USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Parking and transit policy study


Material Information

Parking and transit policy study
Portion of title:
Overview of urban transit and parking policies
Physical Description:
v, 61 leaves : ill., maps ; 29 cm.
Florida -- Office of Public Transportation
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla.
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Automobile parking -- Government policy -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Automobile parking -- Government policy -- United States   ( lcsh )
Transportation and state -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Transportation -- Planning -- Florida   ( lcsh )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )


Includes bibliographical references (leaves 57-61).
Additional Physical Form:
Also available online.
Statement of Responsibility:
prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation, Office of Public Transportation ; by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida.
General Note:
"May 1993."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 026184345
oclc - 84849896
usfldc doi - C01-00249
usfldc handle - c1.249
System ID:

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader 00000nas 2200000Ka 4500
controlfield tag 001 026184345
005 20110908173417.0
008 070222s1993 fluab b s000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00249
b P37 1993
0 245
Parking and transit policy study.
n Technical memorandum no. 1,
p Overview of urban transit and parking policies /
prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation, Office of Public Transportation ; by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida.
3 246
Overview of urban transit and parking policies
[Tampa, Fla.] :
Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida,
v, 61 leaves :
ill., maps ;
29 cm.
"May 1993."
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 57-61).
Also available online.
Automobile parking
x Government policy
z Florida.
Automobile parking
Government policy
United States.
Transportation and state
1 710
Office of Public Transportation.
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856


PARKING AND TRANSIT POLICY STUDY Technical Memorandum No 1 Overview of Urban Transit and Parking Policies


PARKING AND TRANSIT POLICY STUDY Tecbnicall\>;lemorandum No. 1 Overview of Urban Transit and Parking Policies Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation Office of Public Transportation by the Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering University of South Florida May 1993


. PREFACE This is the first of three technical memoranda regarding parking and transit policies to be produced by the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) for the Florida Department of Transportation. These memoranda will comprise the Parking and Transit Policy Study, which is an investigation of the relationship between local parking and transit policies. It will also identify methods for coordinating policies in order to increase transit use and the cost effectiveness of public investments in parking and transit. Technical Memorandum No. J provides an overview of urban transit and parking policies, programs, and data availability for Florida's urban areas Technical Memorandum No. 2 will evaluate parking and transit coordination efforts In other states, as well as the impacts of current parking and transit policies in four selected Florida urban areas. Technical Memorandum No. 3 will identify complementary transit and parking policies and will recommend a strategy for implement a/ion by the appropriate levels of government . II


CONTENTS Preface 0 11 List of Figures .... ........ ................................... iv List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 A Summary of the Literature . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Supply Side Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Demand-Side Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Transportation Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Summacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The Planning and Regulatory Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . IS Florida Transportatio n Plan and State Comprehensive Plan . . . . . IS Growth Management Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Systematic Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Overview of U rbao Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 The Four Selected Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Miami . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Orlando . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Ft. Lauderdale .................... .". . . . . . . . . 42 Ft. Myers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 List of References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Ill


Figure I Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 FigureS LIST O F FIGURES Parking Management MeaSures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Miami Central Business District . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Orlando Central Business District . .... . ............... 35 Ft. Lauderdale Central Business District . . . . . . . . 44 Ft Myers Central Business District . . . . . . . . . . . 50 IV


Table I Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 1 4 Table IS Table 16 Tab l e 17 Tab l e 18 Table 19 Table 20 LIST OF TABLES General Informa tion on Fiotlda;s Sixliien Urban Areas . . . 19 Interv i ew Survey Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1990 Statistics for the Four Selected Areas . . . . . . . 22 Miami Parking Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Miami CBD Parking Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Miami Public Parking Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Miarill CBD Parking Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Metro Dade Trahsit Authority Fare Structure . . . . . . . 32 Orlando Parking Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Orlando CBD Parking Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Orlando CBD Parking Utilization for Selected Sites . . . . . 40 Lynx Fare Structure ........................ ......... 41 Ft. Lauderdale Parking Requi rements . . . . . . . . . . 46 Ft. Lauderdale CBD Parking Supply . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Ft. Lauderdale Public Parking Rates . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Broward County Transit Fare Structure . . . . . . . . . . 48 Ft. Myers Parking Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Ft. Myers CBD Parking Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Ft. Myers Public Park ing Rates .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 54 Lee T ran Fare Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 v


L'iTRODUCTION PARKING AND TRANSIT POLICY STUDY Technical Memorandum No. 1 Various modes of transp()rtation inc luding the private automobile and mass (or public) transit, are utilized for trips to the central business district (CBD). The availability and the use of these modes affect the development, economic vitality, environmental quality, and accessibility of a CBD. When choosing a mode of transportation, persons cons ider a number offactors, such as convenience, cost, and travel time. The private automobile is currently the preferred mode of travel by an overwhelming majority of persons making trips. However because o f concerns regarding the environment, traffic congestion, growth management, and economic development, many local governments have renewed their interest in finding a better balance between the use of the private automobile and the use of public transit. This interest creates an opportunity to better coordinate parking and public transit in the development of urban transportation policies. The primary purpose of the Parking and Transit Policy Study is to provide information and recommendations that can be used to coordinate parking and transit p()licies. In order to effectively provide the needed information, the study evaluates parking initiatives and impacts in Florida and in other areas of the United States It provides a review of the planning proces s in light of the national, state, and local regulatory framework. The study also addresses secondary impacts of cOordinating parking and transit p()licies in areas such as economic development and land use. This report, the first of three technical memoranda, describes parking p()licies currently in-place in Florida and other states and ident ifie s those issues related to p()licy implementation. This report is divided into six sections. The following section presents a summary of parking and transit p()licy-related literature. The tltird se ctio n discusses the regulatory framework that exists within the systematic planning process in Florida. The fourth section presents an overview of the urban areas in Florida that have fixed rou te transit systems. The fifth section provides preliminary data on four Florid a urban areas that have been selected for a closer examination of parking and transit coordinati on. The last section is a s ummary of this report and discusses issues that will be addressed in the next two technical memo randa I


A SUMMARY OF THE LITERATURE This section synthesizes the main elements of the most recent literature on parking management by professionals in the transportation field. It describes the major parking controls used in the United States to reduce automobile trips in central business districts. It also summarizes observations and recommendations compiled from a survey of available literature about the use of parking management measures. An extensive literature search, however, revealed little information regarding the coordination of parking and transit policy. The literature alludes to an association between parking, land use, and economic development. However, analysis of this relationship is not fully developed. The literature does provide a discussion of currently used parking management measures and their respective problems and advantages. In general, it addresses the individual controls as separate topics, not as a coordinated program of measures integrated with transit. The literature does bring to light four subordinate issues that must be considered when developing and implementing coordinated parking and transit policies. The issues are: How to integrate parking policy into the planning process. How to coordinate parking policy with transit in a manner that does not adversely affect the development potential of the CBD. How to integrate parking policy and land use planning How parking policy can be formulated and coordinated with public transit policy so as to treat all segments of the population equitably. The parking management measures presented in the literature and discussed in this section can be organized into supply-side measures, demand-side measures, enforcement measures and transportation demand management (TOM) initiatives, as depicted in Figure I. Measures used to alter the supply of parking include zoning, use of parking caps and preferential parking spaces. Options for the use of flex. ible parking requirements are also identified. Because parking location is a primary consideration in coordinating parking with transit, discussions regarding fringe parking and park-and-ride facilities are included. Other parking management techniques involve demand-side strategies. Traditional demand-side strategies involve altering its price. Aside from obvious approaches which simply raise prices or increase taxes, pricing can be affected by altering the provision of employer-paid 2


Parking Manag e m en t Measures F")8Ure 1 Parking Management Measures SUppl y Measures Demand Measures Enforcement M easures TOM Measures 3 Zoning Flexible Pal1<1ng Requlremenu Parldng caps Preferential Pal1<1ng Park-and-Ride Fringe Parking Pricing Employer Subsidized Transportation Transportation AliO'o\ience Parking TexaUon rocketing Adjudication Transportat ion Management Olsll'lcts


' parking and altering the tax 1mllment of paricing subsidies and lransportation allowances. The cost-savin gs advantage of employer-paid parldng subsidies has received widespread attention as a major reason why commuters choose to drive. The opportunity to manage parking through effective enforcement of existing regulations is also discussed. Enforcement is accomplished through citatio ns fines, and adjudication procedures. Transportation demand management techniques as methods of parking management are also examined. TDM techniques are useful when it is necessary to go beyond parking regulations and actively involve property managers and employers in the management of the commuter activity of their tenants and employees. One TDM technique of particular interest is the use of transportation management districts to direct anq promote economic developm ent near transit corridors, and to define areas in which to impose parking regu lations and assess parking taxes. Trans portation districting is an important area for examination because it raises numerous questions about how districts should be defined and about the n:sponses of commercial activity, tenant leasing, and commuter behavior to differences in parking regulations from o ne district to another Supply-Side Strategies A 1988 survey of 4,000 persons in 17 selected metropolitan statistical areas throughout th. e United States, revealed that 82 percent of people working in the CBD who use transit by choice do so partly due to the cost and availability of parking (Mie12ejewski and Ball 1990). And like most consumer goods the cost of parking is set by market forces that primarily consider parking supply and demand . If parking is scarce and expensive, people are more likely to travel by modes other than the private automobile. While no exact determination of how the supply and cost of parking affect mode choice is available, it does seem clear that lower supply and/or higher costs of parking result in higher mode splits for transit and carpooling. For example, San Francisco has tb e highest parking prices, the least number of downtown parking spaces per employee and the highest transit ridership share (60 percent) of downtown workers according to a 19 83 survey. 4


Zoning Failure to balance parking demand and supply may result in either parking bottlenecks or an oversupply of parking. Traditional zoning codes often require an over supply of parking spaces, which creates an incentive for automobile use and withholds land from other uses. Zoning for parking should consider those measures that reflect actual current need for parking rather than speculation about future levels of demand. Considerations may include employee/floor space ratios, car occupancy, transit availability, and the nature of the interaction among downtown land uses (Weant and Levinson 1990:10). Because restricting parking supply may red)lce the number of motorists attracted to the area with limited parking, it may counteract other downtown policies, such as those promoting economic development. As a most cities control the provision of parking by setting a minimum ratio of spaces per gross square feet of offlce space (Levinson 1984:79). As a means to coordinate parking wit)l trip reduction programs some urban areas have amended their zoning codes to contain maximum limits for the number of parking spaces to be provided. For example, Seattle's zoning requirements include a maximum of one space per I ,000 square feet, while minimum requirements vary according to proximity to transit service. In addition, 20 percent of parking spaces provided to meet the minimum requirements must be reserved for carpools. If the developer makes free transit passes available at the site for at least five years, the parking requirement can be reduced by 15 percent (Higgins 1989). Parking maximums and minimums should be set after considering trends in development, transit and automobile use, and characteristics of parking supply and demand. These tools work most appropriately as a supporting policy for transit and ridesharing programs (K.T. Analytics, Inc. 1987:8-9). Several cities in Florida have adopted maximum limits for parking. Flexible Parking Requirements Flexible parking requirements provide another method for reducing the supply of parking. One strategy is to encourage developers to purchase spaces at a remote facility in exchange for a waiver reducing the number of required on-site parking spaces (Public Technology, Inc. 1982). The city of Miami has an arrangement with developers in which the payment for off-site spaces goes to the local parking authority. This arrangement can give the local parking authority greater control over administration, operation, and rate-setting. 5


