2015 LFCPA TEN-YEAR PARKING ANALYSIS LEXINGTON, KY. May, 2015 FINAL

Transcription

1 2015 LFCPA TEN-YEAR PARKING ANALYSIS LEXINGTON, KY May, 2015 FINAL

2 April 2015 FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 INTRODUCTION... 9 Prject Understanding... 9 Scpe f Services Methdlgies Used PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND Study Area CURRENT PARKING CONDITIONS Current Central Business District Current Public Parking Supply Effective Parking Supply Current Public Parking Demand Daytime Occupancy Evening Occupancy Current Parking Adequacy Analysis by Zne FUTURE CONDITIONS Attitudes n Driving are Changing Limiting Factrs Future Demand Analysis STAKEHOLDER INPUT PARKING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Shared Parking Shared Parking Lcatins Fee-In-Lieu Zning Cde Review Current Requirements Recmmended Zning Parking Cde Changes/Cnsideratins Prhibitin f New Surface Parking within the CBD Transprtatin Demand Management Shared Vehicle Prgrams Bicycle Racks Wayfinding/Signage NEW PARKING GARAGE ANALYSIS Capital Csts Operating Csts Structural Repair Budget Minimum Parking Structure Dimensins Walking Distances Ptential Parking Structure Sites Matrix Cmparisn f the Alternatives PARKING POLICIES AND PRACTICES Graduated Fines Current Citatin Rates... 50

3 April 2015 FINAL Parking Rates Garage Operating Expenses On-Street Hurs f Operatin FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Prjected Operating Revenue Prjected Operating Expenses Assumptins New Garage Optin A New Garage Optin B PROPOSED TEN-YEAR PLAN Phase & Phase TO Phase TO APPENDIX LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Weekday Adequacy Table 2: Weekday Adequacy by Zne Table 3: Vacancy Rate Trends Table 4: Current Weekday Parking Occupancy (9/3/2014) Table 5: Future Weekday Parking Demand Table 6: Future Weekend Parking Demand Table 7: Future Parking Demand Table 8: Future Cnditins by Zne Table 9: Stakehlder Cmments Table 10: Cmmunity Apprach t Parking Planning Table 11: LOS Cnditins: Walking Distances Table 12: Alternative Site Matrix Table 13: Citatin Rate Cmparisn Table 14: Hurly Rate Cmparisn(Cmparative Reference Set) Table 15: Lcal Market Rate Cmparisn Table 16: Permit Rate Cmparisn Table 17: Expense per Space Matrix Table 18: Estimated Year 1 Meter/Enfrcement Revenue Table 19: Five Year Histrical Financial Summary Table 20: Case 1 Financial Summary Table 21: 1-20 Year Financial Summary Table 22: Garage Optin A Table 23: Garage Optin A System Financial Impact Table 24: Garage Optin B Table 25: Garage Optin B System Financial Impact Table A-1: Current Parking Supply Table A-2: Effective Supply Table A-3: Current Weekday Parking Occupancy (On-Street) Table A-4: Evening On-Street Parking Occupancy (10/10/

4 April 2015 FINAL Table A-5: LFCPA Garages Peak Occupancy (9/9/2014) Table A-6: Nn-LFCPA Public Parking Occupancy (9/9/2014) Table A-7: Nn-LFCPA Public Parking Adequacy (9/9/2014) Figure 1: Study Area Figure 2: Effective Supply Factr Figure 3: Weekday Parking Occupancy Heat Map Figure 4: Evening On-Street Parking Occupancy Heat Map Figure 5: Weekday Public Parking Occupancy by Zne Figure 6: Parking Triangle Figure 7: Minimum Parking Structure Dimensins Figure 8: Ptential Structured Parking Lcatins by Zne Figure 9: Evening On-Street Parking Blck Face Heat Map... 57

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Lexingtn & Fayette Cunty Parking Authrity ( LFCPA ) retained Walker Parking Cnsultants ( Walker ) t evaluate the parking supply and demand in dwntwn Lexingtn, perfrm an alternatives analysis t discuss ptential management and peratinal imprvements, assess dwntwn s need fr a new parking structure including ptential lcatin and design elements, and prvide a 10-yr and 20-yr system financial analysis. The purpse f this reprt is t prvide a quantitative and qualitative evaluatin f the current and future parking adequacy that clearly identifies the parking inventry, utilizatin and availability in dwntwn Lexingtn, while prviding insight n hw the current inventry may be used mre efficiently and whether additinal supply is warranted. The verall intent f this evaluatin is t prvide LFCPA with the fundamental visin and strategic plan fr the dwntwn Lexingtn parking system ver the next 10 years. Since parking is such a cstly asset, LFCPA is carefully cnsidering the need fr additinal parking and pprtunities t maximize use f current parking assets. As a result, the impact f the resulting analysis and recmmendatins will then be measured against parking system s future financial sustainability. Public parking plans shuld nt lead cmmunity develpment; rather the brader cmmunity gals fr the dwntwn shuld be supprted by any prpsed parking strategy. With that in mind, the parking strategy shuld serve as a tl t help ensure dwntwn success and embdy the fllwing guiding principles: Maintain the unique sense f place that dwntwn Lexingtn has cultivated, while als prviding prximate and cnvenient parking ptins; Supprt fr a park nce, pedestrian friendly visin that imprves cnnectivity fr visitrs, residents, and emplyees thrugh imprved wayfinding and partnerships with lcal public and alternative transprtatin systems; Prvide a custmer-friendly experience fr visitrs, residents, and emplyees centered n cnvenience, access, and fairness by prviding parking ptins based n an ecnmic chice; Cntinue t help facilitate and encurage a diverse ecnmy thrugh partnerships with Dwntwn Develpment Authrity, private develpers, and the lcal cmmunity t enable ecnmic develpment; Maintain a respnsibility t ptimize public investment in parking infrastructure by imprving access t under-utilized private parking supply and better distributing demand. 1

6 STUDY AREA The defined study area is generally bund by West 3 rd Street t the nrth; Maxwell Street t the suth; Eastern Avenue t the east; and Jeffersn Street t the west. A secndary study area, utside the main dwntwn crridr, knwn as Chevy Chase, has als been included. This area is bund by Suth Ashland Avenue, Chevy Chase Place, and High Street, with Euclid Avenue running thrugh the middle. STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK Subject Off-Street Parking Parking Operatins Parking Rates Parking Rates Parking Supply Parking Supply Parking Supply Parking Supply Parking Rates Parking Plicy Cmment Financing f parking structure s remains an issue and we need t address hw t effectively pay fr parking structures. We have parking spaces available, nt necessarily where a persn may want them. Pssible partnership with private prperty wners t take advantage f existing underutilized parking space. Parking dwntwn is cheap, and the price can affrd t be raised. This will supprt infrastructure needs parking cnvenience justifies a higher cst. Restaurants dwntwn (many upscale) shuld help absrb the cst f parking. Mre restaurants/businesses dwntwn shuld participate in a parking validatin prgram Parking must be accessible and clse t building and must be able t maneuver trucks in and ut f parking area. There is a perceptin prblem frm the suburban ppulatin that they dn t knw where t park and dn t think there is availability. Owners and business wrkers want t park within very clse prximity t their wrkplace Parking prblems mstly ccur at night when there is n parking enfrcement. Larger nighttime market than daytime market. Parking rates are very reasnable, wuld rather increase night time parking cst than day time. Parking requirements fr business zned prperty shuld nt require a specific amunt f parking spaces. This creates underutilized parking. Parking Alternatives Bike lckers and public restrms culd encurage mre bike riders. Off-Street Parking Parking Operatins Adequate lighting f parking structures, artwrk and technlgical features are needed t make the garages mre inviting and welcming. The Helix Garage and its imprvements is a gd example f what can be dne with a parking structure. Prperty wners and real estate representatives need t wrk tgether mre clsely when marketing parking as part f its develpment r leases. There appears t be little r n interface r nt as much as shuld be. Realtrs and develpers need t wrk mre clsely with the LPA. LPA can play a brker rle in develpment. 2

7 CURRENT PARKING CONDITIONS The supply and demand study fcuses n the n-street and ff-street cmpnents f public parking spaces within the study area. Parking supply and utilizatin details fr the LFCPA managed garages and privately wned and managed public parking lcatins were prvided by LFCPA and their sub-cntractr Republic Parking. On-street parking supply and utilizatin were gathered by Walker. This study s cmbined fieldwrk identified: 9,352 ± parking spaces within the defined study area; 6,487± (69%) spaces are lcated in private ff-street public parking garages; 2,057± spaces (22%) are in LFCPA managed garages; 808± (9%) are lcated n-street. CURRENT PARKING ADEQUACY The current parking supply lcated in the study area was fund t be sufficient fr the current demand. Weekday parking cnditins at 10:00 AM n Thursday: 5,466± vehicles parked in public parking spaces(58% ccupancy); 3,886± unccupied public parking spaces. Weekday evening n-street parking cnditins at 8:00 PM n Friday: 512± vehicles parked in public n-street parking spaces(63% ccupancy); 296± unccupied public n-street parking spaces. Observed peak parking cnditins by parking supply type: 56% peak Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street ccupancy = 2,884± unccupied spaces 73% peak LFCPA Public Off-street ccupancy = 550± unccupied spaces 63% peak Public On-street ccupancy = 296± unccupied spaces 3

8 Current Parking Supply Adequacy Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Definitin: Effective Supply is the maximum number f parking spaces that can realistically be used within a given parking system. FUTURE PARKING CONDITIONS AND PROJECTED DEMAND Of the knwn details fr identified future develpments there is apprximately 57,814 ft 2 f Retail; 11,638 ft 2 f Restaurant space; 376 Htel rms; 75 Residential Apartments; 87 Residential Cnds; a 7,958 ft2 bank; and 152,853 ft 2 f additinal Office space. The fllwing prjects encmpass the identified future develpment activity: Centrepint 505 n Main Old Curthuse Main and Vine The Square 21c Museum Htels 4

9 RECOMMENDATIONS Lng-term cnsideratin fr a new parking garage in Zne 5 shuld be cnsidered nce the Centrepinte develpment prject is cmpleted. Shrt-term cnsideratin fr a new parking garage in Znes 1 r 2 shuld be cnsidered fr cmpletin within the next 2 years. Increase enfrcement and meter hurs frm the current 8:00 AM t 5:00 PM t at least 8:00 AM t 8:00 PM Cnsider an assciated ffset by changing t an evening rate schedule fr LFCPA garages that sets the first 2 hurs fr free. Increase the number f bike racks in dwntwn Lexingtn. Similar cities have fund great success prmting biking t dwntwn by remving just a few, strategic n-street spaces and installing central bicycle parklets that can park 10 t 20 bicycles Cnsider bicycle parking areas within parking facilities. These areas can be lcked, fenced, r secured individually t prvide access and security t permitted patrns. Permits t access and utilize the secure bicycle parking areas can be free r a very lw annual fee t gain critical adptin. As adptin imprves, fees can be adjusted t prvide ecnmic chice and fund further bicycle friendly prgrams. Expand the existing residential parking permit prgram t additinal neighbrhds arund Chevy Chase as demand grws. Imprve wayfinding in the Chevy Chase neighbrhd t imprve verall cnsistency and parking chices t parking patrns. On-street rate increase f $ per hur with planned nging annual r bi-annual increases Off-street (garage) daily max increase by $1.00. Determine ff-street (garage) average length f stay fr each facility and cnsider a small, $.50 increase t the crrespnding rate band. Off-street permit rate increase f $10 fr each permit with planned nging annual r bi-annual increases, and intrduce the fllwing new permit ptins: Evening Only Permits Parking Debit Cards Day Permits Frequent Parker Prgram Citatin base fine increase frm $15 t $25 Cnsider a graduated r incentive based fine schedule fr repeat ffenders Lnger-term cnsideratin fr demand based pricing. As new n-street technlgy is intrduced, LFCPA shuld cnsider demand based pricing by adjusting fees, higher and lwer, based nt nly n lcatin but als time f day variables. 5

