GATRA/Plymouth Multimodal Transit Center Estimation of Downtown Parking Demand DRAFT August 18, 2011

Transcription

1 GATRA/Plymouth Multimodal Transit Center Estimation of Downtown Parking DRAFT August 18, 2011 As part of Task IIB, Determine Net Parking and Transit, Facility Needs, McMahon prepared estimates of current and long-term transit ridership and parking demand, through a review of existing source documents. The Downtown-Waterfront Area Parking Analysis: Public Parking Development, Management, and Operations, prepared by Fort Point Associates in February 2003, has served as the basis for determining parking demand in the downtown Plymouth area for the Plymouth Multimodal Transit Center Site Selection Study. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the methodology and assumptions of the 2003 Downtown Waterfront Area Parking Analysis and to update the analysis as required to support the current project. Overall Methodology Fort Point Study In February 2003, Fort Point Associates, Inc. prepared a parking study called Downtown-Waterfront Area Parking Analysis: Public Parking Development, Management, and Operations. (For brevity, we refer to this report at as the FPR in the rest of this memo.) The FPR stated: We arrived at an estimated parking demand for the Downtown Waterfront Area by deriving a demand ratio for non-residential land uses in the district, i.e., the number of spaces required per 1,000 ft of parking generators such as retail, offices, restaurants. According to data supplied by the Assessor's Office, the district includes 2,160,746 ft 2 of gross commercial floor area. We assumed an office vacancy rate of 6%. Using an average (and admittedly conservative) demand ratio of 1.15, the existing parking demand in the Downtown Waterfront District is approximately 2,583 parking spaces, or 126% of the total estimated parking inventory and 133% of the effective supply. When we collected parking utilization and turnover data in July-August 2001 and April 2002, overall occupancy ranged from 75-95%. Our estimate of the district's present parking shortage is 618 spaces. p.11 The Fort Point methodology can be summarized as follows: generated based on commercial land use (2,160,746 sf) ratio of 1.15 per 1000 sf Downtown parking demand of 2,583 parking spaces Downtown parking supply of 1,965 parking spaces (does not seem to include all off-street lots) Shortage of 618 spaces However, the observed utilization of 75%-95% presented in the report does not appear to have been considered in calculating the parking shortage. 1 P age

2 McMahon Methodology The McMahon methodology is similar to that used in the FPR, but is expanded to break the land uses into finer categories and apply parking generation rates specific to the individual categories, as recommended by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation manual. We then further refine the parking demand using the methodology outlined within the Urban Land Institute (ULI) s publication Shared Parking, which takes into account principles of shared parking, such as: Weighted hourly demand based on different land use types Interrelationships among the land uses that result in a person visiting multiple land uses on the same auto trip. Parking supply figures were refined with data provided by Park Plymouth. Land use data was obtained through the Town of Plymouth s GIS and Assessor information. Tourism parking demand is unique to a community so information provided by the Plymouth Convention and Visitors Bureau was used to develop parking demand ratios. 2 P age

3 Parking Supply Fort Point Study Fort Point report (FPR) numbers are broken down into off-street total (739), on-street total (933), and private off-street (293) for a total of 1965 spaces. However, the report indicates that not all off-street private parking was included in the analysis. The area studied in the FPR is represented by the dashed line in Figure 1. Figure 1: Fort Point Parking Study Area McMahon Methodology The area included in the McMahon analysis can be seen in Table 1 and is delineated by the dashed line in Figure 2. Estimated total supply is approximately 2,671 parking spaces. The differences in the lots included in the McMahon and FPR supply numbers are described below. 3 P age