Flexible parking code requirements are likely to be successful in urban areas where developers and lenders prefer minimum requirements, existing parking facilities are not well utilized, there is excess transit capacity, mixed land development is an option, and employe r parking subsidies can be converted to cash. Parking Caps Some municipalities have establiShed caps as a method for limiting the supply of parking. A parking cap is lilcely to be successful as a disin001tive for devoting land to parking in areas with high land values and a strong economic development market. Because parking caps require legislative authority, any later required changes to the cap are slow to occur (K.T. Analytics 1987:7). Because tenants judge a property by its accessibility, a parking cap will force property OWilers to provide means of accessibility other than the automobile. When parking regulations such as caps are implemented, however, motorists might respond by parking elsewhere thus shifting the demand for parking. While caps work bcner if applied equally to all properties in the market, there is a need for local zoning codes to incorporate flexibility in the usc of caps to respond to the needs of smaller areas within the urban area (K.T. Analytics 1987:7). This presents the challenge of how to define the boundaries between distinct markets for implementation of parking caps. Portland, Oregon, employs transit districts in the in s titution of parking caps. The city has fixed the number of allowed off-street and on-street parking spaces with the intent of limiting automobile use. Single occupant driving is discouraged through carpool and transit programs. Further, the transit district bas a program to match carpool applicants (Higgins 1989). Preferenl'iai Parking Preferential parking programs restrict the parking supply by reserving attractive parking spaces as an incentive for commuters to alter their commuter behavior. These spaces are often offered free or at a reduced rate to, for example, carpools and vanpools. Further preferential parking that promotes ridesharing reduces automobile congestion by reducing the number of automobiles on the road thereby decreasing the demand for long-tenn parking. As a result, existing space is used more effectively and the need to construct additional spaces is diminished. Preferential parking programs work best when implemented in areas ncar employment centers with parking shortages. To encou rage ridesharing preferential parking spaces must offe r a clear 6


advantage over those available to single occupant drivers. While preferential parking provides a direct incentive for commuters to join carpools and vanpools, it may also provide an indirect incentive to use transit i f the supply of preferential parking restricts the overall parking supply enough to persuade motorists to forgo use of their cars altogether. Park-and-Ride Park-and-ride lots supply parking at the periphery of a city, which alleviates both downtown congestion and the need for parking spaces These lots are normally served by public transportation and are located to collect travelers near the origin of their trip. This program large ly targets single occupant drivers who commute from the suburbs into the downtown area. Park-and-ride lots offer several advantages to efforts to coordinate p ubl ic transit and parking They provide public transportation service to low-density areas outside the urban core. Those who use park-and-ride facilities become a new source of transit ridership. The location of these facilities also shifts from the expensive land of the downtown to the outlying areas. Fringe Parking Parking at the fringe areas of a central business district, in combination with transit service and free or reduced-rate parking, can help revitalize a downtown without increasing automobile congestion within the urban center. In Knoxville, Tennessee, a shuttle service was offered from a peripheral parking lot to the downtown to alleviate downtown parking congestion. After the shuttle service began, the sale of tickets rose dramatically (Wegmann, 1988). In Orlando, Florida, commuters park at a garage on the fringe of the CBD and are s huttled to the downtown. Frequency of service is higher during rush-hour traffic, but the shuttle offers service throughout the business day (City of O r lando 1987). While fringe parking can remedy a parking shortage in the downtown, there are some poten tia l limitations. F i rst, since automobile congestion is often at its worst along the fringe of the downtown--generally along interstates and principal arterials leadin g to downtown--the provision of fringe parking facilities would not contribute to removing automobiles from the area of wor s t congestion. Further, the provision of ample and convenient fringe parking may even lure commuters away from existing tran sit service routes. 7


Demand..Side Strategies Demand-side strategies involve the use of incentives and disincentives to affect consumer (i.e., automobile drivers) behavior. There are four distinct areas of demand-side straregies: pricing, employer subsidization, transportation allowances, and parking taxation. Pricing The examination of empirical parking studies does not provide clear evidence about the relationship between pricing and tripmaking. But the studies do indicate that the relationship is heavily influenced by local variables. While the concluSions of several reports indicate that more information is needed to determine how pricing affects parking demand, information from case studies suggests that pricing has a stronger effect on the demand for parking than do oth .er factors. Pricing as a parking demand management strategy can be accomplished in several ways, including, general rate increas es differential pricing (e.g., for short-term parking, carpoolers, and by location and duration), and parking taxes/surcharges on parkers arriving during peak periods (DiRenzo, 1981 ). An important factor that should be considered before implementing a pricing strategy is that unless a pricing strategy is implemented over a broad area, it may simply shift the parking demand to adjacent areas. Employer Subsidized Parking Provision of free parking at the workplace is considered to be the most influential determinant of mode choice. Currently, nine out of ten Americans who drive to work park for free (Shoup and Willson 1990: I). This is largely due to the private policy of employer-paid or subsidized parking. Free parking is an important benefit granted to the most valued employees and is used as a tool for recruiting and re tention. It also has been written into labor contracts (Pratt 1990:2). Reluctance to abandon the use of personal vehicles, combined with the availability of free parking, undercuts policies and programs aimed at increasing transit ridership and decreasing parking and traffic congestion. Employers ordinarily prefer to shoulder the cost of parking rather than pass it on to employees for several reasons. First, employees who drive to work may be able to work extra hours with short notice Second, employer-paid parking is prevalent because it is less expensive for the company to pay an employee's parking costs than to compensate the costs with a salary 8


mcrease. If the cost of parking was given in the form of a raise, the employee's base salary would increase. The employer would then be liable for a larger amount of social security, workers compensation, and pension contributions, and all other increases in salary would be calculated on a larger base. Also, the employee would incur higher taxes and other deductions. (Federal and state tax laws exclude the value of parking subsidies from the employee's taxable income.) Finally, the employer can cut non-salary fringe benefits more easily than salary (Williams 1992). Requiring employees to pay for their own parking can remarkably reduce the number of single occupant automobi le trips Results from a survey of thirteen employers from across the nation revealed an average automobile trip reduction of20 percent when employees were required to pay for parking (Anon 1990). An analysis of four cases in Los Angeles and one in Ottawa revealed reductions in the number of single occupant drivers ranging from 18 to 81 percent after employer-paid parking was discontinued. A multinomiallogit model was used to predict change in mode choice given different after-subsidy parking prices based upon a sample size of713 cases from a survey of Los Angeles CBD employees. The findings showed that as parking price increases the demand for parking decreases (Shoup and Willso n 1 990 :24). The Commuter Parking Symposium held in Seattle in 1990 generated recommendations for reducing employer-provided parking. Most of these recommendations involve actions to increase parking price to reflect its true cost. These include: federal tax code changes that would eliminate the advantages of subsidized parking and force th e employee to bear the cost of parking; combining trave l allowances and parking supply reductions to increase the demand for transit use; employer-imposed parking charges, the revenues of which would go to employer based TOM programs; local parking excise taxes; and changes in office leasing procedures, which would separate the price of parking spaces from the price of the building space (U.S. Department of Transportation 1990). 9


Transportation Allowance A transportation allowance is a cash fringe benefit equal to the current cost to park and is an alternative to employer subsidized parking. The employee can save money by choosing less expensive options such as transit or ridesharing Currently, the federal tax code treats employer-provided parking as a fringe benefit, meaning that it is tax exempt. This fringe benefit applies to employer -o\vned parking facilities, parking that is provided in conjunction with office leases, other leased parking, and cash reimbursements. Transit subsidies are also tax exempt but only up to $60 per month Attractively priced commuting alternatives are ke y to the success of a trangportation allowance. Therefore, employees also need to be made aware that such an ailowance is an employee benefit that can be converted to cash instead of spent for parking. Ridesharing programs are often offered as a commuting alternative. Employers might consider reducing the subsidies for si ngle occupant drivers while simultaneously increasing subs idies for use of transit, vanpools, and carpools. However, in developing a subsidy program care must be taken to avoid unintended results T o illustrate, a Los Angeles company was studied to clarify the relationship between parking policies and mode choice. The company actively promoted and provided subsidies for carpooling, vanpooling, and transit use As a result it had a fairly high percentage (38%) of workers utilizing the carpool and vanpool progrilms, but at the expense of transit. The subsidy system made it more economical for employees to rideshare, r,ather than use transit. Thus, whi. le actively promoting ridesharing, the company actually placed more cars on the road (Mehraoian, 1987). Another similar experience occurred in Los Angeles, where a company phased out parking subsidies in 1981 for those employees who did not need their personal to perform work during the day. The share of employees who utilized carpooling or vanpooling consequently rose from an average of 17 percent to 58 percent ; however, the percentage of employees riding the bils fell from 38 percent to 28 percent (Surber eta!. 1984). Many single occupant drivers apparently invited bus riders to join them as carpoolers because it saved the single occupant driver the cost of parking and it also split the driving cost. 10


Parking Taxation Parking taxes can be used both as a parking demand management measure to alter commuter behavior and as a revenue generator. A parking tax is usually an excise tax, imposed upon the use of parking rather than on parking ownership. In developing a parking tax, many elements must be considered, such as who should pay the tax, which jurisdictions or geographic areas shou l d the tax be imposed how to collect the revenues, how to audit taxpayers and enforce the tax, aBd whether to charge a fixed fee or a proportion of some measure of parking use. For pwposes of transportation demand management, an effective tax would be a differential tax rate imposed by area with the highest rates in congested areas (Ulberg 1990:1). It is also necessary t o consider the type of parking available, in order to set up appropriate collection and administrative procedures. For metered park ing, enforcement of the payment of the charge and the tax requires on-site inspection. Under a cashiered parking system, receipts contain serial numbers for use in an audit to enforce j,ay m ent of a parking tax. Leased parking by an individual patron involves a written contract that can be used for easy auditing and tax payment enforcement (Ulberg 1990:2). A parking tax has th e greatest i m pact i f it is paid by those who park. However, parking operators ana employers do not always pass along the cost of the tax to those persons. If retail and employment areas of surrounding jurisdictions do not impose a parking tax, merchants and emp l oyers may simply move to those areas where there is no tax. Potential solutions to this incl u de i n stituting the tax across jurisdictions and imposing the tax on commuters, in addition to upgrading alternative transportation modes. A parking tax enjoys greater success if the parking prices within the taxed area are uniform, which prevents motorists from moving to less costly facilities. Parking facility operators and building operators dislike parking taxes because such taxes can r educe t heir profits through a reduction in usage Depending upon the comparative costs of parking tax administration for different types of parking, facilities may be converted to a less expensive type to administer (Ulberg 1990:3). Parking facility operators may also react to a parking tax by selling the property or converting the parking facility to another use if parking demand is reduced. I I


