USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Toward a common parking policy

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Toward a common parking policy a cross-jurisdictional matrix comparison of municipal off-street parking reguations in Metro Dade County, Florida
Physical Description:
21 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Bradley, John
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Publisher:
University of South Florida, Center for Urban Transportation Research
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Parking facilities -- Florida -- Miami-Dade County   ( lcsh )
Genre:
local government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (p. 19-21).
Additional Physical Form:
Also issued online.
Statement of Responsibility:
John Bradley.
General Note:
"960911."

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 - 025500415
oclc - 664350524
usfldc doi - C01-00329
usfldc handle - c1.329
System ID:
SFS0032398:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Toward a Common Parking Policy: A Cross-Jurisdictional Matrix Comparison of Municipal OtfStreet Parking Regulations in Metropolitan Dade County, Florida' by John Bradley

PAGE 2

. 1996 TRB PRESENTATION Toward a Common . Matrix Comparison of .. . Regulations in Metro:Dade County, Florida CUTR LIBRARY John .Bradley Center-for Urban TransportationResearch (CUTR} University of South _Fiorida

PAGE 3

TOWARD A COMMON PARKING POLICY: A Cross Jurisdictional Matrix Comparison of Municipal Off-Street Parking Regulations in Metropolitan Dade County, Florida John Bradley Abstract Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO's) were developed to promote regional approaches to transportation problems in large metropolitan areas. However, one particular aspect ofthe.overall transportation picture-off-street parking requirements--has generally been left to local municipal regulation without a conscious effortto integrate local parking polici!'S into areawide transportation programs. In an effort to promote regional approaches which take int6 account the impact of parking policies on transportation problems, th.is study is designed to show the crossjurisdictional similarities and differences in off-street parking requirements as regulated by local municipal zoning ordinances in a typical multi-jurisdictional setting. Additionally, the study highlights several basic overall parking policy aspects which may serve as starting points in the consensual development of a regional parking policy for metropolitan areas such as Dade County under the aegis of an MPO. I. Introduction \Vhen a citizen or visitor bas a parking problem, his or her perception is that an entire metropolitan area has a "parking problem"; when a citizen or visitor is stuck in traffic in his or her vehicle amongst a sea of other single-occupant vehicles, he or she tends to perceive that the area has a "highway congestion problem." Yet, in many cases these two situations are symbolic of an important and interconnected relationship --the overall effects of local parking policies on urban transportation issues. Too little parking creates excess traffic in many urban areas as drivers "circle the block" looking for an available spot to park. On the other hand, too much parking encourages excessive use of the single occupant vehicle (SOV) as the primary commuter travel mode, clogging the arteries of both urban and suburban areas and wasting valuable resources. Even the creation of a rapid mass transit system may affect actual or perceived parking issues both within and outside the transit corridors. The public policy issue is how to balance the needs of parking users with publicly man dated goals such as improved access to places of employment or markets, traffic congestion mitigation, and air pollution abatement. Governmental agencies and officials are faced v..ith an imposing central question: How much parking is enough to satisfY commuters, visitors, shoppers, developers and lenders, and public policy objectives? I

