HomeMy WebLinkAbout5031 RESOLUTION NO. 5031
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE
COMPREHENSIVE DOWNTOWN PARKING
MANAGEMENT PLAN (CDPMP) FOR PARKING
POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
IN DOWNTOWN AUBURN
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on May 21, 2001 adopted the Auburn Downtown
Plan as a subarea plan of the City of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Auburn Downtown Plan enumerates a vision of continuous
revitalization of downtown Auburn as the physical and cultural heart of the Auburn
community and development of a mixed-use district; and
WHEREAS, parking is an essential component in facilitating the Auburn
Downtown Plan's vision; and
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn identified an increasing need to balance
competing parking user demands, anticipated redevelopment of the Auburn Junction
blocks and other redevelopment activity in downtown Auburn, and anticipated
expansion of Sounder commuter train services; and
WHEREAS, the previous comprehensive parking plan entitled the Downtown
Parking Plan was adopted by the City of Auburn in 1996 by Resolution 2826, and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Community Development Committee of City
Council adopted the Draft Work Plan for the Comprehensive Downtown Parking
Management Plan ('CDPMP') on July 11, 2011 to develop and adopt a new
comprehensive parking plan to supersede the 1996 Downtown Parking Plan, and
----------------------------------
Resolution No. 5031
January 29, 2014
Page 1 of 4
WHEREAS, City of Auburn staff commenced work on the CDPMP in August
2011, and
WHEREAS, the draft Downtown Urban Center (DUC) On-Street and Off-Street
Parking Supply and Demand Analysis was presented to and discussed by the Planning
and Community Development Committee of City Council on October 24, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the draft Downtown Urban Center (DUC) On-Street and Off-Street
Parking Supply and Demand Analysis was revised in December 2011; and
WHEREAS, public participation in the development of the CDPMP was solicited
from Auburn citizens at-large, downtown Auburn business and property owners, and a
diverse cross-section of stakeholders through the Downtown Parking Survey conducted
in May 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Parking Survey Report was presented to and
discussed by the Planning and Community Development Committee of City Council on
July 9, 2012, and
WHEREAS, the scope of the CDPMP was presented to and discussed by the
Planning and Community Development Committee of City Council on October 8, 2012;
and
WHEREAS, the draft CDPMP was presented to and discussed by the Planning
and Community Development Committee of City Council on August 26, 2013 and
further discussed by Planning and Community Development Committee of City Council
on November 25, 2013; and
Resolution No 5031
January 29, 2014
Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, the Planning and Community Development Committee of City
Council recommended approval of the draft CDPMP to the full Auburn City Council on
January 13, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Committee of City Council concurred with the
recommendation of Planning and Community Development Committee on January 21,
2014; and
WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of staff, City Council determines that
adoption of the CDPMP will facilitate the Auburn Downtown Plan's vision and is
therefore in the best interest of the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS-
Section 1. Adoption. The Comprehensive Downtown Parking Management
Plan (`CDPMP'), comprised of the following documents: (1) "Comprehensive Downtown
Parking Management Plan (CDPMP)" dated January 29, 2014 and (2) "Comprehensive
Downtown Parking Management Plan (CDPMP) — Appendix A" dated January 29, 2014,
all of which are marked as "Exhibit A" with the original resolution and on file with the
Auburn City Clerk, is hereby adopted and approved by reference as if fully set forth
herein as a guidance document for parking policy development and implementation in
downtown Auburn. It is herewith directed that all of the documents listed which comprise
the CDPMP be available at the City Clerk's Office for public inspection.
Section 2. The Downtown Parking Plan, adopted by the City of Auburn by
Resolution 2826 is hereby supplanted by the CDPMP In the event of any conflict, the
CDPMP shall control.
----------------------------------
Resolution No. 5031
January 29, 2014
Page 3 of 4
Section 3. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement
such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this
legislation.
Section 4. Effective date. This resolution shall be in full force and
effect upon passage and signatures hereon.
DATED AND SIGNED this-3d-day of February, 2014.
CITY OF AUBURN
4NCY BACKUS
MAYOR
ATTEST
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED A TO FOR
I'/n D ie aid, ity Attorney
Resolution No. 5031
January 29, 2014
Page 4 of 4
Comprehensive Downtown Parking
Management
January
CITY
)WOO
i '
- - - - - - -
_� , � � � � � � � � � •• r_• � � �, � � � r_•^ins -I �, � - ,.tip -
III I
Mayor Nancy Backus
City Councilmembers
Rich Wagner, Deputy Mayor
Claude DaCorsi
John Holman
Wayne Osborne
Bill Peloza
Yolanda Trout
Largo Wales
Prepared by:
Planning and Community Development Department
Jeff Tate, Interim Planning Director
Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
Gary Yao, Planner
CITYOf_ �C�
Ally WASHINGTON
Executive Summary 1
1. Introduction 3
1.1 - Purpose and Approach 3
1.2 - Plan Components 4
1.3 - Plan Area and Applicability 5
1.4 - 7 Simple Rules of Planning for Parking 7
2. The Parking System 8
2.1 - Existing Parking Infrastructure, Resources, and Usage 8
2.2 - Future Parking Infrastructure, Resources, and Usage 14
2.3 - Parking Organization, Management, Planning, and Investment 32
2.4 - Parking Operations, Maintenance, and Marketing and Communications 35
3. Parking Case Studies 38
3.1 - Parking Organization, Management, Planning, and Investment 38
3.2 - Parking Operations, Maintenance, and Marketing and Communications 43
4. The Parking Best Practices Toolbox 51
4.1 - How to Use the Toolbox 51
Figure 4.1.1 -The Toolbox 52
5. The Parking Action Plan 54
5.1 - Near-Term Recommendations 54
5.2 - Short-Term Recommendations (1-5 Years) 56
5.3 - Long-Term Recommendations (6-10 Years) 61
Appendix A
Executive Summary
The Cotnprehensive Downtown Parking Managetnent Plan(CDPhIP), which primarilv addresses parking policy
within the Downtown Urban Center(DUC) zoning district, begins with an overview of the plan's purpose
and approach:
• To manage existing parking assets, assess current parking demand, forecast future parking needs, and
develop a first-rate downtown parking system as an additional amenity that keeps up with existing
businesses, projects underway, and future development; and
• To balance business, residential, visitor, and commuter parking needs in light of redevelopment and
increased transit service.
The CDPMP is also guided by the 7 Simple Rules of Planning for parking:
• Pinpoint the Parking
• Strike a Balance
• Crown the Customer King
• Provide `Free" Parking
• Reduce the "Last Mile"
• Clarify the Code
• Change It Up
The plan then moves into an overview of the Citv's parking system, including existing and future parking
infrastructure and resources available and existing and future usage:
• Of the approximately 4,879 parking spaces available inventoried as of December 2011, parking areas that
experience particularly vexing problems of high occupancy are limited to Wayland Arms (King County
Housing Authority) block and Multicare Auburn Medical Center blocks for on-street parking and (on
weekdays)the Auburn Transit Center garage and surface parking lot blocks for off-street parking.
• In the short term (5 years) there is an anticipated increase in parking demand of approximateiv 1,483
spaces and increase in parking supply of approximately 806 spaces. At peak hour, considering existing
public on- and off-street parking spaces available in the entire DUC, a 243-space deficit is anticipated.
• In the long term (10 years) there is an anticipated cumulative increase in parking demand of
approximately 1,873 spaces and cumulative increase in parking supply of approximately 80G spaces. At
peak hour, considering existing public on- and off-street parking spaces available in the entire DUC, a
633-space deficit is anticipated.
Other components of the City's parking system are the existing organizational and management structure,
planning efforts, investment strategies, operations, and maintenance. Opportunities for improvement
highlighted include:
• Increase in coordination between City departments and divisions with regards to the parking system's
various components (on-street, off-street, citations, marketing, etc.);
• Increase in regularity of planning for parking;
• Increase in planning for parking impacts on special event days;
• Continued coordination with police and potentially increase parking enforcement; and
• Refinement of marketing and communications for the parking system.
1
Case studies follow the review of these parking system components.
Parking best practices, including those from the aforementioned case studies, are then summarized and
collected into the Best Practices Toolbox (table), based on feedback from the parking surveys received
from Downtown businesses and citizens and staff's research and experience related to parking. Not all best
practices are applicable to Downtown Auburn at this time. As such, the recommended actions for each best
practice are identified as follows: continuation, modification, implementation, or no action. See Chapter 4 of
the CDPMP for the entirety of the best practices toolbox.
The CDPMP closes with a detailed action plan of existing best practices that the City can draw from for
modification or implementation.The action plan includes proposed near-term recommendations(up to 1
year), short-term recommendations (1-5 years), and long-term recommendations (6-10 years), as follows:
Near-Term (up to 1 year)
• Revise timed parking limits to 3 hours throughout the DUC
• Clarify existing code and implement a parking inventory database
• Update the City's website to make more useful for parking seekers
• Design and install updated signs for on-street parking identifying availability and rules
Short-Term (1-5 Years)
• Expand and modify the residential parking zone beyond D ST NW per demand
• Plan for spillover areas on the fringe of downtown
• Designate one department or division that is the single point of contact for all parking-related matters,
despite whatever organizational structure exists behind-the-scenes
• Regularly readjust current parking practices at least every 5th year
• Regularly reevaluate peak parking supply and demand every year
• Evaluate funding options and implement a multi-faceted plan to finance additional public parking for
anticipated parking deficits
• Establish a parking ambassador program
• Require organizers to better plan for special events
• Develop and implement a 3-strikes parking enforcement policy
• Design and install easy-to-read off-street parking signs
• Create alerts for parking availability-impacting maintenance and construction activity
• Design and install trailblazer signs to direct drivers to available off-street public parking
Long Term (6-10 Years)
• Increase transit access, citywide/regionally
• Revise timed parking limits, as needed
• Continue to plan for spillover areas on the fringe of downtown
Increase transit access, around downtown
2
1. Introduction
1.1 - Purpose and Approach
The Con preliensive Downtown Parking Management Plan(CDPMP)serves the same vision enumerated for
downtown in the City's Auburn Downtown Plan and Comprehensive Plan: to support the continuous revitalization
of downtown Auburn as the physical and cultural heart of the Auburn community and development of a
mixed-use district. To facilitate that vision, the CDPAfP is a concerted effort to manage existing parking
assets, assess current parking demand, forecast future parking needs, and develop a first-rate downtown
parking system as an additional amenity that keeps up with existing businesses, projects underway, and
future development.
initiative for developing the CDPMP emerged in a downtown Auburn at the crossroads of:
• Balancing business, residential, visitor, and commuter parking needs in downtown;
• Evolving parking demands in downtown, including a new sushi restaurant and gym on E Main ST
and additional anticipated redevelopment in the Auburn Junction blocks south of City Hall, the fruits
of various downtown public art programs and multi-million dollar investments in streetscape and
infrastructure improvements; and
• Expansion of Sounder commuter train services.
The first step towards the CDPMP were taken with the approval of the Draft Work Plan by the Planning
and Communitv Development Committee in July 2011. It has since progressed as follows:
• October 2011 - Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Detnand Analysis was completed.
The analysis inventoried all of the parking spaces available within downtown, whether public or
privately owned, and their occupancies throughout the day.
• December 2011 - Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis was revised to
reflect changes to the user-type for City-owned and/or -operated surface parking lots.
• July 2012 - Citizens Survey/Business and Property Owners Survey/Stakeholder Interviews gauged people's
perceptions of parking in downtown, the anecdotal statistics of the parking experience.
• August 2013 - Comprehensive Downtown Parking Management Plan(CDPMP)draft is completed. The CDPMP
combines the previously gathered numerical and anecdotal statistics of parking in downtown with
professional staff insight and experiences of other jurisdictions.
• January 2014 - CDPMP is presented to the Planning and Community Development Committee for
finalization and adoption of an administrative framework for staff to implement a first-rate parking
system in downtown.
• Future date - Public open houses will be conducted for further refinement of the CDPMP in future
iterations.
3
1.2- Plan Components
The CDPMP is organized into four components. the Parking System (Chapter 2), Parking Case Studies
(Chapter 3), Parking Best Practices Toolbox (Chapter 4), and Parking Action Plan (Chapter 4).