Enforcement It is important to recognize the necessity for enforcement of the selected program of parking regulations. Enforcement ensures modification of parking habits, helps parking management policies succeed, and enables achievement of a balance among interests competing for available parking space (Scully 1988 ). If enforcement of an existing set of regulations were increased, a program to coordinate parking and transit policies might become easier. The result of good enforcement is greater utilization of parking spaces, reduced congestion, and revenue. There are four basic enforcement methods: ticketing, towing, vehicle immobilization and adjudication. Ticketing It has been estimated that a ticket writer on foot can write as many as I 00 tickets per day, making this a highly valuable means of enforcement. However, this method has its own potential problems. One is the use of police time to enforce the parking restrictions. In some areas civilian agents have been employed to i mplement parking enforcement. The benefits of civilian agents include lower cost, less training expense, and full-time commitment to parking enforcement. Use of civ ilians also fre es officers to handle other assignments. A comprehensive ticket writing program was put into effect in Washington D.C. by using civilian ticket agents who walked beats during both day and evening hou rs. Prior to the programs implementation, the city undertook a great deal of planning in order to ensure the program's effectiveness; during the frrst year of operation meter revenues increased nearly 33 percent (Weant and Levinson 1990:266) Towing/Vehicle Immobilization Many parking tickets are never paid. As a result, towing and vehicle immobilization are often needed to enforce the collection of fines. Towi ng can also be utilized for removing vehicles parked in hazardous places or places that i mpede traffic flow. Towing can be carried out by the municipality itself or contracted out to a private towing firm. In either case, problems can result from towing. Among them are claims of damage to vehicles resulting from a tow. If a private firm is doing the towing under contract . the towing request may become a low priority. If the municipality implements the towing itself, the problem is somewhat different; the public employee gets paid By the hour and not by the tow, which provides no incentive for 12


towing quantities of vehicles. Vehicle immobilization however, also forces violators to pay outstanding tickets by preventing the vehicle's movement until fines are paid. This type of enforcement however, results in fewer damage claims, requires less training than towing, and uses no storage space. It also is a simpler process to implement in terms of retrieving the vehicles. Adjudication Adjudication prognms that support enforcement are equally important Fines should be set higher than the cost of adjudicating the ticket, and high enough to deter illegal parking. The adjudication process has been changing in many areas. Some municipalities have decriminalized parking violations so they can be dealt with as civil offenses. Other adjudication improvements being implemented include the use of credit cards to pay fines, and the option of written appeals. Transportation Demand M11nagement In response to traffic congestion, air quality concerns, and other motivations, TDM measures, initially used in the 1970s in response to the Clean Air Act, are now being required in many areas. These measures include carpooling and vanpooling, HOV lanes, transportation management associations, trip reduction ordinances, non-motorized transportation alternatives, and parking management. Whatever methods are used the basic goal of transportation demand management is to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. The administration of a TDM program is usually the responsibility of an employer or developer. While neither the developer nor the employer may want the long-term commitment of running a TDM program, a recommendation generated from the Commuter Parking Symposium in Seattle suggested offering incentives for employers to estab lish transportation demand management programs for their employees (Pratt 1 990:4). Transportation Management Associations and Commuter Assistance Programs Both T ransporta tion Management Associations (TMAs) and Commuter Assistance Programs (CAPs) create public/private partnerships to facilitate TOM measures. TMAs are formed for specific areas or developments by public and private entities to establish TOM 13


measures for the members They provide informatio n and services to participating employers and residents. Services they provide include carpools, vanpools, and parlcing management programs. CAPs are establi shed fo r an entire region For exam ple, Goldcoast Commuter Servi ces serves Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, and West Palm Beac h CAPs provide technieal and planning assis tance to develope rs, employers, local transportation planners, and others regar ding transportation demand management measures and the establishment of transportation management associations. It i s important to realize that parlcing mana gement can be a means by which transportation demand managemen t is achieved An excell ent example is that of the Sarasota Memoria l Hospital, which took t h e initiative to provide a parki ng manage m ent program for its emp l oyees. The program began in response to neighborhood concerns about employees parking in res identia l areas. Another motivation fo r the program was the anticipation of a parking shortage on hospital property An investigatio n revealed that e mployees considered the parking garages unsafe. In response, security was increased and carpools were organi:r.ed, with incentives such as a guaranteed ride home and free cafeteria meals offered to those who carpool. Flextime was also instituted fo r a portion of the hospita l's emp loyees. A major element of the parking program was coordin ation with the local transit agency. This included arrangem ents to relo cate bus stops for more convenient transit access S ubsidized transit passes were offered, as were infonnation and orientation programs a bout h o w to use transit The hospi tal is also promotin g the formation of a TMA of local employers and businesses (Brouillette 1992). Transportation Management Districts Transportati on management dist ricts can provide monitoring and enfor cement of parking controls. These districts can also give employers an incentive to implement parking manageme nt programs if the district assesses a fee per employe e-vehic le-trip or imposes a parking tax. T hese fees and taxes would be waived if the employer elim inates parking subsidi es and offers reimbursement opportunities for using alternative travel modes (Pratt 1990 :6). Summary Some general observations can be drawn from the literature re view: There is littl e conclus ive information on th e effect of parking supply and price on land use, economic development and transit riders hip. Therefor e, the literature 14


recommends incremental change in the implementation of new parking regulations, with careful monitoring of the results to guide subsequent fine-tuning of the regulations (Bhatt 1990). I t does seem clear, empirically, that limited parking supply and higher parking prices are associated wilh higher proportions of commuters using transit. Case studies suggest that the use of parking measures and mass transit, in combination, can be more effective than when used separately; however, little discussion as to how to detennine an effective combination was found. Development in downtown areas is to suburban competition. Two reasons for the establishment of suburban employment centers is that land is less expensive than in the downtown and accessibility by automobile is not a problem. Whichever parking controls might be introduced into the downtown should be studied against how the attractiveness of the downtown would consequently compare with the suburban areas under the new conditions. Blariket controls imposed over the entire downtown area may prove harmful and unworkable. The literature suggests the need to carefully divide the downtown into subareas based upon market characteristics and to tailor parking management to the particular needs of each area. Efforts to coordinate parking and mass transit policy require cooperation between the public and private sectors. Effective dis i ncentives to park must be combined with corresponding incentives to use transit; otherwise, the parking management effort may have unintended consequences For example, programs to encourage carpooling may result in transit riders switching to carpools. THE PLANNING AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Coordinated parking and transit policies must be consistent with plans that guide the development of the state's overall transportation system." This section of the report discusses the local and plans that form the planning and regulatory framework for transportation systems planning in Florida. Florida Transportation Plan and State Comprehensive Plan The principal statewide transportation planning docume nt is the F lorida Transportation Plan ( FTP). As part of a comprehensive planning and budgetary process, the FTP is implemented at all levels of government to guide transportation decisions within the State Comprehensive Plan IS


(SCP). The SCP con1ain.s goals and policies that guide Florida's long-range p hysical, social, and economic growth. It was developed in accordance with key regulatory documents and legislation including Florida's Transportation Code and the GroWth Management Act. The SCP directs the development of special purpose or "translational" plans to guide transportation and other resource decisions. Using the SCP and these "translational" plans, an Agency Functional Plan is prepared by each state agency, comprehensive regional plans are prepared by the eleven regional planning councils, local governments prepare local comprehensive plans and shortand long-range plans are prepared by metropolitan planning organizations for each urbanized area. (The FTP is the FDOT' s Agency Functional Plan.) Growth Management Ao:t The act mandates a planning process that requires all local comprehensive plans to be consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. The act establishes a hierarchy of plans, mandating that local plans, county plans, and special district or agency plans be consistent with regional plans and that regional plans be consistent with the state plan. The act also requir es that infrastructure be provided concurrently with new development. In order to ensure that the infrastructure being provided is adequa te, level-of-servic e standards are to be established by local governments. The growth management law requires local governments to set service standards for roads water and wastewater treatmen t, solid waste disposal, drainage, and recreation. Roads pose the greateSt chal lenge in complying with the level of-service standards. Since most roads in the urban center are already at unacceptable levels-of service, concurring requirement of the act may, in some cases, cause development to shift to less congest ed suburban locations (Koe ning 1990 ) Large developmen t projects are referred to as developments of regional impact (ORi s ) The act requires that special permits be obtained after impact assessments and mitigation plans are established. TOM initiatives tbat include parking management measures are often part of these mitigation plans. DRI projects can become "Florida Quality Developments" if specific criteria are met, earning a certain number of points. These points can be accumulated by incorporating various design features, amon g them the presence of TDM initiatives that can include various parking management strategies (Center for Urban Transportation Research 1992). 16


Systematic P1annigg Prosflis The formulation of the Florida Transportation Plan utilized the systematic planning process prescribed in the Growth Management Acl The systematic planning process is an integrated approach for dealing with Florida's rapid growth that recognizes the need for cooperative, coordinated and consistent planning at all levels of government. The goals of the process include: To provide a necessary framework, consistent wi th th e S C P, to guide transportation planning in the state. To identifY statewide and local transportation needs and issues by documenting transportation system conditions and projecting future mobility demand. The systematic planning process consists of seven components. Each component is authorized by Florida Statute s.399.155(5)(b) and is described below: Establish a Framework. A systematic planning process must be established stating those factors that are to be used in developing the FTP. Using this process, all major transportation facilities will be planned and coordinated with the overall plan for local regional and state development. This process ensures that transportation planning in the state is consistent with the SCP. Identify Needs and Issues. Future mobility conditions and demand s must be documented; existing and new service must be considered. The conditions and needs must be classified by district and include a cost component. Evaluate Facilities and Services. Appropriate methods are to be applied to evaluate facilities and services This component also requires that the evaluation methods result in an effective balance of transportation modes consistent with overall transportation planning needs. Three types of evaluations are specified: the FOO T Plan Review Process, the FOOT Policy Formulation Process, and the FDOT Modal System Plans. Establish Priorities. This component establishes the priorities for programs and funding leve l s. It also incorporates the project priorities of the MPOs to the fu ll e s t extent possible Solicit and Consider Recommendations. The F OOT is tequired to solicit and consider recommendations from the general public and governmental entities. Assess Funding Levels and Other Resources Needed. The funding levels and other resources required to provide the needed f a cilities and services must be assessed. Monitor Ongoing Planning and Implementation. Ongoing planning and project implementation must be conducted by the FOOT and other governmental entities to determine compliance with, and the effectiveness of, the FTP. 17


Summan The body of state regulation provides the fram ework for transportation policy formulation, and the systematic planning process provides a method for incorporating various government agencies into that process. The result of the planning process is a series of documents tha t must be prepared by the various levels of government. These local and state plans are incorporated into the Florida Transportation Plan and the State Comprehensive Plan. The regulatory framework requires that these planning efforts be coordinated. As a result of this mandate, planning efforts to address other issues must be considered in the transportation planning process. Therefore, given the regulatory framework, issues that have competing ends, such as the public provision of parking and investment in mass transit, require coordination. Consideration of other initiatives that have an impact on both mass transit and automobile use, such as the Clean Air Act, should also be incorporated into these planning efforts. The regulatory framework sets the stage by requiring the coordination and consideration of existing conditions as well as future demands in transportation. The challenge then becomes to create policies and planning documents that respond appropriately and thoroughly to the regulations. OVERVIEW OF URBAN AREAS T here are sixteen urban areas within the state of Florida that receive Section 9 funding for transit service. For this study four representative urban areas were chosen from the sixteen to more closely examine their efforts to coordinate parking and transit policies. Table 1 provides information for each of the sixteen urban areas regarding population, the local transit system and transit service area, and the principal local agency responsible for developing parking policy As shown in the table Miami is the largest .city in Florida and has the largest transit sys tem with 591 vehicles in service during peak periods. Six of the remaining sixteen urban areas have more than one hundred vehicles in service during peak periods. Miami also has the highest transit ridership, w ith 77.1 million passenger trips in 1990. Only Manatee County Transit, Lakeland Area Mass Transit, and Space Coast Area Transit reported fewer than one mill ion passenger trips in 1990. Space Coast Area Transit, which serves the Melbourne area and Brevard County, is the only on e of the sixteen urban systems that does not operate fixed-route transit service. 18


"" Table 1 Gen e ra l In forma tion o n Florida's S ixt ee n Urban Area s City lakeland M iami P&nsa cola Palm Beoct\ I 1990 City Pop. 84.770 58,165 50,961 '73 ----&7,64, 3 Tf11neit Provider S.rvlc:t Art a a rea County Volusla OM$ion Oistfict County I sarasota County Atera Tran< 1 Urbanized rea County I Ta rrran cty of Tala h a ... e I City of exduding nansit 1 P1ant City I Palm Autho(Cy 1990 Pass.Trlpo' 592,430 Oporotod In llax. Strvke' 9 19 Agency RespoMiblt for Developing Parking Polloy oepar1ment P lanning Departmen t of Pubilo Wottct 75 I Municipal Parking SouiCIS: 'Cenllflor lhtlan Transporta6on -tdl. '1990 Perfannance EvalJallon of F tortda Transi Systems; Patl1, Trend Analysis. 1984-1990." (1992). 'Bureau of Eo:momic and 8u$ine$e RliMIJch .. 1991 Fbrida statistical AbsbWCt (1991)..