PAGE 4

. The last two decades have seen a change in the basic policy focus of a number of governm ent agencies that have traditionally been the regulating authorities over parking issues in their local areas. This change is a shift in policy away from the land use-based zoning-mandated supply of "m ore parking" to one of regulation of parking supply quantities, in limited attempts to affect the behavior of parking users. For years, parking policy was directed towards a goal of ensuring that sufficient on-and off-street parking spaces were provided to accommodate peak l oad conditions at all possjble sites. The instnunents used to implement parking policies were foun d in municipal transportation p l anning programs (for municipally-controlled on-street parking space provision ) and local zoning codes which required that specific minimum amounts of parking spaces be provided for each site development based on that site's individual land -use. The reason for this change in focus has been the recognition that tranSPortation p olicy and parking policy were found to have complex, interrelated, and inseparab le relation ships. As more research was conducted, the relationship between municipal parking policy (found in local zoning codes) and transportati on policy (promulgated by state departments of tranSPortation) was more closely examined.' Land-use zoning requirements which promoted an abundance of parking spaces meant that more individual vehicle operators (driving the single occupant vehicle SOY) felt tha t they should be able to locate a parking space, therefore attracting m ore vehic l es to a site in a circular pattern of demand expanding to reflect an artificially stimulated supply. Change in parking policy has been incremental; it has been evolving ever since at least I 923; and it is still evolving today U. Zoning-Ba sed Parking vs. Traffic Congtlltion Mitigation Program s Existing municipal zoning code-based off-street parking provision requirements typically create a parking supply far in excess of demand, resulting in wasted land area, squandered public and private development capital, and excessive commuter dependence on the single occupant 1 For ClOIIIlplcs of thit reoeudl, see: Emerging Tmlds/Pa.rlcin& Progress: A Municipal View, John P. Caval lero, Connecticut Association of Parking Agencies Annual Meeting. o.ricn, Cf: October 24, 1979; Fac!on &elated to Itansit l!
PAGE 5

vehicle.2 Concummtly, transportation planners are promoting programs to reduce thi s same commuter depe ndence. Swans on (1989) observed that areas such as Texas, California, and F l orida, where rapid growth has created an overdependence on (and overuse of) the single occupant v ehicle, must be at the cutting ed ge o f innovative parking ordinance implementation.3 Shoup and Pickrell (1978)' directly addressed the issue of parking oversupply requirement s in local zoning ordinances. They indicate d specific flaws in the land-usc zoning approac h to what was a transportation-centered problem --traffic congestion. Land.use planners thought that by requiring "sufficient" off stre ,et parking more cars woul d be taken off the highways Instead more people chose to diive to their employer or retai ler -provided "free" park in g space, resulting in even more congestion. Although this article was published in 1978, a number of th e problems pointed out by the authors remain as factor s to be addres s ed in metropolitan Dade County's present circumstances. S h oup and Pickrell suggested that land-use zoning shou l d be directed towards the goals listed in the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (to promote health, safety, morals, general welfare, the adequate provision of public services, lessen congestion, etc.) Because these goal s may not or cannot be addressed by the land use market, there is .... a distinct possibility of doing more harm than good by using zoning to resolve a problem that is only indirectly related to the land They go on to indicate the following f!a\vs in this land-use zoning approach: There may be only a tenuous and casual linkage between explicit zoning intervention in the market, the ultimate consequence hoped for, and the perce i ved problem ; 2 "Traffic and Parking, A New O"'Jeration oflnfonnation Roben T. Dunphy Urban Land, May 1988; Par!
PAGE 6

The zoning approach may give the impression that something has been done and a solu t ion arrived at, regatdless of the linkage or lack thereof between the intervention and the actual problem addressed; The zoning approach disguises the true cost of the intervention, because the cost of compliance is not considered in the public budgeting process; If the perceived problem addressed by the zoning intervention is not a land-use market problem, inefficiencies in land use or other unintended consequences may occur. The authors gave two reasons why land-use zoning approaches to problems in non land-us e markets are sometimes chosen:' One is a public secto r ... unwillingness or inability to intervene in the malfunctioning [SOV] matkel" They gave traffic congestion as an example. If the traffic market were addressed by road pricing to alleviate congestion, the effect intended would be direct but the implementation and enforcement would be politically impossible, therefore zoning density limitations are used instead to affect traffic congestion. The second reason offered is that the zoning code-based approach gives the impression of a solution without the expenditure of public funds. Using parking requirements in zoning regulations as an example, Shoup and Pickrell stated that the varieties of requirements, the diff erences in dimensions for parking spaces, the multitude of methodological approaches in their development, and the apparent randomness iri the selection of measurement standards, result in a systemic and unwarranted presumptiveness of effectiveness. They also stated that parking regulations' one common theme is, ... the 'rule of thumb' air about them and the apparent lack of consideration given to the cost of providing the spaces or the price that will be charged for using them. The assumptions appear to be that trip generation rates and parking demand reflect a 'need' to travel by automobile and that demand for parking spaces is not a function of p rice."' As an example ofthe variations in requirements, the author:s included a table of municipal parking space requirements for a single 7 p.S46 8 p.S47 4