10 Increase use f underutilized public and private parking assets by emplying a cmmunity shared parking prgram. A shared Parking prgram will allw private wners t market and lease unused excess supply and generate additinal lcal revenue. The LFCPA can fill the brker psitin by intrducing available private spaces t the public market by prviding signage, cnnecting private wners t mnthly parkers, r inventrying available private spaces and selling them nline fr the private wner. The LFCPA can wrk with private parking supply wners t allw hurly r evening fee based parking in the evenings when their demand is lw. This can be accmplished thrugh piggy-backing n the existing Pay by Phne applicatin. Walker recmmends that the zning cde allw reductin f the required number f parking spaces based upn a shared parking study perfrmed in accrdance with the latest editin f Shared Parking, by a qualified traffic r parking cnsultant The parking requirement in the zning rdinance may be reduced r eliminated by a Payment In Lieu f Parking (PILOP), r Fee-in-Lieu rdinance. The fee (per space) culd initially be set at the estimated cst per space fr LFCPA t build new supply, but adjusted, as needed, per prject and per year. Wrk with LFCPA s parking system and hardware vendrs t crdinate and implement a plan and timeline fr EMV cmpliance in 2015 EMV regulatins are expected t be released in Octber 2015, and are expected t impact the risk and cst fr prcessing credit cards, as well as the physical hardware used t read credit cards Parking system vendrs shuld wrk with their custmers (LFCPA) t determine the prper path and timeline t bring nn-cmpliant hardware t cmpliance in 2015 Wrk with the Dwntwn Develpment Authrity t determine the apprpriate metrics fr evaluating and grading ptential parking supply additins and requirements fr new develpment pprtunities This reprt prvides guidance n the fllwing criteria t assist bth LFCPA and the DDA determine apprpriate evaluatin criteria: Walking Distance Level f Service by patrn type Operating and Capital Csts Structural Repair Budget Assumptins Minimum Parking Structure Dimensins Fee-In-Lieu (Payment In Lieu f Parking) ptins 6

11 Shared Parking pprtunities: Walker recmmends the adptin f the base parking ratis develped by the Urban Land Institute, the Institute f Transprtatin Engineers (ITE), r the Parking Cnsultants Cuncil f the Natinal Parking Assciatin PRELIMINARY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (PHASE 1: SHORT TERM) Increase sidewalk bicycle racks dwntwn, alng with a pilt f 1 bicycle parklet that wuld remve 1 n-street space On-street and Off-street hurly increase f $.50 per hur Off-street daily max increase by $1.00, including ff-street rate band changes based n average length f stay data Increase Victrian Square permit pricing by $10.00 fr each permit type Intrduce new permit types t increase mnthly parking EMV migratin fr credit card hardware bth n- and ff-street In crdinatin with the Dwntwn Develpment Authrity, determine apprpriate evaluatin criteria fr ptential ecnmic develpment pprtunities and standardize the guidelines fr nging management Imprve wayfinding in the Chevy Chase area and expand the residential parking permit prgram t the adjacent neighbrhd, as demand warrants in rder t prvide easy shrt-term implementatins t prepare the area fr increased develpment grwth and the resulting parking demand (PHASE 2: MID-TERM) Increase n-street peratins and enfrcement until, at a minimum, 8:00 PM M F Wrk with the Dwntwn Develpment Authrity t determine the apprpriate evaluating and grading metrics fr ptential parking supply additins and requirements related t new develpment pprtunities Re-assess verall dwntwn parking supply and demand Cnsider cnstructin f a new structured parking facility in Zne 1 r Zne 2 Re-evaluate n-street and ff-street rates fr cntinuus, but mdest increases t adjust fr inflatin and any ther variables affecting market pricing Citatin base fine increase by $10.00 Cnsider a graduated r incentive based fine schedule fr repeat ffenders 7

12 Depending n the success f the increased bicycle racks and parklet(s), cnsider installing secure bicycle access cntrlled areas Outline and implement an LFCPA Dwntwn Shared Parking Prgram as described in this reprt (PHASE 3: LONG-TERM) As n-street hardware is replaced, cnsider hw demand based pricing mechanisms with new technlgy can help manage and distribute demand Re-assess verall dwntwn parking supply and demand alng with unique characteristics f specific dwntwn areas t determine ptential needs and lcatins fr new parking structures Cntinue t evaluate lcal and natinal trends related t single-ccupancy vehicle usage and changes mdal trends, which can impact current and future parking demand characteristics 8

13 INTRODUCTION Dwntwn parking systems serve numerus stakehlders, demand flexibility fr grwth, and integrate with transprtatin helping mve significant traffic vlumes. As such, develpment f an integrated, lng-term, strategic parking management and financial plan is critical. T assist with this apprach, Walker Parking Cnsultants perfrmed a parking study fr the Lexingtn & Fayette Cunty Parking Authrity ( LFCPA ) fcusing n future parking needs and their assciated financial impact. Lexingtn s Dwntwn Central Business District is a unique space. In additin t the usual retail shps, restaurants, ffice buildings and gvernment cmplexes, this district is adjacent t the University f Kentucky campus. This prximity t a large university, alng with the diverse needs f a thriving dwntwn creates unique challenges fr a parking peratin. The Lexingtn-Fayette Cunty Parking Authrity has dne a tremendus jb managing their parking infrastructure in accrdance with the dwntwn area s varied needs and serves as a mdel parking management system. This reprt is intended t supprt their effrts t cntinuusly imprve the parking experience in dwntwn Lexingtn. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The LFCPA has engaged Walker Parking Cnsultants t prvide a parking study that anticipates future parking needs and develps a ten-year plan aimed at supprting future develpment and prmting an effective parking system. Included within this cnsultatin is a parking supply/demand analysis, prjected future parking demand and recmmended imprvements t meet future parking needs, recmmended changes t existing LFCPA plicies and practices, and evaluatin f ptential lcatins fr additinal parking and develpment f a 10- and 20-year financial frecast. A number f previus parking studies have been perfrmed fr the LFCPA within the last few years. Walker was able t build n these previus studies and relied n previusly-cllected infrmatin where apprpriate. Building structured parking is expensive and therefre we view this as a last resrt t address the grwth challenges facing the LFCPA. Befre recmmending additinal structured parking, we advcate fr the ptimizatin f existing parking facilities, the usage f alternative transprtatin mdes, and parking management strategies t create a mre unifrm parking distributin. T cmplete the Plan, Walker engaged in a review f existing parking plicies and practices and develped recmmendatins fr LFCPA t execute. This includes a review f dwntwn public parking pricing, time restrictins, parking citatins fines, parking enfrcement hurs, the emplyment f n-street versus ff-street management strategies, the use f parking technlgies, parking permit prgrams, and mre. In cases where thers have cmmented n parking management plicies and practices, we will review and augment recmmendatins. 9

14 Additinally, based n Walker s experience with the successful design and cnstructin f thusands f parking facilities ver the past 49 years, we identified and analyzed multiple sites that may be candidates fr future parking facilities and supply decisin-making infrmatin such as design efficiency, prject cst, cst per added space, cntext relative t adjacent uses, traffic impact, etc. SCOPE OF SERVICES Wrked with EHI Cnsultants t cnduct numerus stakehlder meetings t gather and prvide cmmunity feedback n the parking system. Identified 10 cities, similar t dwntwn Lexingtn, were included as a reference set t benchmark citatin, permit, and hurly pricing. Observed the day and evening parking system utilizatin thrugh a supply and demand analysis. Evaluated the current parking plicies and technlgy ptins implemented within the study area. Perfrmed a parking alternatives analysis. Lastly, a 10-yr and 20-yr financial analysis was develped t present tw future cases including a base case shwing mdest changes and a system ptimizatin case. The system ptimizatin case als cnsidered the financial impact f a new parking garage. The ptential new garage is similarly analyzed under tw scenaris, a high financial perfrmance case based n the highest tw perfrming LFCPA garages and a lw financial perfrmance case based n the lwest tw perfrming LFCPA garages. METHODOLOGIES USED Walker used a variety f methdlgies t successfully cmplete this prject, including the fllwing: Perfrmed field data cllectin using standard frms that we have successfully used fr hundreds f similar studies. These frms were used t gather infrmatin regarding the existing parking inventry including name and lcatin f spaces, capacity, user restrictins, and rates. Frms were als used t cllect parking ccupancy, turnver and duratin data. The field data has been entered int an MS Excel spreadsheet fr tabulatin and analysis and the results have been prvided within this reprt. Best practices emplyed by ther municipalities have been cnsidered when develping a plan fr Lexingtn. Walker maintains a database fr future reference. 10

15 Walker utilized varius databases that we maintain fr purpses f making cmparisns and prjectins. These databases include thse relating t parking generatin rates and recmmended parking demand ratis, parking facility and system perating revenues and expenses, parking facility cnstructin csts, and parking access and revenue cntrl system csts. The technical aspects f ur wrk were based n industry-accepted standards that have withstd the tests f time. This includes ur wrk relating t parking supply/demand analysis, parking facility site analysis, and parking facility financial planning. Our peratinal theries, recmmendatins, plicies, and practices were reviewed by ne f ur peratins cnsultants smene with significant experience as a parking peratr befre making their way int ur deliverables. This ensures that ur recmmendatins g beynd thery and actually wrk in the real wrld. Our parking facility site planning and cnstructin cst pinins have been based n ur experience with the design f thusands f parking structures, significantly mre than any ther firm. Our parking facility cst pinins are infrmed by thusands f prjects that have made it thrugh the cmplete design and cnstructin prcess. 11

16 PARKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND The assessment f current cnditins includes a cmprehensive review f parking inventry, the effective parking supply, parking ccupancy trends, and parking adequacy during peak cnditins. STUDY AREA The defined study area fr this analysis is generally bund by West 3 rd Street t the nrth; Maxwell Street t the suth; Eastern Avenue t the east; and Jeffersn Street t the west. A secndary study area, utside the main dwntwn crridr, knwn as Chevy Chase, has als been included. This area is bund by Suth Ashland Avenue, Chevy Chase Place, and High Street, with Euclid Avenue running thrugh the middle. This purpseful cnfiguratin encmpasses the wide variety f land uses and captures the unique parking characteristics within dwntwn Lexingtn. The study area is defined in the fllwing Figure 1. Figure 1: Study Area Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 12

17 CURRENT PARKING CONDITIONS CURRENT CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The primary surce fr the current Lexingtn CBD data was fund in the Central Business District Office Market Studies (Furth Quarter 2013) perfrmed by the Cleman Grup. Additinal data was gathered frm the Dwntwn Lexingtn Market Inventry 2014, prduced by the Lexingtn Dwntwn Develpment Authrity. The purpse f this effrt was t build a picture f the central dwntwn district, including the number f restaurants, htels, ffices, and residential units. The fllwing data, gathered frm these tw reprts prvides a snapsht f all existing demand drivers n the current parking supply: 151,875 ft 2 f Retail establishments 50,625 ft 2 Specialty Retail and/r Grcery A ttal f 121 Restaurants and Bars 54 Fine t Casual Dining establishments 45 Fast Casual r Fast Fd establishments 24 Bars A 900 seat Perfrming Arts Theater 123,000 ft 2 Cnventin Center The 23,000 seat Rupp Arena 773 ttal Htel Rms 211 Apartments and Cnds split evenly amng 1 and 2 bedrm cndminiums and apartments An estimated 2,070,577 ft 2 f Office space lcated in the defined study area This estimate ranged between 2,400,000 t 2,600,000 between the tw CBD market studies, hwever these ttals included buildings lcated utside f the defined study area Of this 2,070,577 ft 2, apprximately 15% is currently vacant 13