The agency responsible for developing parking policy, as listed in Table I, generally has jurisdiction only over the central city within the metropolitan area. In most cases, city councils or county commissions determine the parking policy with input from their planning departments or traffic engineers. Miami has a parking authority, which will be discussed in detail later. Sarasota has a parking management division within the city commission, and Ft. La uderdale has a parking administrator. In Tampa and Orlando, parking policy recommendations are handled within the division of public works. The selection of the four urban areas was determined in consultation with FDOT staff. A principal consideration was to include one large urban area, one small urban area and two midsize urban areas. Other criteria used to select the four areas included data availability, geographic diversity, CBD employment density, and transit ridership. The presence of transportation management associations or other progressive transportation initiatives also was considered. The selections were mad e after an extensive data collection effort. A survey was developed based upon the data required to complete the scope of services. Additional data needs were identified through a literature review. Representatives from each city were surveyed by telephone to determine data availability and types of parking policies and programs currently in place. Table 2 provides a summary of the info rmation obtained from these telephone interviews. The four urban areas selected for further examination are Miami, Ft. Lauderdale Orlando, and Ft. Myers. Miami was chosen because it is the largest urban area in the state. Ft. Lauderdale was chosen because it represents a medium-size urban area, and the examination of the regional impacts of parking and transit policies (e.g., in the Miami and Ft. Lauderdale region) were considered to be of important research v alue. Orlando was chosen for its progressive approach toward transportation management, as demonsttated by three functioning TMAs. Ft. Myers was chosen as a representative of a smaller city. The four areas are discussed in greater detail in the following section. THE FOU.R SELECTED AREAS This report focuses upon the coordination of parking and transit policies in the CBDs of these four urban areas. This section of the report presents a general overview of each of the four urban areas, including demographic information and employment data, which is summarized i n Table 3. It is important to note that while Table 3 is intended to illustrate their relative size differences using a number of variables, caution is advised when comparing land areas and, in 20


.... Table 2. Interview Survey S ummary Factors Considered CBD Fringe Parl4 t1f':lf,i? .... \ -.. ;j . ::fA;;,. I! '* .... *'lr 13 St. Petersburg 14 Tallahassee 1 5 Tampa 16 West Palm Beach I 1 3 14 15 16


particular, CBD square miles and empl oyee s per square mile. There are no standard cr i teria used by these cities to e stablish CBD boundaries and no attempt was made h ere to identify boundaries based on consistent criteria. This study simp l y used each city's prevailing, or generally accepted, boundar ies. As a resu l t, there Is some distortion in the measures noted above. For example, the way in which Ft Lauderdale defines its CBD results in an empl oyment density value significantly greater than Miami. However, Miami is generally accepted to have the largest and most concentrated CBD in the state. This report also discusses each area's planning an d regulatory framework, focusing on specific planning efforts and city ordinances that are relevant to the relationship between transit and parking. Availab l e parking data for each area are also presented The transit authority for each of the urban areas is also described, inc l uding an overview of the types of service provided. Also described are any special transportation demand management programs in-place, such as transportation management associations. TABLE 3. 1990 Statisti cs for t h e Four Selected Areas. . . BQ . > : .;u:._ .. . County . c;,y. . ... c ... a;ns ... . . . . .. .. ''' ': ... A'iew. : . . .. : ' n ''' -; . .' ' City . Atea Er:np. per Erilp> per. VehiOper.:. iff.i'$$on9er. (County) Pop. Emp. (Ac,...). Pop .. Emp. : 'SquarO : t.R,Max.;.

M iami There are 27 municipalities within Dade CoiUlty of which the largest and most populous is the city of Miami. In 1990, Miami's population totaled 358,548 persons representing approximatel y nineteen percent of the total Dade CoiUlty populat ion of 1 ,937,094. The central business district has an approximated 104,000 person s employed within its two square miles. This makes for a high-densi ty urban core of 52,000 employees per square mile, compared with COIUlty-wide employment of approximately 450 persons per square mile . Miami's proximity to the Canbbean Islands and Latin America, and its subtropical marine cl. imate, which attracts retirees and tourists, allows the city to have a diverse and culturally rich population. The economy is diversified, with it s principal sectors including international trade and finance, tourism insurance, real estate, communications agriculture, light manufacturing, high technology, textile manufacturing, health care, and education. Employment within the downtown is principally retail trade, international finance, and professional and governmental services. Miami International Airport has the second highest level of international passenger traflic in the United States, and the Port of Miami is the world's largest cruise port, both reflecting the city's importance in tourism and international business. Parking data was gathered for the area bounded by NE 5th Street to the north, Biscayne Bay to the east, the Miami River to the south, and 1-95 to the west. Thi s area is shown in Figure 2. This portion of Miami's central business district is the same as the study area used in the "Dade CoiUlty Parking/Transit Ridership Study" conducted by K. T. Analytics in 1987. City offi cials, however, indicate that this area is about 80 percent of the CBD area defined by the city. P lanning and Regu l atory Framewor k There are var i ous organizations that affect publi c transportat ion within Dade County The MPO, county, city, and transit agency all have comprehensive planning efforts that address t:ransjlortation. Transportation planning and legislation that influence parking and transit in Miami are contained in the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood PlWl and the Miami Code. The Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000. The transportation goal is containe d in this plan states; 23


Figure 2 Miami Central Business District Study Area* Seole Mi&:Mi. PlMnina 0 D .;k eo.,.,.ry Ricknhip Study, 1987 foot Ana COm:tpoftd$ with OM u.ttd in K.T. Analyt)c( report. 24


Maintain an e.ffoctive and cost efficient traffic circulation network within the City of Miami that provides transportation for all persons and facilitates commercial activity, and which is consistent with, and fort hers, neighborhood plans, supports economic development conserves energy, and protects and enhances the natural environment. The plan also enumerates various objectives and policies and establishes milestones to measure progress in reaching these objectives. For example, in order to meet the objective of roadways and parking facilities that fit the needs of an IU"ban center, Policy TR-1.1. 2 of the plan sets a target passenger vehicle capacity of 1.6, and headways of 20 minutes for express and local buses and rail. The plan includes other policies designed to work toward achieving the objective of a transportation system that meets the needs of an IU"ban center Policy TR-1.1.15 directly addresses the supply of parking. It states that minimums and maximums will be used for on-site parking "to promote economic growth to facilitate local traffic circulation, and to enco\U"age public transportation use." Another transportation-related policy in'(olves intergovernmental coordination The policy states that through coordinated efforts the city will encourage the Metro-Dade Transit Authority (MOTA) to expand its system, work with MDT A in policy formulation, and encourage MOTA to adopt le vel-of-service standards that are compatible with the cost-effective operation of a mass transit system. The T ransportation Plan Technical Advisory Committee provides another intergovernmental mechanism for policy coordination. The plan states that the city should use its membership on this committee to participate in the formulation of traffic circulation polices and to support efforts to increase fringe parking at Metrorail stations and express stops The city's land development regulations are also used as a policy m e chanism for meetin g the objective of a transportation system that serves the needs of an urban center. A. policy states that land development regulations should require adequate parking that is consistent with demand These regulations are to be used in conjunction with the Department of Off-Street Par ki ng (DOSP) to incre ase the supply of short-term parking as a means of facilitating the retail activity and to develop peripheral parking garages near expressways and arterials to reduce congestion in the core. In another development-related policy, new downtown developm e nt is required to implement measures to reduce vehicular traffic and increase automobile occupancy and transit ridership. 25


An objective in the city s land development regulations involves the need for efficient mass transit and paratransit services. Objective TR-1.5 states: Although mass transit can be operated within the City of Miami only under the absolute authority of Metropolitan Dade County, the City of Miami's continued development requires the provision of efficien t mass transit and paratransit services that serve existing and future trip generators and attractors, the provision of safe and convenient mass transit passenger tranifer terminal facilities and the accommodation of the special needs of the City of Miami's populatiott Therefore, the City of Miami will support Metropolitan Daik County in the provision of these essential mass transit services The policies formulated to implement these objectives also draw upon existin g interg overnmental initia t ives. The city states that thr o ugh its intergovernmental coordina tion policies it will support Metro-Dade's effort to link t ransit lin es at intermodal termin als'an d that it will implement p rojects that will assist in mee ting the regional objective of increasing transit ridership by 50 percent of total person trips during peak and 30 percent during o on-pea.k Land development regulations will be used to meet the objective by directing high density comme rcial and residential developm ent to areas near Metrorail and Metromove r stations and by encouraging transit ridership to the University of Miami/ Jackson M em orial Hospital and the Civic Center to decre ase the need for surface parking Miami Code. The code con tains the city's parking policies and regulations. Included in the code are a schedule of parking fines, a description of prohibited parkin g locations overtime parking regulations, rates and hours for off-street parking, and the disposition of revenues derived from meters. S ection 14-71 of the code requires that transportation con trol measures be implemented ln conjunction with new d evelopmen t pro j ects. It requir es that rideshariog information packages be distributed and a n updated referral list for joining and vanpool s be maintaine d Ridesharing information is to be obtaine d from ques t ioru1aires provided by Metropolitan Dade Co unty and distributed to all tenants' employees. The code also requires the display of mass transit route and schedule information in prominent places within new developments. Transit amenities such as bus shelters and bus turnaround lanes must be provided upon the recomme n datio n of the city planning director Section 14-71 also requires new development to reduce peak-hour trip generation t hrough scheduling staggered work hours for employees, w here p r act ical. 26


Section 14-71 also specifies the nwnber of parking spaces by land use type, and also . provides alternatives to parking facility construction. One alternative is for the developer of the property to reduce the nwnber of required spaces by executing a permanent agreement to purchase two transit passes in lieu of each required parking space. A second alternative is for the developer to purchase or lease parking spaces that are located within 600 feet of a Metrorail or Metromover station, or the tenninus of a city-approved parking shuttle system. A third option is for the developer to. make a one-time payment equal to the cost of each space and to lease the spaces from the Department of Off-Street Parking. A representative of the Downtown Development Authority stated, however, that no developers have yet availed themselves of these options. The Jack of development activity was cited as a primary factor for this Jack of response, but as the pace of activity increases, it is anticipated that developers will take advantage of these options. The code also req u ires large-scale developments to submit a transportation control measures (TCM) plan as part of the application f

