Downtown Parking and
Travel Management
Plan
April 14, 2015 Public Forum
Agenda
 History – how did we get here?
 Goals
 Lessons from November 1 changes
 Parking Management District
 Next steps – timeline
 Feedback from you
History – how did
we get here?
 2013 – 2014 – over 60 meetings with downtown stakeholders (CEDO
and BBA) identified parking as one of the key economic development
challenges in our downtown
 Summer of 2013 – DPW, BBA, and CEDO start meeting weekly to
address parking
 November 13, 2013 – BBA hosts Parking Summit in the Hilton – over
150 attendees with keynote speaker Jeffrey Tumlin of Nelson
Nygaard
 November 13, 2013 – USDN provides funding for CEDO to bring 7
cities’ parking experts to Burlington for a Parking Convening
 November 2013 – City Council passes resolution empowering BBA,
DPW and CEDO to launch the Downtown Parking Improvement
Initiative
History – how did we
get here?
 Spring 2014 – Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission and
business community fund BBA, CEDO, and DPW to hire experts to complete
Downtown Parking and Travel Management Plan
 Partners create Parking Advisory Committee with local stakeholders
 June 2014 – BBA and City team hire DESMAN Associates, with support from
Stantec, WZHA, UVM and Donald Shoup to complete the Plan
 November 1, 2014 – City installs smart meters and multi-space parking
meters, rolls out pilot pricing and later hourly enforcement, and makes
improvements to the garages
 November 19, 2014 – City and BBA host Parking Forum in collaboration with
Residential Parking partners in Contois Auditorium, and launch
www.parkburlington.com to gather feedback and educate
 Winter 2014 – City collects and analyzes data from the pilot, continues work
on the study, and continues to gather feedback
We have a parking
problem
Not enough spaces…
Parking in the wrong
places…
Accessibility challenges…
Poor access control…
Can’t get to an open
space…
Bad way finding…
Goals
1 Deliver a consistently positive customer experience
2 Achieve a sustainable parking system
3 Maximize parking and transportation system resources
for a vibrant downtown
Project approach
1. Assess current operations
2. Factor in future needs and growth
3. Help make the most of existing assets
4. Recommend immediate actions
5. Develop a long-range plan for management
6. Coordinate planning with Residential Parking and
Transportation Demand Management studies
7. Present a plan which is politically, environmentally and
fiscally sustainable
Study Area
• Bounded by Pearl,
Union, Maple and Lake
Streets
• Includes four zones
• 40 total blocks
• Includes office buildings,
retail stores, restaurants,
hotels, courthouses, City
Hall and residences
Inventory
• Definitions
– On-Street = curbside parking
– Public = clearly publically accessible
– Private = indicated as exclusive
• 8,081 spaces in total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1,199 On-Street spaces
2,825 spaces in 13 Public facilities
4,057 spaces in 123 Private facilities
39% (3,160 spaces) in Zone 1
26% (2,094 spaces) in Zone 2
23% (1,828 spaces) in Zone 3
12% (999 spaces) in Zone 4
Parking assets
10
On street assets
• 1,199 spaces
• Almost 2/3rds are mid-term meters
• Fairly even distribution across zones
11
Public (off-street) assets
• 2,825 spaces
• Almost 2/3rds are located in Zone 1 facilities
• City provides ~ 63% of total public capacity
12
Weekday observation (Thursday, 9/25/14)
•
•
•
Averaged 60%
utilization
Highest utilization
was at 1:00 PM
(71%)
Average
utilization rates:
–
Zone 1: 57%
Zone 2: 73%
Zone 3: 52%
Zone 4: 57%
Weekdays: private offstreet
•
•
•
•
•
Averaged 58%
utilization for the
day
Highest utilization
was at 12:00 PM
(69%)
Garages were
better utilized
(67% avg.) than
lots (57% avg.)
Lots dedicated to
employees had
strongest
utilization
Customer &
resident lots were
~ 50% utilized
Weekend utilization by
zone
Observation conclusions
1.
Office uses drive parking demand on weekdays, retail on
weekends
2.
Areas with complimentary land uses (hotel or residential & office)
experienced a more balanced demand profile
3.
Zone 2 is consistently subject to greatest localized demand
4.
Pricing impacts asset utilization
5.
Curbside parking and public lots are in highest demand
6.
Public assets are unevenly utilized
7.
Large amounts of private parking are going underutilized
8.
Majority of motorists are practicing ‘line of sight’ wayfinding
9.
Current enforcement efforts appear effective
Possible solutions
CHALLENGES
REMEDIES