Chapter 2 examines the existing parking system, with a focus on City-owned and Citv-run parking in terms
of physical parking resources, administration and planning, operations, and marketing. The chapter is
divided into the following sections:
Existing and Future Infrastructure, Resources, and Usage
• How many and where are parking spaces located?
• Where are the most vexing parking issues?
• What are occupancy trends in downtown overall?
How will parking demand change over time?
• How many parking spaces are expected to be added?
Organization, Management, Planning, and investment
Who in the City is responsible for what?
• How has the City planned for parking in the past?
How does the City plan for parking in the future?
• How and when does the City invest in additional parking spaces?
Maintenance and Operations
• How does the City's parking operate on a daily basis?
• How are parking regulations enforced?
• How are permit fees and violation fines paid?
• How are the City's parking resources maintained?
Marketing and Communications
• How does the City get word out about parking options for businesses, residents, visitors, and commuters?
• How does the City show where parking is located?
Chapter 3 presents case studies of how the above-referenced parking system components are operated in
other jurisdictions and institutions. Some policies and practices presented are intended to be best practices
(whose applicability to the City is analyzed in Chapter 4) while others serve as cautions.
Chapter 4, following review of the City's existing parking system and case studies, presents the various best
practices employed in the provision of parking, parking demand management, and operations of a parking
system. Not all policies and practices listed in the toolbox are intended to be applicable for the City in this
iteration of the CDPMP; instead, it is a collection of tools that should be considered whenever the City is
looking to fine-tune its parking system.
Chapter 5, the final part of the CDPMP, assembles a recommended action plan of near-term (up to I year
implementation), short-term (1-5 year implementation), and long-term (6-10 year implementation) changes to
the City's parking system.
4
1.3 - Plan Area and Applicability
The CDPMP, in terms of geographic implementation, primarily addresses parking policy within the
Downtown Urban Center(DUC)zoning district, which includes the Auburn Junction blocks where
development activity of significant scale is expected (Figure 1.3.1).
■■M■ �®
PA ONE
Legend
■ r4taga
.n.11..g...u.y.�.n.....n.n y.nnn uv.nn.1"!!�1^.1'1::"..::::' "�W:"J:L•lll."!�Y_P....__i..
Figure 1.3.1- Map of Downtown Urban Center(DUC)and Auburn Junction
The physical effects of parking policies applicable to the DUC, however,may not be necessarily quarantined
within the politically defined boundaries of the DUC. In response to that potential, staff have identified
5
Potential Parking Spillover Areas(PPSAs) (Appendix A) where impacts of DUC parking policies may
warrant extension of DUC parking policies into those areas (or at the very least, consideration of toolbox
best practices in Chapter 4)to diffuse the impacts. PPSAs were identified based on the following criteria:
• Areas within '/4-mile from the DUC and Downtown Business Improvement Area (BIA), whose
boundaries include areas not otherwise included within the DUC; and
• Where availability of on-street public parking is potentially impacted by spillover parking demand
generated from the DUC and BIA and/or large businesses, institutions, public gathering places, and
other high parking demand uses within the PPSAs themselves.
Operationally speaking, the CDPAIFs recommended action plan in Chapter 5 primarily focuses on City-
owned and City-run parking resources. Many best practices identified in the toolbox in Chapter 4, especially
those applicable to parking in private development, have already been adopted as part of the development
regulations applicable to the DUC contained in Auburn City Code(ACC) Chapter 18.29 or in the Downtown
Urban Center Design Standards.
6
1.4- 7 Simple Rules of Planning for Parking
The 7 Simple Rules of Planning for Parking serve as guiding principles for development of Auburn-specific
parking policy in this iteration of the CDPAIP.They derive from the parking supply and demand realities
observed in downtown Auburn, the feedback about downtown parking received', and staff analysis of parking
approaches taken in other jurisdictions.
1. PINPOINT THE PARKING
Direct people effectively and efficiently to available parking. There is not a parking supply problem
everywhere, all the time.
2. STRIKE A BALANCE
Address the needs of overlapping and/or competing parking interests. In downtown Auburn, these needs are
broadly identified as those of residents, businesses, visitors, and commuters.
3. CROWN THE CUSTOMER KING
Prioritize visitor parking. Make visitor parking as easy as possible in prime locations.
4. PROVIDE "FREE" PARKING
Avoid paid parking, whenever possible. While parking is never truly without costs, visitors, residents,
businesses, and commuters should shoulder part of those costs only as a last resort.
5. REDUCE THE "LAST MILE"
Shorten the distance, perception-wise, between parking space and destination.The vibrantly urban, compact,
and walkable mixed-use character that downtown Auburn continues to grow into is inherently incompatible
with the provision of plentiful home-, office-, store-, and restaurant- front parking.
6. CLARIFY THE CODE
Write code that streamlines the process of parking system organization, management, planning,
maintenance, and operations.
7. CHANGE IT UP
Reassess each component of the CDPMP to meet current needs, as parking system conditions change and
new parking best practices emerge.The CDPMP is not intended to be static; it merely establishes the
framework for fine-tuning the parking system at any given time.
'Besides specific problematic parking areas, responses from the Do«ntown Parking Survey conducted to July 2012 also
identified the following parking concerns.the distance between parking space and destination,non-residents parking on
residential streets,confusing and/or lack of parking signage,and the poor design of parking spaces.
7
2. The Parking System
2.1 - Existing Parking Infrastructure, Resources, and Usage
EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCES
According to the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis, which cross-
referenced code-specified parking and available Public Works data with physical observations for on-
street parking and cross-referenced the City's and Google Maps' aerial imagery and previous studies and
reports with physical counts for off-street stalls, there were a total of 4,879' parking spaces in the DUC as
of December 2011. The different types of parking available, along with the general locations of each type
(Figures 2.1.1 and 2.1.2), are as follows:
• On-street public parking(unlimited time, time-limited, permit only, and loading zones)
Locations: almost all blocks in the DUC
• Off-street public parking(time-limited)
Locations: within one to two blocks from E/W Main ST,between the Auburn Justice Center and the
Burlington Northern-Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks
• Off-street permit parking' (unlimited time)
Locations: within one to two blocks from E/W Main ST,between the Auburn Justice Center and the
BNSF railroad tracks
• Off-street private parking
Locations: almost all blocks in the DUC
All on-street and off-street public and permit parking spaces in the DUC are located within an
approximately 1/4-mile walking distance' from Auburn Transit Center, Auburn Junction, and Multicare
Auburn Medical Center blocks, where demand is currently and anticipated to be the highest(see
'EXISTING USAGE' under Chapter 2.1 and'FUTURE USAGE' under Chapter 2.2). This includes parking
spaces located across C ST NW/SW and the BNSF railroad tracks to the west for Auburn Transit Center and
Auburn Junction blocks and parking spaces located across Auburn Ave N/A ST SE and Auburn Way N/S to
the east for Auburn Junction and Multicare Auburn Medical Center blocks(Figure 2.1.3). That being said,
there is opportunity for improvement in east-west connections to parking spaces.
' Excluding on-and off-street public and private parking spaces inaccessible due to S Division ST Promenade construction,
other off-street private parking spaces in lots inaccessible for data collection,and single-family off-street private garage and
driveway parking;this underestimates the number of parking spaces as of January 2014. See'Chapter 3-Methodology'in the
Doemtoum Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis for how parking supply in the DUC was specifically
measured.
' Including City employee and non-police fleet parking.
'The widely adopted walking distance that a transit user will tolerate betwven point of origin and transit station.
8
and
Figure�1.1 ' Location ofOu'Street Parking
Approximately 1/5 of parking spaces in the DUC are City-mvned and/or City-run; the remainder are
provided by tiie private sector. Neither the City nor the private sector currently provide hourly or daily paid
parking. Paid parking in the City is limited to monthly permit parking provided by the City and parking
provided as part of commercial and residential unit sales and leases in the private sector.
EXISTING USAGE
According to the occupancies observed in the Downlown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand
9
■EWAN MIN
NONE _ ■
iv . . . i
a qkl
Legend `
RrvAli=Off Sncwl
r.,-.
■
w.
r�
Figure 2.1.2 - Location of Off-Street Parking
Analysis, the DUC as a whole skews toward higher parking occupancy during the first half of the day and
specifically experiences peak parking occupancy during lunchtime (llam-2pm)s on weekdays.While not an
exact daily occupancy for all days in the DUC, it was observed for the Analysis that during this time 2,666
'Morning(9-11am),lunehame(llam-2pm),afternoon(2-5pm),and evening(5-7pm)time segments per the Downtown Urban'
Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis.
10
■■ ONE
Legend
C�lel IIXJG
■
25m1 Had us of
'MUlucam lwWrn
MShcralQ Blxks '..nonn.nnnnnw.... ...
25m Had uSa -
Au RIrCTm
2 dm RaclVls of
lwburn Juncluxl
Figure 2.1.3- Parking Within Walking Distance(1/4 Mile)
parking spaces are occupied (56%) and 2,213 parking spaces are available (44%). On the weekend, the DUC
experiences peak parking occupancy during daytime Saturday,with 1,721 (35`Yo)parking spaces occupied and
3,158 (65%) spaces available.
6 Due to limited resources,data collected on weekends for the Dountount Urban Center On-and Of/-Street Parking Supply and Demand
Analysts was limited to daytime and nighttime only, rather than speck time segments. For the same reason,off-street parking
occupancies are extrapolated,as off-street parking observed does not include all off-street parking spaces in the DUC.
11
Block-by-block, peak parking occupancy also occurs during lunchtime on weekdays,with the average block
431k occupied. Few blocks, even when considering on- and off-street parking separately, ever exceed 85%
occupied,the widely adopted threshold for optimal parking occupancy espoused by Donald Shoup, parking
professor, researcher, economist, and author of The High Cost of Free Parking. For those blocks that do, very few
exceed 85% occupancy for more than one time segment per day.
There are 2 types of blocks with on-or off-street parking that exceed 85% occupancy throughout the day
(Figure 2.1:4). The less problematic are blocks with available parking spaces nearby when exceeding 85%
occupancy(blocks of moderate concern). For example, >85% occupancy in on-street parking on one block is
potentially negated with <85% occupancy in off-street parking on the same block and/or <85`Yo occupancy
in on- or off-street parking within a 2-block radius. Blocks that fall into this category include the Auburn
Avenue Theater, Truitt Building, and Agrishop blocks for on-street parking and the Truitt Building and (on
the weekend) Multicare Auburn Medical Center blocks for off-street parking.The more vexing blocks are
those without available parking spaces nearby when exceeding 85`S, occupancy(blocks of heavy concern).
These include the Wayland Arms (King County Housing Authority) block and Multicare Auburn Medical
Center blocks for on-street parking and(on weekdays)the Auburn Transit Center garage and surface parking
lot blocks.
I
12
r
t
t
1
t
t
Post F
oNic,
s
a
H Municare
A West Aubum
AINUrn Moe mr
Sr NS Ciry Nat Au um
city Annex •Sr HIS
W He]]Main 51 EMain St A
Justice
Auh urn CI`
Junc tion
AAWm
Tmnsil
Ch
m
w
s
N Q
a
1 �
x
2.2 - Future Parking Infrastructure, Resources,
t
and Usage
FUTURE INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCES
Prior to the Comprehensive Downlown Parking Management Plan
(CDPMP), there has been no recent consideration by the City to
expand on- and off-street parking resources in the DUC.
Per the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, only one future roadway
capacity improvement project identified(F ST SE between 4th ST
SE and Auburn Way S) includes the addition of on-street parking
and is located outside of the DUC.
Additionally, neither land acquisitions for off-street parking nor
improvement of existing municipal properties for off-street parking
have been identified in the 2013-2018 Capital Facilities Plan.
Figure 2.2.1 -The Auburn The Auburn Transit Center garage and surface parking lots
Transit Center garage (above) (Figure 2.2.1), which are already at capacity, are not operated by
and surface parking lots (bottom) the City, but by Sound Transit. While Sound Transit committed
are already at capacity. to a second Auburn Transit Center parking garage as part of the
Sound Transit 2 package of improvements approved by voters
in 2008, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan recommends
that Sound Transit immediately work with the City to create the
additional parking,the facility has been put on hold as funding
has not been identified. Funding of$1.3 million to $1.5 million,
however, does exist from Metro for an Auburn Transit Center-
adjacent parking facility that serves commuters during weekdays
and other users at all other times, though no specific site has
been selected and acquired.The funding originates from the sale
agreement for the existing Metro park and ride near 15th ST
NE and A ST NE, but no construction date has been forecasted.