Table 4. Miami Parking Requireme n ts. Resident i al None 2 per dwelling Office 1 per 1,000 sq ft GFA* 1 per 600 sq ft GFA Retail None 1 per 300 sq ft GFA Hotel None 1.5 per room Restaurant None 1 per 100 sq ft GFA other Non e 1 per 1,000 sq ft G F A Gross Floor AUla Source: City of Miami. "Miami C o de street parking facilities in th e city. The Miam i City Commission retains final authority over a variety. of the agency's functions i n cluding rate structure and bond issuance. DOSP operates facilitie s t hat it owns, those owned by other governmental units, and facilitie s that are managed under lease agreements. DOSP shares responsibility with the Miami Police Department for ticketing and tow i ng illegally parked vehicles It also shares responsibility for enforceme n t of parking regu l ations w i th Metropolitan Dade County, but receives no parking fme revenues. Two-thirds of the parking fine re v enue is distributed to the City of Miami, an d Metropo li tan Dade County receives the remaining third. During the fiscal year 1990 fine revenues totaled approximately $697,000 for the city and $348,000 for Metropolitan Dade County (Department of Off-Street Parking 1990 p.2). DOSP also ha s a role in community development. The age n cy's financial report states tbat the ... t r aditional role of meeting the parking needs ... has been expanded to include fostering an awareness of parking as an integral comp o nent of a balanced transporta t ion system and the community development process. In t aking on th i s new role the age n cy ha s become involved in neig h borhood beautification and econom i c development projects. Parking In 1987 the Parking Tas k Force, com p rised of officials of the City of l\lliami and Dade Coun t y r e p resentatives of the downtown business community, and other int erested parties, 28


commissio n ed the "Dade County Parking/Tra!isH IDclefShip Study The purpose of the study was t o analyze how po li cies involvjng parking pricing and supply in the downtown could increase Metrorail transit use. The report offered recommendations for downtown parking policy and for improving Metrorail station parking and access. These recommendations will be discussed in Technical Memorandum No.2. The data presented here o n parking supply rates and usage were obtained from this report. The total CB D study area parking supply in 1987, the mos t recen t year an inventory was conducted, is shown in Table 5. Within the CBD there were 22,500 parking spaces in 1987 21 600 offs treet and 900 onstreet m e tered spaces. Of the total, approximate l y 8,300 (37%) spaces are operated by DOSP; I 1,700 (52%) are privately owned and operated spaces open to the public and 2 500 (II %) are private spaces. T a b l e 5 Miami CBD Parking S upply '<' ,v, y v ..,, '"',; , d }If). ;(.4.J, .,., .. 1"" ''1" . .. : : . .: r .. "-. . .... ,.., r r" v.. C

' Tabl e 6. Mi am i P u blic Parki ng Rates On-street Hourly Off-street Hourly Dally CBD East Daily, CBD West Mon t hly CBD East CBDWest $1.00 $1.00/30 m inutes $8.00 max./day $3 00-8.00 $1.20-2.00 $50.00-80 00 $25 00-40.00 $0.50-1.00 nla $5. 00-8.00 $2 00-4.00 $60.00-85.00 $30 .0040.00 Souroe: K.T Analytlcs, Inc. "Dade Co unty Parking/Transit Ridefsh., Study." Frederick, Md.: K .T Analytlcs, Inc. (January 1987) The parking study also provided information regarding the extent t o which downtown parking facilitjes are utilized. Usage was summarized for two points in time, 9:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. Survey results, which are shown in Tab l e 7, indicate that many facilities operate near capacity. (For parking utilization estimates, planners generally consider 85 percent of a facility's total supp l y of spaces to be its "practical capacity.") T a bl e 7 M i ami CB D Parking Utilization : ... . .. . < : . . ..... !' -.>". . .. . Ficility .. Pa rkin g Capacity ry,pe . iiri1 : . . .. . . Municipal 8,300 74% 90% P u blic Pay Park i ng 11, 700 98% 100% Private 2,500 98% 100% Total 22,500 89"/o 96% Source: K.T. Analytics, Inc. oac1e Cou nty Parking/Transit Ridetsh., Study. Frederick, MD: K.T. Analytic$. I n c (Januai'J 1987). The survey of on -street metered spaces conducted for the study showed that metered spaces were close to 98 p e rcent occ u pied during the 9:30 a.m to 4:30 p.m. time period. A license plate survey suggested that apprOlomate l y 15 percent of the short-term metered spaces 30


were being used for long term parking. The survey indicated that the average duration of persons parking less than tJuee hours was about one hour The study concluded that some displacement (approximately 15 percent) of short-term parkers was happening as a result of meter feeding by long-term parkers. This displacement may have a negative impact on downtown businesses. Compared to other cities, the K.T. Analytics study indicated that the 15 percent incidence of meter feeding is low While the study judged the level of parking enforcement in downtown Miami adequate, it concluded that increased parking enforcement may be required if rates for long-term parking were raised. Tran s i t The Metro-Dade Transit Agency (MDTA), a department of Dade County, manages an integrated transit sntem cons i sting of light rail (Metrorail), a downtown people mover (Metromover), bus service (Metrobus), and paratransit that operates throughout the county. In 1990, MOTA provided 77.1 million one-way passenger trips. MDTA is managed by a director w h o is appointed by and directly responsible to the county manager. T h e county m anager is appointed by the board of county comm i ssioners Metrobus consists of a network of 74 bus rou tes which are operated throughout Dade County. Most bus routes connect with Metrorail, a 21-mile elevated light rail line that provides transporta t ion to 21 station stops. It connects downtown Miami to 12 stations to the north, including an interchange with a regional commuter line (Tri Rail) and 8 stations to the south. Metrorail runs weekdays from 5:30a.m. to midnight, with service frequency every 7 5 minutes . during peak hours and every 15 minutes during all other times. Metromover operates within downtown Miami on an elevated I. 9-rnile-long circular route connecting nine downtown s tations. It connects with Metrorail at the Government Center Station, as well as with most downtown Metrobus routes. Metromover's State Plaza/Arena Station is within one-quarter mile of seven parking lots situated northwest of the station and downtown. These lots contain a combin"ed total of 2,765 parking spaces, which, in effect, adds an additional 12 percent to the CBD parking supply These spaces serve a dual ro l e: primarily, they serve the parking needs of the Miami Arena and secondary they provide CBD fringe parking spaces for commuters destined for downtown 31


The :MDT A Metro pass, \\'hich can be purchased monthly, allows unlimited transfers among the Metromover Metrobus, and Metrorail services and it includes a parking pennit. Discount passes are offered to employee poolS arid t o college students. Metro-Dade fares are provided in Table 8. Table 8. Metro Dade Transit Authority Fare Structure. Metrobus or Metrorail Special* Express Bus Speciar Metromover/Shuttle Bus Spec ial" Bus/Rail Special" Mover-to-Rail Special Rai l -to-Mover Metro pass Discount Metropass Group Discount Pass (5 99 passes) Group Discount Pass (100 or more passes) College Student Pass Monthly Metrorail Parl

Regi.onal rail service is also provided, as mentioned previously, by the Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail). Established by the Florida Legisl ature Tri-Rail is an independent authority maintaining a cominuter rail system in Broward, Dade, and Palm Beach counties. Tri-Rail is governed by a nine-member board of directors, four representing Broward County, two representing Palm Beach County, and three representing Dade County. There are also two ex-officio members. Originally a temporary demonstration project for use during construction ofl-95, Tri-Rail is now a permanent rail operator with 30 trains operating daily between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. The service is somewhat reduced on the weekends. The system has connections to both feeder buses (operated by each county's transit agency) and Metrorail. Free parking is provided at each station, except for the Metrorail connection station, which has no parking. The fare for a round trip on Tri-Rail is $5.00; a monthly pass can be purchased for $65.00; and a weekly pass costs $ 18.50. TDM Initiatives Gold Coast Commuter Services is a regional commuter assistance program serving the southeast Florida counties of Palm Beach, Broward, and Dade. Gold Coast was originally an organization to provide carpool matching for the I-95 expansion. However, in 1991 Gold Coast was expanded to provide assistance in implementing TDM programs throughout the community. Gold Coast's current focus is to provide assistance in the formulation of the Downtown Fort Lauderdale TMA, the Golden Glades TMA in north Miami, and the Civic Center TMA in downtown Miami. Gold Coast is also performing a regional employee transportation survey. A consultant for the city recently completed a congestion management plan. The focus of the plan is on ride sharing strategies. Four areas in the city were recommended for TMAs. The Board of County Commissioners recently passed a resolution requiring one area, the Civic Center area, to form a TMA. Several hospitals, including Jackson Hospital, the University of Miami Hospital, and Veterans Hospita l are located in the area. Orlando The Orlando area is known worldwide for its tourist attractions, such as Walt Disney World, Universal Studios, Sea World, and others. Although tourism is. of primary importance 33


other important elements of the economy include manufacturing, communications, medicine, agriculture, and the movie industry. In 1990, Orlando's population totaled 164 ,693, compared to the total population of Orange County at 677,491. Approximately 35,000 persons commute to work in Orlando's central business district which is referred to locally as the Downtown Development District. Development within the CBD is overseen by the Downtown Development Board. Composed of five directors, the board is charged with the mission of revitalizing and maintaining downtown Orlando as an attractive, economically healthy, and socially desirable area. The board is funded by an ad valorem tax on non-homestead properties within a special taxing district. The central business district, illustrated in Figure 3, is approximately 2 miles from north to south and 1.25 miles from east to west, encompassing I, 185 acres. It is bounded on the north by Colonial Drive, Interstate 4, and Ivanho e Boulevard; on the east by Highland Avenue (to Livingston Street) and Summerlin Avenue; on the south by Palmer Street, Ponce de Leon P lace, and Gore Street; and on the west by Division Avenue ( t o South Street) and Parramore Avenue:. Orlando officials have made a decision to direct development into a linear core within the centra l business district There are eight districts within this core. Orlando's parking is managed by the Parking Department of the Public Works Division. Parking policies and programs are approved by the Public Works Directors, based on input from the parking department. Planning and Regulatory Framework A nu mber of docume nts contain parking and transit related policies for the Orlando area. They include the Growth Management Plan (GMP), and the Orlando Municipal Code. The city also has the Parking Bureau, which is responsible for operating and maintaining s ix parking structures. The Bureau reports directly to the Public Works Director. As a city department its budget is determined by the City Council. Growth Management Plan. The Downtown Element of the OMP provides deve lopment goals and strategies for individual neighborhoods and the downtown. It recommends integrated parking and transit policies in land use, urban design, and transportation. The plan is intended to provide a high level of accessibility to the downtown through increased transit usage reduced 34


2 I f 4 F i gure 3 O rlando C e ntral Business Dis trict 8 3 5 CBD Boundary Parking District B oundary N !f [ > 0 1000 Feet Source: Growth Management Plan Downtown Element, Orlando Ple.nning & Development Department


' dependence on the automobile, and a qtliiliiy pedestrian environment To do this, the plan proposes a combination of expanded transit services, higher fees for parking, and restrictions on the availability of parking As stated in the GMP, "a variety of transportation options from buses to trolleys to a fixed-rail system will move people from parking structures to their places of work. . without the need for the automob ile." The GMP recommends usage of maximum parking space ratios for city developments and specifies that approved new parking shall meet the needs of short-term parkers. As a taxget, approximately 20 percent of the parking spaces built for office use should be used for shortterm parking. Transportation system management measures are also recommended in the OMP. For exam p le, it recommends that developments seek to. maximize potential tenant carpooling. As a target, approximately 15 percent of the most accessible on-site parking should be allocated for carpool use, provided that a viable TMA is developed. The GMP also recommends that short term and carpool parking shall be marketed, priced and operated in a manner that discourages long-term parking or single occupant veruc les. The Capital Improvements Element of the GMP is another tool for the achievement of Orlando's goals. To ensure attainment of standards identified in the Downtown OR! Deve lopment Order, certain needed improvements to parking and transit are identified. These include seven new parking garages, the improvement and e xpansion of two surface parking lots, the purchase of transit equipment, transit corridor improvements, and a light rail alignment study. Orlando Municipal Code. The code contains a number of parking-related ordinances. Zoning ordinances are contained in Section 61.400 of its Land Development Code, Chapter 61. The Orlando Land Development Code is a set of procedures, standards, and regulations that implemen t the goals objectives, and policies of the GMP. The design guidelines of the code for parking facilities address the building-to-sidewalk relationship but do not address location or coordi nation with transit. The code's requirements outlining minimum and maximum parking requirements by land use type for the central business district are presented in Table 9. Some nonresidential uses are e>