4 4 P age Figure 2: McMahon Parking Study Area

5 Lot Name Spaces Waterfront Waterfront 2 72 Waterfront Pump House (Bus) 16 Middle St Lot 71 Main St Ext 55 Market St Ext 24 Russell St 1 62 Russell St 2 26 in front of DPW bldg 12 Brewster St Lot 23 North St Lot 33 Memorial Lot 116 N Plymouth Village Lot 64 Off-Street Total (public) 805 Lot Name Spaces Village Landing 101 South of Village Landing 69 McGrath's/East Bay Grill 81 Lobster Hut 24 Private (other) Off-Street 639 Off-Street Total (private) 914 Town Wharf 19 Other on-street 933 On-Street Total 952 Total 2671 Table 1: Total Parking Supply On-Street Parking On-street parking consists of parallel or perpendicular parking along a public right-of-way. This parking can be metered, free, or permit parking. We used the FPR on-street public parking space estimate of 933 spaces as a starting point. However, the 2011 Plymouth Growth and Development Corporation (PGDC) data included 19 spaces at the Fisherman s Wharf/Town Wharf which was added to the original 933 spaces for a total supply of onstreet parking of 952 spaces. It should be noted that in the approved Public Space Action Plan, much of what is currently waterfront parking is proposed to be converted into parkland and other water uses. This would eliminate approximately 80 head-in waterfront surface parking spaces, as can be seen in Figure 3. This change may be implemented prior to construction of the proposed Multimodal Transportation facility, but the reduction in parking spaces was not included in the estimate of the current total number of on-street parking spaces. 5 P age

6 Figure 3: Public Space Action Plan Proposed Water St Promenade Off-Street Parking Off-street parking consists of private and public lots which may or may not require a fee or permit for parking. McMahon estimated the total spaces in off-street lots based on three sources: the supply numbers in the June 2010 utilization tables provided by Park Plymouth, several additional lots from the FPR, and aerial images. Table 1 shows a breakdown of off-street public and private lots (Attachment 1 shows a comparison of which parking lots in the FPR correspond with the parking lots used in the McMahon analysis). The public lots total 805 parking spaces. The Jenny Pond lot (111 spaces) falls outside the Waterfront District study area in both the FPR and McMahon analyses. The Multimodal Site Selection Steering Committee group discussed the appropriateness of including this lot in the overall downtown parking supply figures during their May 31, 2011 meeting. It was decided that the Jenney Grist Mill lot not be included due to the distance to other parking locations in the downtown area, and the reluctance of downtown employees to use this lot. 6 P age

7 The Radisson Hotel lot was not included in the McMahon parking supply, because it was assumed that the only people who would be using this lot would be the hotel patrons and employees. Hotel parking demand was not included in the analysis, since we do not have the information on the number of rooms for the Radisson Hotel (which is how hotel demand is typically calculated). It is unclear whether this lot was included in the parking supply for the FPR. The Multimodal Site Selection Steering Committee group agreed with removing this lot from the inventory. During the May 31, 2011 meeting, the group discussed that, since the demand for Radisson parking is currently not included in the analysis, that the supply figures should not be added since the overall unmet demand will not be impacted if the Radisson supply and demand are factored into the analysis. It was also agreed that the Waterfront 3 lot should be included due to the proximity to other waterfront parking and potential to increase use of this lot as the waterfront area develops. The area between Russell Street and South Russell Street in the vicinity of the historic courthouse (known as the Courthouse Corridor) is currently being studied by CBT Architects and the Plymouth Redevelopment Authority in terms of adaptive re-use potential. The area consists of the historic courthouse building, the commissioners building, several residences, the former DPW building, and two off-street lots. It is possible that development along this corridor could eliminate some surface parking and generate additional parking demand. Due to the preliminary nature of plans for this area, no adjustments were made to parking supply and demand. McMahon estimates approximately 914 spaces in private lots. Private lots include parking associated with the Village Landing, McGrath's/East Bay Grill, and Lobster Hut as well as other private parking identified from the aerial imagery. Table 2 shows a summary of the parking supply numbers for onand off-street areas. The number of spaces in these lots was reviewed with Park Plymouth and the Multimodal Site Selection Steering Committee to improve accuracy. For a table delineating the breakdown of off-street parking supply for the two different studies, see Attachment 1. Table 2: Parking Supply Summary On-Street Off-Street Total Supply Fort Point McMahon P age

8 Parking Fort Point Study To calculate parking demand, an average demand ratio of 1.15 was used and applied to the gross commercial floor area (2,160,746 sf) to determine the existing parking demand in the Downtown Waterfront District. This approach accounted for an assumed office vacancy rate of 6% but did not document any breakdown of demand by various uses. McMahon Methodology Table 3 below is called Table 3 from the FPR, showing the breakdown by land use. Additional refinement was done by McMahon to account for ITE land use categories and parking projection units, (which are not always in square feet). Adjustments were also made based on information from the Town of Plymouth s planning, assessor, and GIS departments. These specific adjustments and refinements will be discussed in the following sections. Table 3: Land Use Breakdown (from p. 6 of the FPR) Land Area (acres) Floor Area (square ft) Retail ,194 Offices, Banks ,413 Other Commercial ,044 Industrial ,505 Mixed Use ,636 Single-Family ,066 Multi-Family ,344 Apartments ,352 Public ,352 Institutional ,755 Vacant Land Total ,864,661 The above floor areas from the FPRwere reallocated into the ITE Land Use Codes (methodology and assumptions to follow) delineated in Table 4 below. 8 P age