While the City is open to discussing interim Sound Transit and
Metro parking solutions, the planned permanent Sound Transit-
and Metro-funded parking spaces are therefore not included as
available future supply'.
Instead, any physical expansion of overall parking supply in the
foreseeable future is anticipated to be code-required off-street
parking constructed for private development in the DUC only. As
of the report's writing, only plans for one project has emerged that
will noticeably increase parking supply in the DUC.The project
occupies half of the northeastern block of Auburn Junction, where
Though not anticipated,Scenario lb in the`FUTURE USAGE'subsection includes as available future supply the number
of Sound Transit-and Metro-funded parking spaces matching the anticipated increase in transit demand,solely as basis for
analysis of existing public parking resources'ability to accommodate non-transit demand
14
development activity of significant scale is expected to occur' in
downtown Auburn. Per the plans received by the Planning and
Development Department, the project will be a 5-story, 126-
unit, commercial/residential mixed use building(Figure 2.2.2) `f P-
t!9i
providing a net increase of 1109 parking spaces to the parking ��d
supply identified in the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street
Parking Supply and Demand Analysis. Three (3) additional blocks ofu
mixed use buildings totaling about 693 units are expected to be
constructed in Auburn Junction10 and about 693 parking spaces Figure 2.2.2 - Rendering of
will be added to the DUC's parking supply". the proposed 5-story, 126-unit,
commercial/residential mixed
Other potential private development and redevelopment activity use building in the northeastern
in the DUC is unlikely to result in increases to the DUC's block of Auburn Junction.
overall parking supply.The Market Anahsis prepared for the
City by Gardner Economics in 2011 noted that structured and
underground parking is the biggest barrier to development in the
Auburn Junction blocks. In addition, the Auburn Junction Design
Guidelines allow for exemption from providing on-site parking for
non-residential uses if"adequate parking in public rights-of-way
and offske public facilities" can be demonstrated. For the rest of
the DUC, ACC Section 18.29.060(H) also specifies that changes
of use in existing buildings, expansions of not more than 25%
in floor area, and new retail and restaurant developments of less
than 3,000SF are exempt from providing any additional parking
spaces at all. While any development or redevelopment activity in
the DUC outside of those exemptions are required to contribute
to contribute a fee in lieu of providing required parking spaces,
the date of construction for a City parking structure, if any, is
indeterminate.
As such, about 803 parking spaces arc anticipated to be added to
the DUC overall in the foreseeable future.
FUTURE USAGE
Parking demand forecasting performed for the DUC derives from
known projects in the pipeline, the Market Analvsis, Sound Transit's
June 2013 CEO Report, and Sound Transit's 2012 Station Access
Analysis. The three (3) documents identify the primary demand-
impacting trends and activities, as follows:
s Plans have been received for the northeastern block.The mostly City-owned southeastern and southwestern blocks sold
October 2013. See'FUTURE USAGE'subsection for detailed demand modeling.
9 The project wilt provide 54 parking spaces and repurpose the existing Cavanaugh parking structure,whose 56-apace second
floor was not included in the parking supply in the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street parking Supplv and Demand Analvsis,to
provide the remainder of its code-required parking.
10 See`FUTURE USAGE'subsection for detailed demand modeling.
a Per the Aubum Junction Design Standards,all residential uses in Auburn Junction are required to provide parking spaces on-site
per the one(1)parking space per dwelling unit ratio specified in ACC Section 18.29.060(H).
15
Market Analysis(Gardner Economics)
• Demand for retail space in Auburn Junction will arrive after residential development has
commenced.
• Smaller scale apartment projects are viable with phased development of commercial space.
CEO Report(Sound Transit)
• Three (3) Seattle-bound and one (1)Tacoma/Lakewood-bound Sounder commuter rail roundtrips
will be added in the next 4 years (2013-2017), if plans do not otherwise change.
Station Access Analysis(Sound Transit)
• Auburn Transit Center arrivals by car(park and ride)will decrease over time with shift to arrivals
by public transportation, bicycling, and walking.
Since anticipated development and redevelopment for the DUC is unclear relative to anticipated
development in Auburn Junction and the Sound Transit's projections only extends to 2017, demand
forecasting in the current CDPMP will be limited in scope to the subsequent 10 years. Specifically, parking
demand in the DUC can be forecasted with reasonable accuracy in the short term (2014-2018, 1-5 years) and
vaguer accuracy in the long term (2019-2023, 6-10 years).
SHORT TERM (1-5 YEARS)
Residential Parking Demand:
The project at the northeastern Auburn Junction block will add 126 studio, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom
apartment units per application materials received by the Planning and Development Department.
As previously identified, the remaining Auburn Junction blocks are likely to collectively add 693
apartment units". Over the next 5 years, construction of 819 apartment units can be assumed with
reasonable confidence. Per the parking ratios specified in ACC Section 18.29.060(H), the total new
short-term residential parking demand is 819 spaces.
Commercial Parking Demand:
The project at the northeastern Auburn Junction block will add 5,195SP of commercial space per
application materials received by the Planning and Development Department.
While no project has come forward for the other blocks, ground floor spaces in Auburn Junction that
front E/W Main Street and S Division Street are required to he retail, restaurant, or personal service
12 The 126-unit building proposed in half of the northeastern Auburn Junction block is reasonably consistent with the Market
Analysis. It is consequently realistic to assume that the other Auburn Junction blocks will be developed with no more than 126
units each per half block. Excluding the parcels that contain the Sunbreak Cafe,a successful restaurant entity that is unlikely
to be developed,there are 2.75 blocks available for residential development.
16
uses per the Auburn Junction Design Guidelines. Given the ratio of commercial space to parcel size in the
proposed project in the northeastern block of Auburn Junction, it is assumed that the same ratio for
ground floors in the remaining blocks will be developed as commercial space.
Under that scenario, approximately 29,075SF of commercial space in total will become available as a
result of short-term development activity, of which 22,389SF will be occupied in the short-term. This
is based on the total SF of the remaining Auburn Junction parcels plus vacated alleyways, less the
following:
• The Plaza Park and Sunbreak Caf6 parcels at the northwest Auburn Junction block;the former, a
permanent public amenity and the latter, a successful restaurant entity; and
• 6,686SF in the northwest Auburn Junction block, whose commercial spaces will likely be occupied
in the long-term, assuming that this block will be the last to develop (since it has not sold and is
not owned by the City, unlike most of the properties in the southeast and southwest blocks)
The Market Analysis identified this commercial demand as retail or restaurant in nature. More specifically,
it predicted positive localized effects of a residential base at Auburn Junction on demand for food
(restaurants/groceries), apparel, healthcare, entertainment (public venues/retail), personal care (services/
retail), and books and magazines. As demand for groceries is already served by the existing Safeway just
east of Auburn Junction, across A ST SE, it is unlikely that an additional grocery store will locate in
Auburn Junction. Since groundfloor spaces in Auburn Junction are required to be retail, restaurant, or
personal service uses, it is also unlikely that medical offices will locate in Auburn Junction.
Should the occupancy of the commercial space at Auburn Junction be a scenario where it is divided
evenly between the localized short-term commercial demand generated by the projected residential
base, the following SF of occupancy and associated parking demand per ACC Section 18.29.060(H) is
expected:
• Food (restaurants) - 4,478SF at 0.5/4 seats" = 26 parking spaces
• Apparel - 4,478SF at 2/1,OOOSF = 9 parking spaces
• Entertainment(public venues) - 2,239SF at 5/1,000SF14 = 11 parking spaces
• Entertainment(retail) - 2,239SF at 2/1,000SF = 4parking spaces
• Personal care (services) - 2,239SF at 2/1,000SF''= 4 parking spaces
• Personal care (retail) - 2,239SF at 2/1,000SF = 4 parking spaces
• Books and magazines -4,478SF at 2/1,000SF= 9 parking spaces
There is also about 12,254SF of commercial vacancy in the DUC overall, of which 3,200SF is expected
to be occupied in the short-term by a business that provides spa-like services. Since personal care
(services) require 2/1,000SF, the parking demand for this business is 6 parking spaces.
The total new short-term commercial parking demand is therefore 73 spaces.
n Each seat is 15SF of floor area(excluding kitchens)on average per Design and Equipment far Restaurants and Food Service:A
Alanagernent View,"A Business Link"(Government of Alberta website),and Chuck Gohn Restaurant Associates IQV✓;30%of
Floor area is for kitchens per"The Average Cost of Opening a Restaurant-,based on an Ohio State University Survey.
"per ACC Section 18.29.060(H)footnote(1),a parking study may he required to parking demand for uses not listed; in lieu
of doing so for the CDPAfP,parking demand for entertainment venues in Auburn Junction were calculated at 5/1,000SF,the
ratio for commercial recreation(indoor)uses per ACC Section 18.52020.
17
Auburn Transit Center Demand
Per the June 2013 CEO Report, Sound Transit intends to add one (1) Seattle-bound Sounder commuter
rail roundtrip in 2013, 2016, and 2017, and one (1)Tacoma/Lakewood-bound roundtrip in 2016, for a
total of 3 additional morning trips to Seattle and 1 additional morning trip to Tacoma in the short-term
(thru 2018).
Per the 2013 Service Implementation Plan(SIP), there were 963 daily boardings across seven (7) Seattle-bound
trains and 21 daily boardings across two(2)Tacoma-bound trains at Auburn Transit Center.
Assuming proportional growth between service and ridership, Sounder commuter rail service expansion
in the short-term could potentially bring 425 new riders to Auburn Transit Center. Based on previous
and October 2013 Public Works staff observations, 80`Yo of arrivals at Auburn Transit Center are by
car (park and ride)16 No statistically significant decrease in percentage of car(park and ride)arrivals is
expected in the short term (that 2018)°.
Therefore, the new total short-term parking demand for 425 riders is 340 spaces.
Displaced Parking Demand
Existing off-street private, permit, and public parking lots in the Auburn Junction blocks will become
permanently displaced as part of development in the short term. During lunchtime on weekdays, when
the DUC experiences peak parking occupancy,the existing off-street parking lots in the Auburn
Junction parcels to be developed are occupied by 251 cars; during the day on Saturday, when the DUC
experiences peak parking occupancy on the weekend, the same are occupied by 39 cars18.
The displaced total short-term parking demand is 251 spaces on weekdays and 39 spaces on weekends.
is Per ACC Seaton 18.29.060(11)footnote(1),a parking study may be required to parking demand for uses not listed;in lieu
of doing so for the CDPJIP, parking demand for personal care services in Auburn Junction were calculated at 2/1,000SF,the
ratio for retail uses in the DUC per ACC Section 18.29.060(H);retail uses below 15,000SF generate the same parking demand
as personal service shops per ACC Section 18.52.020.
16 The 2012 Station Access Analysis noted 65%of arrivals by car(park and ride),and the 2011 State of the Stations noted 62%of
riders surveyed arrived by car(park and ride).This is contrary to multiple observations made by the Public Works Department
and therefore disregarded.
"While the 2012 Station Access Analysis projects that arrivals by car(park and ride)by 2030 will decrease to 47%with land use
projections or 33%with land use projections and Auburn Transit Center-adjacent improvement projects,this is not anticipated
to occur based on previous trends observed by Public Works Division staff,demographic information on Sounder commuter
rail riders,and anticipated decreases in existing transit services to and from Auburn Transit Center.
i6 Extrapolated from off-street parking observed for the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis,
which does not include data for all off-street parking spaces due to limited resources.
18
This page intentionally left blank.
19
Total New Short Term Parking Demand -At a Glance (Figure 2.2.3)
Demand Parking
Residential 819
Commercial 73
Residential + Commercial 892
Auburn Transit Center 340
Displaced Parking Demand (Weekday) 251
Displaced Parking Demand (Weekend) 39
20
1
1
1
1
1
1 z.
1 _
1 -
1
1 emt
■
d .