Table 9 . Orlando Parking Requirements. Si n gle-family Residential 1 per 2 patrons Mu lti-fami ly Res id ential 1 per unit depending on number of bedrooms Non-residential; 2 per 1000 sq tt GFA GFA">10,000 sq ft Non-residential; None GFA<10,000 sq It; with on-site parking F loor Area None None 3 per 1;000 sq ft GFA 2 per 1,000 sq tt GFA Source: Orlando Ptanni'tg andOevelopment OeQartment. "Growth Management Ptan Downtown E lement." ( 1 99 1 ). Currently developers of projects in the eigh t district downtown are given an option of making a payment to the city's Parking Program Trust Fund in lieu of meeting minimum parking requirements. Under this option developers may reduce the amount of required parking by up to 20 percent in exchange for trust fund contributio ns Funds contributed to this trust fund sh all be used for the following: Acquire construct, develop or reimburse advanced funds for off-str eet parking and re l ated facilit ie s; either permanent or interim i n c l uding land as well as associated professional services for design, engineering, financing or similar required functions Fund the operating costs associated with new, upgraded, and/or expanded offstreet parking areas serving new development within the Downtown. Provide transit or transit related services to the offsite parking areas. Pro v ide necessary technical or planning studies to periodically assess parking n eeds or As an incentive for developers, th e Land Development Code guideline s contain a bo n us system "Parki ng Alternatives and Bonuses": Under the bonus system, the developer provides public amenities, inclu d ing transit ameniti e s, in return for an allowance of additional floor space or floor area ratio. A problem cited by several officials however is that the current allowab le floor area ratio is sufficiently high for most deve l opers; there will few developers seeking to obtain a higher allowance. 37


. Orlando's on-street parking policies and iegulations are contained in Chapter 39 of the traffic code. This section of the Orlando Municipal Code outlines parkin g fines, enforcement responsibili ties prohibited parking locations, overtime parking regulations, rates and hours for metered parking, and the disposition of funds derived from the meters. The police department i s responsible for enforcing o n street parking regulations. In S ec tion 39.31 of the traffic code, the city transportation engineer is charged with the responsibility of administering, collecting, safeguarding, and accountin g for all revenue d e rived from parking meters. The city transportatio n engineer is also responsible for setting the rates for parking meters, as outlined in Section 39.33. The hours and days of operation of on-stre et meters and off-street facilities are con tained in Section 39.32. On-street parking meters are in operation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily, excep t Sundays and holidays. Most off-street parking faciliti es are in operation from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00a.m dai ly, except for S undays and city holidays Two public off-street facilities are in operation 24 hours a day. P a rldng Te n percent of Orlando's CBD land area (comprised of the eight districts shown in Figure 3) is utilized for parkin g facilities. There are approximatel y 35,000 employe es in downtown Orlando. Approximately 58 percent of these employees are classified as office employees, the largest category. Eleven percent are government employees, I 0 percent work in services, while the remaining 21 percent are employed in various industry groups, including retail, restaurant, lodging, industrial, and hospital. There are also appr oximately 35,000 parking spaces, resulting in roughly one parking space per empl o yee. The total supply of parking within the eigh t district CBD is shown i n Table I 0. Parking utili zation data, collected in a 1991 survey, are shown in Table ll. Utilization rates vary significantl y among th e selected facilities As indicated by the peak utilization rates, many facilities are very under utilized. If these selected faciliti e s are repre sentative of parking utilization within the entire CBD there is a significant level of unused parking capacity in the downtown. 38


On-W'eot Metered 221 345 261 175 475 525 40 1 50 2 ,192 100% Non-metered nla n/a nla nla nla n la nla nla nla nla Subtotal 221 345 261 175 475 525 40 150 100% Off .. treet Lot 1, 181 2.482 3.087 1,886 3,398 1 892 1 935 1 720 17,581 23% Source: 011ando Plann i ng a n d OevaJopme n t Department. "Growth Management Plan Downtown Element" (1991). Transit Transit s;rvices are provided by Lynx Transit (formerly Tri-County Transit). An independent authority Lynx was created by int erlocal agreement to provide public transportation services as the Section 9 fixed-route operator. The board of directors of Lynx Transit is composed of representatives of Orange County, Seminole County, Osceola County, the City of Orlando, the East Central Regional Planning Council, and the Florida Department of Transportation. Lynx Transit operates a radial network of routes with the downtown bus terminal serving as the terminating and transfer station. There are 26 routes that originate and terminate in the downtown and four crosstown routes. There ate three direct routes from the Seminole County suburbs to the Matli n Marietta plant in southwest Orlando. Currently, the agency has one park and-ride facility served by fixed-route transit service. In 1990, 8 026,790 trips were prov ided by Lynx. Most bus routes operate six days per week. Twenty four routes have one-hour headways, with the remaining six ro utes operate on thirty-minute headways. Weekday operation begins between 5:00a.m. and 6:00a.m. and ends at 7:00p.m., with some routes operating until 10:00 p.m The fare stru ctur e for Lynx Transit is shown in Table I 2. 39


Table 11. Orlando CBD Parking Utilization for Selected Sites. 8 public 378 68 47% 408 permit 74 55 13 penn it 1 63 Sources: City of Orlando. ortando Ga1aga Survey." (1991); CitY of Orlando. Parking Survey (1991} 22% 18% 60% 75% 32% 59% 10% 10:30 a.m. a.m.: p .m. a.m.; 2:30 p.m. a .m. 9:30-11:30a.m. 9:30a.m p m a.m.; p.m. A downtown circulator called the "Freebee" also provides shuttle service between the CentroPlex Garage (a fringe parking facility formerly known as the Meter Eater Garage) and the downtown. T he Freebee opera tes o n a four-to-six-minute headway. As it s name implies, the shuttle service is free. 40


Table 12. Lynx Fare Structure. SingleRide Fares Basic Special' School-children .. Tra ns fer Multi-Ride Fares 1 O-R ide Ticket Book 20-Ride Ticket Book Pass senior citizens and handicapped Individuals "Students 18 and under Source: Lynx.TranSil $0.75 $0.30 $0.10 $0.10 $7.00 $12.00 $30.00 The region is also evaluating whether to implement commuter rail service. The Central Florida Commuter Rail Authority was created by Florida Statute to build, operate, maintain, and manage a commuter rail system in the area of Seminole Orange, Osceola, and Brevard counties. The rail system is currently in the planning stages. The authority consists of nine members, including one county commissioner from each of the four participating counties, five members appointed by the governor including the mayor of a city within the area served by the authority and an ex-officio nonvoting member. TDM Initiatives The Down town Orlando TMA was created in 1990 as a resul t of an areawide DRI recommendation. The TMA promotes vanpooling, ride sharing, alternative work hours, transportation allowances and the downtown circulator system. The Growth Management P lan recommends cer1ain actions for the TMA. These include coordinating efforts with the city to manage longterm and short-term parking, restructuring rates, implementing a higher percentage of short-term parking, aiding in locating off-site parking locations, and restricting total par king supply. The GMP states that the TMA should pursue the use of a transportation allowance benefit while discouraging free parking and parking subsidies for single occupant vehicles. It further re commends that the ThiA work with local transit 41


providers and the city to implement the lise of off-si t e parking lots on the d owntown fringe and at suburban locations with shuttle service to the downtown. Ft. Laud erda l e The city of Ft. Laud erd ale is located in Broward County on Florida's southeast coast. The city encompasses 31.5 square miles (3 percent of the county's total land area) and had a 1990 populatio n of 149,377 (12 percent of the county population of 1,255,488) The city is part of a growing tri-county region (includin g Broward, Dade and Palm Beach Counties) Ft. Lauderdal e is characterized by a pattern of low-density, mixed-use land development. The Future Land Use Element of the City of Fort Lau derdale Comprehensive Plan, 1989, identifi es this pattern of deve lopment as non-conduciv e to mass transit. Presently four percent of the land within the Ft. Lauderdale incorporated area is still vacant and available for deve lopment; therefore most future changes in land use will more like l y occur from redevelopm ent. The vacant land is larg ely zoned for industrial, institutional, and commercial uses. Downtown Ft. Lauderdale is the financial and cultural core of Broward County The downtown is also the governmental center of the county and bas a significant go vernmental employment representing federal, state, and local government agencies. In 1990, there were app r o ximately 6.8 million square feet of total floor space in the downtown; of this 3.3 million square fe et had been adde d recently. V acancy rates range from approximately 20 to 25 percent The downtown has approximately 30,000 persons employed within its boundaries. I t is e x pected that employment will increase approximately 25 percent by 1994 due to new office space absorptio n with the fastest growing employment sectors being services and retail. Recent l y adopted policies now permit high-density housing and mixed-us e development in and around the CBD. Unlimite d height and housing density, reduced parkin g requirements, and an interim minimal setback standar d are permitt ed within the CBD. The Future Lan d Use Element identifies the CBD as a regional activity center and recomm ends m ixed-use zoning for the downtown. The Downtown Development Authority was originally established in 1965 by the state legislature as an urban renewal agency for the purpose of revitalizing the downtown core. The authority promoted the l ocati on of government office s and investment in the downtown to 42


stimulate downtown private investment. Its intent is to establish the downtown as a vibrant 24hour environment by creating pedestrian traffic, encouraging retail activity, and finding tenants for office space. The Downtown Development Authority has worked to develop zoning standards that would . direct future uses, densities, and intensities in the Downtown." Ft. Lauderdale's downtown is defined, for purposes of this study, as the area bounded by NE 4th Street to the north, U.S. I to the east, SE 7th Street to the south, and the Florida East Coast Railroad tracks to the west. This area is shown in Figure 4. These boundaries include additional areas outside the urban core as defined in the city's comprehensive p lan These additional areas affect parking operations in the downtown. Planning and Regulatory Framework Transit and parking policies and regulations for the Ft. Lauderdale urban area have been formulated on the city, county and regional levels. Transit planning is conducted by the Broward County Mass Transit Division in conjunction with the Broward County Transportation Planning Division of the Office of Planning. The Broward County Office of Planning administers and coordinates the county's planning functions and comprehensive planning programs. Transportation planning and legis la tion that influence parking and transit are contained in the City of Ft. Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan and the Ft. Lauderdale Code. The management and operation of city-owned parking facilities is the responsibility of the Municipal Parking System. CitY ofFt. Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan. The Traffic Circulation Element of the city's comprehensive plan contains several transit-related policies. These include: Development of programs to enhance employee usage of an operating commuter or urban rail passenger service that will result in a sustained diversion of traffic from congested highway links. Preferential treatment for high-occupancy vehicles on congested links of the stjlte highway system. Expansion of ride sharing efforts, drawing upon the Regional Gold Coast Commuter Services Program sponsored by the FDOT The goal of these policies is to : 43


FJgUre 4 Ft. Lauderdale Centtlll Business District --hea of :U% lttducdoo &om Porki<>J Mioimuo>1 Munk:ipol Lou lllld GN 0 200 ..,. I I J ..... S