PAGE 7

land use (a 10 000 square foot office building of three floors) from nearly 70 California cities.9 Cumulatively, these amounted to fifteen diffe.rent categorical totals of parking spaces, ranging from a low total number of spaces required of I 0 to a high of 80; and these were just in the Los Angeles-San Bernardino area. While these quantitative requirements may appear to reflect differences in community values, do these differences need to be quantified in municipal zoning codes? This is a fundamental question. In Shoup and Pickrell's view, it would appear that, rather than reflecting community values regarding space utilization, traffic congestion mitigation, access to markets, or other factors, this numerical codification may simply reflect that zoning : l code writers have no concept of the effects of their ordinances on i.lmC of these issues. The authors suggested that this detailing of numerical parking requirements in zoning regulations ... implies that planners know how to tailor the parking supply to differing local circumstances. But the difficulty inherent in taking these decisions out of the private market is illustrated by the fact that some planners recommend zoning regulations to force the supply of parking above the quantity that would be provided by the private market, while others recommend an upper limit on the number of parking spaces to reduce the quantity below what wpuld be provided by !he private marketboth with the goal of reducing traffic congestion ... [italics the authorsl1 0 They admitted that both approaches are logical, depending on overall objectives: increased parking use efficiency at a development may reduce local street congestion; 11 limited parking may result in a general reduction in automobile use .1z Shoup and Pickrell also argued that zoning regulations requiring parking supply .-minimums actually have two market effec. ts: First, they increase the overall supply of parking to levels above the market-determined equilibrium level, depressing the price. The authors indicated that there is inferred evidence to suggest that ... zouing codes [result in levels] o f 9 p.548 10 p. 549 11 See also: "Ttanspo.rtation Demand Management: Planning, Development, An. d Implementation Erik Ferguson, ]QUrnal of the American Planning Association Vol. 56, no. 4 ( Autumn 1990) pp.442-456 1 2 As reported in: Rideshare/Parking MQJUJgement Handbook, City of Bellevue, Washington: March 1994 5

PAGE 8

inefficiently large amounts of parking space [such] that new parking garages are rarely built as independent commercial ventures ... "" This oversupply and underprice also results in encouragement of SOV commuter. Second, zoning requirements spatially determine the distribution of parking i:ather than letting the parking user market's demand and cost considerations determine parking user patterns. In cities where zoning codes did not specify minimum requirements, ... submarkets for parking are likely to develop in response to spatial differences in demand and supply functions for parking spaces. That is, parking services will be sold at different prices in differing geographic locations within the downtown area. Demand for parking at each location will depend largely on the density of employment and shopping in the immediate area, the price and service levels of public transit, and travelers' incomes ... and that parking prices" ... thus act both to allocate the quantity o f land and capital devoted to parking in different parts of the downtown and to ration the number of automobile trips destined there."14 The authors studied the impacts of zoning regulations that required developers io oversuj>ply the parking user market in an attempt by parking policy makers to affect a non land-use market problem -traffic congestion Well-intentioned planners assumed that more off street parking would result in more cars being taken off the city streets. The planners did not recognize that the parking user market would react as it did, even though conditions that the planners assumed to exist --development-induced demand-did, in fac t exist. The unintended consequences of the planners use of zoning land-use regulations to affect a traffic-oriented objective did, however, supply evidence to s uggest that opposite measures (reducing parking supply) could, in practice, reduce traffic congestion. III. The Challenge in Metropolitan Dade County The challenge to local jurisdictions is to change the parking user market by curtailing these codified parking oversupply mandates. Transportation issues do not stop at (nor change because of) municipal borders, and parking supp l y mandates have been showp. to affect I) p. 556 ,. p. 553 6