T
i G5 y 3
�
NIP t�MUltiNa, Nub► 1
F
Ctr tr
Aub urn
,HH Junc tion
ResdentJ bSRPONUburn ;i,2 a. lyj-�4
`�5R TfanSlt
1 Cb iSi of
Q r y
0
•-
•-
• • { r' gG r [ , n!nSl....- 11
S � j�Vl as
k
q
TTT=
•
Total New Short-term Parking Scenarios
Parking Scenario la:Weekday Peak(11am -2pm)
New Sound Transit-and Metro-Funded Parking Garages NOT Constructed
Supply Demand Result
803 new dedicated off- 1,483 parking spaces 680 deficit in dedicated off-
street parking spaces street parking spaces
2,125* existing unoccupied 680 parking spaces not provided by 1,445 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekday dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
437* existing public19 680 parking spaces not provided by 243 deficit in total available
parking spaces dedicated off-street parking spaces public parking spaces in the
DUC
If Sound Transit- and Metro-funded parking garages are not constructed, dedicated off-street
parking is not anticipated to be adequately supplied.Though the new parking demand can be absorbed
into the RUC's total existing parking resources, inclusive of permit-only and private off-street parking
spaces, it cannot be adequately absorbed by only the total available public parking resources, even when
considering commuters parking in on-and off-street public parking throughout the entire DUC.
Parking Scenario 1b:Weekday Peak(11am - 2pm)
New Sound Transit-and Metro-Funded Parking Garages ARE Constructed
Supply Demand Result
1,143 new dedicated off- 1,483 parking spaces 340 deficit in dedicated off-street
street parking spaces parking spaces
2,125* existing unoccupied 340 parking spaces not provided by 1,785 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekday dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
437* existing public 340 parking spaces not provided 93 surplus in total available
parking spaces by dedicated off-street parking public parking spaces in the
spaces DUC
If Sound Transit- and Metro-funded parking garages are constructed, dedicated off-street parking
is still not anticipated to be adequately supplied. Though not only can the new parking demand be
absorbed into the DUC's total existing parking resources, inclusive of permit-only and private off-street
parking spaces, it can also be adequately absorbed by only the total available public parking resources in
the entire DUC. Most of these available public parking resources are located within an approximately
1/4-mile walking distance of Auburn Junction, where the hulk of future non-transit demand is
anticipated.There is opportunity for improvement, however, in east-west connections to parking spaces
across C ST NW/SW and the BNSF railroad tracks to the west and across Auburn Ave N/A ST SE and
Auburn Way N/S to the cast.
19 City-owned and/or run unlimited time,time-limited,and loading zones on-street public parking and time-limited off-street
parking open to non-permit holders.
22
Parking Scenario 1c:Weekend Peak(Daytime Saturday)
New Sound Transit- and Metro-Funded Parking Garages NOT Constructed
Supply Demand Result
803 new dedicated off-street 921" parking spaces 128 deficit in dedicated off-
parking spaces street parking spaces
3,158*" existing unoccupied 128 parking spaces not provided by 3,130 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekend dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
429***existing on-street 128 parking spaces not provided by 301 surplus in total available
public parking spaces dedicated off-street parking spaces on-street public parking
spaces in the DUC
If Sound Transit- and Metro-funded parking garages are not constructed, dedicated off-street
parking is still not anticipated to be adequately supplied even with no Sounder commuter rail service on
weekends.That being said, the new parking demand can be adequately absorbed by the total available
public parking resources in the DUC, even without accounting for off-street public parking resources.
Most of these available public parking resources are located within an approximately 1/4-mile walking
distance of Auburn Junction, where the bulk of future non-transit demand is anticipated.There is
opportunity for improvement, however, in cast-west connections to parking spaces across C ST NW/SW
and the BNSF railroad tracks to the west and across Auburn Ave N/A ST SE and Auburn Way N/S to
the east.
*Adjusted for existing off-street private, permit, and public parking spaces in Auburn Junction blocks
that will become permanently displaced as part of development in the short term.
"* Extrapolated from off-street parking observed for the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking
Supply and Demand Analysis, which does not include data for all off-street parking spaces due to limited
resources.
*** Off-street public parking unable to be extrapolated from the off-street parking observed for the
Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supply and Demand Analysis.
20 Sounder commuter rail service does not currently run on weekends. Per the 2013 SIP,weekend Sounder commuter rail
service is not anticipated.
23
LONG TERM (6-10 YEARS)
Residential Parking Demand
Outside of the apartments developed in Auburn Junction over the short-term, the number of apartments
developed in the DUC overall over the long-term is unknown. No City document projects the expected
apartment units in the DUC overall over the next 10 years with reasonable confidence.
Assuming residential market saturation for the DUC and absent any anticipated new significant
residential development in the long-term, the total new long-term residential parking demand is hence
0 spaces.
Commercial Parking Demand
The final 6,686SF of commercial space developed in the Auburn Junction blocks will likely be occupied
in the long term, to account for the lag between development of residences and occupancy of associated
commercial space.
Should the occupancy of the commercial space at Auburn Junction be divided evenly between the
long-term localized commercial demand generated by the projected residential base, the following SF of
occupancy and associated parking demand per ACC Section 18.29.060(H) is expected":
• Food(restaurants)- 1,337SF at 0.5/4 seats = 8 parking spaces
• Apparel - 1,337SF at 2/1,000SF = 3 parking spaces
• Entertainment (public venues) - 669SF at 5/1,000SF - 3 parking spaces
• Entertainment (retail)- 669SF at 2/1,000SF = 1 parking spaces
Personal care (services) - 669SF at 2/1,000SF = I parking spaces
Personal care (retail) - 669SF at 2/1,000SF = 1 parking spaces
• Books and magazines - 1,337SF at 2/1,000SF = 3 parking spaces
In addition, assuming the remaining 9,054SFzezt of vacant commercial space in the DUC is occupied
in the long-term as a result of the anticipated demand generated by Auburn Junction, and occupancy
is divided evenly between the long-term localized commercial demand generated by the projected
residential base, the following SF of occupancy and associated parking demand per ACC Section
18.29.060(H) is expected:
• Food (restaurants)-1,811SF at 0.5/4 seats = 11 parking spaces
• Apparel - 1,811SF at 2/1,000SF = 4 parking spaces
• Entertainment (public venues) - 905SF at 5/I,000SF = 5 parking spaces
• Entertainment(retail)- 905SF at 2/1,000SF - 2 parking spaces
• Personal care (services)- 905SF at 2/1,000SF = 2 parking spaces
See'Commercial Parking Demand'under'FUTURE USAGE-SHORT-TERM(1-5 YEARSI'for detailed calculation
methodology.
2'Based on an October 2013 physical survey of vacant commercial spaces in the DUC,excluding vacancies with off-street
private parking.With 1,000+off-street private parking spaces available at the weekday peak of lunchtime(llam-2pm),it is
not anticipated that occupancy of vacant commercial spaces with off-street private parking will generate any on-street parking
impacts,nor is it anticipated that the same occupancy will be statistically significant regarding the overall reduction of parking
supply in the DUC.
v Excludes any potential vacancies in the long-term,in the DUC.
24
• Personal care (retail)- 905SF at 2/1,000SF = 2 parking spaces
• Books and magazines - 1,81ISF at 2/1,000SF = 4 parking spaces
The total new long-term commercial parking demand is therefore 50 spaces.
Auburn Transit Center Demand
While the June 2013 CEO Report and 2013 SIP identify Sounder commuter rail service expansion for the
short term, no document projects service levels beyond the short term (thru 2018). For the purposes of
estimating parking demand in the CDPAIP and absent any projection or promise by Sound Transit, it
is assumed that Sound Transit will mirror Sounder commuter rail service expansion in the short-term,
and thus parking demand for 3 additional Seattle-bound roundtrips and I additional Tacoma/Lakewood-
bound roundtrip in the long-term (then 2023) is anticipated.
Using the same assumption of proportional growth between service and ridership 24, Sounder commuter
rail service expansion in the long-term could potentially bring 425 new riders to Auburn Transit Center
Based on previous and October 2013 Public Works staff observations, 80`Y, of arrivals at Auburn Transit
Center are by car(park and ride)25. No statistically significant decrease in percentage of car(park and
ride) arrivals is expected in the long term (thru 2023)26.
Due to the anticipated mode shift in arrivals to Auburn Transit Center, the new total long-term parking
demand for 425 riders is 340 spaces.
Displaced Parking Demand
Existing off-street private, permit, and public parking lots in the Auburn Junction blocks will already
have become permanently displaced as part of development in the short term.
The displaced total long-term parking demand is therefore 0 spaces on weekdays and weekends.
24 See`Auburn Transit Center Deniand'under'FUTURE USAGE-SHORT-TERM(1-5 YEARS)'for detailed calculation
methodology.
25The 2012 Station Access Analysis noted 65`&of arrivals by car(park and ride),and the 2011 State of the Stations noted 62%of
riders surveyed arrived by car(park and ride).This is contrary to multiple observations made by the Public Works Division
and therefore disregarded.
26 While the 2012 Station Access Analysis projects that arrivals by car(park and ride)by 2030 will decrease to 476/o with land use
projections or 33%with land use projections and Auburn Transit Center-adjacent improvement projects,this is not anticipated
to occur based on previous trends observed by Public Works Department staff,demographic information on Sounder commuter
rail riders,and anticipated decreases in existing transit services to and from Auburn Transit Center.
25
Total New Long-Term Parking Demand -At a Glance(Figure 2.2.4)
Demand Parking
Residential 0
Commercial 50
Residential + Commercial 50
Auburn Transit Center 340
Displaced Parking Demand (Weekday) 0
Displaced Parking Demand (Weekend) 0
26
I
t
t
t
t
t
t
t _
t �>
t Q
t Paat
011la® �Fs
t � t r� • t< •:• r� x a
t +'
ze2 e)� t �. �MUIIiGfE .
i Futium'�
t q Aubum s 5d + 1 iSN {.y qlr Metl Clr
4'
15 1
GO t k•,r. x C ty ' i � S,XS
nm n
W Main st ;* TC r . d c3 .�` ,r..;TL�F L7 r _E Main St
'p Justice
,.
Aub urn io-
• of .}1pm Junc tion
Twsit
CU C
•t � r
N
•- • 3
� irl Ct�M
Z z t y
h �
< Z G
Tota • •
Tonsil
N
a SH
. P 4
�1
t� CTl
Total New Long- and Short Term Combined Parking Demand - At a Glance (Figure 2.2.5)
Parking Demand Generator No.of Parking Spaces
Residential 0
Commercial 50
Residential + Commercial 50
Auburn Transit Center 340
Displaced Parking Demand(Weekday) 0
Displaced Parking Demand (Weekend) 0
28
I
1
I
1
1
I J
I
t
I �
I
I Poll R ,
iOHia® 'aF
v I v z ' '`, ■
I ik tl N i Y 4
z
n �
1 a
y o
�I "' � �A7 Wesl /t �� c♦ Aubum r
♦ 11 Aua
Ci .Nil _
I:IIY ' fAnne� i I> •.. Mln SINS
}wry
(ail I �a�:i' ��t W Maln St .^a ., xmi� � , {. .✓.a„}I 6 S E Main 51 t` ~ rAR
..^ t,4 .dustice
Ctr
I w: Aub
Junc dulrnl.-.,,.,..
Tlansit 2 p
y M :••I S'�F
1
N
bS ti c
a
w
Total New Long- and Short Term Combined Parking Scenarios
Parking Scenario Is:Weekday Peak(Ilarn -2pm)
New Sound Transit- and Metro-Funded Parking Garages NOT Constructed
Supply Demand Result
803 new dedicated off- 1,873 parking spaces 1,070 deficit in dedicated off-
street parking spaces street parking spaces
2,125*existing unoccupied 1,070 parking spaces not provided by 1,055 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekday dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
437* existing publicz' 1,070 parking spaces not provided by 633 deficit in total available
parking spaces dedicated off-street parking spaces public parking spaces in the
DUC
If Sound Transit- and Metro-funded parking garages are not constructed, dedicated off-street
parking is not anticipated to be adequately supplied. Though the new parking demand can be absorbed
into the DUC's total existing parking resources, inclusive of permit-only and private off-street parking
spaces, it cannot be adequately absorbed by only the total available public parking resources in the DUC,
even when considering commuters parking in on- and off-street public parking throughout the entire
DUC.