9 Table 4: Unadjusted Calculations by Land Use ITE Land Land Use Use Code Code Description Rate Quantity Units Residential 210 Single-Family* dwelling 221 Two-Family/Condos* units Unadjusted Parking 221 Three-/Multi-Family* Retail 850 Supermarket, Urban ft Convenience Market ft Liquor Store ft Sporting Goods ft Apparel ft 2 58 Banks 912 Drive-in Bank, Urban ft Offices 701 Office Building ft Restaurant 932 High-Turnover Sit-Down , ft Industrial 110 General Light Industrial ft 2 56 Parking demand figures were refined with data provided by Park Plymouth. Land use data was obtained through the FPR and through the Town of Plymouth s GIS and Assessor information. Tourism parking demand is unique to a community so information provided by the Plymouth Convention and Visitors Bureau was used to develop parking demand ratios. The Unadjusted Parking, shown in the last column of Table 4 does not take into account different land uses peaking at different times of day and year, or that visitors to downtown Plymouth may use several land uses within the same vehicle trip, rendering an artificially high projection. These factors will be addressed in the Shared Parking section of this memorandum. Residential Parking demands for residential areas are typically calculated with housing units rather than square feet. The Town of Plymouth provided a graphic of the study area with the number and type of residential units (e.g. single-, double-, three-, or multi-family structures). Table 5: Residential Calculations Average off-street spaces/bldg Average no of units/bldg ITE demand/ unit Unadjusted demand/ bldg Effective demand/ bldg Effective demand/ unit Single-family Two-family Three-/multi-family The residential parking demand, for the purposes of this study, represents the demand that is not satisfied by driveways or garages on the residential properties, as displayed in Table 5. For single- 9 P age

10 family and two-family houses, we have assumed each unit has 1.5 parking spaces per building. For single-family housing, the ITE average is 1.83 vehicles/dwelling unit. Subtracting the 1.5 parking spaces per building results in a demand rate 0.33 spaces/unit. For multi-family housing, the ITE average is 1.2 vehicles/dwelling unit; we have assumed 2 units per building and 1.5 parking spaces per building makes the demand rate 0.45 for multi-family residences. Retail As delineated in Table 5, retail (597,458 sf) was divided into five categories (Supermarket, Urban; Convenience Market; Liquor Store; Sporting Goods; and Apparel). A Google maps search of business resulted in 17 retail establishments falling into the above categories, though there are likely more businesses in the area. Therefore, the 597,458 sf was allocated to the different categories based on the typical square footage of each business type and the observed proportion of that type of establishment. Table 6: Retail Land Uses ITE Land Use Code Description Area (sf) Supermarket, Urban 124,950 Convenience Market 8,211 Liquor Store 28,560 Sporting Goods 28,560 Apparel 28,560 Offices, Banks There were six banks observed in the Waterfront District. According to ITE, the average bank size is 9,200 sf. The remaining square footage from this category was allocated to offices (437,477 sf). Other Commercial This category is assumed to be primarily restaurants and places of lodging. A business search reveals that there are approximately 24 dining establishments observed in the Waterfront District. Size for each was assumed to be 120 seats (average for high-turnover restaurant in ITE). Hotel parking demand was not included in the analysis, since we do not have the information on the number of rooms for the Radisson Hotel (which is how hotel demand is typically calculated). For consistency, the parking lot immediately adjacent to the Radisson Hotel wasn t included in the overall supply either. Industrial The ITE parking generation rate for General Light Industrial was applied for these land uses. Tourism Mayflower II and Plymouth Rock are both significant generators of tourism trips yet do not correspond with any of the ITE land use codes. Visitation to institutions such as the Pilgrim Hall Museum, Hedge House Museum, and other attractions influence parking demand as well. Tourist demand was calculated based on information and estimates provided by the Plymouth Convention Center and Visitor s Bureau. 10 P age