Balancing existing supply & demand

Promoting complimentary mixed-use
development

Reducing demand for on-street spaces

Expand

Improving use of underutilized assets

Improving wayfinding

Unlocking underused private reserves

Creating a central parking & transportation
resource

Reducing parking demand at peak periods

Establishing differential pricing

Establishing Shared Parking protocols

Developing more effective management
procedures/structures

Promoting transportation options

Restoring the supporting fund

Improving service delivery
Meter Pilot
Objectives of Meter Pilot
1. Manage occupancy towards an 85% target
2. Improve compliance (i.e. voluntary payment of fees)
3. Introduce flexibility into the program
4. Create turnover for curbside spaces
5. Generate revenues for system improvements
April 2015 Occupancy
Street
Bank Street
Starting
Ending
Meter
X-Street
X-Street
Inventory
11:00 AM
6:00 PM
8:00 PM
11:00 AM
6:00 PM
8:00 PM
10:00 AM
4:00 PM
45
32
33
23
36
33
28
34
24
71%
73%
51%
80%
73%
62%
76%
53%
11
11
10
13
13
9
10
10
85%
85%
77%
100%
100%
69%
77%
77%
36
35
26
38
33
29
28
35
95%
92%
68%
100%
87%
76%
74%
92%
41
29
31
41
40
37
33
37
93%
66%
70%
93%
91%
84%
75%
84%
39
38
30
41
43
31
33
43
71%
69%
55%
75%
78%
56%
60%
78%
31
29
29
33
33
27
18
27
84%
78%
78%
89%
89%
73%
49%
73%
52
43
33
43
47
41
24
35
100%
83%
63%
83%
90%
79%
46%
67%
242
218
182
245
242
202
180
211
85%
77%
64%
86%
85%
71%
63%
74%
Pine
S. Winooski
Utilization Rate:
Center Street
College
Bank
13
Utilization Rate:
Cherry Street
Pine
S. Winooski
38
Utilization Rate:
College Street
Pine
S. Winooski
44
Utilization Rate:
Main Street
Pine
S. Winooski
55
Utilization Rate:
Pine Street
Bank
Main
37
Utilization Rate:
St. Paul Street
Bank
Main
52
Utilization Rate:
TOTAL
Utilization Rate:
284
Weekday Occupancy
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
Weekend Occupancy
Sunday Occupancy
20
Comparison to Sept 2014
Total Area
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
11:00 AM
6:00 PM
8:00 PM
11:00 AM
Apr-15
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
6:00 PM
8:00 PM
10:00 AM
4:00 PM
Sep-14
21
Impact on Abutting Areas
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
11:00 AM
11:00 AM
6:00 PM
Apr-15
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
8:00 PM
10:00 AM
4:00 PM
Sep-14
22
Length of Stay Analysis
 Reviewed meter reports for 12/15/14 – 1/15/15
 ~285 meters with 10-20 transactions per day
 70% of transactions were credit/debit card
 Purchases ranged from 30 minutes up to 6 hours
 Average minimum purchase was ~ 0.5 hours
 Average median purchase was ~ 1.5 hours
 Average maximum purchased was ~ 3.0 hours
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
23
Increase in Meter
Revenues
 Data based on total system revenues
 Actual meter revenues, 11/13-3/14 = $419,302
 Projection with 50% rate increase = $628,953
 Projected improvement = $209,651
 Actual meter revenues, 11/15-3/15 = $712,186
 Actual improvement TYD = $292,884
 40% increase over YTD revenues
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
24
Parking Meter Revenues
4/14/2015 Park Burlington – Public Forum
25
Parking Ticket Increases
Period
Tickets
Period
Tickets
Variance
Jul-13
5,593
Jul-14
4,381
(1,212)
Aug-13
4,882
Aug-14
3,758
(1,124)
Sep-13
5,103
Sep-14
4,517
(586)
Oct-13
5,282
Oct-14
4,565
(717)
Nov-13
4,594
Nov-14
3,880
(714)
Dec-13
3,714
Dec-14
4,817
1,103
Jan-14
3,809
Jan-15
4,884
1,075
Feb-14
3,558
Feb-15
4,432
874
TOTALS
36,535
35,234
(1,301)
Upcoming efforts
 Determining prioritization of capital reinvestments
 Strategy for Parking Management District
 Coordination with other initiatives
 Finish the planning effort
Capital reinvestments
Capital reinvestments
Development influencing the
plan
 New elevators in Marketplace
 Mall redevelopment – Town
Garage this year
 Resurfacing, deck repairs, and
drainage upgrades in College
Street garage this year
 New signs and wayfinding
 New lighting in College Street
garage
Center
 More development projects
downtown
 Transit center – St. Paul
 Walk/bike masterplan
What is a parking
management district?
A comprehensive system of managing both public and
private parking assets collaboratively.
What are some examples?
• Downtown improvement districts
• Parking authorities
• Private management entities
Examples: Boise, ID; Ann Arbor, MI; Boulder, CO
PMD principles
 Collaborative governance
 Unified parking system
 Measured implementation
Parking management
district (PMD)

Provide high quality parking services at a fair market price

Promote the use of all transportation modes

Support the parking and transportation needs of existing and new development in downtown
Burlington

Maximize the operational efficiency of our parking and transportation assets and systems

Create collaborative agreements with public and private downtown parking and transportation owners
and operators – brings private parking spaces into the public system

Collect data on system usage and use that data to inform parking and transportation policy

Maintain fiscal stability and self sufficiency

Support branding, marketing and programs that increase downtown vitality

Integrate our parking and transportation efforts into a larger initiative which supports the vitality of our
Downtown, preserves our natural resources, and supports the quality of life in downtown
neighborhoods.
PMD Think About…
 Operations versus ownership – public and private
assets, on-street and off-street
 Public voice – private stakeholders, users, employers,
employees
 Cover of all modes of transportation
 How is it funded?
 Who governs?
 Other areas of responsibility – branding, signage,
online interfaces, marketing, “parking broker,” etc.
Next steps
 Get more feedback
 Make recommendations – use data!
 Capital reinvestment and new investment
 Parking management district
 Policy changes – pricing, operations, etc.
 Zoning – data and best practices analysis
 Coordination with TDM and Residential Parking
 Come back with final plan from consultants in June
Next steps:
public timeline
 Continue meeting with PAC – April and May mtgs
 May
 Meet with stakeholder groups – seniors, arts, faith, employees,
NPA’s, walk/bike advocates, business groups, city committees
and commissions, transportation partners
 May 18 – City Council meeting
 May 20 – CSM Commission; DPW Commission
 Late May – Final changes to the plan
 June
 DPW Commission endorsement
 TEUC endorsement
 City Council action
Get your feedback
For more information, visit:
www.parkburlington.com
Email:
dcolangelo@burlingtonvt.gov
director@bbavt.org