18 CURRENT PUBLIC PARKING SUPPLY Walker cnducted a physical inventry f all n-street parking spaces within the study area. Off-Street public parking inventries, fr bth LFCPA and nn-lfcpa managed lcatins, were prvided t Walker Parking Cnsultants by the LFCPA. The inventry was tabulated by blck and categrized as either n-street, LFCPA managed public ff-street, r nn-lfcpa public ff-street. Fr the defined study area, the parking supply ttaled 9,352 spaces. This inventry des nt include private parking spaces, which were excluded frm ur analysis at the directin f the client. The ttal parking inventry includes: 808 n-street parking spaces (primarily metered) LFCPA managed ff-street public parking: The Transit Center Garage 777 spaces The Victrian Square Garage 382 spaces The Helix Garage 380 spaces The Curthuse Garage 518 spaces 6,614 ff-street nn-lfcpa managed public parking spaces EFFECTIVE PARKING SUPPLY When discussing the utilizatin f a parking system, it is imprtant t cnsider the cncept f effective supply. Effective supply is the maximum number f parking spaces that can realistically be used within a given parking system. An effective supply cushin helps t prtect against the inevitable lss f spaces resulting frm temprary disturbances such as cnstructin, incrrectly parked cars, snw remval, etc. This cushin als helps t decrease traffic cngestin by minimizing the amunt f time visitrs must spend lking fr an empty space. Fr n-street parking, Walker generally recmmends an effective supply equal t 85% f the ttal capacity. This allws a sizable cushin f spaces s that traffic des nt back up n surface streets. Off-street parking requires less f a cushin, generally 90% t 95% f the actual supply, depending n the type f facility and the anticipated user grup. Smaller cushins are calculated fr lng-term parking lcatins because lng-term parkers (ex: dwntwn emplyees) tend t be familiar with the facilities and spaces. These lcatins are nt as subject t frequent turn ver r unfamiliar parkers. Fr this study 95% was used fr the nn- LFCPA ff-street lcatins due t the assumptin that they wuld have a higher number f lng-term parkers. 14

19 Fr the ff-street public lts, it is expected that much f the traffic is generated by a cmbinatin f frequent visitrs and emplyees, and therefre use an effective supply f 90% f the ttal capacity. Shrt-term ff-street parkers are assumed t have a higher cncentratin in LFCPA managed lcatins due t lwer price-pints therefre, 90% f the actual supply was calculated as the LFCPA managed effective supply. The study area includes an actual ttal f 8,544 ff-street spaces and 808 n-street spaces, befre any adjustments are made t accunt fr an effective supply. After the effective supply factrs are applied, the study area s effective supply is 8,014 ff-street spaces and 687 n-street spaces fr a ttal effective supply f 8,705 spaces, as shwn in the fllwing table: Figure 2: Effective Supply Factr Effectiv e Supply Calculatins Parking Actual Supply Effectiv e Supply Factr Effectiv e Supply Operating Cushin LFCPA Garages 2,057 90% 1, Nn-LFCPA Off-Street 6,487 95% 6, On-Street % Ttal 9,352 90% 8, Cnfiguratin Scattered surface lts perate less efficiently than mre cmpact facilities Type f User Regular parking patrns ften find available spaces mre efficiently than infrequent visitrs On-Street On-street parking is less efficient than ffstreet due t the time it takes patrns t navigate traffic and find the last few vacant spts Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 15

20 CURRENT PUBLIC PARKING DEMAND A series f parking utilizatin cunts were cnducted ver multiple days t identify lcal parking characteristics. LFCPA staff prvided daytime ff-street public parking ccupancy cunts fr September 9 th, 10 th, and 11th. The primary field bservatins fr n-street ccupancy cunts ccurred n Octber 9 th (daytime) and 10 th (evening). DAYTIME OCCUPANCY The ttal public parking system was estimated t have an effective ccupancy f 63% ver the bservatin dates. Daytime n-street cunts frm 10/9/2014 had a peak 413 (51% effective ccupancy) vehicles parked arund 4pm. There are areas and times that stress the current public parking supply but the current parking cnditins indicate that the supply satisfies the demand. The LFCPA managed garages exhibited a daytime ccupancy peak f 1,507 (81%) vehicles parked, arund 10:00 AM n September 9th. Nn-LFCPA managed, private surface lts and garages had a peak f 3,063 (58%) vehicles parked, arund 10:00 AM n September 9th. The average ccupancy fr all three days f nn-lfcpa ccupancy cunts was slightly lwer with an average f 3,478 (56%) vehicles parked. EVENING OCCUPANCY Evening n-street cunts, perfrmed n 10/10/2014, exhibited peak ccupancy f 512 (63%) vehicles parked at 8:00 PM. The evening n-street ccupancy cunts averaged 100 mre vehicles parked than the daytime. The majrity f this increase is cncentrated n Shrt and Church Streets in the area east f Bradway and West f N. Limestne. This area is defined by blcks 3, 4, 9, 10, 13, and 14. A significant cntributr t this demand cncentratin is due t the high vlume f restaurants, bars, and night-time activities. In the table belw, nearly every ne f the blcks in this area were at r greater than 100% ccupancy fr the entire evening. Althugh the restaurant and bar cncentratin des drive visitrs t this small area in dwntwn Lexingtn, free parking that starts after 5:00 PM is the main parking demand driver twards n-street spaces. Alternatively, the Victrian Square facility, lcated in the same area, had mre than 280 (14% effective ccupancy) spaces available thrughut the same evening. 16

21 The verall system can supprt sme increase in dwntwn parking demand, there are lcatins within the study area that experience very high demand. These areas have been identified in red within the fllwing figures. Figure 3: Weekday Parking Occupancy Heat Map Ttal Parking Supply Nn-LFCPA Public Supply Public On-street Supply LFCPA Public Supply Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 17

22 Figure 4: Evening On-street Parking Occupancy Heat Map Public On-street Supply Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 18

23 CURRENT PARKING ADEQUACY Cmbining the n-street and ff-street cunts, althugh gathered n separate days, can prvide an estimate fr peak ccupancy acrss the entire public parking system within the defined study area. This analysis shws a mid-mrning ttal f 5,523 parked vehicles. Cmparing this peak ccupancy t the effective parking supply f 8,701 spaces, results in a 3,178 (63%) effective space surplus (adequacy). The nn-lfcpa parking lcatins experienced the highest effective adequacy during the bserved daytime cnditins. The effective parking adequacy (surplus) fr these lcatins, at peak was bserved t be 2,561 spaces, less than 59% ccupancy. Table 1: Weekday Adequacy Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants ANALYSIS BY ZONE The previus sectin f this reprt prvided an verview f the current parking cnditins in dwntwn Lexingtn. The data shws an perating surplus during peak weekday cnditins in public ff-street and n-street supply. T further analyze the lcal market cnditins and assess adequacy, the study area is divided int six znes (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). Cnclusins: While each zne exhibits unique parking demand patterns and levels f adequacy, all znes have unccupied parking supply with peak ccupancy rates that range frm 33% (Zne 6) t 80% (Znes 1 & 4). There is an actual surplus and effective surplus f parking in all znes. The study area znes are prvided in the fllwing Table. 19

24 Table 2: Weekday Adequacy by Zne ZONE 1 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Supply 10:00 AM Effective Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street % % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 2,244 95% 2,132 1,750 82% LFCPA Off-street % % Ttal 2,903 90% 2,711 2,165 80% ZONE 2 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Effective Supply 10:00 AM Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street % % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street % % LFCPA Off-street % % Ttal 1,128 90% 1, % ZONE 3 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Supply 10:00 AM Effective Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street % % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street % % LFCPA Off-street - 90% - - 0% - - Ttal % % ZONE 4 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Supply 10:00 AM Effective Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street 73 85% % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 1,780 95% 1,691 1,376 81% LFCPA Off-street - 90% - - 0% - - Ttal 1,853 90% 1,753 1,409 80% ZONE 5 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Effective Supply 10:00 AM Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street % % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street % % LFCPA Off-street 1,157 90% 1, % Ttal 1,835 90% 1,670 1,249 75% ZONE 6 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Supply 10:00 AM Effective Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street - 85% - - 0% - - Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 2,511 95% 2, % 1,717 1,591 LFCPA Off-street - 90% - - 0% - - Ttal 2,511 90% 2, % 1,717 1,591 ZONE 7 Type Actual Supply Effective Supply Factr Effective Supply 10:00 AM Effective Occupancy % Actual Surplus Effective Surplus On-street 67 85% % Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street - 95% - - 0% - - LFCPA Off-street - 90% - - 0% - - Ttal 67 90% % Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 20

25 Figure 5: Weekday Public Parking Occupancy by Zne Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 21

26 FUTURE CONDITIONS ATTITUDES ON DRIVING ARE CHANGING 'Millennials' (thse brn between 1980 and 2000) are having a significant impact n transprtatin and parking these days because their attitudes tward driving are different than the histrical nrm. Recent studies f this grup s behavir suggest that the driving bm may be ver. After decades f adding mre cars t the husehld fleet while mving further and further ut int the suburbs, Americans are waiting lnger t get licensed, driving less and increasingly turning t alternatives such as mass transit r car-sharing prgrams, accrding t a new study by the U.S. Public Research Interest Grup, r PIRG. This reprt says that "the time has cme fr America t hit the reset buttn n transprtatin plicy replacing the plicy infrastructure f the driving bm years with a mre efficient, flexible and nimble system that is better able t meet the transprtatin needs f the 21st century." The changes are apparent amng virtually all demgraphic grups, but especially s with Millennials. Millennials are shwing an increased desire t mve back int urban centers where cars are ften a hindrance, and they are increasingly receptive t mass transit a factr that can be seen in a steady grwth in ridership n bth city bus and rail systems Accrding t a recent study cnducted by the University f Michigan Transprtatin Institute: The percent f 19 year lds wh held a driver s license decreased frm 87% in 1983 t 75% by The percent f 18 year lds wh held a driver s license decreased frm 80% in 1983 t 75% by The percent f 17 year lds wh held a driver s license decreased frm 69% in 1983 t 46% by Accrding t an article reprted at in a recent study university students rated the fllwing as mst imprtant. Friends 52% Studying 29% Mbile Phnes 24% Games 13% Facebk 11% Sex 9% One f the cnclusins is that electrnic cmmunicatins are reducing the need fr face t face persnal interactin, and reducing the necessity f driving. 22

27 LIMITING FACTORS Walker has relied n cmmunity stakehlders, market reprts, and City representatives t prvide the prjectins fr future build-ut and reabsrptin f vacant space. This reprt analyzes the results f full prject cmpletin, but n change in vacancy absrptin given that the current status f 14-15% is nt expected t change significantly. This assumptin is based n the lcal market averaging ver 14% vacancy and available sub-lease space frm 2004 t Table 3: Vacancy Rate Trends Surce: Cleman Grup, LLC: Central Business District Furth Quarter 2013 Office Market Study Walker als assumes that new dwntwn businesses will be successful and generate parking demand at a level cnsistent with natinal averages. If, fr any reasn, there are changes t the size r land-use prjectins, future parking demand may als be affected. Als, the additin f new parking facilities r the destructin f existing supplies will have an impact n the future adequacy prjected in this reprt. The Future Cnditins Shared Parking Mdel nly cnsiders the identified prjects and is nt t be cnsidered an estimate f ttal future system demand acrss all ptential parking demand drivers. 23

28 FUTURE DEMAND ANALYSIS T calculate the prjected future parking demand fr specific prjects identified as inqueue Walker reviewed the prpsed future develpments and vacancy absrptin assumptins in dwntwn Lexingtn. The data used in this study were fund in the fllwing: Central Business District Furth Quarter 2013; Office Market Study Central Business District Office Space Surveyed 2009 Real Estate Develpment Ecnmic Gap Analysis Dwntwn Lexingtn Market Inventry 2014 The Walker mdel is initially based n parking ratis that have been established fr many different land uses by transprtatin industry research. The ratis describe the number f cars that are generated per 1,000 square feet (measured in grss leasable area when available) f a given land use. A restaurant, fr example, can generate many mre peple per square ft than an ffice, and thus requires a higher rati. Sme f the typical base, unadjusted ratis include the fllwing: Table 4: Current Weekday Parking Occupancy (9/3/2014) Land Use Cmmunity Retail General Office Quality Restaurant Emplyee 0.8 cars/1,000 SF GLA 2.85 cars/1,000 SF GLA 1.8 cars/1,000 SF GLA Visitrs 3.2 cars/1,000 SF GLA 0.15 cars/1,000 SF GLA 15.2 cars/1,000 SF GLA Peak Perid 1:00 PM 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Any given study area will have unique characteristics that make it different frm the averages develped thrugh natinal research. Walker uses its knwledge f parking patterns, research n the study area, and client input t adjust the mdel t reflect cnditins in the prject area. Specifically, we lk at lcal use f transit (r ther alternatives t driving), captive market effects, and ther lcal factrs that may affect parking demand (such as a particularly dense ffice cmplex that may be generating at a higher rate than average). Having adjusted the ratis used in the mdel t reflect cnditins in the lcal area, further adjustments t the mdel accunt fr the fact that nt all land uses will be at their peaks at the same time. Fr example, restaurants peak n weekend evenings when ffices are at their lwest. Therefre, it wuld be an errr t plan the parking system such that spaces are built t accmmdate bth peaks at nce (thugh this is hw spaces are planned accrding t many city cdes) this wuld result in an versupply f parking, which is wasteful. The adjustment fr hurly, daily and seasnal fluctuatins is the basis f a shared parking analysis. Walker als applied parking demand ratis accrding t the type f land use fr the specified prjects. Frm these ratis, parking demand was prjected fr the fllwing prjects: 24