11 Assuming 1,000,000 1 visitors to downtown attractions per year and a tourist season of 5 months (150 days), it is estimated that an average of 6,667 people visit downtown Plymouth daily. We assumed each visitor stayed about 3 hours in the downtown area. According to the Plymouth Convention Center and Visitor s Bureau, the average visitor stays in Plymouth for 4 hrs 1, but not all of that time is spent in the downtown (i.e. some time is spent at Plimouth Plantation and other non-downtown attractions). As seen in Table 6, the 6,667 visitors were assigned proportionally to the various three-hour blocks based on an approximate midday peak between 10:30 AM and 3:00 PM 1, with visitor activity lower in the morning and afternoon/evening hours: Table 7: Tourist Arrivals by 3-hr Block 8am to 11am % 9am to 12pm % 10am to 1pm % 11am to 2pm % 12pm to 3pm % 1pm to 4pm % 2pm to 5pm % 3pm to 6pm % 4pm to 7pm 467 7% 6667 Since the three-hour blocks overlap, the hourly accumulation (visitor volumes by hour) was tallied, based on arrival and departures (Table 7). Table 8: Tourist Accumulation 8am 9am 10am 11am 12pm 1pm 2pm 3pm 4pm 5pm 6pm Arrivals Departures Accumulation ( Visitors) Many of the riders carpool or take a tour bus or charter bus to arrive in downtown Plymouth. The Plymouth Convention Center and Visitor s Bureau estimated that approximately 30% of visitors arrive by bus. This resulted in an estimated reduction of 30% 1 (second and third rows in Table 8 below) to the number of visitors who would require parking. The number of hourly vehicles was calculated using a factor of 3 visitors per vehicle on average 1 (fourth row in Table 8 below, which represents the hourly parking demand for tourism). 11 P age

12 Table 9: Tourist Bus and Carpool Adjustments Accumulation ( Visitors) Bus Reduction (30% visitors on buses) Adjusted Accumulation Vehicles (3 visitors /vehicle) 8am 9am 10am 11am 12pm 1pm 2pm 3pm 4pm 5pm 6pm The number of hourly vehicles corresponds to the hourly parking demand for the downtown tourism uses and was incorporated into the shared parking analysis, which is explained in the following section. Shared Parking A mixed-use district, such as Downtown Plymouth, encourages a park once and walk transportation option for employees and visitors of the area. Therefore, the methodology from Shared Parking Second Edition by the Urban Land Institute was followed, based upon the following factors: Variations in accumulation of vehicles by hour for the different land use types (for example, it is unlikely that anyone will be at a restaurant at 9:00 AM) so, for each land use, for each hour, the parking demand associated with that land use has an hourly factor applied and the demand from all the land uses is totaled by hour. This typically results in a reduction in parking demand. Interrelationships among the land uses that result in visiting multiple land uses on the same auto trip (i.e. going to Plymouth Rock and then out to eat) this is called the Shared Use Factor in the Shared Parking table Shared parking principles typically result in a reduction in the estimate for parking demand. See Table 10 for a breakdown of the hourly accumulation of parking demand by land use type. The maximum parking demand based upon these principles is 3,224 and occurs at 12:00PM. Occupancy Economic conditions in downtown Plymouth today are different than they were in 2003 when the FPR was published. There are several vacant storefronts which were likely occupied in However, we assumed full occupancy for commercial, retail, office, and residential uses in the area to estimate parking demand. While a lower occupancy would reduce the projected demand, we calculated demand based on full occupancy so as to account for a maximum-demand scenario. 12 P age

13 Unmet The potential unmet demand is a measure to determine if additional parking may be needed in downtown it does not represent an exact number of vehicles parking illegally or circling the downtown. The unmet demand represents a typical weekday in this case, the summer months in downtown Plymouth. It is estimated that peak hour (12:00 PM) demand for parking in downtown Plymouth is 3,224 spaces. With an approximate parking supply of 2,671 spaces, we estimate the unmet peak hour demand to be approximately 553 parking spaces. Parking demand is not likely to be significantly higher than this estimate for a typical day in downtown. will be much higher for certain special events (i.e., the July 4th celebration, etc.), but it is not expected that the Town of Plymouth would attempt to provide additional downtown parking as part of this project to accommodate these special events due to the very high cost that would be involved. Conclusion Based on the initial analysis, the current parking supply is estimated to be about 2,671 parking spaces (not including the Jenney lot or the Radisson parking, which did not appear to have been included in the 2003 analysis). The peak hour demand for parking during the prime tourism season during the summer months is noon with a demand for 3,224 parking spaces. The demand is fairly constant between 11 am to 1 pm. This indicates the potential unmet parking demand is about 553 spaces, which is consistent with the findings of prior studies. The analysis provided in this report indicates that there is an unmet parking demand in downtown Plymouth. For the purposes of the Site Selection Study, this means that 1) the multimodal center should not displace existing parking and 2) additional downtown parking should be considered as part of the multimodal center. 1 Information provided by Plymouth Convention and Visitors Bureau 13 P age