Parking Scenario lb:Weekday Peak(Ilarn - 2pm)
New Sound Transit- and Metro-Funded Parking Garages ARE Constructed
Supply Demand Result
1,483 new dedicated off- 1,873 parking spaces 390 deficit in dedicated off-street
street parking spaces parking spaces
2,125*existing unoccupied 390 parking spaces not provided by 1,735 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekday dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
437* existing public 390 parking spaces not provided 47 surplus in total available
parking spaces by dedicated off-street parking public parking spaces in the
spaces DUC
If Sound Transit does construct a second Auburn Transit Center garage, dedicated off-street
parking is still not anticipated to be adequately supplied.Though not only can the new parking
demand be absorbed into the DUC's total existing parking resources, inclusive of permit-onlv and
private off-street parking spaces, it can also be adequately absorbed by only the total available public
parking resources in the DUC. Most of these available public parking resources are located within
an approximately t/4-mile walking distance of Auburn Junction, where the bulk of future non-transit
demand is anticipated. There is opportunity for improvement, however, in east-west connections to
parking spaces across C ST NW/SW and the BNSF railroad tracks to the west and across Auburn Ave
N/A ST SE and Auburn Way N/S to the cast.
City-owned and/or run unlimited time,time-limited,and loading zones on-street public parking and time-limited off-street
parking open to non-permit holders.
30
j
Parking (Daytime
New Sound Transit- and Metro-Funded Parking Garages NOT
Supply Demand Result
803 new dedicated off-street 981'' parking spaces 178 deficit in dedicated off-
parking spaces street parking spaces
3,158**existing unoccupied 178 parking spaces not provided by 2,980 surplus in total available
parking spaces at weekend dedicated off-street parking spaces parking spaces in the DUC
peak in the DUC
429*** existing on-street 178 parking spaces not provided by 251 surplus in total available
public parking spaces dedicated off-street parking spaces on-street public parking
spaces in the DUC
If Sound Transit- and Metro-funded parking garages are not constructed, dedicated off-street
parking is still not anticipated to be adequately supplied even with no Sounder commuter rail service on
weekends.That being said, the new parking demand can be adequately absorbed by the total available
public parking resources in the DUC, even without accounting for off-street public parking resources.
Most of these available public parking resources are located within an approximately t/4-mile walking
distance of Auburn Junction, where the bulk of future non-transit demand is anticipated.There is
opportunity for improvement, however, in east-west connections to parking spaces across C ST NW/SW
and the BNSF railroad tracks to the west and across Auburn Ave N/A ST SE and Auburn Way N/S to
the east.
* Adjusted for existing off-street private, permit, and public parking spaces in Auburn Junction blocks
that will become permanently displaced as part of development in the short term.
** Extrapolated from off-street parking observed for the Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking
Supply and Demand Analysis, which does not include data for all off-street parking spaces due to limited
resources.
*** Off-street public parking unable to be extrapolated from the off-street parking observed for the
Downtown Urban Center On-and Off-Street Parking Supplv and Demand Analysis.
ss Sounder commuter rail service does not currently run on weekends. Per the 2013 SIP,weekend Sounder commuter rail
service is not anticipated.
31
� 1 '3ZA 74 2.3- Parking Organization, Management,
Planning, and Investment
o
r
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
The DUC parking system, which includes privately and
F
municipally owned and/or operated parking spaces, falls
� under the authority of various private property owners and at
• least 6 departments and divisions within the City.These City
Figure 2.3.1 -Typical departments and divisions include Planning, Public Works,
wayfmc ing sign, which does not Maintenance and Operations, Facilities, Police, and the Court
currently direct drivers to off- Clerk.
street parking
Some components of the parking system are mainly managed by
one department or division while responsibility for others are
shared by multiple departments and divisions. Responsibilities are
not clearly identified in the ACC. For instance, while signage in
the City's off-street parking lots is collaboratively executed between
the Facilities Department and Planning Division, the Public
Works Division is identified as the responsible entity for "marking"
off-street permit parking spaces for the City's vehicles per the ACC.
As such, there is opportunity for both increased coordination
and clarity of roles. Examples of these opportunities include
wayfinding signs(Figure 2.3.1) interspersed throughout the Citv
(managed by the Public Works Division)that currently directs
drivers towards landmarks only, but not to off-street no-permit
parking in the DUC (managed by the Planning Division) and
clarity of roles so that Planning and Public Works staff at the
Permit Center can either directly provide information on how to
pay or contest a parking citation (processed by the Court Clerk)
or direct customers to the appropriate City contact with the
information.
PLANNING
The Citv has not undertaken comprehensive planning for parking
in the DUC with regularity, nor has it adopted any framework for
future parking planning efforts.
Downtown Parking Plan (1996)
In fact, the last comprehensive parking plan (the Downtown
Parking Plan) adopted for the DUC dates from 1996.The
impetus for developing the Downtown Parking Plan was threefold:
• Passage of the Commute Trip Reduction law in
Washington State, which mandated employers of a certain
size to undertake measures to reduce single-occupancy
vehicle commutes; the Downtown Parking Plan examined
32
parking supply and demand management strategies as `, 4
part of that mandate;
• Recurring parking concerns expressed by the downtown _ 7`
business community: and l
• Anticipation of parking demand generated by a future
transit hub (Auburn Transit Center).
The scope of the Downtown Parking Plan included the following:
Figure 2.3.2 - Looking south
• Extensive parking supply and demand analysis, including from E Main ST at on-street
turnover rates, between the hours of 7am and 6pm for all parking on the west side of
areas of downtown Auburn 29 Auburn Way S, implemented as
a result of the 1996 Downtown
• Future demand forecasting, incorporating projections from Parking Plan.
the City's Comprehensive Plan tempered with observations of
development trends in downtown Auburn;
• Identification of significant downtown Auburn parking
issues ; and
• Parking policies to address idegtified parking issues.
The parking policies fell under the umbrella strategy of
reducing demand for parking, utilizing existing public parking
resources more efficiently, increasing usage of underutilized
private parking through lease and shared parking
arrangements, and providing guidance for future purchase and
establishment of public off-street parking lots in a manner
that is phased, cost effective, and affordable for the City and
downtown business and property owners.
Some specific parking policies directly affecting the City's
physical parking resources have been adopted, such as the
conversion of on-street parking spaces along the west side
of Auburn Way S, between E Main ST and 2nd ST SE, to
unlimited time, no-permit on-street parking, as it exists today
(Figure 2.3.2).
Most specific parking policies that more indirectly affect
the City's parking system have been adopted in the ACC.
Policies such as maximum off-street parking requirements
for development, shared parking and other required off-street
parking reduction incentives, and employer incentives for non-
single occupancy vehicle commutes have been adopted in ACC
Chapter 18.52 - Off-Street Parking and Loading, ACC Chapter
29"Downtown"did not include all blocks of DUC and was generally smaller in geographic area.
33
18.29 - DUC Downtown Urban Center District, and ACC Chapter 10.02 - Commute Trip Reduction.
Other parking policies have not been adopted and are no longer applicable currently. For example, the
proposed policy of encouraging employees to park in the residential neighborhoods east of Auburn Wav
N/S conflicts with concerns raised about non-residents parking on residential streets in the Downtown
Parking Survey. On the other hand, some parking policies were not adopted, but are still applicable, such
as better use of signage to direct drivers to available City off-street parking.
Comprehensive Downtown Parking Management Plan(CDPMP)(2013)
The current CDPMP comes seventeen (17)years subsequent the last concerted comprehensive planning
effort. It contains much of the same elements as the Downtown Parking Plan as the level of assessment
performed is either equivalent or in excess of that in other cities' plans.
Unlike the previous parking plan however, which was prepared by consultants, the current CDPMP
is a product of City staff.The CDPMP also adds the toolbox, which presents the various best practices
employed in the provision of parking, parking demand management, and operations of a parking system.
It is a collection of tools intended to be updated periodically and should be considered at a glance
whenever the City is looking to fine-tune its parking system. In its current iteration it includes best
practices for provision of special event parking and real-time parking information, parking topics not
addressed by the previous plan.
With the toolbox and as a whole, the CDPMP sets the framework for parking planning at a specific
point in time and allows for flexibility to update its contents to suit future parking needs.
INVESTMENT
The City's current investment in the provision of off-street parking in the future is based on a two-pronged
fee-in-lieu-of strategy.
All Auburn Junction development, per the Auburn Junction Design Guidelines, must provide required residential
parking spaces on-site, though the same does not apply to non-residential uses. Although required non-
residential parking spaces do not need to be provided on-site, a fee-in-lieu-of payment"is required to be
made towards a fund for a future parking structure in the DUC if the non-residential demand cannot be
adequately fulfilled by existing on- and off-street public parking resources 31.
DUC development at large also have the option for fee-in-lieu-of payments per ACC Section 18.29.060(H)
as an alternative to provision of required spaces on-site 12. Unlike the fee-in-lieu-of payments for Auburn
Junction development, however, neither the Downtown Urban Center Design Standards nor the ACC direct these
payments toward funding a future parking structure in the DUC.
30 No per space fee-in-lieu-of payment is defined.Assessed on a case-by-crose basis.
31 The radius from an Auburn Junction development within which existing on-and off-street public parking resources may be
considered"supply"is not defined.
33The maximum number of required on-site parking spaces allowed via fee-in-lieu-of payments is not defined.
34
2.4- Parking Operations, Maintenance, and
Marketing and Communications ;
OPERATIONS
Operation of the DUC parking system falls to the City for on-
street parking spaces and off-street public and permit parking lots - _
and private property owners for off-street parking lots located on
their own property
Figure 2.4.1 - Complimentary
Activities associated with parking operations are minimal. None of valet parking is advertised at the
the City's on-street parking spaces are metered, so operation is no entrance to Multicare Auburn
more than ingress and egress from these spaces. Additionally, no Medical Center on N Division
off-street parking lot operated by the City or privately owned ever ST.
"opens"or "closes" in the DUC by way of gates or personnel.The
only operational activity for parking is undertaken by Multicare
Auburn Medical Center, which contracts out to a private company t•. _
for operation of its complimentary valet service (Figure 2.4.1). _
E „fin Q
OPERATIONS — SPECIAL EVENTS y
Several seasonal events (Figure 2.4.2) currently draw big crowds
to downtown Auburn and introduce additional demand into the e t }
existing parking system, while sometimes simultaneously reducing fi 5
available parking supply. , p
Activities associated with the operation of the parking system _ Fcrsaabc : �i
on event days, like non-event days, is similarly minimal. No
personnel direct drivers to parking for the Auburn International
Farmers Market, which takes place weekly in the Auburn Transit
Center plaza during summer months. Nor do any personnel direct
drivers to parking for the Auburn Good OI' Days festival, which
takes place annually in the vicinity of E/W Main Street and closes
several streets. Maps of parking locations on event days are not
available online for either event and are generally not required for
permit approval of special events. Figure 2.4.2 - Dancers at the
Auburn International Festival
OPERATIONS — RATES, FEES, ENFORCEMENT, (above) and cars along E Main
AND FINES ST for the Auburn Good OI'
Days festival (below), both
RATES events that draw big crowds to
downtown Auburn.
No rates for hourly or daily parking have been established
for the City.The City's on- and off-street parking spaces are
available to drivers who park for the short-term or for the
evening at no cost. Likewise, privately owned and operated
off-street parking lots in the City do not charge for customer
and visitor parking.
35
FEES
The City charges a $10 per month permit parking fee for parking in its off-street permit parking lots.
Permit parking is available for business owners, employees, downtown residents, commuters who are
residents of Auburn (until 2014), and Green River Community College students. Parking permits are
acquired at the City's Permit Center. Fees for permit parking are established administratively by the
Planning Division.
Privately owned and operated off-street parking lots may assess monthly parking fees for its tenants
as well. Data for how many private property owners assess such a fee and how much they charge is
unavailable.
ENFORCEMENT
For City owned and/or operated on- and off-street parking spaces, 2 parking enforcement officers in the
Police Department enforce maximum time limits, amongst other parking regulations, and impound
abandoned vehicles.
Enforcement in off-street parking lots owned and operated by private parties varies; typically, private
property owners contract out for towing services on larger off-street parking lots.
FINES
The City issued 3,383 parking citations in 2011 and levies a variety of fines for parking violations cited.
These fines include $25 for parking in excess of the maximum allowed time for on-or off-street parking
($35 if not paid within 15 days of the parking citation's issuance) and $30 for violations of loading zone
restrictions. Other parking violations with no fines defined include parking in a no-parking zone and
parking too far away from the curb.