29 7,814 ft 2 f Retail space; 11,638 ft 2 f Restaurant space; 286 Htel rms; 16 Cnds; 75 Apartments; 127,853 ft 2 f Office space; and a 7,958 ft 2 Bank 700± parking spaces prvided as part f the prject 1,265± ttal parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekdays 565± typical nn-event weekday parking space deficit 848± ttal parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekends 148± typical nn-event weekend parking space deficit 505 ON MAIN 17 Luxury Cnds Zer (0) change in net parking demand MAIN AND VINE 18,000 ft 2 f Retail space; 54 Residential Units 209± parking spaces prvided as part f the prject 139± ttal parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekdays 70± typical nn-event weekday parking space surplus 138± ttal parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekends 71± typical nn-event weekend parking space surplus THE SQUARE 32,000 ft 2 grund flr Retail (size unknwn) and Restaurant space (size unknwn) 72± parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekdays 58± parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekends 21C MUSEUM HOTELS 90 rm Htel; Art Museum (size unknwn); Restaurant (size unknwn) 99± parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekdays 89± parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekends OLD COURTHOUSE 25,000 ft 2 f Office space 95± ttal parking spaces fr typical nn-event weekdays 25

30 In rder t prject the demand generated by future develpments in dwntwn Lexingtn, a shared parking mdel fr all identified and ptential new develpment was created. These prjects are estimated t bring an additinal demand fr 1,671 spaces t dwntwn during typical daytime cnditins. Sme f this demand can be absrbed int the current surplus, given the assumptin that sme private parking, thrugh shared parking agreements, can be absrbed int available public parking ptins during peak cnditins. The prjected new parking demand generated during peak weekday and weekend cnditins are presented in the fllwing tables: Table 5: Future Weekday Parking Demand Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Weekday Demand Demand Unadj Mnth Adj Pk Hr Adj Nn Captive Drive Rati Mar Aug Land Use Demand Mar 2:00 PM Daytime Daytime 2:00 PM 6:00 PM Cmmunity Shpping Center (<400 ksf) % 95% 96% 100% Emplyee 40 80% 100% 100% 95% Fine/Casual Dining % 65% 82% 100% Emplyee % 90% 100% 95% Htel-Leisure % 70% 100% 100% Restaurant/Lunge 70 95% 33% 90% 60% Meeting/Banquet (20-50 sq ft/key) % 65% 60% 75% Emplyee % 100% 100% 95% Residential Guest % 20% 100% 100% 3 9 Residential Reserved - Cnd % 100% 100% 97% Residential Unreserved - Cnd 0 100% 70% 100% 97% 0 0 Residential Reserved - Rental % 100% 100% 97% Office 25k t 100k sq ft 8 100% 100% 100% 100% 8 0 Emplyee % 100% 100% 100% Office 100k t 500k sq ft % 100% 100% 100% 32 2 Emplyee % 100% 100% 100% Bank (Drive In Branch) % 70% 96% 100% 16 0 Emplyee % 100% 100% 100% 11 0 Emplyee % 100% 100% 100% Subttal Custmer/Guest 1, Subttal Emplyee/Resident Subttal Reserved Resident - Cnd Subttal Reserved Resident - Rental Subttal Reserved Office 24/ Subttal Valet Retail/Dining 9 9 Subttal Valet Htel Ttal Typical Day N Event 2,039 1,671 1,280 Ttal Parking Spaces Required 2,039 1,671 1,280 26

31 Table 6: Future Weekend Parking Demand Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Weekend Demand Demand Unadj Mnth Adj Pk Hr Adj Nn Captive Drive Rati Aug Late Dec Land Use Demand Aug 8:00 PM Evening Evening 8:00 PM 5:00 PM Cmmunity Shpping Center (<400 ksf) % 65% 96% 100% Emplyee 46 80% 75% 100% 95% Fine/Casual Dining % 100% 90% 100% Emplyee % 100% 100% 95% Htel-Leisure % 90% 100% 100% Restaurant/Lunge 70 99% 70% 30% 70% 10 4 Meeting/Banquet (20-50 sq ft/key) % 100% 70% 75% Emplyee % 55% 100% 95% Residential Guest 24 95% 100% 100% 100% Residential Reserved - Cnd % 100% 100% 97% Residential Unreserved - Cnd 0 95% 98% 100% 97% 0 0 Residential Reserved - Rental % 100% 100% 97% Office 25k t 100k sq ft 1 95% 0% 100% 100% 0 0 Emplyee 8 95% 0% 100% 100% 0 1 Office 100k t 500k sq ft 3 95% 0% 100% 100% 0 0 Emplyee 37 95% 0% 100% 100% 0 3 Bank (Drive In Branch) % 0% 96% 100% 0 0 Emplyee 13 95% 0% 100% 100% 0 0 Emplyee % 100% 100% 100% Subttal Custmer/Guest 1, Subttal Emplyee/Resident Subttal Reserved Resident - Cnd Subttal Reserved Resident - Rental Subttal Reserved Office 24/ Subttal Valet Retail/Dining 9 9 Subttal Valet Htel Ttal Typical Day N Event 1,173 1,212 Subttal Event Patrns 0 0 Subttal Event Emplyees 0 0 Ttal Parking Spaces Required 1,670 1,173 1,212 Table 7: Future Parking Demand Centrepinte 505 n Main Main + Vine The Square 21c Museum Old Curthuse Ttal Custmer/Guest, All Uses Emplyee, All Uses Reserved Resident Reserved Office 24/ Retail/Dining Valet Htel Valet Ttal Typical Day N Event 1, ,671 Ttal Parking Spaces Required 1, ,671 Planned Supply Surplus (+)/Deficit (-) Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 27

32 Table 8: Future Cnditins by Zne ZONE 1 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 2,132 1, LFCPA Off-street Ttal 2,711 2, ZONE 2 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street LFCPA Off-street Ttal 1, ZONE 3 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street LFCPA Off-street Ttal ZONE 4 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 1,691 1, ,265 (250) LFCPA Off-street Ttal 1,753 1, ,265 (221) ZONE 5 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street LFCPA Off-street 1, Ttal 1,670 1, ZONE 6 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street 2, ,591 LFCPA Off-street Ttal 2, ,591 ZONE 7 Current Cnditins Future Cnditins Type Effective Supply Occupancy Supply + Adjusted Supply New Demand Prjected Adequacy On-street Nn-LFCPA Public Off-street LFCPA Off-street Ttal Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 28

33 STAKEHOLDER INPUT Stakehlder interviews, cnducted by EHI Cnsultants, were held with a sample f individuals and leaders in the dwntwn cmmunity. These stakehlders prvide valuable insight because they are directly impacted by parking plicies and decisins. The fllwing summary highlights cmmn subjects and reflects key cmments btained frm cmmunity members. The cmments, summarized in the table belw, prvide key insights t the public cmmunity s perceptins n the LFCPA parking system. A cmmn theme t the feedback was that additinal parking supply, specifically structured parking is desired. Multiple individuals als indicated that parking dwntwn was inexpensive r cheap. Price increases that fund new supply r ther public interest prjects may garner public supprt. Table 9: Stakehlder Cmments Subject 1 Off-Street Parking 2 Off-Street Parking 3 Off-Street Parking 4 Parking Operatins 5 Parking Meters 6 Off-Street Parking 7 Parking Operatins Cmment With the funding and cnstructin f the 160 unit parking structure n the east end f dwntwn Lexingtn, will alleviate the need fr parking and als spur develpment pprtunities, such as the Main and Midland develpment and the Midland Avenue crridr. Lng term there is a need fr an additinal 600 parking spaces in the eastern part f dwntwn. The Mill and Shrt St. lt needs a garage Shrt St. between Upper needs a cnnecting garage. Financing f parking structure s remains an issue and we need t address hw t effectively pay fr parking structures. Mre restaurants/businesses dwntwn shuld participate in a parking validatin prgram. Partner (UK) with LPA t place meters n Linden Walk n-street parking. Currently this street is zned residential and free t park n. Create parking structure n the crner f University Dr. and Cper Dr. r place parking structure n the Sctt St. surface lt Pssible partnership with private prperty wners t take advantage f existing underutilized parking space. 8 Off-Street Parking The High St. surface lt can be replaced with a parking structure. 9 Off-Street Parking Chevy Chase area has pprtunity fr a structured lt. 10 Off-Street Parking 11 Parking Supply 12 Parking Rates Underdevelped campus area west f Limestne, between Virginia Ave and Avenue f Champins. Cnsider parking fr the Medical Center in this area. 21c Htel- will require mre parking than the 21c Htel in Luisville, due t the majrity f Lexingtn visitrs using/renting a car. This htel will utilize the Curt Huse parking garage. Parking dwntwn is cheap, and the price can affrd t be raised. This will supprt infrastructure needs parking cnvenience justifies a higher cst. 13 Parking Rates Restaurants dwntwn (many upscale) shuld help absrb the cst f parking. 14 Off-Street Parking Shrt St. shuld have a shared parking structure instead f private surface lts. 29

34 15 Parking Supply 16 Parking Supply 17 Parking Supply 18 Parking Supply 19 Parking Supply 20 Off-Street Parking 21 Parking Supply Parking must be accessible and clse t building and must be able t maneuver trucks in and ut f parking area. With limited availability f parking areas, it culd becme harder t attract events t Rupp and the cnventin center. Parking is a cncern fr the public expsitin areas: small exhibitrs need accessibility and parking nearby fr the drp ff and lading f merchandise. With the eventual develpment f the Twn Branch Cmmns Prject, it culd have an impact n LCC s parking spaces. Future needs culd be a parking structure n the High St. site, with a preference f the LCC managing the parking structure. A 3 level parking structure is preferred custmers prefer nt t park r g higher than 3 levels. There is a perceptin prblem frm the suburban ppulatin that they dn t knw where t park and dn t think there is availability. 22 Parking Supply Owners and business wrkers want t park within very clse prximity t their wrkplace 23 Parking Supply 23 Parking Rates Parking prblems mstly ccur at night when there is n parking enfrcement. Larger nighttime market than daytime market. Parking rates are very reasnable, wuld rather increase night time parking cst than day time. 24 Residential Parking Need fr residential parking permits in Jeffersn St. crridr. 25 Residential Parking 26 Parking Plicy 27 Parking Plicy Residential parking permits shuld (cntinue t) be the rle f the Lexingtn Parking Authrity and nt LFUCG. Cuncil members steer the public in the LPA s directin when dealing with parking issues. Parking requirements fr business zned prperty shuld nt require a specific amunt f parking spaces. This creates underutilized parking. Delivery/lading areas shuld be enfrced by LPA and zning. This prblem culd be slved with alleys. 28 Parking Alternatives Bike lckers and public restrms culd encurage mre bike riders. 29 Parking Plicy 30 Parking Plicy 31 Parking Plicy 32 Parking Supply 33 Parking Supply 34 Off-Street Parking 35 Off-Street Parking Parking is a public private venture and Lexingtn s plan shuld mimic what has been dne in Greenville, Suth Carlina. Shrt St. shuld be designated as a parking crridr, t take traffic and parking ff f Main St. and transfer it t Shrt St. Once this is accmplished, the ptential fr Church St. becmes a service street fr parking accessibility. High St. culd als becme anther parking crridr t the suth f dwntwn. Yu culd then take parking ff f High St. which culd then be used as anther vehicular crridr. Main St. culd then be retaken as a retail crridr. On Main St. yu culd add parking meters with angular parking n ne side. Algnquin Ave. next t Victrian Square (frm Main t Shrt St.) culd include angular parking. A strategy fr prperty cndemnatin shuld be discussed in rder t make way fr parking decks and structures. LPA shuld cnstruct state f the art parking garage with technlgical features multifaceted 2 level system. Adequate lighting f parking structures, artwrk and technlgical features are needed t make the garages mre inviting and welcming. The Helix Garage and its imprvements is a gd example f what can be dne with a parking structure. 30

