toolbox/Handbook: Parking Best Practices & Strategies for Supporting
Transit Oriented Development in the San Francisco Bay Area, 2007. This publication includes recommended
parking strategies for TODs such as those proposed in parts of the Station Area Plan. Five TOD types
are defined in the study, including Regional Center, City Center/Urban Neighborhood, Suburban
Center/Town Center, Transit Neighborhood, and Rural/Small Town. The transit characteristics
associated with a Suburban Center best describe the North Santa Rosa Plan area (bus and commuter
rail based transit service). For Suburban Centers, MTC recommends reduced parking standards which
are summarized and compared with current City of Santa Rosa parking requirements in Table 4.
Table 4
Representative Parking Requirements for Suburban Centers
Land Use
Unit
MTC Reduced
Requirements
Low
High
Current City
Requirements
Residential
Dwelling
1.0
1.5
1.5 to 4.0
Office
1,000 sf
2.0
3.0
4.0
Retail
1,000 sf
1.5
2.5
4.0
Restaurant
1,000 sf
3.0
5.0
13.3
Notes: sf = square feet
Source: MTC and City of Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa’s detached residential parking requirements are four spaces per single family detached unit,
including one covered onsite space plus three spaces that can be counted on fronting streets and/or
onsite tandem spaces. Parking requirements for attached residential units are determined by unit size,
ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 spaces per unit. Affordable housing is required to provide 1.0 to 2.0 spaces per
unit depending on size, and senior housing is required to provide 1.0 space per unit plus one additional
visitor space per 10 units. These residential parking requirements generally exceed the typical MTC
ranges for a Suburban Center, as well as TOD-based parking requirements set by the City of Santa Rosa
for areas within the Downtown Station Area Plan.
Santa Rosa’s non-residential parking requirements are also somewhat higher than the MTC ranges and
the standards applied in the Downtown Station Area, with parking requirements of 4.0 spaces per 1,000
square feet for retail and professional uses. Restaurant uses are required to provide 13.33 spaces per
1,000 square feet, which may be appropriate for suburban auto-oriented locations.
Based on review and analysis of the land use mix and development pattern envisioned by the Plan, and
considering the best-practice parking research conducted by MTC for the Bay Area, the reduced nonresidential parking requirements shown in Table 5 may be appropriate for application within the
boundaries of the North Santa Rosa Station Area Plan.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 10
August 22, 2011
Table 5
Potential Reduced Parking Requirements for the Plan Area
Unit
Current City
Requirements
Potential Reduced
Parking Requirement
Detached Residential
Dwelling
4.0
2.0
Attached Residential
Dwelling
1.5 (studio and 1 bedroom)
2.5 (2+ bedrooms)
1.5
Affordable Residential
Dwelling
1.0 (studio and 1 bedroom)
2.0 (2+ bedrooms)
1.0
Senior Housing
Dwelling
1.0 per unit plus 1.0 visitor
spaces per 10 units
0.5
Office
1,000 sf
4
3.0
Retail
1,000 sf
4
3.0
Restaurant
1,000 sf
13.3
3.0
Land Use
Notes: sf = square feet
The suggested parking requirements shown in Table 5 are generally near the upper end of MTC’s
recommended range for a Suburban Center, commensurate with the level of transit service anticipated
to be present within the Station Area over time and at buildout. The recommended rates are also at a
similar range to those applied for the Railroad Square and Railroad Corridor sub-areas of the
Downtown Station Area Specific Plan, which would have similar characteristics to the North Santa Rosa
Plan area. With respect to restaurant uses, it is recommended that a consistent parking demand rate be
applied as for other nonresidential uses given the transit-oriented nature of the Plan area. This
approach is also consistent to that used in the Downtown Station Area Plan.
Parking Maximums
To help foster shared parking programs and encourage the use of transit, some communities have
implemented parking maximum code requirements rather than minimum requirements. This approach
may avoid the building of excess parking supply that contributes to low-density development and the
dependency on personal vehicles. The ability to establish maximum parking requirements, however, is
highly contingent on the availability of frequent and convenient transit service in addition to dense
development patterns. While it is expected that good transit service would be provided within the plan
area, it may not reach the levels found in other Bay Area communities or cities like Portland, OR where
parking maximums have been established. Because of this, and considering existing and planned
development patterns, it is recommended that reduced parking requirements shown in Table 5 be
applied to the plan area without implementation of a maximum parking rate cap.
Development of Parking
Construction of parking spaces necessary to fill the demand will likely be completed through several
means.
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 11
August 22, 2011
Developer Constructed Parking
In suburban developments, it is common for developers to construct surface parking lots and occasional
parking structures for the sole use of their development. Within a higher density core area such as the
one proposed for the Station Area Plan, this developer constructed parking can result in a patchwork of
parking that is confusing to drivers, limits the ability to share parking and may result in overdevelopment of parking. Over-development of parking is not only costly, but reduces the potential for
higher density development and promotes automobile dependency.
Public Parking
Parking lots or structures could be constructed by the City of Santa Rosa for public use. These could be
funded through the creation of a parking district, such as the one in downtown Santa Rosa, where
developers would pay fees into the district in lieu of providing some or all of the parking required for
their development. In this case, business owners opt to pay in-lieu fees through a parking district or
similar mechanism and absorb the cost of parking on behalf of their patrons or employees. Public
parking would need to be located throughout the plan area, in particular centralized locations that
would allow for greater possibilities for shared parking.