Provide and maintain a balanced multi-modal transportation system with a mixture of highway and mass transit services, which coordinates transportation system development with the planned, orderly growth of Broward County, and which fosters a cooperative apphJach io provide safe and efficient operating conditions on the roadway network throughout Broward County. The lVIass Transit Element of the comprehensive plan was derived from the "Mass Transit Element of the Broward County Comprehensive Plan." The city itself provides no transit service and has no direct control over the county transit system. However, it can influence county decisions regarding mass transit through intergovernmental coordination. Such coordination includes providing support, information and input to the county regarding mass transit matters. According to the comprehensive plan, the city's principal transportation goal is "to promote public mass transit system as part of an integrated, multi-modal transportation system ... Ft. Lauderdale Code. The parking regulations for the Ft. Lauderdale are contained in the city code. The code includes a schedule of parking fines, descriptions of prohibited parking locations, overtime parking regulations, rates and hours for off-street parking, the disposition of funds derived f r om meters and off-street parking requ i rements for permitted land uses What is missing from the city code are ordinances that directly address the central business district. The code was written before the emergence of high-rise development in the urban core, thereby failing to give any guidance to pedestrian needs and traffic congestion relief measures. However, the Future Land Use E l ement recommends revisions to the code, giving pedestrian needs priority over the automobile and creating an urban mixed-use district. City parking policies and programs are established by the city council, with input from the city manager the director of finance, and the parking systems manager. Section 26-156 o f the zoning codes gives the finance department the authority over installation regulation, operation, and maintenance of parking meters. This includes any decisions to decrease or increase the number of metered parking spaces and designate new parking zones, as well as any decisions to convert metered parking to attendant cashier -o perated park ing. The zoning ordinances can be found in Section 47 of the code. Section 47-44 includes specifications for locations and amounts of required off-street parking. The minimum required parking spaces to serve land uses in the downtown, which are contained in Section 47-44.3.1 are shown in Table 13. Section 47-44.2 specifies that off-street parking facilities must be located on the same parcel of land that the facilities are intended to serve or with i n 700 feet of the served property. 45


Tab le 13. Ft Lauderdale Parking Requirements. Sing l e Family Res ident i al 1 p er dwelli n g un i t None Multifamily Residenti al 1.2 per dwelling N one Office 1 per 400 sq It GFA I n excess o f None 2 ,500 sq It R eta i l 1 per 400 sq It GFA in e x cess of None 2,500 sq It Hotel 3 per every 4 s l eeping r ooms None Restaurant 1 p e r 50 sq It GF A in rooms for None customer servic e '"Gros s Aoor Area SOurce: C{ty of Ft. Laucterdale "Fl LauderdaJe Cod e." The central core of th e downtow n however is exempt from these parking req u irements; that i s there are no park ing requirements for new buil d ings and develop men ts in th e exempt area P a rkin g A report of the municipal parking system is prepared annually, reviewing the' current status and conditio n of municipal parking facilities an d their performance during the past fiscal year. Parking supply data from t he mo s t rec en t report (1992) are shown in Table 14. As show n in the table, there were 2 ,727 munici p al parking lot spaces, 12,447 parking garage space s and 2,425 metered Onstreet spaces fo r a tota l of 17, 59 9 spaces in the downtown area. These figures i nc l ude private, city, and county parking facilities. Table 15 summarize s parking rates within the downtown. Tra n s i t Broward County Transit the Section 9 fixed route ope r at o r serv i ng the county and the city of Ft. Lauderdale, i s operated by the Mass Tran s it Division of the Broward County Public Services Department. T r ansit planning is conducted by the Mass Transit Division in conjunction with the Broward County Transportation Planning Div i sio n of the Office of Planning. Responsib ilit ies of the Mas s Transit D i vis i on i n c l ude the administering of the mass transit 46


On-street Mete red 2,425 100% Nor>-metered non e n/a Subt otal 2,425 100% Off-street Lot 2 727 100% Garage 12 447 29% Subtotal 15, 174 42% Scwrce: Parking Systelll$ Oepartm..,t. (/\u9U$1 1992). Table 1 5. Ft. L a uder d ale P u blic Par king Rates. ... ' .. Typeof' ... R)ltiiS .. On-street Hourl y $0 25 Off-st reet Hourly $0 .50 Dail y $6.00 Monthly $25 .oo Average Rates vary by lOcation Source: Consulting Services, Inc "Ann u a l Report. Municipal Parl

In 1990, Broward County T ransit provided 17,094,760 passenger trips. The agency estimates that 66 percent of the system's riders are on routes that operate within the city although origins and destinations of bus patrons have not been studied. Route transfer points are generally located at shopping malls, transit stops, major employment centers, and various attractions. For fiscal year 1990/1991, the "Broward County F ive-Year Transit Improvement Plan" called for an increase in bus routes from 15 to 22, and reducing headways from 30 minutes to 15 minutes on some routes. The Broward County Transit fare structure is shown in Table 16. Table 16. Broward County Transit Fare Structure. Single-Ride Fares Basic Special Multi-Ride Fares Weekly Pass Monthly Pass "Senior c itilel'\$, handicapped individuals, and youth Source: Broward County Transit. County Transit Map." (1992). $0 65 $0.40 $6.00 $30.00 $15.00 Broward County Transit operates two parking programs the Broward County Employee Reduced Transit Pass program and a park-and-ride program. In the Broward County Employee Reduced Transit Pass program, the employee waives the use of a parki ng space in exchange for a county-subsidized bus pass. The cost of the pass is $9 00, which is a $21.00 savings over the regular mon t hly pass The program has had limited success, however, in recruiting employees as program participants. The county operdtes one park-and-ride lot, located at a commercial shopping center. Broward County Transit currently contracts with the shopping center property manager for a designated number of parking spaces for park-and-ride patrons. Three transit routes serve the park-and-ride lot. The fare for transit service is $1.50 each way and $0.65 w ith a Monthly Transpass; parki ng is free in the lot. 48


The Mass Transit E lement o f the Broward County Comprehensive Plan contains recommenda tions that additional par k-and-ride lots developed as additional park-and-ride services are expan ded and as feed er bus service for Tri Rail stations is imp lemented It is anticipated that the demand for park-and-ride service will i ncrease with continued commercial development in the downtown. TDM Initiatives Under a policy of reducing automobile congestion in the downtown, the Downtown Developm ent Authority, in conjunction with the city and the county, bas established a free trolley system in downtown Ft. Lauderdale. Two routes are currently i n operation between office buildings, shops, and restaurants along Las Olas Boule vard. This same partnership has also established a parking shuttle system. A s part of the tro lle y system, a parking shuttle trolley links the Arts and Sciences Garage with downtown offices. The shuttle operates during morning and evening peak hours with five-minute head ways. Permits to park in the garage are S 19.95 pe'r month plus tax. This program is being advertised as a low -cost monthly parking aiternative for those who work in the downtown office core. Ft. Mvers The population of F t Myers' totaled 45,206 in 1990. Although Ft. Myers is the recognized business and governmental center of Lee County, more persons actually reside in the neighboring community o f Cape Coral Development patterns in the county and i n Ft. Myers are generally more dispersed than the othe r three ar eas selected for this study. The city' s Downtown Redevelopmen t Agency (ORA) estimated that 11,321 persons worked in downtown F t My ers in 1988. Figure 5 s hows the central business district o f F t. Myers. Bounded by th e Cal oos ahatchee River to the north, State Road 45 to the west ; Victoria Avenue to the south, and Fowler Street to the east, this area covers approximat ely 0.78 square miles. The DRA was created by the city in 1984 to develop a plan and strategy for downtown revitaliza tion. Aut h ority for it was established under the 1969 Com munit y Redevelopment Act. The city council acts as the Comm unity Redev e lopm ent Agenc y for the city but has deleg ated responsibility for redevelop ment activities to an appointed se ven-member board of directocs. 49


Figure 5 Fort Myers Central Business District Cowuy Lota D Privt Locs CBD BOS.,..t Padcloc Sowas: DowatuWu l'orkiai AllaJysio, 1988 City ol Ft Mym, P""""a DMsion 50 City Lo .. N 1


In 1990, the DRA completed an application for development approval as a downtown development of regional impact. The DRA projected the amount of new development in the downtown over the next ten years and the infrastructure required to support it. It also established a downtown retail task force, which developed a program for implementation in 1991 to promote downtown business. The strategy included a parking validation program designed to increase downtown retail sales. Under Chapter 29 of the Ft. Myers Code, a parking-exempt area in the downtown is established to attract businesses to the area bounded by the Caloosahatchee River to the north, Lee Street to the east, Second Street to the south, and Monroe Street to the west. This area lies within the selected study boundaries. Under Section 29-86 of the code, the land uses in this area have no off-street parking requirements. Planning and Regulatory Framework Parking and transit policies and programs in Ft. Myers are contained in the Ft. Myers Comprehensive Plan and the Ft. Myers Code. City of Ft. Myers Comprehensive Plan. The comprehensive plan contains goals, objectives, policies, and actions to guide growth management of the community. The city's plan is required to be consistent with the Southwest Florida Regional Policy Plan, the State Plan, and Charlotte Harbor Plan. The comprehensive plan reflects both the city's awareness of the importance of parking in the downtown as well as the need to increase transit ridership and vehicle occupancy. Action 1.2.1 of the plan the Traffic Circulation Element, states that "The City will encourage the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Section 9 transit operator (Lee Tran) to increase ridership and add routes when appropriate." Further, Policy 2.8 of the Traffic Circulation Element states that: "Roadways that operate under Level of Service standards shall receive priority for: (a) Mass transit routes (b) Alternate mode facilities (bicycle/pedestrian) (c) Improvements to alternate or parallel roadways (d) 'Soft' improvements such as ridesharing and staggered work-hour programs." 51


On the other hand, the plan contains an objective "To provide adequate parking and pedestrian space in the centralized commercial areas." Policy 4.1, which corresponds to thi s objective, states that "An increase in the Ilturibtlt of parking spaces in the CBD will be promoted." The plan also contains an objective that relates efficient use of capacity and new facility investment. Objective 9 of the plan is "To make efficient use of existing capacity of the transportation system before investing in additional facilities. Policy 9.1 states that "Carpooling, staggered work hours, park and ride, and other capacity increasing techniques will be promoted ... It is noteworthy that transit is not listed specifically as a capacity increasing technique Ft. Myers Code. The code outlines parking policies and regulations for the city Parking policies and regulations are approved by the city council based on input from the city's planning department. Section I 7-96 of the code authorizes the mayor and city eo unci! to designate city owned property for subscription parking and allows them to grant any person an exclusive permit to park, upon payment of fees as set by the mayor and council. The eode also includes a description of parking violations and prohibited parking locations, a schedule of parking fines, and guidelines for the disposition of parking meter revenues. Section 17-21 of the city code authorizes the mayor to regulate the operation and parking o f vehicles w i thin the corporate limits of the city by "the erection or placement of proper signs or markers indicating prohibited or limited parking". Section 17-67 provides the mayor and the city council authority over the installation, regulation, eontrol, and operation of parking meters. E nforcement of parking regulations is performed by both law enforcement officers and parking enforcement specialists. The parking-related zoning ordinances are contained in Chapter 29 of the eode. Table 17 shows the requirements pertaining to off-street parking. These are the min i mum number of off street parking and loiding spaces required by land use type. Sections 29-86(b) through (d) require that all offstreet parking be located o n the same lot or land parcel as the building, use, or structure to which they are accessory. If off-street facilities cannot be established on the same parcel of land, then other nearby (within 300 feet) lots or parcels 'of land may be used to meet the minimum parking requirements. 52


Table 17. Ft. Myers Parking Requirements; Single-family Residential Multi-family Residential Office Retail Hotel Restaurant Gross Floor Area 2 per dwelling 1 Bedroom, 1.5 per dwell ing unit; 2 or more bedrooms, 2 per dwelling 1 per 250 sq ft of GFA" 1 per 300 sq ft of GFA 1 25 per room 1 per 3 seats Souroe: Clty of Ft. Myers "Fl Myers Code." Parking None None None None None None The primary sources of information for parking supply and utilization are recent city and county inventories. In addition, the city sponsored the "Downtown Parking Analysis for tb e C i ty of Ft. Myers Florida," in I 988. The purpose of this s t udy was to evaluate the effect of downtown parking as it related to a proposed 73,000-square foot civic center. The report contnins revenue and expense datn, an inventory of existing parking spaces and projected demand for parking. As shown in Table 18, the downtown parking supply within the study boundaries totals 7,720 parking spaces. Approximately 58 perce n t of the total downtown parking supply is owned by the city and the county and 42 percent are privately owned (most of the privately owned facilities are open to the general public). Of the totnl supply 904 spaces are on-street metered and non-metered spaces. Ft. Myers public parking rates are shown in Table 19. While short-term parking space turnover rates were unavailable, the overall daily parking occupancy rate was under 50 percent for this area, according to the 1988 study. Surprisingly, however, downtown employ e rs and employees indicated in interviews that there was little or no parking available. The study concluded that a better distribution of parkers through more efficient use of rate structures could change the perception of a lack of parking in the downtown .. 53