35 36 Parking Rates The cst t park in Lexingtn is relatively cheap cmpared tm ther cities. 37 Parking Operatins Prperty wners and real estate representatives need t wrk tgether mre clsely when marketing parking as part f its develpment r leases. There appears t be little r n interface r nt as much as shuld be. Realtrs and develpers need t wrk mre clsely with the LPA. LPA can play a brker rle in develpment. 38 Parking Operatins Public des nt understand that Central parking is nt LPA. 39 Off-Street Parking Parking structure that has retail n main level shuld be mre appealing i.e. Festival Market. 40 Parking Supply We have parking spaces available, nt necessarily where a persn may want them. 41 Parking Supply 42 On-Street Parking 43 Parking Operatins 44 Parking Supply 45 On-Street Parking 46 Residential Parking 47 On-Street Parking 49 Residential Parking 51 Parking Operatins 53 On-Street Parking 54 On-Street Parking 55 Parking Operatins 56 Parking Operatins Public Private Partnerships as an alternative t fund parking in the future. Dwntwn Lexingtn will need anther new ffice building in the future and parking will be needed t meet the demands fr that new building. The public des nt like the public metered space where yu have t walk t a designated space t pay fr yur parking. (LUKE machines) LPA culd cnsider parking prmtins t get lcal r suburban peple t cme dwntwn t park. Can the LPA develp strategies r prmtins t assist restaurants n slwer nights? Studies have shwn that peple will park in suburban malls and walk further than they will if dwntwn when it cmes t parking. Prblem lading elderly adults int a vehicle, especially when street parking is nt available (8 10pm enfrcement). ADA standards shuld be in place fr ADA marked parking spaces. N place fr service cmpanies t park (ex: Carpet cleaners, Hspice) in rder t service hmewners. Mill Street On-Street parking is full f emplyee parkers by 10am. Underutilized private parking lts. (Liability is a prblem) If hmewners want t hst a party, they have n rm fr guests t park. Can a system be put in place t distribute guest parking permits? Is there a way t have dispsable parking passes? Print n demand was discussed as ne ptin fr visitr permits. Enfrcement patrl shuld be mre neighbrly and mre understanding f sme situatins. T many signs in sme areas and limited sign visibility due t traffic and trees. Better signage, especially fr handicap, culd be designed. The painting f street curbs and striping is a need. Cnsider diagnal parking t differentiate parking spts. The Parking Authrity culd play a rle as a gdwill ambassadr t brker parking in neighbrhds. Parking enfrcement has been a psitive fr permitted parking. Parking enfrcement and permits have had a significant impact n addressing UK students parking. Surce: EHI Cnsultants & Walker Parking Cnsultants 31

36 PARKING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Based n the analysis f current and future parking adequacy, there is a surplus f parking in dwntwn during peak cnditins. This sectin f the reprt presents pprtunities t make better use f existing parking resurces and capitalize n the strengths already in place. In additin, this sectin prvides infrmatin n parking management, an verview f parking ecnmics, and basic parking gemetrics fr LFCPA t cnsider. There are areas f dwntwn that temprarily experience high levels f demand that strain public parking supply, while at the same time nearby areas experience a parking surplus. Even thugh available supply may exist within ne r tw blcks, these lcalized ht spts frm perceptins that parking is inadequate. The cmmunity can either address the parking challenges by building mre supply r by better managing the existing resurces. Many suburban cmmunities are rethinking hw best t address the challenges f parking and pursuing management slutins befre cmmitting t a lng-term capital investment. This curse f actin may imprve perceptins and increase access t available existing supply. While parking is clearly ne imprtant part f dwntwn s develpment, it shuld nt detract frm intrinsic qualities such as a pedestrian-friendly envirnment, a unique sense f place, and architectural feel that make dwntwn Lexingtn a distinctive and desirable destinatin. This unique envirnment and cmbinatin f attractins bring peple t dwntwn. With that in mind, parking shuld be viewed as a supprtive tl t help make dwntwn attractins easier t access. The fllwing Table prvides an verview f hw cmmunities are starting t think abut parking planning. Table 10: Cmmunity Apprach t Parking Planning Old Parking Paradigm Parking Prblem means inadequate parking supply. Abundant parking supply is always desirable. Parking shuld be prvided free, funded indirectly, thrugh rents and taxes. Innvatin faces a high burden f prf and shuld nly be applied if prven and widely accepted. New Parking Paradigm There are many types f parking prblems (management, pricing, enfrcement, etc.) T much supply is as harmful as t little. Public resurces shuld be maximized and sized apprpriately. Users shuld pay directly fr parking facilities. A crdinated pricing system shuld value price parking with n-street the highest. Innvatins shuld be encuraged. Even unsuccessful experiments ften prvide useful infrmatin. 32

37 Parking management is a last resrt, t be applied nly if increasing supply is infeasible. Parking management prgrams shuld be applied t prevent parking prblems. Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Figure 6: Parking Triangle Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants SHARED PARKING Shared parking is defined as parking spaces that can be used t serve tw r mre individual land uses withut cnflict r encrachment. The resurgence f many central cities resulting frm the additin f vibrant ffice, residential, retail, and entertainment develpments cntinues t rely heavily n shared parking fr ecnmic viability. In additin, mixed-use prjects in many different settings have benefited frm shared parking. Numerus benefits f shared parking exist t a cmmunity at large, nt the least f which is the envirnmental benefit f significantly reducing the square feet f parking prvided t serve cmmercial develpment. It has been Walker s experience that an verall perfrmance based parking rati f apprximately 3.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet f cmmercial space represents a generally acceptable level f parking supply fr mature business districts with a semi-urban character such as dwntwn Lexingtn. Specific cnditins vary frm lcatin t lcatin, but this prvides a useful rule f thumb t determine the verall adequacy f the available parking supply. 33

38 The ability t share parking spaces is the result f tw cnditins: Variatins in the accumulatin f vehicles by hur, by day, r by seasn at the individual land uses. Relatinships amng the land uses that result in visiting multiple land uses n the same aut trip. Fr example, ffice buildings require parking spaces during daytime hurs n weekdays, while restaurants and entertainment venues have peak parking needs during the evening and weekends. The interplay f land uses in a mixed-use envirnment als prduces a reductin in verall parking demand. Fr example, a substantial percentage f patrns at ne business (restaurant) may be emplyees f anther dwntwn business (ffice). This phenmenn is referred t as the effects f the captive market. Because these patrns are already parking, they cntribute nly nce t the number f peak hur parkers. In ther wrds, the parking demand rati fr individual land uses shuld be factred dwnward in prprtin t the captive market supprt received frm neighbring land uses. Althugh the interplay f land uses can reduce the verall demand, it shuld be nted that there are limits impsed by prximity f land uses t each ther and t parking facilities. While "shared parking" by definitin is capitalizing n the different demand perid fr a cmbinatin f land uses, it is nt lgical t assume that a htel (with peak demand in the evening) can share with an ffice building (with peak demand during the day) if the tw land uses are t far apart. Human behavir restricts shared parking pprtunities by limiting the distance users are willing t walk frm a parking facility t their final destinatins. SHARED PARKING LOCATIONS In sme cmmunities there is an infrmal versin f shared parking. Many wners tacitly allw public parking in their private lts. Sme are lts marked expressly fr a given use, but custmers are never bted r twed fr using these areas. In ther cases, lts are divided between spaces marked fr the businesses n that site and unmarked r custmer nly spaces that can (infrmally) be used by anyne despite being assciated with a particular building. This is an infrmal apprach t prviding mre public parking, and ne that requires little n the part f the wner and LFCPA. The dwnside f such an apprach is that if the lt is nt advertised as public, it remains ambiguus and many visitrs will avid using it. A mre thrugh apprach is t make frmal agreements and implement a prgram t allw public parking n private lts, and direct cars t these areas. The prgram wuld aim t entice lcal businesses and prperty wners t partner with LFCPA fr public access t underutilized parking supply. Ptential prgram benefits t LFCPA and the dwntwn cmmunity include, but are nt limited t: Reduce verall investment, bth public and private, in expensive new parking supply 34

39 Imprve the verall parking experience fr all dwntwn Lexingtn visitrs, residents, and emplyees Make all parking assets, public and private, mre efficient thrugh increased utilizatin Prvide a mnthly financial return t private parking supply wners Assist private parking supply wners market and sell unused spaces Given the lw ccupancy Walker infrmally bserved in sme f the surface lts, an LFCPA shared parking prgram shuld be strngly cnsidered even where lt wners are reluctant t allw verflw nt underutilized prtins f their lts during their busy daytime hurs. Walker wuld recmmend LFCPA cnsider a pilt prgram in the Chevy Chase neighbrhd fr shared parking. There are many rles the LFCPA culd play in this prgram, but LFCPA shuld cnsider: Mnthly Lease (Permit) Parking: Discuss the pssible revenues and benefits f increased prximate parking space availability t lcal private parking supply wners Wrk with the private supply wners t create a database f private parking space inventry that is available fr public cnsumptin Create a map f lcatin rates by area r zne that wuld prvide the private supply wners a guideline fr ptential mnthly rates Market the available spaces t the public thrugh prviding physical signage, marketing pamphlets, campaigns, and pening the inventry database up t the lexpark.rg website fr ptential patrns t search, find, and cnnect t available spaces LFCPA culd ptentially prvide the fllwing services t the private supply wners fr a fee: Prvide parking permits / hangtags Sell the permits fr the private supply wner thrugh the current T2 Systems applicatin Track the permit payments and prvide cllectins services fr unpaid permit fees Enfrce the lcatin with current enfrcement staff and tls Prvide additinal insurance cverage Daily r Evening (Transient) Parking: 35

40 Wrk with paybyphne and the lcal private supply wner t pen available spaces up t public transient cnsumptin thrugh the current mbile payment applicatin Market the available spaces t the public thrugh prviding physical signage, marketing pamphlets, campaigns, the ParkMe applicatin, and the lexpark.rg website LFCPA culd ptentially prvide the fllwing services t the private supply wners fr a fee: Prvide parking permits / hangtags Track the paybyphne revenues and distribute individual lcatin prfits t the private supply wners Enfrce the lcatin with current enfrcement staff and tls Prvide additinal insurance cverage FEE-IN-LIEU A number f cities have tried t find a means t advance the cncept f shared parking by mtivating develpers r prperty wners wh create the need fr additinal parking t cntribute sme r all f the cst f develping additinal parking in municipal facilities. The fee-in-lieu apprach prvides the develper with an pprtunity t cntribute a predetermined amunt fr each required parking space nt cnstructed n site. Funds cntributed t the in-lieu accunt are used by the City t prvide an apprpriate number f spaces in municipal parking facilities. Such a fund must be sufficient t csteffectively develp adequate parking in reasnable prximity and in a timely manner t each new develpment. The City must charge a sufficient fee-in-lieu t cver the cst f land acquisitin and cnstructin, even when it isn t immediately turning the fee int parking spaces. We nte that a number f develpments are ften needed t create the critical mass t fund a parking facility. Therefre the timing f facility cmpletin may nt cincide with that f the develpment, which may create a challenge. While in lieu fees are typically set at a level lw enugh t encurage develpers t pay them rather than engage in cnstructing new, exclusive and expensive parking, these fees are typically near r at the cst, per space, fr a municipal parking peratin t build new supply. Walker has analyzed 22 in-lieu prgrams and fund an average fee f $26,000 per space, with a range f $1,572 per space at the lwest and $66,260 per space at the highest. One in-lieu prgram frm the data set implemented a graduated fee based n a scale f: 1 t 5 spaces = $15,000 per space 6 t 15 spaces = $20,000 per space 16 t 25 spaces = $25,000 per space 36