PAGE 9

commuter transportation mode choices in both urban and suburban areas.15 Large metropolitan areas with multiple jurisdictions (often not only geographically abutting but economically competing) may require an areawide approach to parking policy -just as they have adopted a similar approach to transportation policy development and implementation. Metropolitan municipalities have to a large extent renounced uncoordinated transportation policies and turned over development an areawide transportation policy to a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in r ecognition of the fact that transportation issues have become borderless .In a typical metropolitan area such as Dade County16, with a number of large and small municipalities, the development of a countywide parking policy requires that changes in off-street parking provision regulation be made on a consensual basis. While municipalities may believe that they have good reason to retain their zoning-based parking provisions currently in use these municipalities may simply not be aware of the effects of mandating parking oversupply. In addition, the various municipalities may also not be aware that there are conflicts between their codes and the areawide transportation policies under development by the MPO. Communicating the nature of these problematic conflicts --between local zoning codes and areawide transportation policy may well be the key to development of an areawide parking policy in areas such as Dade County. However, no literature available to me indicated that any attempt has ever been made in Dade County (or elsewhere) to collect, collate, or directly compare and contrast the extant municipal off-street parking policies of a large metropolitan area on a cross-jurisdictional basis. There are twenty-seven municipalities in metropolitan Dade County and, in addition to 15 See: "Parking and Traffic Characteristics of Suburban Industriol Deve l opments", Willsrd A. A \roth, Highway Research Record231 (Washington, DC: Highway Research Bosrd, 1966); Household re actions t o possible options for deoling with future traffic and parking demands in congested urban areas", Elizabeth Antpt and Peter Jones, ProceedingsJ 6th Conference oft he Australian Road Research Board Vo1.16, Part 7, 1992 (Nunawading, Aust.) pp.51; and, An of Travel Demand Management Approaches at Suburban Ac t ivity Center,s Kirsn Bhatt and Thomas Higgins (Cambridge, MA: USDOT Transportation Systems Center, July 1989) 16 Roughly 1955 square miles and some 1.9 million r esidents, plus thousands of tourists and business visitors 7

PAGE 10

the C01mty regulations, each has its own parking-related ordinances.17 Some jurisdictions codify only parking rules and violations; others include engineering and aesthetic ordinances. Tiuough the use and enforcement of zoning codes and ordinances, jurisdictions also address off-street parking s upply provisions for certain land uses and technical details supplementing such requirements. With twenty-eight goverrunentaljurisdictions (and multiple zoning districts in some municipalities) in metropolitan Dade Cotu1ty, each using variations in land-use definitions . resulting in myriad categori es, and each adopting different independent variables for use in quantitative determination, a comparison of municipal off-street parking regulations could have . become excessively complicated. To further complicate matters, some cities (e.g.: Miami and Miami Beach) break up those jurisdictions into specific overlay districts; while the City of Miami adds special requirements within transportation demand management (TDM) areas. IV. The Matrix Method Polanis and Price (1991) observed that" ... the diversity ofland-use tables, parking generation equations, and values used in similar equations makes empirical comparison of parking generation practices across municipalities difficult". 18 For this study, I fotu1d that the clearest way to present the differences (and simill!l'ities) in parking policies across jurisdictions is through a matrix format. Dade Cotu1ty and all of the municipalities within the MctroDadc MPO were requested to provide copies of their zoning code sections that relate to off-street parking requirements --all complied with this request.19 These regulations were then reviewed and their requirements categorized by representative types. Five matrices were developed from this data including Parking Policy Comparison (Appendix A). The PARKING POLICY COMPARISON MATRIX shows the similarities and differences 17 See Countywide Parking Po]jcy Study: T.iterature and Regulations Revje
PAGE 11

in parking policies across jurisdictions.'" For the purposes of this p aper the details of quantitative variations in local parl
PAGE 12