14 Table 10: Shared Parking LU Code Shared Use Factor Adjusted Parking Factor 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM Factor Factor Factor Single-Family* Two-Family/Condos* Three-/Multi-Family* Supermarket, Urban Convenience Market Liquor Store Sporting Goods Apparel Drive-in Bank, Urban Office Building High-Turnover Sit-Down General Light Industrial Tourist Total

15 Table 10: Shared Parking (cont.) 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM LU Code Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Single-Family* Two-Family/Condos* Three/Multi-Family* Supermarket, Urban Convenience Market Liquor Store Sporting Goods Apparel Drive-in Bank, Urban Office Building High-Turnover Sit-Down General Light Industrial Tourist Total

16 LOTHROP STREET MURRAY STREET SAWYER PLACE COURT STREET PHOENIX COURT CUSHMAN STREET COURT STREET MEMORIAL DRIVE PLYMOUTH HARBOR HIGHLAND PLACE SAMOSET STREET VERNON STREET DAVIS STREET BROOK STREET ALLERTON STREET CLYFTON STREET SEVER PLACE SEVER STREET THOMAS STREET STODDARD STREET RUSSELL STREET RUSSELL STREET BREWSTER STREET SCHOOL STRE ET CHURCH STREET GORDON PLACE WATER STREET WINSLOW STREET NORTH STREET MIDDLE STREET LEYDEN STREET UNION STREET OAK STREET MARGERIE STREET Parking SPRING STREET SPRING LANE BRADFORD STREET LOIS STREET AMOS HILL LANE SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE WOODWORTH STREET COLE STREET Severely Underutilized (under 40%) Underutilized (40-55%) Adequate Use (55-70%) Heavy Use (70-85%) Capacity (85% to 100%) EDES STR ET SUMMER STREET NEWFIELD STREET RUSSELL STREET WILLARD PLACE SUMMER STREET ROBINSON STREET SAGAMORE STREET MAYFLOWER STREET SANDWICH STREET PLEASANT STREET JEFFERSON STREET FRANKLIN STREET WASHINGTON STREET Town of Plymouth Data Source: Plymouth Growth and Development Corporation, Summer 2010 AM Parking Utilization

17 LOTHROP STREET MURRAY STREET SAWYER PLACE COURT STREET PHOENIX COURT CUSHMAN STREET COURT STREET MEMORIAL DRIVE PLYMOUTH HARBOR HIGHLAND PLACE SAMOSET STREET VERNON STREET DAVIS STREET BROOK STREET ALLERTON STREET CLYFTON STREET SEVER PLACE SEVER STREET THOMAS STREET STODDARD STREET RUSSELL STREET RUSSELL STREET BREWSTER STREET SCHOOL STRE ET CHURCH STREET GORDON PLACE WATER STREET WINSLOW STREET NORTH STREET MIDDLE STREET LEYDEN STREET UNION STREET OAK STREET MARGERIE STREET Parking SPRING STREET SPRING LANE BRADFORD STREET LOIS STREET AMOS HILL LANE SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE WOODWORTH STREET COLE STREET Severely Underutilized (under 40%) Underutilized (40-55%) Adequate Use (55-70%) Heavy Use (70-85%) Capacity (85% to 100%) EDES STR ET SUMMER STREET NEWFIELD STREET RUSSELL STREET WILLARD PLACE SUMMER STREET ROBINSON STREET SAGAMORE STREET MAYFLOWER STREET SANDWICH STREET PLEASANT STREET JEFFERSON STREET FRANKLIN STREET WASHINGTON STREET Town of Plymouth Data Source: Plymouth Growth and Development Corporation, Summer 2010 Noon Parking Utilization