41 26+ spaces = $30,000 per space The vast majrity f these prgrams included a disclaimer that the fee amunt was adjusted n an as-needed basis based n cst f cnstructin, and many als review and adjust the per space fee annually. Existing Fee-in-Lieu Prgrams: Twn f Davie, FL Orland, FL City f Bend, OR Crvallis, OR Twn f Jacksn, WY Berkley, CA Davis, CA Laguna Beach, CA Wheatn, IL Siux Falls, SD The Fee-in-Lieu mdel prvides a mechanism fr develpments t fund shared parking imprvements. This mdel includes the fllwing cmpnents: Develpers are prvided an incentive t pay an in-lieu fee t the City t reduce their cnstructin requirement, which will increase the density and the verall feasibility f the prject; The City can use the in-lieu fees t finance the cnstructin f shared-use municipal parking facilities with cllected fees t meet prject cmpletins in a timely manner It shuld be nted that new zning cde changes shuld be enacted that will effectively demand cnstructin f 100% t 110% f the zning requirement (after sme shared parking cnsideratin). Develpments will still require sme n-site space fr visitrs and VIPs, but emplyees can be accmmdated in shared parking facilities. ZONING CODE REVIEW Walker reviewed sectins f the Lexingtn Zning Ordinance that gvern parking (articles 8 and 16). There are three primary zning classificatins within the study area, B-2, B-2A, and B- 2B. Walker was asked t prvide cmments and suggestins t better serve ecnmic develpment and prtect prperty wner rights while minimizing waste and prmting sustainability. The Zning Ordinance ( Cde ) is used by the Planning Department t ensure sufficient parking is prvided fr new and re-develpment in Lexingtn. 37

42 CURRENT REQUIREMENTS Accrding t Sectin 8-18(n) Off-Street Parking, the B-2 district requires parking be prvided at a rate f 25% f the least parking area required in any zne. The B-2A and B-2B districts d nt require ff-street parking, unless residential use fr 25 r mre units is prpsed (sectin 8-19(n)). Off-street parking is a cnditinal use in the B-2B district, requiring a special permit (sectin 8-19(d)). RECOMMENDED ZONING PARKING CODE CHANGES/CONSIDERATIONS The zning prvisins used by Lexingtn are fairly cmprehensive and thrugh. The reduced parking requirement in the B-2A zne and virtually n parking requirement in the B-2 and B-2B znes prvide an ecnmic incentive fr cntinued develpment by reducing ptential upfrnt develpment csts fr parking. Discussins with the city planning department staff indicate that present plicies n reduced r n parking requirements have been wrking well fr sme time. As a pint f discussin and cnsideratin, we intrduce the fllwing issues and strategies that Lexingtn may cnsider in rder t further enhance the current cde. PROHIBITION OF NEW SURFACE PARKING WITHIN THE CBD As an alternate apprach, sme cities have gne as far as prhibiting the develpment f new ff-street parking anywhere in the dwntwn t help achieve the gals f New Urbanism and Smart Grwth planning gals, and then cllect fees-in-lieu t build municipal parking, usually n the periphery. While prhibiting all ff-street parking in a CBD may nt be the chice f every cmmunity, prhibiting new surface parking lts can imprve the pedestrian ambience f the dwntwn. Based in part n the previusly discussed shared parking cncepts, Walker makes the fllwing recmmendatins t better prmte shared parking within the study area. These als are based in part n Recmmended Zning Ordinance Prvisins published by the Natinal Parking Assciatin. Walker strngly recmmends that the Cde allw reductin f the required number f parking spaces based upn a shared parking study perfrmed in accrdance with the latest editin f Shared Parking, by a qualified traffic r parking cnsultant. The prcess may be facilitated by prescribing acceptable mde adjustments, particularly fr emplyee parking, based upn lcal census data n mdal splits. The rdinance shuld cntinue t set a maximum reductin in parking requirements fr shared parking that can be administratively apprved withut a public hearing r apprval by the zning bard. 38

43 The parking requirement may be reduced r eliminated by the payment f the Feein-Lieu f parking. This fee wuld be established and ccasinally updated by vte f the city cuncil, fr each space nt prvided n-site. This fee shuld be equivalent t the cst f cnstructin f a structured parking space. N changes are recmmended fr the reductin in parking in each zne. Nte: The previus recmmendatins are nt represented t be suitable as written fr inclusin in an amendment t the existing Cde, nr are they represented t be exhaustive. Walker Parking and its cnsultants d nt represent these pints as a legal dcument r mdel rdinance. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) As ppulatin grwth cntinues t place greater demand n transprtatin systems, strategies that fcus n peratins rather than increased capacity will becme mre and mre a part f the slutin t future prblems. With this realizatin, many cities have begun t emply Transprtatin Demand Management (TDM) Prgrams t imprve peratins. The general idea f these prgrams is t reduce the number f autmbile trips in a given area by ffering incentives and prviding alternatives t driving alne. In rder t develp and market successful TDM Prgrams defined areas, such as central business districts, create Transprtatin Management Assciatins (TMA). These public-private partnerships prvide the institutinal structure t develp and emply the strategies best suited fr a particular area. One funding strategy, utilized by a majrity f TMAs, is the cllectin f membership dues. These annual dues, based n the number f individuals a participating member emplys, typically accunt fr an average f ne third f a TMA s revenue. TDM strategies implemented by TMAs fcus n reducing wrk-related single ccupancy vehicle trips. These strategies prvide incentives fr individuals t chse different mdes f transprtatin such as transit, carpling, bicycles r walking when traveling t wrk. With the right mix f TDM alternatives and strategies, vehicle trips can be significantly reduced in relatin t backgrund cnditins. Varius marketing techniques such as distributing free transit maps, ffering free transit days, and putting up prmtinal psters can help attract mre riders. TMAs can als encurage ridership by ffering mnetary incentives in paid parking areas, as well as ther specific strategies t emplyees wh ride transit t wrk. SHARED VEHICLE PROGRAMS Car-sharing is a prgram that has been very successful in a number f Nrth American cities. The basic cncept f this strategy is t prvide an ptin fr cnvenient vehicular travel withut wning a car. It prvides a medium between having n vehicle and persnal vehicle wnership. These prgrams ffer access t a fleet f cars that can be used n an hurly basis. 39

44 After signing up nline and reserving a car, custmers simply shw up at the lt and drive ff with a car. Many municipal parking peratins will dedicate, r reserve, parking spaces in strategic areas in rder t prvide the mst cnvenient pick-up and return lcatins fr the shared vehicles. Walker recmmends that the LFCPA be prepared t reserve n-street parking spaces that culd be dedicated fr car and ride sharing prviders. This culd als include reduced r free access t LFCPA managed parking garages in rder t minimize the impact t the limited nstreet parking supply. BICYCLE RACKS Many emplyers have truble cvering shifts due t their emplyees lack f transprtatin. An alternative t expanding the bus schedule r shared vehicle services is using bicycles. By prviding bicycle racks either n-street r at emplyment centers, emplyers can encurage individuals wh live in clse prximity t their places f wrk t bike r walk. Installing bicycle racks alne, will nt slve transprtatin issues, partly because safety will als need t be addressed in tandem. Lighting, security, bike paths, and signage all need t be cnsidered when creating a bike prgram. Prmtinal pprtunities can include, but are nt limited t lcal bike shps run seminars t teach children and adults alike in rder t ensure that biking remain a viable alternative transprtatin surce. Cities where a successful Bike Rack prgram exists: Madisn, Wiscnsin Chicag, Illinis Prtland, Oregn Santa Cruz, Califrnia Blmingtn, Indiana WAYFINDING / SIGNAGE We recmmend implementing a cmprehensive signage prgram t maximize visitr awareness t public parking lcatins. The signage imprvements shuld be prepared in cnjunctin with any enhancements t the parking resurces, in additin t any streetscape imprvements alng the crridr radways. As is true with any gd cmmunicatins medium, signs shuld be brief, precise and apprpriate, such as Public Parking r Tw Hur 40

45 Parking. Further, the signage shuld guide the driver frm the main thrughfares int the parking lts. Each parking area has its wn set f wayfinding/signage requirements. These requirements present specific questins cncerning the needs and cncerns f the users t be answered during the design f the signs, including: What are the pints at which infrmatin is needed? What infrmatin is needed? Hw shuld this infrmatin be presented? Will there be a high percentage f first-time visitrs t the district, r is the parking supply used by the same peple every day? Are there special sign requirements fr accessible parking r bilingual patrns? COLORADO SPRINGS, CO Are there chices in traffic patterns that must be presented t drivers such as directins t parking near the entrance t an anchr tenant r exits t different streets? It is als imprtant that general rules fr sign design and placement be fllwed when planning the streetscape imprvements. All signage shuld have a general rganizing principle cnsistently evident in the system. Directin signage fr bth pedestrians and vehicles must be cntinuus (i.e., repeated at each pint f chice) until the destinatin is reached. Very minimal signage exists at the pint f parking that directs patrns back t the merchants. Signs shuld be placed in cnsistent and therefre predictable lcatins. Mre sphisticated space cunt signage culd be incrprated int the existing ff-street garage PARCS system. Many municipalities are cnsidering dynamic space availability signs in crdinatin with wayfinding signage at central access pints and crridrs. Fr example, at the east and west ends f Vine and Main, dynamic signs culd be placed advertising current LFCPA garage space availability and incrprate assciated directinal signage t navigate parkers t specific garage lcatins. The space availability infrmatin culd als be added t the lexpark.rg website, shwing current garage space availability, while als incrprating an interactive map that prvides directinal infrmatin guiding users t the garages with space availability. NEW PARKING GARAGE ANALYSIS 41

46 There are cases where parking management alne is nt the slutin. While an rganized parking system prvides the framewrk fr future grwth, additinal supply in the frm f a parking structure may be required t supprt new develpment. It is rare that a cmmunity wuld build a fully subsidized, stand-alne parking ramp withut clear plans fr new cmmercial develpment. The preferred apprach is t develp new parking in crdinatin with highly dense mixed-use prjects. This apprach maximizes develpment space by integrating parking int the develpment prgram. This sectin prvides a general verview f basic parking ecnmics that must be cnsidered when planning fr a new parking structure. A brief discussin is prvided n capital csts, perating expenses, breakeven pricing, structural repair budget, and minimum parking dimensins. CAPITAL COSTS Walker understands that future parking imprvements may be develped as a stand-alne parking ramp r incrprated with the design f a future mixed-use building. A parking facility that is built int a prject, as either the upper r lwer flrs f that develpment cmpared t a stand-alne parking facility, requires that the garage use shrt-span cnstructin. Shrtspan cnstructin uses an increased number f clumns t supprt the weight f the structural elements abve it. In shrt-span cnstructin, the clumn grid is rughly 30 feet n center. The efficiencies f shrt-span cnstructin are less than lng-span cnstructin because f the clumn prjectins that interfere with the parking layut. A typical shrt-span cnstructin garage has design efficiency in the range f square feet per space, depending upn the gemetrics f the ftprint. If the ramp is a stand-alne structure, utilizing lng-span cnstructin, the clumns can be lcated at the frnt f the parking stalls s that there are n clumn prjectins. The efficiency f the garage can be increased t an apprximate range f 315 t 350 square feet per space, depending upn the gemetrics f the ftprint. The increase in efficiency is due t the ability t increase the number f parking spaces inside the same ftprint. A general guideline fr determining the cnceptual estimate f prbable cst fr a parking ramp is t apply a cst per space figure t the target capacity. The cst f parking ramps vary greatly based n lcatin, architectural features, sustainability features, and whether the facility is abve r belw-grade. A reasnable range fr an abve-grade, space parking facility is $14,000 t $18,000 per space, assuming lng-span cnstructin. The cst per space can increase significantly when built belw grund, r includes multi-use retail and ffice space. OPERATING COSTS 42