parking provision requirements for a mixed-use site must be a cumulative figure derived by adding together each use's parking requirements to reach the total required at the site Six other jurisdictions"' include wording in the ordinance which allows some alternative method in determining total parking provision requirements for mixed-use sites. 4. FLEXIBLE PROVISIONS?Are there some sections of the ordinance that allow for flexibility in determination of quantities required for land uses or for relief in supply manc!ates? In six jurisdictionslS the ordinance makes no comment t whatsoever. Six o\hers26 indicate that there is no allowance for flexibility but fifteen27 indicate that there is some section of the ordinance that allows for discretion by planning agencies or provides for methods to gain relief from mandates. That is, the County and fourteen municipalities (including the three that have adopted the Dade County Code) had some ordinance provision that could be qualitatively interpreted as "flexible". 5. CATEGORIES USED -How many separate categorizations ofland-use types are used in the ordinance thatdetermined the quantity required for each use? The quantitative range (083) is mther wide. This cross-jurisdictional complication is not helped by the extent of the differences in vocabulary and additional codified land-use breakdowns that involve zoning districts, specific geographic locations, and even lot size. The PARKING POLICY COMP ARJSON MATRIX shows some of the impacts of jurisdictional fragmentation in parking policies across a large metropolitan area; however, it also can be used as a starting point for a program to bring municipal and county policies into harmony 24 NQ in the matrix cell 25 NO MENDON in the matrix cell under FLEXIBLE PROVISIONS? 26 l':!Q in the matrix cell 27 YES in the matrix cell 10

PAGE 13

in order to develop a countywide parking policy to more comprehensively address countywide parking-related transportation issues. Deeper insight into the actual differences (and similarities) between jurisdictions may be available by comparing the abstracted Dade County and municipal ordinances found in the Count;ywide Parkim: Policy Study: Literature and Regulations Review: Final Report (Center for Urban Transportation Research 1994). V. Jurisdictional Issues The overarchingjurisdictional question regarding parking policy involves on.e of determining which one (or combination of) representational government levels within the State of Florida may, or is required to, assume for parking policy. That is : Upon which governmental level (state, county, or municipality) is parking policy development, implementation, administration, and enjo1cement legitimately presumed to be empowered? First i t does not lie with the State of Florida. The State statutes primarily address roadway parking violations and handicapped parking space violations ( .316.194 thro u gh 316.1967 Florida Statutes) and the State does not address any mandated parking quantities. The State has assigned all other parking policy responsibility to the counties (.125. 01 [1} [ m}), and, t o a much more limited degree, to the municipa lities ( .170. 01 [1 }{g)). Therefore, in the case of Dade Coun ty, with a number of large and small municipalities and a substantial unincorpora t ed area, upon which "government within government" does the responsibility for, and authority over, park in g rest? The State statutes give broad powers to the counties to go a l ong with the assignment of equally broad responsibilities. In the case ofDade County specifically, the Metropolitan Planning Organizatio n (MPO) has the power to ... provide and regulate parking facilities; and develop and enforce plans for the control of traffic and parking ... (. I 25.0 I [ 1 ][ m]), and to develop a comprehensive plan which includes an ... e l ement for the development of off street parking facilities for motor vehicles ... (.163. 3177 [7 }{d)) Therefore i t may also follow that along with this planning responsibility should come regulatory authority over parking policy within the county through land development regulations ( 163.3202[2}[hj). It does not appear then, from a simple but liberal reading of the prime statutes (.125. 01 [3] [a] and [b ]) that these county powers are restr icted to unincorporated areas of the 11