Tabl e 18 F t. M yers CBD Parki n g S uppl y. On-street Metered Non-metered Subtotal Includes a mbcture of Jots and garages. Sources.: Downtown Development Agency; 649 255 904 Parl

Transit Transit services in Lee County are provided by the Lee County Transit Authority (Lee Tran), a division of the Lee County Department of Transportation and Engineering. Lee Tran is governed by the Lee County Board of Commissi oners, a five-member public policy body. In 1990, Lee Tran provided 2 ,055,230 passenger trips operating 26 vehicles in maximum service. Currently, the authority has one park -and-ride facility that began as part of a 1987-1990 FT A demonstration grant and was made permai:!ent at the end of the grant. The park-and-ride lot consists of 300 parking spaces at a shopping center located midway between Ft. Myers Beach and the downtown area. There is an informal agreement with the shopping center management that allows commuters free use of the parking spaces. Future park-and-ride lots are being considered. The Lee Tran fare structure is shown in Table 20. Table 20. Lee Tran Fare Strudure. S i ngle Ride Fares Basic Special" ChildrenH Transfer Multi Ride Fares Daily Pass 10-R ide Ticket Book 1 Q-Ride Ticket Book : Student 1 O-R ide Ticket Book: Seniors Month l y Pass Senior Citizen Pass senior ciNtens a n d handieapped individuals .. Chidren under 42 lnchM Source: Lee Tran. ' Tum System Map.'" ( 1 992) 55 $0.75 $0.35 Free $0.10 $2.00 $7.50 $5.00 $3.50 $25.00 $15 .00


TDM Initiatives The downtown DRI addresses congestion problems through the proposed formation of a TMA. As of the date of this report, a TMA has not been formed. CONCLUSIONS The coordination of parking and transit policies is important to ensure that transit usage is maximized and investments i11, public parking are cost effective. Benefits in other areas, such as environmental quality and economic development can also be achieved through coordination. There are four major considerations that should be taken into account during the formulation of policies to coordinate parking and transit policies: How to integrate parking policy into the planning policy. How to coordinate parking policy with transit in a manner that does not adversely affect the development potential of a CBD. How to integrate parking policy and land use planning. How to formulate parking policy and coordinate it with public transit so as to treat all segments of the population equitably. The literature discusses a variety of parking management measures that have been utilized in other urban areas. In the next phase of this research effort special attention will be paid to these elements and how they have contributed to the successful implementation of parking policy in other states. The research will also examine how Florida can assimilate these experiences and utilize them to meet its objectives. 56


LIST OF REFERENCES Anon. "Parking Policy Reform, A White Paper, Draft." (August 1990). Bhatt Kiran. "Local Zoning Codes and Parking Supply: A White Paper." In: USDOT, Proceedings of the Commuter Parking Symposium Washington, D.C.: USDOT (December 1990):9. Brouillette, J. Personal Interview (May II 1992). Broward County Transportation Planning Division. "Broward County Comprehensive Plan: Mass Trans it Element." Bureau of Economic and Business Research. 1991 Florida Statistical Abstract. Gainesville: Uni versity of Florida Press (1991). Center for Urban Transportation Research. (1992). "Program Director's Manual Draft." Center for Urban Transportation Research Commute Alternatives Systems Handbook. Tallahassee: Florida Department of Transportation (1992) Ce n ter for Urban Transportation Research. "1990 Performance Evaluat i on of Florida Transit Systems: Part I, Tre nd Analysis, 1984-1990." Tallahassee, FL : FDOT (!992). City of Ft. Lauderdale. "Ft. Lauderda l e Code." City of Ft. Myers. "City of Ft. Myers Code." City of Miami. "Miami Code." City of Orlando. "Land Development Code." City of Orlando "Or lando Municipal Code." City of Orlando "Meter Eater Parking Garage II, Application for Sec tion 3 D i scretionary Grant" ( 1987). Department of Community Affairs. "Changes in Store for Transportatio n Planning in Florida." Florida Planning (April 1992). DiRenzo, J., B. Cima, and E. Barber. Parking Management Tactics: Vol .J, Reference Guide. Washington, D C.: USDOT (1981):9. Downtown Orlando Transportation Management Association "Commuting m Downtown Or l ando, Survey Results." ( 1991 ). 57


Ellis, Raymond H., John F DiRenzo and Edward J. Barber. "New Directions in Central Business District Parking Policies." Transportation Research Record 845 (1982): 40-51. "Employer Provided Parking Cap: A Boost to Mass Transportation?" Urban Outlook. 14.10 (May 1992):7. Florida Department of Transportation. "The Florida Transportation Plan." Tallahassee, FL: FOOT ( 1992) Florida Department of Transportation. The Florida Urban Mobility Technical Assistance Manual, Draft 5. (November 1991). Ft. Lauderdale City Planning Department. "City of Fort Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Element." (1989). FL Myers City Planning Department. "City of Ft. Myers Comprehensive Plan: Traffic Circulation Element." (1991) Glazer, Lawre n ce J. and David A. Curry "A Ridesharing Market Analysis Survey of Commuter Attitudes and Behavior at a Major Suburban Employment Center." Transportation Research Record 1130 (1987):9-13. Higgins Thomas "Parking Management and T raffic Mit i gation i n Six Cities : Implications for Local Policy." Transportation Research Board, 68th Annual Meeting. Washington, D.C. (January 1989) I nstitute of Transportation Engineers Technical Council Committee 6F-24. "Employment Center Parking Facilities." ITE Journal (June 1988):29-35 K.T. Analytics Inc "Dade County Parking/Transit Ridership Study." Frederick MD: K.T. Analytics, Inc. (January 1987). Koening, John "Down to the Wire in Florida." Planning (October 1990):8. Kenyon, Kay L. "Increasing Mode Split Thro ug h Parking Management: A Suburban Success Story." Transportation Research Record 980 (1984):65 69. Lee, Chi Y. "Peak Period Occupancy -A Parking Tool." ITE Journal (December 1986):25-29. Levinson, Herbert S. "Zoning for Parking Global Perspective." ITE Jouma/. 54 (1984). "Whither Parking in the City Center?" Transportation Research Record 957 (1984):7779 Levi nson, Herbert S., and Charles 0 Pratt. "Estimating Downtown Parking Demands : A Land Use Approach Transportation Research Record 957 (1984):63 66. 58


Lopez-Aqueres. Waldo and Catherine Wasikowski. "Relationship Between Employer-Paid Parking and Average Vehicle Ridership Among Employers Affected by Regulation XV." Transportation Research Board, 70th Annual Meeting. Washington, D.C. (January 1991). McCormick, Tom. Ft. Lauderdale Parkiilg System. Personal Interview (August 1992) Mehranian, Maria, et a!. "Parking Cost and Mode Choices Among Downtown Workers: A Case Study." Transportation Research Record 1130 (1987):1-5. Metropolitan Transportation Planning Organization. "Regional Transit System Long Term Policies and Strategies." Gainesville, FL: MTPO (March 1986). Meyer, Michael D., A.M. ASCE, and Mary McShane. "Parking Policy and Downtown Economic Development. Miam i Planning, Building & Zoning Department. "Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000: Goals, Objectives, and Policies." (February 1991). Mierzejewski, Edward A, and William L. Ball. "New Findings on Factors Related to Transit Use." ITE Journal (February 1990) :34-39. Miller, Craig, Doug Coomer, and Rick Jameson. "Role and Function of Transit in Growth Management: Current Issues in Florida." Transportation Research Record 1237 (198 9 ): 64-76. Orlando Planning and Development Departmen t "Growth Management Plan, Downtown Element. ( 1 991) Pickrell, Don H "Federal Tax Policy and Employer-Subsidized Parking." ln: USDOT, Proceedings of the Commuter Par/ang Symposium. USDOT: Washington D.C. Plan ning Directors Exchange. "Land U se and Development Standards to Support Trans it. Triangle J Council of Governments. Research Triangle Park, NC. (February 1992). Pratt Richard H "Employer Parking Pricing and Incentive Programs That Change Modal Split: A White Paper." In: USDOT Proceedings of the Commuter Par/ang Symposium. USDOT: Washington D.C. (1990). Public Parking System. "Downtown Parking Analysis for the City of Ft. Myers, Florida." Chattanooga, TN (October 1988). Public T echnology, Inc. The Coordination of Par/ang with Public Transportation and Ridesharing: An Urban Consonium Info rmation Bulletin Washington, D.C. (June 1982). Ramp Consult ing Services, Inc. "Annual Report, Municipal Parking System, Fort Lauderdale, Florida." (December 1990). 59


St. Martin Marcia Armant. "A Synopsis of the New Orleans On-Street Parking Management Program Evaluation Report." ITE Journal 56 (May 1986):29-?2 Scully, William J. "Parking Management in a S mall Community: Back to Basics." ITE Journal 58 (November 1988):32-35. Shoup, Donald C., and _Richard W. Willson. "Employer-Paid Parking: The Influence of Parking Prices on Travel Demand." In: USDOT, Proceedings of the Commu ter Parking Symposium. USDOT: Washington, D.C. (1990). Staniewicz, James M. "New Directions in Parking Policy: The New Haven Experience." Transportation Quarterly 43.2 (1989):193-213. State of F lorida. "Florida Statutes." (1992) Surber, Monica, Donald Shoup, and Matrin Wachs. "Effects of End ing Employer-Paid Parking for Solo Drivers." Transportation Research Record 957 (1984): 67-70 U S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Task Force of the Urban Consortium for Technology Initiatives. "Parking and Traffic Enforcement" Washington, D C : USDOT (September 1980) . U.S. Department of Transportation. Proceedings of the Commuter Parldng Symposium USDOT: Washington, D.C. (1990). Ulberg, Cy. "Parking Tax Discussion Paper: White Paper." In: USDOT Proceedings of the Commuter Parking Symposium. USDOT: Washington D C. (1990). WA (December 1990) Ulberg, Cy, and Graciela Etchart. "Parking Tax in Washington State." Transportation Research Board 70th Annual Meeting. Washington, D .C. (January 1991). U rban Mobility Corp. "Tax Treatment of Employer Parking and Transportation Subsidies." Private Sector Briefs. Fede ral Transit Administration, Washington, D.C. Vol 4, No. I (1991): 1 -2 Valk Peter J. "Leasing Practices and Parking." In: USDOT, Proceedings of the Commuter Parking Symposium. USDOT: Washington, D.C. (1990). Weant, Robert A., and Levinson, Herbert S. Parking. The Eno Foundation. Washington, D.C. (1990):10. Wegmann, Fre derick J., Arun Chaterjee, and Jeffrey A. Welch. "Downtown Circulation System in a Medium-Size City: A Case Study." ITE Journal 58 (November 1988): 37-41. Williams, Jon. "Free and Paid Parking in the Washington Region." Tran sportation Research Board Paper 920562, 71st Annual Meeting, Washington D.C. (January 1992):8. 60


Willson, Richard W. "Parking Subsidies and the Drive-Alone Commuter: New Evidence and I m plications." Transportation Res earch Board, 67th Annual Meeting. Washington, D.C. (January 1988). "Parking Subsidies and the Drive Alone Commuter : New Evidence and Implications Transportation Research Record 1181 (1988):50-56. 61