47 Expenses can vary dramatically since these depend n a number f independent variables. Traditinal expenses can include csts assciated with labr, utilities, daily maintenance, supplies, management and accunting, and insurance. Key factrs in determining perating csts include the prpsed hurs f peratins, type f parking access and revenue cntrls, and the applicatin f active r passive security measures. The perating expenses fr a parking facility are typically presented n a cst per space basis. Walker s 2012 research indicates actual perating expenses that range frm $150 t ver $1,000 per space annually. The perating csts are lwer at facilities that d nt maintain revenue and access cntrls, and have limited hurs f peratin. Cnversely, perating csts are higher at facilities that are staffed, that mnitr access t the prperty with revenue and access cntrls, and perate 24 hurs 7 days a week. All facilities require sme degree f daily janitrial service that includes trash remval, sweeping, and minr repairs and maintenance such as lighting replacement. These respnsibilities are ften delegated t a city s public wrks department, if a parking department des nt exist. STRUCTURAL REPAIR BUDGET Fr new parking structures, in additin t perating expenses, Walker highly recmmends that funds be set-aside in a sinking fund, n a regular basis, t cver structural maintenance csts at a minimum f $75 per structured space annually. Once a sinking fund is established, cntributins t this fund accumulate ver time and are available t cver structural maintenance and structural repairs. Even the best designed and cnstructed parking facility requires structural maintenance. Fr example, expansin jints need t be replaced and cncrete invariably deterirates ver time and needs t be repaired t ensure safety and t prevent further damage. The structural maintenance cst typically represents the largest prtin f the ttal maintenance budget. Prperty wners tend t grssly underestimate the structural maintenance cst and d nt budget adequately fr timely crrective actins that must be perfrmed t cst effectively extend the service life f the structure. The cst f structural maintenance is relatively small cnsidering the ptential waste f the imprvements assciated with the failure t perfrm prper maintenance n a timely basis. Peridic structural maintenance includes items such as patching cncrete spalls and delaminatins in flr slabs, beams, clumns, walls, etc. In many instances there are maintenance csts assciated with the tpping membranes, the ruting and sealing f jints and cracks, and the expansin jint repairs. The cst f these repairs can vary significantly frm ne structure t anther. The factrs that will impact the maintenance cst include, but are nt limited t: the value the wner places n the maintenance f the facility, the lcal climate, and the age f the structure. MINIMUM PARKING STRUCTURE DIMENSIONS 43

48 There are several variables and ptins t cnsider when selecting the type f structure, including the desired traffic flw (ne-way r tw-way), the type f users, the Level f Service (LOS), and height restrictins. The fllwing table prvides the minimum dimensins fr tw types f structures, as well as a variatin n the level f service. Characteristics f a singlethreaded helix include tw-bays, tw-way traffic flw, and 90-degree parking, with the mtrist ascending ne flr fr every 360-degree revlutin. By cntrast, a duble-threaded helix features angled parking and ne-way traffic flw, prviding a cntinuus travel path up and then dwn thrugh the structure. In a duble-threaded helix, the mtrist climbs tw levels fr every 360-degree revlutin, thus requiring a lnger site than a single-threaded helix. Figure 7: Minimum Parking Structure Dimensins Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Parking structures culd be built n smaller ftprints. Hwever, implied in this discussin is the desirability t achieve a relatively efficient parking structure design, as measured by square feet f flr area per each parking space. WALKING DISTANCE Pedestrian Safety invlves tw factrs: the ability f vehicles t mve t and frm the area withut pedestrian cnflict and, the ease f use by pedestrians with cnsideratin f the walking path and distances t and frm the facility. Walking distance varies based n the patrn user grup as well as the envirnment f the surrunding area in which the patrn must walk. T aid in estimating the apprpriate walking distance, a Level f Service (LOS) rating system is used fr evaluating apprpriate walking distances based n specific criteria. Several factrs impact the walking distance that a typical persn will cnsider reasnable. These include climate, perceived security, lighting, and whether it is thrugh a surface lt r inside a parking structure. LOS A is cnsidered the best r ideal, LOS B is gd, LOS C is average and LOS D is belw average but minimally acceptable. 44

49 The fllwing table includes the level f service walking distances fr varius parking envirnments. Walker applies the level f service fr utdr/uncvered parking when cnsidering shared parking pprtunities in Dwntwn Lexingtn. Table 11: LOS Cnditins: Walking Distances Level f Service Cnditins A B C D Outdr/Uncvered 400 ft. 800 ft. 1,200 ft. 1,600 ft. Thrugh Surface Lt ,050 1,400 Outdr/Cvered 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Climate Cntrlled 1,000 2,400 3,800 5,200 Inside Parking Facility ,200 Surce: Parking, Butcher, T. and Smith, M. In cmparisn, the parking used during typical days at shpping centers is designed t prvide LOS A and B, while the parking that nly gets used fr a few hurs n the busiest days f the year might be designed fr LOS C. Additinally, emplyee parking at a shpping mall is mst ften prvided at LOS C, due t the willingness f emplyees t walk farther than custmers and the desire t prvide custmers with the mst prximate parking ptins. We recmmend striving t prvide adequate parking t specific user grups using the fllwing LOS guidelines. VISITORS Because visitrs are mst likely unfamiliar with the area and/r are shrt-term parkers, we recmmend prviding walking distance LOS A t all visitrs. EMPLOYEES We recmmend striving t prvide LOS C and/r D t emplyees, which park fr lnger perids and may nt require the use their vehicle thrughut the day. POTENTIAL PARKING STRUCTURE SITES The study area was evaluated t determine the ptimum lcatins fr a parking structure based n independent Walker evaluatin, cnversatins with LFCPA staff, recmmendatins frm the Parking Study Reprt 2014 (Draft), and the current parking surplus. As the city grws and parking demand increases, it is imprtant t plan the parking t grw with the expansin, in rder t cntinue t meet the grwing parking demands. 45

50 Zne 1 includes Blcks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, and 16 Zne 2 includes Blcks 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 37, and 38 Zne 3 includes Blcks 30, 31, 32, 35, and 39 Zne 4 includes Blcks 6, 7, 11, 12, 21, and 22 Zne 5 includes Blcks 27, 28, 29, 33, 34, and 36 Zne 6 is Blck 41 Zne 7 is Blck 40 Figure 8: Ptential Structured Parking Lcatins by Zne Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants SITE CONSTRAINTS 46

51 Ptential high acquisitin csts. Ptential significant street changes t surrunding area. Ptential small site ftprint that culd increase the number f levels. Ptential lcatin in the same zne as the existing LFCPA managed garages. Ptential high demlitin csts. Ptential lng walking distance frm primary drivers fr dwntwn visitrs. Ptential interruptin f dwntwn green spaces. Ptential lw mnthly parking rates which culd result in lwer revenues. DESIGN CAPACITIES Estimated ptential capacities range frm 600 t 650± spaces. Estimated ptential heights range frm 5 t 9 levels. ESTIMATED RELATIVE CONSTRUCTION COSTS Estimated ptential csts range frm $8,625,000 t $10,838,750. The estimates d nt include ptential land acquisitin csts. Table 12: Alternative Site Matrix City f Lexingtn Alternative Site Matrix Structured Parking Criteria Weight Zne 1 Zne 2 Zne 3 Zne 5 #1 Zne 5 #2 Added Net Capacity 25.0% Rev enue Prjectin 15.0% Cnstructin Cst 20.0% Demlitin Csts 10.0% Parking Displacement 5.0% Lcatin 20.0% Vehicular Access 5.0% Av erage Scre 100% Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 47

52 MATRIX COMPARISON OF THE ALTERNATIVES The matrix was develped t assist LFCPA fr individual and cllective ranking f the ptential parking garage lcatins. The previusly identified parking site alternatives are evaluated n the basis f a number f subjective criteria. Each criterin is scred relative t the thers. A value (10 = excellent, dwn t 1 = pr) is awarded t each. Next, each criterin is weighted by percentage. The criteria used t evaluate the alternatives are as fllws: ADDED NET CAPACITY 25% Cnsiders the ttal number f new spaces t be added fr each site less the number f spaces remved, if applicable, in rder t arrive at a net new supply number. REVENUE PROJECTION 15% Estimated financial perfrmance based n site characteristics and parking demand drivers. CONSTRUCTION COST 20% Ttal estimated per space cnstructin, design fee, and ther csts multiplied by the ttal spaces fr each lcatin. DEMOLITION COST 10% Ttal estimated cst t remve existing buildings, parking garages, surface lts, r ther existing site structures. PARKING DISPLACEMENT 5% Cnsiders the impact n current users if supply needs t be remved fr shrt- r lng-term perids f time. LOCATION 20% The ability f a slutin t satisfy parking needs within a reasnable walking distance. VEHICULAR ACCESS 5% The ability f vehicles t mve t and frm the area withut cnflicting negatively with traffic patterns. 48

53 PARKING POLICIES AND PRACTICES The Lexingtn-Fayette Cunty Parking Authrity is a very sphisticated parking peratin that incrprates many peratinal and management best practices, utilizes the latest enfrcement, meter, and PARCS technlgies, and cnsistently invests in their parking assets. As evidenced by the fllwing prgrams and investments: Installatin f leading PARCS technlgies with the new Scheidt & Bachmann management system and equipment, including dynamic space availability signage Significant recent investments in the lng-term viability f parking structures thrugh cncrete and structural repairs Utilizatin f T2 System s Flex Permit and Enfrcement management sftware, as well as their mbile handheld enfrcement suite A well designed website that cnveys very detailed and thrugh infrmatin n a wide range f parking related tpics ParkMe app integratin fr dynamic space availability n mbile devices Varius Green initiatives, including: Recycled paper fr letters and frms Electric and hybrid enfrcement vehicles New energy efficient lighting in ff-street facilities Nn-paper ticket (chip based) PARCS equipment Slar pwered meters And many mre An infrmative and interactive Facebk page Prgrams that help engage the cmmunity t use parking t slve larger prblems in unique and interesting ways, setting examples fr ther municipalities Fr example, recent canned fd drives fr parking ticket amnesty t help the hmeless that received natinal attentin. The fllwing sectins fcus n ways that LFCPA can cntinue t imprve parking peratins. These slutins generally fcus n the effective use f the existing parking supply, where imprvements t the system can be accmplished via pricing changes t apprpriately value high demand spaces. The analysis als cvers the relatinship between n-street vs. ff-street rates, as well as pssible increased hurs f meter and enfrcement peratins in rder t better distribute evening parking demand. 49

54 GRADUATED FINES The gal f fining vilatrs is nt t increase revenues r fill city cffers; it is t keep parking spaces available fr shrt-term demand. Current parking fines, if t lw, will encurage abuse by members f the resident and business cmmunities. The idea behind graduated fines is t deter repeat vilatrs and change their behavir, thus freeing parking space in the study area fr the intended users. Walker recmmends a graduated fine schedule based n the number f vilatins within a specific time frame. The fllwing fines are ne way f transfrming behavir f the current repeat vilatrs. 1 st Vilatin $ nd Vilatin (within 60 days) $ rd Vilatin $ th Vilatin $ plus vehicle bting r twing Cnsideratin shuld be given t an incentive system where the initial fine is set at a higher fee. If the vilatr pays the fine within a certain perid f time a discunt is then applied. Fr example, under the current system, smene might receive a $15 fine, and if nt paid within 10 days the citatin wuld escalate t $30. Under the incentive system, the initial fine wuld be set higher, $30, already incrprating the late fee. Hwever, if the fine is paid within a given perid f time, 10 days, a discunt f $15 is applied bringing the actual fine cllected t $15. CURRENT CITATION RATES In Lexingtn, citatin fines are currently set at $15 fr Overtime Limit, Expired Meter, and Zne citatins. Althugh the fine amunt des duble if nt paid within the first 10 days, the initial amunt was fund t be lwer than a number f cmparative cities. Seven cities, chsen based n a number f factrs, including but nt limited t ppulatin size, reginal lcatin, and similar university prximities were, used t cmpare rates. These seven cities averaged base rates fr Overtime Limits / Zne vilatins at $25.00 and Expired Meter vilatins were just ver $ Increasing citatin fine rates t be mre in-line with cmparative markets culd increase cmpliance, ultimately reducing the number f vilatins written while at the same time increase valuable space availability. 50