Fines for parking citations are paid and processed at the Court Clerk. Many parking citations can
be waived by participation in community service for non-profits at a rate of$10 waived per hour
volunteered.
Fines for improper parking in privately owned and operated off-street parking lots are established by
private property owners.Towing fees are set by the companies that private property owners contract
towing services to.
MAINTENANCE
Maintenance of the City's on-street parking, such as striping of spaces and signage, clearly falls to the
Maintenance and Operations Division. Maintenance of the City's off-street parking lots, on the other hand,
is not as clearly designated in code or in practice.
While the Facilities Department currently maintains off-street parking lot signs, the Planning Division
designates off-street public and permit parking spaces, processes parking permit fees, and otherwise manages
the City's off-street parking resources.
Both on- or off-street parking oamed and/or operated by the City is swept and restriped on a more or less
regular basis, but no formal maintenance schedule or plan exists. Likewise, private off-street parking is
required to be consistent with the applicable parking code at construction, but is not explicitly mandated by
36
any City code section to perform specific maintenance per a formal r „'k
schedule.
MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS .x.
The City's parking philosophy and parking policies require further n, - '�RE
1 �' PARKI G �
refinement through the CDPMP as neither are currently clearly _
defined. Regarding the former, the existing Downtown Parking
Plan does offer overall direction for the downtown parking.The
Downtown Parking Plan, however, dates from 1996 and is not an Figure 2.4.3 -'FREE PARKING'
actively referenced document for downtown parking policymaking. sign in large font at the entrance
The City's parking policies and fines themselves are contained in to the off-stree public and permit
Auburn City Code, rather than at a centralized location on the parking lots between E Main ST
City's website, and occasionally contradict with what is signed. and 1st ST NE at B ST NE.
There are also opportunities for improvement in promoting City's
off-street permit parking program, administered by the Planning
Division at the Permit Center, on the City's website and on off-
street permit parking lot signage. Avenues of promotion beyond ® � -
the City are currently limited to the passing of information from
the Auburn Downtown Association (ADA) and Auburn Area -
Chamber of Commerce to its members. —
The question of how to obtain a parking permit and where off-
street permit parking exists for the general public is typically
answered at the Permit Center, where a map of off-street parking
available in the City is available.There is no map, however, that
identifies the on--street parking spaces available to the general Figure 2.4.4 - Off-street permit
public. parking space (foreground)
located adjacent to off-street
At on-street parking spaces , the City has installed signs that parking spaces (background), in
identify time limits, although these signs' designs are not uniform an area also connected to the
On the other hand, signs with 'FREE PARKING' (Figure Safeway parking lot.
2.4.3) in a large-sized font proclaim available public parking at
each City owned and/or operated off-street parking lot. Due to
permit parking spaces interspersed amongst public parking spaces
(Figure 2.4.4), while signed and marked appropriately, drivers
have expressed confusion deciphering whether a parking space was
designated for public or permit parking.
37
� -fe=yp;A - o " 3. Parking Case Studies
3.1 - Parking Organization, Management,
Planning, and Investment
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Location(s): City of San Diego
Figure 3.1.1 -The City of
Vancouver's EasyPark website Approach: One point of contact for all parking, multiple
features parking lot finder, departments with collaborative authority over the
citation payment system, and parking system.
citation appeal system for off-
street parking- all located front Key Points: •The primary point of contact for the public is
and center on its homepage. the `Parking Administration', which processes
residential parking permits, payment of
parking citations, and provides general parking
information from the City.
• Behind the scenes, however, one department
or division is clearly defined as the ultimate
authority for a certain component of the parking
system
Location(s): City of Vancouver, B.C.
Approach: One point of contact for on-street parking, one
point of contact for off-street parking, authority
over the parking system split along the same lines.
Key Points: •The primary on-street parking point of contact
for the public is Engineering Services, which
processes residential and commercial on-street
parking permits, payment of on-street parking
citations, requests for on-street parking meters,
and all other on-street parking related matters.
•The primary off-street parking point of contact
for the public is Easypark (Figure 3.1.1), a
non-profit corporation owned by the City, which
processes off-street parking permits, payment of
off-street parking citations, and all other matters
related to off-street parking.
Location(s): City of Champaign, IL, City of Lynchburg, VA,
City of Monterey, CA
Approach: One point of contact for all parking, one
department or parking authority with control over
38
the parking system.
Key Points: •The one department or parking authority ,
usually does not have control over parking
i 7
standards for private development and �
enforcement of parking regulations. A ,f WA
PLANNING
As mentioned previously, the CDPMP matches or exceeds the
level of assessment performed in other cities'parking plans.
Where thev differ is when cities choose to undertake an effort toi
produce or procure a parking plan.
Location(s): City of Bellingham ---) MEMO
Approach: Financial shortfalls in the budget. _
Location(s): City of Pasadena, CA Figure 3.1.2 - A dilapidated
Approach: Struggling downtown and the desire to spur new building in Old Pasadena in
development(Figure 3.1.2), the 1980s (above) and the same
building now (below).
Location(s): City of Redwood City, CA
Approach: Anticipation of new development and visitors who
will mostly arrive by car.
Location(s): City of Ventura, CA
Approach: Simultaneous with update of Downtown Specific
Plan.
INVESTMENT
Of the other cities' parking plans surveyed, the Downtown
Redmond Parking Study from 2008 examines the various options
available for financing downtown parking infrastructure most
comprehensively The options below", however, are not exhaustive
nor meant to be mutually exclusive (use of multiple funding
sources is the rule rather than exception for public financing).
Options Affecting Customers
Approach: Event surcharges
Key Points: • Ticketing fees that are authorized by a public
J3 Updated to include current financing options available and not identified in the study.
39
facilities district, such as the one established for the ShoWare Center in the City of Kent.
Approach: On-street parking fees
Key Points: • Parking meters and/or permits.
Approach: Parking fine revenues
Key Points: • N/A
Options Affecting Businesses
Approach: Business improvement area(BIA)
Key Points: •Assessment on business owners based on square footage, assessed land value, and/or
business and operation (B&O)taxes
• Useful for funding parking operations and marketing
Options Affecting Property Owners
Approach: Local improvement district (LID)
Key Points: • Assessment on property owners to repay bonds sold to finance improvement
• Benefit to the land must be more intense than to the rest of the city and must be actual,
physical, and material, and not merely speculative or conjectural
• Useful for funding capital development (ex. parking structure)
• Useful as one component of revenue bond without the need for general obligation bond
backing(and drawing down the available debt capacity of the city)
Options Affecting Developers
Approach: Fee-in-lieu-of parking
Key Points: N/A
Approach: Options affecting developers - puhlic/private development partnerships
Key Points: • Ex, public acquisition of land and sale or lease of land/air rights not needed for parking
• Es. private development of mixed-use development with sale or lease back of the public
parking portion upon completion, a turnkey project
Options Affecting the General Public
Approach: General obligation bonds
Key Points: • Bonds issued to finance parking improvements underwritten by the general fund when
40
repayment of debt is unable to be serviced by parking revenues alone
• Bonds can be issued by public vote or council decree
• Legal limit for all voter-approved debt in a city is 7.5%of assessed property values; non-
voted debt is 1.5% of assessed property values
Approach: Refinancing general obligation bonds
Key Points: • Refinancing existing debt and shifting savings from the general fund to debt coverage for
parking improvements
Approach: Revenue bonds
Key Points: • Bonds issued to finance parking improvements underwritten by parking and other
specific revenues rather than by the general fund; however, unless utilization and revenue
projections (such as LID revenues) are strong and predictable enough to cover debt and
operations and provide a coverage cushion, general obligation bonds may still be required
• Legal limit for debt is not affected, unless general obligation bond backing is required
Approach: 63-20 financing
Key Points: • Bonds (tax-exempt) issued by a non-profit corporation on behalf of the city
• Financed assets must be "capital" and must be turned over free and clear to the
government by the time that bonded indebtedness is retired
Approach: Public facilities districts (PFD)
Key Points: •An independent taxing authority and district under Washington State statue that may
charge fees for the use of its facilities, levv an admissions tax not exceeding 5%, and impose
a vehicle parking tax not exceeding 10`Z,
• State law also allows PFDs to impose two different types of sales and use taxes: local sales
and use taxes of up to 0.033% to finance regional centers and local sales and use taxes up
to 0.2%to finance, design, construct, remodel, maintain, or operate public facilities(if
approved by voters)
Approach: Downtown and neighborhood commercial districts
Key Points: • Uses incremental increases in local sales and use tax revenue subsequent establishment of
the district to finance community revitalization projects, such as "publicly owned or lease
facilities"
Approach: Community revitalization financing
Key Points: • Uses incremental increases in property taxes to finance parking improvements
• Tax "increment area" must be established with approval from local governments imposing
at least 75% of the regular property taxes
41
•Tax increment is calculate at 75`Yo of any increase in assessed property value
Approach: Local revitalization financing
Key Points: • Uses incremental increases in local sales and use tax revenues and property tax revenues
within the "revitalization area", additional funds from other local public sources, and a
state contribution to finance parking improvements
•Tax increment is calculate at 75% of anv increase in assessed property value
• State contribution applications are currently closed
Approach: Stale and federal grants
Key Points: • No current grants for downtown parking structures have been found
Approach: Parking fund
Key Points: • Establishes parking commissions and funding mechanisms for parking improvements and
maintenance and operations
Approach: General fund contribution
Key Points: • For a one-time capital improvement or on-going contributions to maintenance and
operations of a downtown parking system
42
3.2 - Parking Operations, Maintenance, and
Marketing and Communications
OPERATIONS }d-�
Location(s): Various
Approach: Parking meters and/or pay stations as a tool tol»``'�$
promote parking turnover; act as a means of
distributing limited amount of on-street spaces in
commercial areas where demand exceeds supply;
provide short-term parking spaces for shopping or
personal errands; improve traffic circulation and
economic viability of downtown commercial areas
by maximizing the number of patron visits; and
to generate revenue for the city.
i
Key Points: • Individual conventional meters that accept coins and credit cards (City of Salem) (Figure 3.2.1)
• Individual "smart" meters that accept coins, • —
credit cards, and pay-by-phone, with different
prices at different times of the day; has resulted ,
in higher revenues and fewer parking citations, �\ ..=�•
but may result in less turnover(City of San {`•—`P.
Francisco) (Figure 3.2.2)
• individual "smart" meters that accept coins and
p >�.
credit cards, resets any remaining parking time - .
available to zero when a car leaves, and prohibits
drivers from paying for more time when the
has already parked for the maximum time limit
applicable to the parking space (City of Santa
Monica) Figure 3.2.1/3.2.2/3.2.3 - Meters
from Salem, San Francisco, and
• Conventional pay-and-display pav stations that Boulder, respectively(top to
accept coins and credit cards (City of Boulder) bottom).
(Figure 3.2.3)
Location(s): City of'Tacoma
Approach: Parking operations and maintenance contracted
out to Republic Parking
Key Points: • Since 1987, Republic Parking has provided daily
operational oversight for 2,500 parking spaces
located within the city's lots and garages
•The city's budget for 2011-2012 allocated
$1,214,800 for operations and maintenance of
43
its parking facilities;this includes $20,000 for
Republic ParkinK s management fee of 1.5`8, of
net parking revenues and the remainder for'out
of pocket' expenses to operate and maintain its
t parking facilities
Location(s): Research Drive Parking Garage, Duke University
(Figure 3.2.4)
Approach: Environmental and parking operation efficiency
-"�-.- best practices
Key Points: • Received 2012 International Parking Institute
Award of Excellence
,._^1 !
