Agendas and Minutes

Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Ad Hoc Advisory Committee (View All)

June 04, 2014 Meeting

Minutes
Wednesday, June 04, 2014

ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MINUTES

June 4, 2014

 

 

CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in Pioneer Hall, 73 Winburn Way

Regular members present: Lisa Beam, Michael Dawkins, Rich Kaplan, Dave Young, Craig Anderson, John Williams, Emile Amarotico, Joe Collonge, Liz Murphy and John Fields

Regular members absent: Marie Donovan, Pam Hammond and Cynthia Rider

Ex officio (non-voting) members present: Sandra Slattery, Katharine Flanagan, Mike Gardiner, Bill Molnar (left at 4:45), Mike Faught (left at 4:30), Rich Rosenthal (left at 4:45) and Lee Tuneberg

Ex officio (non-voting) members absent: Dennis Slattery

University of Oregon members present: Nicholas Meltzer and Robert Parker

City of Ashland Staff members present: Tami De Mille-Campos and Kristi Blackman

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of April 2, 2014 – Minutes were approved by unanimous consent.

 

PUBLIC FORUM

Colin Swales, 95 Coolidge Street

He stated that there has been discussion in previous years regarding the idea of removing the couplet. He stated Karl Johnson just did new traffic counts. Right up until Bush Street there is only 1 lane and he thinks that would be sufficient to carry the traffic downtown. He would like everyone to keep this in mind & allow more commercial friendly pedestrian traffic. 

 

DISCUSSION OF RECENT CPW WORK

April 9th parking monitoring (see attached).

They divided the downtown up into 3 zones and monitored parking every 2 hours between 8:00 am and 6:00 pm.

 

Parking generation research: CPW conducted research using the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Parking Generation Handbook

 

ITE CODE

Hotel, Urban

UNITS

Occupied Rooms

EXPECTED UNITS

180

PARKING STALLS (Weekday)

115

PARKING STALLS (Saturday)

162

*assumptions inherent

 *does not separate private versus public

 

Parking generation findings:

*Deficiency of parking spaces during the week

-Supported by perceptions survey

 

*Problem not as bad as ITE suggests

-alternative transportation and variability

 

*Data further supports project issues

 

Difference in ITE estimate versus Actual Parking Stalls

 

Weekday                                             

-950

Saturday

-850

Sunday

+2100

 

Key City Interviews:

City

Population (visitors per year)

Reason for Tourism

Bend, O

79,000 (2,000,000)

Outdoor recreational activities/ski resorts

Boone, NC

17,000

College town

Myrtle Beach, SC

27,000 (14,000,000)

Beaches

Park City, UT

8,000 (3,000,000)

Ski resorts

South Lake Tahoe, CA

21,000 (3,000,000)

Lake Tahoe/Ski resorts

Steamboat Springs, CO

12,000 (100,000)

Ski resorts

Ashland, OR

20,000 (410,000)

OSF/outdoor recreation

 

Key City Interview findings:

*Specific peak season policies

*Employee permit systems

*Voucher programs for patrons

*Varying degrees of parking information

*Convenience is emphasized for paid parking

 

Revisit problem definition: Issue review – Introduction:

*Extensive research and analysis conducted over the past 6 months

*Before moving forward with policy options, wanted to revisit original problems definition

*Validate existing issues and identify new ones

 

Issue review:

*Concern that the existing supply is “at capacity” during peak days and seasons

          -“At capacity” is defined as 85% or greater

          -Key findings:

          *At capacity beyond peak season

          *At capacity in certain areas of downtown

          -Research: Monitoring, Survey, Parking Generation Analysis

*A desire to balance short-term “retail” parking, theater patron and employee parking demand in a manner that continues to support downtown vitality.

         -Imbalance of short-term use

         -Research: Monitoring & OSF survey

         -Are time regulated parking spaces located in the right places?

*Suspicion that employees are using core area short-term parking, thereby reducing “capacity” for customers and visitors

         -Not as severe as previously thought

         -Research: Monitoring, parking perceptions survey

*Loading zones are not efficiently used to balance the needs of all downtown users

         -Loading zones underutilized throughout the day

         -Lowest use from 4-6pm

         -Deliveries made in undesignated areas

*A desire to make the best use of off-street facilities both in and outside of the core areas

         -Monitoring: Public parking lot occupancy rates are varied throughout the day

         -Private lots: Opportunities to develop partnerships to meet parking demand

*Residential/core downtown interface areas

         -Opportunity to distribute parking demand with careful consideration of residents’ needs

         -Parking perceptions survey

                   *64% would be willing to park farther away

                   *Half of employees already park in residential areas

         -Monitoring: Occupancy imbalance

*Potential to increase use of multi-modal transportation to access downtown

         -Parking perceptions survey

                   *76% say bicycle access within downtown could be improved

                   *56% say bicycle access to downtown could be improved

                   *Pedestrian facilities are adequate

         -Monitoring

                   *Only 36% of bicycle parking was used during peak hours

                   *Is bicycle parking in the right spots?

*The need for a better system/plan for communicating parking to users (e.g. signage, marketing)

         -Clearly identifiable

         -Research: Survey & monitoring   

*Concern that “pricing” parking will have a negative effect on customer traffic

         -Don’t know the answer at this point

         -Research: Key City interviews & policy options survey

         -Wait 3-5 years then revisit this idea

*Issues identified in the Scope of Work are valid

*New findings

         -Parking at capacity beyond just peak season

         -Occupancy issues specific to certain areas of downtown

         -Employees occupying time regulated spaces less problematic than originally thought

         -Loading zones don’t balance all user needs

         -Potential to increase multi-modal transportation use

 

STRAW POLL (see attached results)

CPW conducted a straw poll. The goal of the straw poll was to measure preliminary opinions of committee members (voting & non-voting) on future policy decisions. Each question was asked independently, and responses were collected anonymously. 

 

MOVING FORWARD/NEXT STEPS

 

July

Moving forward

High level programmatic decisions

Policy options survey results

Policy options survey analysis

OSF survey

 

Policy packages

 

Policy options matrix (see attached)

*Research & public engagement inform policy options

*Proven success elsewhere

*Matrix includes:

         -7 Management Elements

         -18 Policy options

         -64 Policy variations

         -Evaluation Criteria for each

*Management Element: Information Resources

*Policy Option: Develop navigation tools with a consistent branding strategy

*Policy variations:

         -Map

         -Website

         -Smartphone app.

         -Outreach/coordination with organizations

*Interim Project Report

         -Summary of research

         -CPW policy recommendations package

         -Suggested guidelines and timeline

 

The Committee agreed to change the date of the August meeting from August 6th to August 13th from 3:30-5:30.

 

ADJOURNMENT

Meeting adjourned at 5:23 pm

Respectfully submitted,

Tami De Mille-Campos, Administrative Assistant

Ashland 24/7

Pay Your
Utility Bill
Connect
to AFN
Request Conservation
Evaluation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Inspection
Apply for
Building Permits
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2017 City of Ashland, OR | Site by Project A

Quicklinks

Connect

Share

Email Share