55 Table 13: Citatin Rate Cmparisn City Ppulatin Expired Meter Overtime / Zne Madisn, WI 240,323 $ $ Blmingtn, IN 82,575 $ $ Luisv ille, KY 253,128 $ $ Cincinnati, OH 297,517 $ $ Bulder, CO 103,166 $ $ Ann Arbr, MI 117,025 $ $ Pittsburgh, PA 305,841 $ $ Average $ $ Lexingtn, KY 308,428 $ $ Difference ($9.29) ($10.00) Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants PARKING RATES In municipal parking systems there is a direct relatinship between pricing and ccupancy. This is ne f the best tls the parking authrity has t distribute demand acrss existing resurces in rder t effectively manage supply. Over time, this pricing relatinship shuld be managed and balanced in rder t achieve ptimum ccupancy acrss the different parking supply ptins. Optimizatin is generally cnsidered t be between 80-90% peak ccupancy evenly distributed acrss the available supply. As described in the supply and demand analysis, the LFCPA parking garages were bserved t have an effective ccupancy f just ver 81%, while the nn-lfcpa lcatins experienced 59% effective ccupancy. Sme f this discrepancy can be attributed t the price differences between the parking ptins. The hurly parking rate analysis includes ten cities, all exhibiting ne r many similarities t Lexingtn. The cmparisn fund that the current hurly and permit parking rates are currently lw. The rates are lw by cmparisn t the lcal market, the ten chsen municipalities, and the lw-end f natinal averages. 51

56 Table 14: Hurly Rate Cmparisn (Cmparative Reference Set) Parking Structures Parking Lts On-Street City Ppulatin Hurly Permits Hurly Permits Hurly 1 Hurly 2 Hurly 3 Madisn, WI 240,323 $ 1.50 $ $ 1.50 $ $ 1.00 $ 1.20 $ 1.75 Blmingtn, IN 82,575 $ 0.50 $ $ 1.00 $ $ 1.00 Luisv ille, KY 253,128 $ 2.00 $ $5 / day $ $ 1.25 $ 1.50 Cincinnati, OH 297,517 $ 3.85 $ $ 7.59 $ $ 1.50 $ 2.00 Bulder, CO 103,166 $ 1.25 $ $ 1.25 $ $ 1.25 Ann Arbr, MI 117,025 $ 1.20 $ $ 1.50 $ $ 1.50 Pittsburgh, PA 305,841 $ 3.94 $ $ 4.35 $ $ 1.00 $ 2.00 $ 3.00 Nashv ille, TN 601,222 $ 4.77 $ $ 6.69 $ $ 1.50 Indianaplis, IN 852,866 $ 5.50 $ $ 5.53 $ $ 1.50 Kansas City, MO 467,007 $ 2.60 $ $ 3.33 $ $ 1.50 $ 3.00 Average $ 2.71 $ $ 3.64 $ $ 1.30 $ 1.94 $ 2.38 Lexingtn, KY 308,428 $ 2.00 $ $ 2.60 $ $ 0.50 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 Difference ($0.71) ($67.89) ($1.04) ($25.44) ($0.80) ($0.94) ($1.38) Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants ON-STREET RATES As utlined, n-street hurly rates are currently lwer than garage and surface lt hurly rates. The majrity f n-street meters are priced at $1.00 per hur and lcated within 1 hur, 2 hur, r 4 hur maximum time znes. Walker ften recmmends that the n-street supply, fr high demand areas, be priced $.50 t $1.00 mre per hur than the cmparative ff-street per hur pricing. Currently, daytime n-street peak ccupancy was bserved t be 413 vehicles parked fr an effective ccupancy f 59%, much less than the 80-90% ptimizatin. Based n this data alne, increasing the n-street pricing t be higher than ff-street pricing is likely nt warranted in the near term. Hwever, cmparing n-street rates t bth the lcal market, reference market set, and the natinal average increases t n-street hurly price pints are warranted. Ging frward, Walker recmmends scheduling incremental increases at regular annual r bi-annual intervals, starting with a $.25-$.50 increase immediately. T help distribute n-street demand acrss the entire supply, an assciated decrease in, r simply nt increasing the price fr the lwest utilized areas shuld als be cnsidered. OFF-STREET TRANSIENT RATES Accrding t Clliers Internatinal s Nrth America Central Business District 2012 Parking Rate Survey the lw-end average fr hurly parking is $2.71, which is equal t the average structured parking rate fr the ten municipalities evaluated fr this study. By cmparisn, 52

57 LFCPA managed public garages currently charge $1.00 per half hur, r $2.00 per hur. Nn- LFCPA managed ff-street public parking ptins averaged $3.00 per hur. The LFCPA managed garages are ($.71) belw this study s cmparative reference set and the natinal average. They are als ($1.00) belw the privately managed lcal market. The Clliers study als prvides a lw-end average fr all day parking at $9.64. The LFCPA managed garage maximum per day rate is currently $8.00. This puts the current max daily rate ($1.64) belw the lw-end natinal average and ($1.33) belw lcal nn-lfcpa garages. Off-street parking rates range frm $2.00 t $5.00 fr the first hur, with LFCPA managed garages priced at $2.00 fr the first hur. It is recmmended that LFCPA garage rates by raised t at least $2.50 per hur, with an assciated increase t maximum daily cst between $9-10. Table 15: Lcal Market Rate Cmparisn Lcatin Type 1st HR All Day Evening Mnthly On-Street Avg $1.00 $0.00 Primary Surface Lt Av g $3.17 $6.11 $4.00 $82.33 Nn-LFCPA Garage Av g $3.00 $9.33 $3.33 $72.88 LFCPA Garage Av g $2.00 $8.00 $3.00 $63.75 Natinal Lw-end Av g $2.71 $9.64 $ Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants OFF-STREET PERMIT RATES Fr garage permit pricing, LFCPA managed garages are als belw the lcal private market, reference grup set, and natinal average. As illustrated in the table belw the nn-reserved rate fr LFCPA garages averaged $ The actual rates fr LFCPA garages ranged frm $55.00 t $75.00, while the lcal nn-lfcpa garage permits ranged frm $65.00 t $ It is recmmended that LFCPA managed lcatins implement a $10 increase t mnthly permits, starting with the Victrian Square garage immediately. Table 16: Permit Rate Cmparisn Lcatin Type LFCPA Nn-LFCPA Garages Lcal Surface Lts Reference Set Natinal Average Permits Avg $63.75 $72.88 $82.33 $ $ Difference ($9.13) ($18.58) ($55.96) ($44.85) Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants 53

58 T attract additinal mnthly parkers, it is recmmended that LFCPA intrduce new permit ptins fr LFCPA garages t increase ff-street parking supply utilizatin, and better manage demand by time f day: If a parking garage has lw evening demand, cnsider: Evening Only Permits Fr example these permits wuld be prgrammed fr use during 6:00 PM t 6:00 AM nly and price pints shuld be set very lw t capture a large audience. This permit is ideal fr evening emplyees and shuld be heavily marketed t lcal restaurants and bars. If a parking garage has lw daytime demand, cnsider: Parking Debit Cards this type f permit wuld ffer a parker a decrementing value card (by dllar r by use) that is cheaper than the full daily rate. This permit type is ideal fr regular dwntwn visitrs r daytime emplyees that nly drive dwntwn a few times each week. Less expensive, standard business hur nly permits, r Day Permits this type f permit wuld be ideal fr ffice emplyees wrking standard day shifts. These permits wuld be less expensive as cmpared t a 24/7 access permit, but culd be cnfigured t charge a fee t the permit hlder if they use the permit utside f standard business hurs, fr example 6:00 AM t 6:00 PM. A Frequent Parker Prgram : Similar t Parking Debit Cards, this permit ptin can track usage and prvide incentives fr LFCPA garage use. Fr example, every ten parking purchases the frequent parker receives 1 free. GARAGE OPERATING EXPENSES An Operating expense analysis, fr the current garages, was cmpleted cmparing the existing expense structure t the Walker database with ver 300 Prfit & Lss statements. This analysis cmpares expense categries, as a percent f ttal perating expenses, fr the LFCPA managed garages against natinal averages. Overall the garages are perating at $474 f perating expense per space. Including administrative verhead, the average ttal expense per space fr LFCPA garages is $546 which is slightly lwer than the Walker s Calculated Average (WCA) f $720 per space. Hwever, there are specific categries that have been fund t be utside f expected expense per space. The fllwing figures are expressed as a per space dllar amunt, by expense categry, befre any dllar amunts are mved t Capital Expenses. LFCPA expense per space dllar amunts are a cmbined averaged percentages frm 2013 and

59 Table 17: Expense per Space Matrix Expense Per Space Expense Categry WCA Abve Grade Midwest LFCPA Payrll & Benefits $ 352 $ 324 $ 352 $ 252 Security $ 120 $ 111 $ 141 $ 31 Management Fees $ 52 $ 45 $ 45 $ 30 Accunting/ Banking $ 6 $ 5 $ 6 $ 14 Supplies $ 23 $ 21 $ 36 $ 18 I nsurance $ 30 $ 28 $ 19 $ 22 Snw Remv al $ 3 $ 5 $ 2 $ 15 Utilities - All $ 72 $ 72 $ 95 $ 83 Maintenance $ 48 $ 51 $ 103 $ 75 Misc/ Other Exp $ 14 $ 15 $ 16 $ 6 Ttal Cst Per Space $ 720 $ 677 $ 816 $ 546 Surce: Walker Parking Cnsultants Payrll is currently at $252, 39% belw the WCA f 45%. This is due t a significant drp in 2014 (34%) ver 2013 (44%). Cmpensatin Insurance at 4.8% was at the lw-end f industry standards which range frm 4.75% t 11%. Payrll Taxes in 2014 were 11%, slightly higher than the industry standard f 10%. Security was significantly belw the WCA. LFCPA Security expense categry was at $31, nearly 25% f the WCA f $120. Management Fees f $30 were in line with the WCA f $52. Bth categries cme t an average f 6% f Operating Expenses. Banking averaged $14, slightly higher than the WCA f $6. This expense categry is ut f line due t an unidentified increase in 2014 ($23) ver 2013 ($5) which was mre inline with the WCA. The Supplies categry was at $18 slightly lwer than the WCA f $23. Liability insurance was at 4%, slightly higher than the WCA f 3%. Snw Remval averaged $15, which is higher than the WCA $3. The majrity f this verage is due t significant snw fall in 2014 ($25) ver 2013 ($4) which was mre inline with the WCA. Utilities expense was slightly higher than average cst per space, currently at $83 fr LFCPA, as cmpared t the WCA f $72. Hwever, this figure was much lwer than a reginal cmparisn, which has a WCA f $95. 55

60 Electricity csts accunted fr 98% f this expense categry. The kw / hr in LFCPA was determined t be $ , which is n the lw-end f the industry range f $ $ Maintenance was als higher than the average cst per space, currently at $75 fr LFCPA. Hwever, this figure is much lwer than the reginal cmparisn, which has a WCA f $103. Misc. / Other expenses were lwer LFCPA averaged $6, while the WCA was $14. ON-STREET HOURS OF OPERATION On-street spaces are usually the highest demand areas within a dwntwn municipal setting, regardless f the time f day. Cmbine this high demand with free evening n-street parking in a thriving and active cmmunity and the result is a stressed parking supply. A stressed n-street evening parking supply is a significant challenge facing the Lexingtn parking system. As discussed in the previus sectin, there is a direct relatinship between price and ccupancy, which is clearly evident in this situatin. This relatinship between price, demand, and ccupancy is very clear after 5:00 PM. The highest n-street ccupancies were bserved t be between 4:00 PM and 8:00 PM. As mentined, ne factr cntributing t this demand is due t a cncentratin f bars, restaurants, and entertainment activities. This cncentratin is generally bund by Bradway, W. 2 nd St., Limestne St., and Main St. A few areas further east n Main St. als experience sme increased demand. Anther driver is the disparity in pricing. On-street parking after 5:00 PM is currently free, while the vast majrity f all ther ff-street ptins still charge a reduced evening rate f $2 t $4. As the evening heat map and picture will attest, the ff-street ptins during this time experience very lw utilizatin, while n-street spaces are ften full. The added n-street hurs f peratin culd receive significant push back frm lcal business wners, especially frm restaurants, bars, and evening events. Evening free nstreet parking is als a marketing tl used by LFCPA t entice dwntwn visitrs t the cre f Lexingtn and experience the great evening attractins. As an example, the LFCPA Facebk page has evening free parking advertised n the hme page. Anther challenge with increasing the hurs f 56