--�'-''-i--= • Environmentally sensitive design that
incorporates vegetated canopies on the roof,
vegetated walls, and rainwater-collecting cisterns
___ _ - • Real-time space availability display boards
(spaces available on each level)
-a7 - •Automated entries and exits and an express
ramp for frequent users using vehicle
—*.
identification technology
��"� • Pay stations for payment prior to leaving rather
than payment at exits
Location(s): 123 Baxter Street Garage, New York (Figure
°;;;C, 3.2.5)
{ - e Approach: Land use and parking operation efficiency
through use of an automatic mechanical parking
I � '
i system (a la a vending machine)
G
Key Points: • Entire process for parking or retrieval of a car
Figure 3.2.4 -The Duke takes around 2 minutes
University Research Drive
Parking Garage features (top • Occupies less space than conventional garages,
to bottom) vegetated rooftop which makes it especially practical for high-
canopies, space availability density locations
display boards, and pay stations
prior to exiting. • One attendant "operates" the entire garage
• Potential inefficient ingress and egress during
periods of overwhelming demand, such as
morning and evening rush hour
• High initial investment
44
• Potential fire code limitations nn1
• Potential for mechanical failure, as some
systems have experienced, trapping vehicles - •
inside the garage
1
OPERATIONS — SPECIAL EVENTS /
Location(s): River Days, Renton
Approach: Shuttles from off-site parking facilities and
extensive information provided
Key Points: • Complimentary shuttles move people between
off-site parking facilities and the festival
• Information provided online include directions
to parking lots and garages, the free shuttle to •.�,;,;,--�.r""-^"""" ;
non-downtown parking, and location and timing
of street closures (Figure 3.2.6)
Source(s): "Special Event Parking Basics", Campus Safety
Magazine1
( - i
Approach: Parking operation efficiency and safety best
practices .�
Key Points: • Changing cashier locations accommodates Figure 3.2.5 - New York City's
queues and promote faster entrances and exits
first automatic parking garage,
• Pavrnent upon entry prevents bottlenecks at located at 123 Baxter Street.
exits
• Limiting cash transactions reduces delay
• Make multiple entrances and exits available
• Designated pedestrian walkways quickly and
safely move visitors to and from garage
OPERATIONS — RATES, FEES, ENFORCEMENT,
AND FINES
RATES Figure 3.2.6 -The Renton River
Days website provides clear
parking information.
Location(s): City of Tacoma
Approach: Reinstatement of paid parking, removed
during downtown's decline in the 1970s,
as on-street parking became increasingly
45
congested again
Key Points: • During the first 6 months of operation (January- June 2011), revenue exceeded
projections by around $60,000 ($364,782.41 vs. $303,510.69)
• Bus pass sales doubled and off-street parking lot occupancy increased to near-capacity
for University of Washington (UW) -Tacoma
FEES
Location(s): City of Kent, City of Olympia, City of Puyallup, City of Renton, City of Tacoma
Approach: Charging for monthly off-street parking
Key Points: • Data includes monthly off-street parking lots and garages owned and/or operated by
the cities and by private parking operators as of February 2013
• The lowest monthly rate for a parking lot was $15, operated by Diamond Parking, and
located next to the marine and Heritage Park Fountain, though several blocks away
from downtown Olympia
•The highest monthly rate for a parking lot was $148, operated by Republic Parking
on behalf of the City of Tacoma, and located nest to many businesses, attractions, and a
Sound Transit LINK light rail station
•The unweighted average monthly rate for a parking lot was $56
•The lowest monthly rate for a parking garage was $35, operated by Diamond Parking,
at the downtown Renton transit center
• The highest monthly rate for a parking garage was $164, operated be Republic
Parking on behalf of the City of Tacoma, and located next to several businesses, the
Convention Center, Tacoma Art Museum, UW-Tacoma, and a Sound Transit LINK
light rail station
• The unweighted average monthly rate for a parking garage was $74
ENFORCEMENT
I ocation(s): City of Chattanooga, TN
Approach: Parking enforcement officers doubling as downtown customer service representatives
("parking ambassadors")
Key Points: • Parking ambassador service provided by Republic Parking
• In addition to parking enforcement, parking ambassadors assist people with parking
correctly, give courtesy garage passes to drivers who have experienced difficulty with
parking, provide maps and directions, provide informal security in coordination with
police, and pick up litter(Figure 3.2.7)
46
• Newspapers report that parking spaces on I
the busiest commercial streets have freed
up considerably since parking ambassador
W.
program implementation ®'d
x¢
rype
FINES �>
r
Location(s): City of Somerville, MA
Approach: Superior customer service for parking permit Figure 3.2.7 - Parking
and citation processing ambassador in Chattanooga
provides assistance to visitors
Key Points: • Customer service representatives at the as well as enforcing parking
Office of the Parking Clerk consistently regulations.
praised for efficiencv and pleasantness,
despite only an average rating of 2 out of 5
stars on Yelp
MAINTENANCE
Location(s): City of Chicago, IL
Approach: On-street parking is operated and maintained by
Chicago Parking Meters LLC through a 75-year
concession, which includes price-setting rights
Key Points: •$1.2 billion lump sum paid to the city, but long-
term budget shortfall
• Rapid rise in parking rates
• Increase in inoperable meters
Location(s): City of Tacoma
Approach: Parking operations and maintenance contracted
out to Republic Parking
Key Points: • Republic Parking operates and maintains all
of the city's 2,500+ off-street parking spaces;
maintenance costs incurred are reimbursed to
Republic Parking as part of the contract
Location(s): City of Vancouver
Approach: • Maintenance of signs, meters, off-street parking
lots and garages is performed by the Parking
Services Division in the Community and
Economic Development Department
47
Key Points: N/A
Location(s): City of West Hollywood, CA
Approach: Off-street parking lots and garages are operated
--_- _ -- and maintained by the Parking Services Division
_.== in the Public Works Department
Key Points: • N/A
Figure 3.2.8 -The Denver
parking website features easy- Location(s): Plymouth State University, Plymouth, NH
to-find links for reporting a
problem, purchasing parking Approach: Maintenance of off-street parking lots regularly
permits, finding public parking, scheduled
and paying for citations.
Key Points: • Test and email reminders to move cars for
subscribers
l
• Signs at off-street parking lots the day of closure
°•� for maintenance
� � mnerm
Od�Yly
COMMERCIAL
ICLES ONLY MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS
VEH
` olx[AS NO STANDING
- MNnaay-Friday Location(s): City of Ventura, CA
bPN-MINNIGHT .. lam.6pm
MDN rx.0 fRl
NCIEflCD PAAAING ~� �i
6 Roufl ulAn ,Yg mom, Approach: Radius map of destinations from main parking
8AN-M~GHi `yY; P'1rkra garage
SATUPDAY t^ Monody inOay
NETEAED PAAKINL rASr•_ ,a_ A4DniGDI
6 HOUR LINK ••� 6dlmNay Key Points: Demonstrates the concept of"park-once" and
Sam-MI wdcnl I .
visiting multiple destinations
Muni•Meter Location(s): Citv of Denver, CO
_-- Approach: Public Works Department "parking angels"
reward legally parked cars with $5 parking cards
during the holiday season
Figure 3.2.9 - New York City
on-street parking signs pre- (left) Key Points: • Caught the attention of multiple news sources
and post-redesign (right). (TV stations, newspapers, online sources)
• Simultaneous with a social media campaign
Location(s): City of Denver, CO
Approach: Parking homepage with street sweeping
reminders and all components of the parking
system front and center
Key Points: • Divided into four user-friendly links: 'Report
a Problem' for broken meters, lights, potholes/
48
sinkholes, and illegally parked cars, 'Parking
Permits'for residential and handicap parking
permits, 'Public Parking'for where and how
to park, and 'Tickets and Towing'for paying 1 °"""' Q.�
citations, removing boots, and locating a towed
vehicle (Figure 3.2.8)
Location(s): City of New York, NY
19
Approach: Redesigned parking signs for readability
Figure 3.2.10 -The proposed
Key Points: • Fewer signs, less text, and more `white space" Novato sign program features
(Figure 3.2.9) parking signs that are
thematically tied to general
• Former signs were called"a cross between an wayfinding and other signs in
Excel spreadsheet and a totem pole' by Janette the city
Sadik-Khan,Transportation Commissioner
Location(s): City of Novato, CA
Approach: Thematically tied-together signs (Figure 3.2.10) t'
D'
Key Points: • Parking signage is thematically tic to general car
and pedestrian wayfinding signage
• "Trailblazer" signs directing drivers to parking 1
are thematically tied to parking facility signage l .'
• On-location parking signage identify the Figure 3.2.11 - Seattle's e-Park
location and/or name of the lot and basic rules - sign boards show available
and not much else parking spaces in participating
downtown parking garages.
Location(s): City of Seattle
Approach: •e-Park, a real-time live feed of available
parking spaces in participating parking garages
throughout downtown (Figure 3.2.11)
Key Points: N/A
Location(s): City of Los Angeles, City of San Carlos, City of
San Francisco, CA
Approach: Parker app provides real-time parking availability
information for both on-street parking spaces and
off-street parking spaces in City and privately
owned and/or operated parking lots and garages
Key Points: •Availability is based on information transmitted
from networked wireless sensors at each parking
space
49
r_AT&T 11:16AM 1,$100%W
• Each wireless sensor is self-powered, requires
• •' 4-6 minutes to install, and costs $300/installation
a and $120/year in software licensing fees (per USA
S Today in a 2011 article)
O all l� �� •App provides a map of parking locations, rates,
w o and types(time limits) (Figure 3.2.12); allows
'��. �B for adding inventory to its map database, even
o without paving for and installing sensors
i� �"` ' r •App can search for parking in proximity by
destination and also direct drivers via voice
-a iI Et navigation to the nearest space
AT&T S' 10:0 AM 10L�.
X L �
IIM�rvM Puking rvNa04 1
T:._._ .._
X ta; �
WINN
Figure 3.2.12 -The Parker
app displays locations and rates
of on- and off-street parking
and real-time availabilitv for
parking spaces equipped with a
networked wireless sensor.
50
4. The Parking Best Practices Toolbox
4.1 - How to Use the Toolbox
The Parking Best Practices Toolbox is a collection of general best practices employed in the provision
of parking, parking demand management, and operations of a parking system. Experiences of other
jurisdictions examined and guiding principles from planning and parking literature drove what best
practices ended up in the toolhox.
The best practices contained herein, however, are not meant to be static; some may be removed and other
may be added to the framework of the toolbox as parking patterns and results from parking research
continue to evolve. In addition, what is a parking best practice generally is not necessarily a parking best
practice specifically applicable to the DUC.
As such, the Parking Best Practices Toolbox has been structured as such:
• Description of the best practice;
• Whether or not the best practice is currently implemented;
• The action proposed for the best practice (continuation, modification, implementation, or no action); and
• Where to find additional information, if available.
In short, the toolbox embodies an at-a-glance evaluation of best practices applicable generally and
specifically, in the CDPbIP's current iteration.
Please turn to the next page for the Parking Best Practices Toolbox(Figure 4.1.1).
51
Best Practice(BP) Now Action More Information
Existing Parking Infrastructure-Demand Management
Commute trip reduction Yes lContinue ACC10.02 070
Long-term rec
Frequent transit access,citywide/regional Yes Modify Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Off-street permit parking Yes Continue
On-street paid parking,conventional meters No No action' Case study
On-street paid parking,"smart'meters No No action' Case study
On-street permit parking No Implement Short-term rec
Roadway pricing No No action'
Near term rec
Timed parking Yes Modify Long-term rec
Unbundled parking No No action' Commute Tnp Reduction Plan
Future Parking Infrastructure-Development Regulations and Design
Elimination of parking minimums No No action
Establishment of parking maximum Yes Continue ACC18.29.060(H)
Parking lot lighting Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking lot pedestrian connections Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking lot screening Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking over,under,behind,or side of buildings Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking structure screening Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking structure w/active street frontage Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Parking structures w/environmentally-sensitive design Yes Continue DUC Design Standards
Reductions for shared parking Yes Continue ACC78.29.060(H)(8)
Smart growth Yes Continue ACC18.29.010
Organization and Management
Short-term rec
Parking spillover area planning,downtown-adjacent No Implement Long-term rec
Single contact for all City parking matters INo limplement Short-term rec
Planning
Regular readjustment of current parking practices No Implement Short-term rec
Regular reevaluation of current parking conditions No Iln plement Shod-tens rec
Investment
Short-tens rec
Planning for investment in public parking,per supply deficit No Implement Case study
Operations
Bikeshare No No action
Carshare No No action
Downtown valet No No action
Frequent transit access,around downtown No Implement Long-term rec
Short-term rec
Parking ambassadors No Implement Case study
Near-term rec
Parking policy transparency No Implement Case study
Parking shuttle No No actions
Parking structures w/automated entry/exit and express ramps No No action° Case study
Parking structures w/pay-before-leaving pay stations No No action° Case study
Parking structures w/real-time space availability displays No No action° Case study
Short-term rec
Planning for special events No Implement Case study
Soft enforcement No Im lement Short-term rec
52
Best Practice JBP) Now Action More Information
Maintenance
Clarity of maintenance roles jNo INo action
Marketing and Communications
Near-term rec
Centralized City parking webpage No Implement Case study
Short-term rec
Easy-to-read off-street parking signs No Implement Case Study
Near-term rec
Easy-to-read on-street parking signs No Implement Case study
Parker smartphone app No No action Case study
Parking alerts,for construction/maintenance No Implement Short-tens rec
Short-term rec
Positive publicity for parking system No Implement Case study
Real-time availability displays,for off-street parking No No action5 Case study
Short-term rec
Trailblazer signs INO Implement Case study
'Current demand does not warrant best practice;current parking supply is sufficient;citizens not interested in best practice
Current transit service levels and development patterns not feasible to expect interest in completely car-free lifestyle
Current deisre to address parking impacts of anticipated development,parking minimums are already more generous in the DUC
than in the rest of the City
Currently no parking structures are planned
Current demand does not warrant best practice;unknown when sufficient demand is anticipated
Currently too expensive;not intuitive to use when parking remains available,as in the DUG overall
Figure 4.1.1 -The Parking Best Practices Toolbox.