Parking Infiltration
Parking infiltration occurs when drivers choose to park an in area not designated for that use. Examples
of this would be commuters parking in neighborhoods then ride the train or residents parking in
commercial parking lots during the day. If this begins to occur, additional parking regulation and
enforcement strategies may need to be implemented.
Residential Parking Zone
If it is found that commuters or commercial business patrons encroach into nearby neighborhoods it
may become necessary to implement residential parking zones like those found elsewhere in the city.
Currently the request for these zones must be initiated by the residents. Residential parking zones must
be carefully planned so that parking is not merely shifted from one street to another. The size of the
zone, the cost allocations, and the administration of the program must be planned to achieve the desired
outcome.
Paid Parking
As a long-term strategy, paid parking at major centers such as Coddingtown Mall, in dense mixed-use
areas, or at the SMART Station may be beneficial to affect parking behavior. Prior to considering a paid
parking program, however, parking demand levels would have to be consistently high (e.g. routinely
above 85 percent), and scarce parking resources would need to be managed through various means
that have yet to be employed. Such strategies may include the use of shared parking resources in public
or private surface lots, and providing designated locations for employee parking, patron parking, and
higher turnover spaces. Ultimately, a paid parking system could be implemented, with scaled parking
rates that influence the location of short-term and long-term parking.
In this system, the user pays for their own parking, although business owners can elect to validate
parking for their patrons or employees. The fee structure and level of enforcement help organize the
parking to achieve the desired distribution of parking across the available resources. The money
generated by paid parking can be used to maintain the parking resources, for enforcement of parking
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 12
August 22, 2011
regulations, to fund additional parking resources, or localized improvements such as streetscape
improvements.
Employers can also be encouraged to provide a parking cash-out or transit benefits for their employees
in lieu of parking. This would have a dual benefit of reducing parking demand while encouraging transit
usage.
MS/tdh/SRO300.M2.doc
Attachments:
Shared Parking Calculations
Ms. Loreli Cappel
Page 12
August 17, 2011
regulations, to fund additional parking resources, or localized improvements such as streetscape
improvements.
Employers can also be encouraged to provide a parking cash-out or transit benefits for their employees
in lieu of parking. This would have a dual benefit of reducing parking demand while encouraging transit
usage.
MS/tdh/SRO300.M2.doc
Attachments:
Shared Parking Calculations
Land Use
Community Shopping Center (<400 ksf)
Employee
Residential, Rental, Shared Spaces
Reserved
Guest
Residential, Owned, Shared Spaces
Reserved
Guest
Office 100 to 500 ksf
Employee
558
1.5
558
578
1.5
578
238,125
units
sp/unit
units
units
sp/unit
units
sf GLA
Project Data
Quantity
Unit
164,750 sf GLA
Table
Project: Santa Rosa North Station Area Plan
Description: Alternative B - Core Area Only
Base
Rate
2.90
0.70
0.00
1.5
0
0.20
1.50
0.15
0.23
2.96
PEAK MONTH: DECEMBER -Weekday
NonMode
Captive Project
Adj
Ratio
Rate
Unit
1.00
1.00
2.90
/ksf GLA
1.00
1.00
0.70
/ksf GLA
1.00
1.00
0.00
/unit
1.00
1.00
2
/unit
1.00
1.00
0
/unit
1.00
1.00
0.20
/unit
1.00
1.00
1.50
/unit
1.00
1.00
0.15
/unit
1.00
1.00
0.23
/ksf GLA
1.00
1.00
2.96
/ksf GLA
3339
1142
25%
13054
10%
9%
Shared Parking Supply with 5% Buffer (Core Only)
Shared Parking Reduction with 5% Buffer (Core Only)
Percent Shared Parking Reduction with 5% Buffer (Core Only)
City Code Parking Requirements (Entire Plan Area)
Percent Shared Parking Reduction (Entire Plan Area)
Percent Shared Parking Reduction with 5% Buffer (Entire Plan Area)
Estimated
Parking
Demand
478
115
0
837
17
81
867
17
55
705
567
901
1704
3172
4481
1309
29%
Unit
/ksf GLA
/ksf GLA
/unit
/unit
/unit
/unit
/unit
/unit
/ksf GLA
/ksf GLA
Weekday
Peak Hr
Peak Mo
Adj
Adj
2 PM
December
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.70
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.20
1.00
0.70
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.20
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Customer
Employee
Reserved
Total
City Code Parking Requires (Core Only)
Shared Parking Reduction (Core Only)
Percent Shared Parking Reduction (Core Only)
PEAK PERIOD: 2 PM, WEEKDAY
Weekend
NonBase
Mode
Captive Project
Rate
Adj
Ratio
Rate
3.20
1.00
1.00
3.20
0.80
1.00
1.00
0.80
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
2
1.00
1.00
2
0
1.00
1.00
0
0.20
1.00
1.00
0.20
1.50
1.00
1.00
1.50
0.15
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.03
1.00
1.00
0.03
0.30
1.00
1.00
0.30
SHARED PARKING DEMAND SUMMARY
Weekend
Peak Hr
Peak Mo
Adj
Adj
2 PM
December
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.70
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.20
1.00
0.70
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.20
1.00
0.60
1.00
0.60
1.00
Customer
Employee
Reserved
Total
13054
15%
14%
2658
1823
41%
4481
1956
44%
Estimated
Parking
Demand
527
132
0
837
17
81
867
17
4
43
565
256
1704
2525
8/16/2011