18 LOTHROP STREET MURRAY STREET SAWYER PLACE COURT STREET PHOENIX COURT CUSHMAN STREET COURT STREET MEMORIAL DRIVE PLYMOUTH HARBOR HIGHLAND PLACE SAMOSET STREET VERNON STREET DAVIS STREET BROOK STREET ALLERTON STREET CLYFTON STREET SEVER PLACE SEVER STREET THOMAS STREET STODDARD STREET RUSSELL STREET RUSSELL STREET BREWSTER STREET SCHOOL STRE ET CHURCH STREET GORDON PLACE WATER STREET WINSLOW STREET NORTH STREET MIDDLE STREET LEYDEN STREET UNION STREET OAK STREET MARGERIE STREET Parking SPRING STREET SPRING LANE BRADFORD STREET LOIS STREET AMOS HILL LANE SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE WOODWORTH STREET COLE STREET Severely Underutilized (under 40%) Underutilized (40-55%) Adequate Use (55-70%) Heavy Use (70-85%) Capacity (85% to 100%) EDES STR ET SUMMER STREET NEWFIELD STREET RUSSELL STREET WILLARD PLACE SUMMER STREET ROBINSON STREET SAGAMORE STREET MAYFLOWER STREET SANDWICH STREET PLEASANT STREET JEFFERSON STREET FRANKLIN STREET WASHINGTON STREET Town of Plymouth Data Source: Plymouth Growth and Development Corporation, Summer 2010 PM Parking Utilization

19 Downtown Plymouth Monthly Shared Parking Analysis March 2012 Our earlier analysis, summarized in the August 2011 draft document titled GATRA/Plymouth Multimodal Transit Center Estimation of Downtown Parking, estimated a peak hour parking demand of 3,224 from 12:00 1:00 PM for a weekday during the tourist season. When looking at average annual utilization, it is necessary to take into account the monthly demand variation for land uses other than tourist within the study area. The various land uses do not peak at the same time of the year, with some slightly higher in the summer, others peaking during the December/holiday shopping season, and others remaining relatively even throughout the year. The August 2011analysis did not take the monthly variation into account and represents more of a maximum demand than a demand associated with any particular time of year. Because of the seasonal and monthly variations, our current calculations for each month result in lower parking demand than the previously calculated maximum rate (3,224), which assumed all of the land uses peak during the same time of the year. See the attached table Downtown Plymouth Study Area Shared Parking Summary by Month for a breakdown of the newer, month by month calculations. As can be seen in the month by month table, when taking the seasonal variations into account, the peak hour parking demand varies from 2,287 in the month of January to 3,018 in the month of May. The other months of the year would fall somewhere in between the lowest and highest demands estimated for January and May. Our August 2011 parking analysis estimated 2,671 existing parking spaces. Assuming 85% occupancy (2,270), the point at which drivers perceive parking to be at capacity, results in an unmet demand of 17 spaces for the month of January and 748 spaces for the month of May. A proposed 310 space garage would, therefore, operate at approximately 5% capacity in January and full capacity in May and other peak months, as summarized in the table below. January May Monthly Parking 2,287 3,018 Existing Parking Spaces 2,671 2,671 Existing Parking Capacity (assuming 85% occupied) 2,270 2,270 Unmet, Existing Parking Spaces Proposed Garage Spaces Hypothetical Garage Occupancy 5% 100% The parking demand for other months of the year would fall somewhere in between the January and May demand levels, resulting in an annual utilization of the garage of approximately 67%.

20 We note that the calculated hypothetical occupancy of the garage is only possible if the parking rates for the areas surrounding the garage are managed to a level that keeps the garage rates competitive with those for surrounding parking spaces and vice versa. This means that occupancy assumptions depend upon implementation of all of the management, enforcement, and fee collection recommendations included in PGDC s 2012 Final Report for the Plymouth Parking Management Plan. Measures identified in the PGDC report included the following: Implementation of competitively priced meters on Main/Court Street and side streets in the immediate vicinity of the Transportation Center; Requirements for employees of nearby businesses to utilize the Transportation Center garage; Expanding and enforcing resident permits in areas west of Main/Court Street; and Adjusting permit fees to competitive levels. It is essential that all of these measures be implemented. Parking at the Transportation Center must be seen as part of the overall program for providing appropriate capacity for downtown Plymouth. Revenue assumptions for the parking garage will not be applicable without effective implementation of all these supporting strategies.

21

22