53
5. The Parking Action Plan
5.1 - Near-Term Recommendations
MTimed parking
Action: Modify
Description: Revise parking time limits for the City's on- and off-street public parking spaces to 3 hours
throughout the DUC
Pros: •Allows visitors to patronize multiple businesses at a leisurely pace, no matter where they
park
• Reduces the confusion of brought upon by a myriad of time limits and signs, of which
some currently conflict with each other, even on the same street
Cons: • Lacks the nuance of area-specific time limits that would address the various needs for
different types of parking in the DUC
•Additional costs will be incurred to replace signs if redevelopment and increased demand
necessitate area-specific time limits again
• May be more difficult for parking enforcement officers to discern cars parked all day(cars
of commuters and downtown employees, for example)
Mill Parking policy transparency
Action: Implement
Description: Remove all code referencing the City's on- and off-street parking, create a new parking
database maintained by staff, and insert new code specifying available parking that adopts
the parking database by reference
Pros: • Eliminates code that currently conflicts with on-street parking as-signed/as-marked or is
outdated
• Parking database can be updated administratively
• Parking database can serve double-duty as public information on where to park in the
DUC
Cons: • Parking database would require time to develop
MCentralized City parking webpage
Action: Implement
54
Description: Update website to include easy-to-locate map and information for on-and off-street public
and permit parking available in the City(including potentially a `Where to Park If This
Area is Full' feature for areas and lots that experience peak parking occupancy in excess of
85%), pictures of all signs and explanations of what thev mean, and better marketing for
the City's off-street permit parking program
Pros: • Centralizes information for DUC parking
• Provides information for alternative parking options when the desired parking lot or street
is full
• Provides information to help discern whether a parking space is public or permit,
addressing the difficulty of doing so raised in the Downtown Parking Survey
• Relatively easy and inexpensive to implement
Cons: • In itself, may not be the most intuitive tool for finding parking spaces, especially for those
that do not plan ahead or use smartphones
Easy-to-read on-street parking signs
Action: Implement
Description: Design and install easy-to-read signs that identify availability and rules of on-street public
parking
Pros: • Relatively easy and inexpensive to implement
Cons: •Additional costs will be incurred to replace signs if redevelopment and increased demand
necessitate area-specific time limits again
55
5.2 -Short-Term Recommendations (1-5 Years)
MOn-street permit parking
Action: Modify
Description: Expand and modify residential parking zone beyond D ST NW per demand; begin by
providing 2 free parking permits per single-family residence, duplex unit, or townhouse
unit with less than 2 off-street parking spaces (garage or paved), 1 free parking permit per
single-family residence, duplex, unit, or townhouse unit with 2 or more off-street parking
spaces(garage or paved), and 1 free parking permit per multifamily unit with less than 1
off-street parking space (garage or paved) per unit; charge nominal fee for additional permit
and raise fees as demand necessitates; tailor to each residential parking zone by inventory of
on-street parking supply
Pros: • Provides long-term parking for residents and prevents other cars from parking all day in
spaces convenient and valuable to residents, thereby encouraging downtown employees and
commuters to obtain off-street parking permits
• Free permits to a certain extent is more or less in line with the overwhelming Downtown
Parking Survey response of not having to pay for parking
• Reinforces a"customer-first" ethic amongst downtown employees who choose to park on-
street all day by providing impetus to purchase an off-street parking permit
Cons: • Past opposition has stalled implementation of residential parking zones in areas just
beyond the DUC
EParking spillover area planning, downtown adjacent
Action: implement
Description: Consider areas expected to experience impacts from DUC parking, even if not technically
located within the DUC
Pros: • Addresses potential parking spillover impacts from the DUC so that parking problems are
not simply shifted away from the DUC into surrounding areas
Cons: • Past opposition has stalled implementation of residential parking zones in areas just
bevond the DUC
no Single contact for all City parking matters
Action: Implement
Description: Designate one department or division that is the single contact for all parking-related
matters in the City, despite whatever the organizational structure is behind-the-scenes
56
Pros: • Reduces confusion of who is in charge of parking in the City and increases transparency,
as perceived by the public; is a more user-friendly approach to interactions with the public
Cons: • N/A
MRegular readjustment of current parking practices
Action: Implement
Description: Make minor adjustments to permit rates, time limits, residential permit zones, etc. to
respond to current parking conditions in the DUC every year and make major adjustments
every 5th year in the parking planning cycle
Pros: • Responds to current parking conditions in the DUC, implements current parking best
practices for the City, and modifies or eliminates failing parking policies
Cons: •Additional costs will be incurred if additional consultation and staffing from private
parking consultants are required for implementation rather than City staff alone
MRegular reevaluation of current parking conditions
Action: Implement
Description: Evaluate supply and demand of parking in the DUC at peak weekday hours Qlam-2pm)
every year, comprehensively every 4th year in the parking planning cycle
Pros: • Evaluates current parking conditions in the DUC to guide implementation of current
parking best practices for the City and modification or elimination of failing parking
policies
Cons: • Additional costs will be incurred if additional consultation and staffing from private
parking consultants are required for implementation rather than City staff alone
MUMM Planning for investment in public parking, per supply deficit
Action: implement
Description: Evaluate funding options, existing and potential overflow from Auburn Transit Center,
and implement a multi-faceted plan to finance additional public parking, per supply deficit
observed
Pros: •Addresses potential public parking supplv deficit identified by the CDPMP
• Reduces risk with diversity of funding options utilized
Cons: • Does not consider measures to reduce parking demand and congestion in problem areas of
downtown without expanding the physical infrastructure of public parking
57
MParking ambassadors
Action: Implement
Description: Assign parking ambassador responsibilities to existing parking enforcement and downtown
patrol officers, including provision of information (and informal safety by parking
enforcement officers)
Pros: • Generates goodwill
• Reinforces a `customer-first" ethic by pointing people in the right direction in terms
of destinations and parking in the DUC, including alternative parking options when the
desired parking lot or street is full
• Decentralizes the delivery of information centralized at the City's Permit Center and
website
• Provides additional transparency to parking policies
• Diversifies the role of existing parking enforcement officers
Cons: • Requires coordination between multiple departments and divisions and relies on one
representative to convey each department or division's respective parking policies
• Additional costs will be incurred if additional consultation and staffing from private
parking operators are required for implementation
MPlanning for special events
Action: Implement
Description: Require organizers to designate event parking, distribute information for event parking,
make multiple exits available, and establish pedestrian paths
Pros: •Addresses difficulties experienced during event parking, as expressed in responses from
the Downtown Parking Survey
•Addresses potential parking spillover impact from the DUC so that parking problems
from special events are not simply shifted away from the DUC into surrounding areas
• Generates goodwill with efficient organization of special events
Cons: • N/A
ME Soft enforcement
Action: Implement
58
Description: Develop and implement 3-strikes parking enforcement policy wherein the first 2 strikes
consist of dismissible tickets and education on where to park
Pros: • Generates good will
• Allows those genuinely unfamiliar with downtown parking an opportunity to park
"correctly"
• Reinforces a "customer-first" ethic amongst downtown employees who choose to park on-
street all day by providing impetus to purchase an off-street parking permit
Cons: • Off-street permit parking demand already exceeds supply
• May shift cars to unlimited time on-street parking on residential streets beyond the DUC
EEasy-to-read off-street parking signs
Action: Modify
Description: Design and install easy-to-read signs that identify availability of off-street public parking,
identifier/location of off-street parking lot, and alternative parking options
Pros: • Relatively easy and inexpensive to implement
• Reduces perceived last mile when off-street parking lot is easy to identify and remember
• Reduces parking demand and congestion in problem areas of downtown without
expanding physical infrastructure of parking by shifting demand to underutilized off-street
parking lots
Cons: • May work too well, shifting parking supply problems to formerly underutilized off-street
parking lots
EParking alerts, for construction/maintenance
Action: Implement
Description: Alert interested parties and drivers through the City's website, emails, text alerts, and pre-
closure on-location signage so that they are not caught off-guard when regularly available
parking becomes unavailable
Pros: • Provides additional transparency to parking availability
•Allows people to plan for alternative parking and/or transportation options
• Decentralizes the delivery of information centralized at the City's Permit Center and
website (through text alerts and on-location signage)
59
• Utilizes existing City communication channels (website and construction notices)
Cons: • Additional costa will be incurred if additional technological resources are required (text
alerts)
• Mav become unwanted information overload if implemented incorrectly
mTrailblazer signs
Action: Implement
Description: Direct drivers to available off-street parking
Pros: • Decentralizes the delivery of information centralized at the City's Permit Center and
websile
• Relatively easy and inexpensive to implement
Cons: • May work too well, shifting parking supply problems exclusively to off-street parking lots
• Additional costs will be incurred to replace signs if comprehensive downtown signage
program is implemented in the future
60
5.3 - Long-Term Recommendations (6-10 Years)
MFrequent transit access, citywide/regional
Action: Modify
Description: Evaluate demand and petition for demand-appropriate reductions to current 30-minute
headways and expansion of evening service
Pros: • Reduces parking demand and congestion by making trips to and from downtown more
enticing and feasible, without expanding physical infrastructure of parking
• Expands the customer base for the DUC
• Responds to anticipated growth in demand required to support increase from current
levels of transit access
Cons: • May lie difficult for buy-in from cash-strapped transit agencies
MTimed parking
Action: Modify
Description: Revise parking time limits for the City's on- and off-street public parking spaces to area-
specific time limits as-needed
Pros: • Provides nuanced time limits that address various needs for different types of parking in
the DUC, especially areas with high peak occupancy
• Increases the ultimate number of visitors to the DUC by increasing turnover
Cons: • May increase confusion brought upon by a myriad of time limits and signs
•Additional costs will be incurred to replace existing 3-hour time-limit signs
MParking spillover area planning, downtown adjacent
Action: Implement
Description: Continue to consider areas expected to experience impacts from DUC parking, even if not
technically located within the DUC
Pros: •Addresses potential parking spillover impacts from the DUC so that parking problems are
not simply shifted away from the DUC into surrounding areas
• May be easier to implement in the long-term as potential parking spillover impacts from
the DUC become more identifiable
61
Cons: • Past opposition has stalled implementation of residential parking zones in areas just
beyond the DUC
MFrequent transit access, around downtown
Action: Implement
Description: Evaluate demand and petition for demand-appropriate reductions to current 30-minute and
1-hour headways, expansion of service area by rerouting, and expansion of evening service
Pros: • Reduces parking demand and congestion in problem areas of downtown by reducing the
last mile between parking space and destination, without expanding physical infrastructure
of parking
• Responds to anticipated growth in demand required to support increase from current
levels of transit access
Cons: • May be difficult for buy-in from cash-strapped transit agencies
•Additional costs will be incurred if additional consultation and staffing from private
paratransit operators for implementation is required
62
I
R.. e:X16 ' a1dM iiYEG w
1 bA
W 1 �
1 - a r ! r w.�-OR n w w
I
r e w.m r