2008 Parking Study Final Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

iv · The following requests should normally be refused: o Change to a non-standard time limit. o Change to a time limit not appropriate to that zone. Construction projects often eliminate one or more spaces close to the site, either to provide a staging area for materials or to provide parking for construction equipment. Construction projects should still be able to make use of spaces in this way. However, it is important to insure that loading and other specialist needs are still met. The policy for construction projects should therefore be as follows: · The City Traffic Engineer can approve temporary use of spaces for construction projects. · Where a construction project takes over a loading, ADA or other specialist parking space, the City Traffic Engineer should have the discretion to adjust other nearby spaces for the duration of the project to ensure the specialist needs are still met. For example, if a loading space is taken for construction, an adjacent one-hour space could be converted to loading at the same time. · Where a construction project takes over a general parking space (for example, a 1-hour space), no consequential changes are needed. Residential moving needs should also be handled through a similar process. However because the needs are generally for one day only, the space(s) should normally be ‘reserved’ for moving that day, with no consequential changes to other spaces. This is similar to the way theater vehicles are currently handled on Market Street. The City Traffic Engineer should, however, have the discretion to designate the appropriate space(s) to be reserved in each case. FutureFutureFutureFuture Parking Management Parking Management Parking Management Parking Management Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy Current best-practice in downtown parking management is to move away from a reactive approach to one which involves pro-actively managing parking as a component of a downtown’s success. Typical elements adopted in similar cities include: · Creating a City Parking Department, or a Parking Division within an existing City department, to provide full-time management of the parking system. · Treating parking enforcement as an ambassador/welcome role as much as a ticketing role. · Using on-street parking fees to cover management costs and to create revenue for downtown booster programs. · Adopting an occupancy target for general on-street parking, with rates set accordingly, so that the convenient spaces are never totally full and customers and visitors can therefore always find a convenient space. · Using modern meters or multi-space ‘pay stations’. There are two options for Charlottesville’s future downtown parking strategy: Option 1: Make the recommended changes to parking space designations, as described above, and retain free on-street parking. The recommended changes will address many of the existing concerns about downtown parking. The cost will be small (mostly signage, striping and staff time). However, retaining free parking means that the city does not gain the ability to manage on- street parking availability through a price mechanism. It also means that enforcement is the only available mechanism for discouraging the two-hour shuffle. Option 2: Make the recommended changes to parking space designations, as described above, and move to a more pro-active model of managing downtown parking, including charging for on-street parking in the Core Zone and Inner Zone. This is more complicated to implement and would require an up-front investment in ticket machines or meters. However, it would provide a revenue stream to fund parking management and potentially other downtown