PAGE 14

county only by .163. 3171 {2 ]; and there wonld to be a potential to create a countywide parking policy under the statutes of the State of Florida. This is not to say that it would be necessary to usurp the powers of municipalities to regulate parking use within their jurisdictions; rather, a cooperative program could be developed under the umbrella of the existing MPO structure. To look at the parking situation in Dade County requires a three-tiered approach: first, an examination of the institutions with parking responsibility; second, an examination of the parking policy instruments available to regulating authorities; and, third, the logistics of parking policy implementation . Institutionally; the power to regulate parking in the unincorporated areas of the county falls directly on the County government itself (.125. 01 ); additionally, the County has original jurisdiction over parking on property owned or leased by the county which is located within the boundaries of chartered municipalities (. 316. 006{ notation]). Municipalities have only been statutorily given jurisdiction over on-street parking, that is, ... with to streets and highways under their jurisdiction ... (.316.008[1]{a]). The various parking ordinances in effect in the many municipalities of Dade County may tend to give the impression that all zoning for off-street parking is within the.scope of municipal regulatory powers, and yet, this could be argued as inconsistent with Florida Statutes. Although the element of Public Transportation (Title XXV)) which authorizes county MPO ... development of transportation systems ... that will maximize the mobility of people ... and minimize ... transportation related fuel consumption and air pollution. .. (.339.175) does not specifically mention parking as a factor in transportation development, it does reference using existing facilities efficiently, congestion relief, land use and development, and the ... "overall social, economic, energy, and environmental effec ts of transportation decisions" (. 3 39.17 5 [5] [b ]) Additionally, the statutes require that each MPO ... must develop and implement a traffic congestion management system" (. 33 9.177 {2 ]) The Congestion Management Plan as suggested in Dade County Transportation Demand Management & Congestion Mitigation Study (Barton-Aschman, 1992) indicates that such a plan 12

PAGE 15

requires an overall Congestion Management Coordinator" and countywide parking policies .29 Countywide authority over parking requires countywide regulatory powers. It may be argued that this regulatory power is imp lied by Florida Statutes : Chapter 163lntergovernmental Programs, and specifically .163.3161 163.3171 and 163.3202, which address local land development regulations This regulatory power could devolve to a parking administration agency, located e ither within the MPO, in the Metro-Dade Transit Agency, as a part of the above-mentioned Congest ion Management Coordinator, or as a separate institution if necessary. However, it is more important to dev elop a proactive and cooperative countywide park!JJ& policy than it is to develop another countywide institution. Despite the potential of jurisdictional disputes, a cooperative approach between the County and its municipalities could result in a compromise which has beneficial outcomes for all parties. This approach would involve the recognition of the overall County responsibility for establishing instrumental (regulatory) control over all public or private off street parking in the county -including within the boundaries of chartered municipalities (.316.3171) The responsibility for ordinances regulating parking meter locations, "no parking" zones and on-street parking within the existing municipal ,jurisdictions could remain with the various municipalities, if they so chose. Additionally, the various municipalities could retain their aesthetic ordinances over parking of certain types or conditions of vehicles on private property. The "fill-in" growth of the county in the areas between the (relatively) small municipalities can create problems for these municipalities if a consistent, countywide parking policy does not evolve. By tying regulation of parking with congestion management coordination and the existing countywide transportation authority, an overall policy of parking/transit integration could serve to best benefit Dade County's citizens and meet the explicit county responsibilities inherent in the State statutes. It is imperative that parking management be coordinated with transit management to implement changes in parking policy that will best work with transit rather than against it 28 See: Plan, p.34 29 Plan Part 4 pp.59, 67-68; Tables 1 & 4 13

PAGE 16

Instrumentally, whatever policy is adopted--status quo, incremental change, or departures from the norm -a centralized parking policy could be developed. The Congestion Management Plan has identified the need for the implementation of a series of congestion management techniques.$0 In particular are four non-statutory measures to create a more cooperative atmosphere between the County MPO, municipal parking managers, commuters and 1bis task, and the Dade County Transportation Demand Management & Congestion Mitigation Study-recommended changes to the development regulations incorporated in the 1993 Metro-Dade MPO Dade County Comprehensive Development Master Pla,il, require a single countywide office of parking management to coordinate efforts directly aimed at alleviating real or perceived parking problems; at recognizing parking's role in transportation demand management and congestion mitigation; and increasing transit ridership. The third level is one oflogistics. The State of Florida regulates only the number of parking spaces to be provided by governmental (.316.1955) and nongovernmental (.316.1956) agencies for certain disabled persons on the basis of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The power to regulate the total number (minimums or maximums) of parking spaces which developers must provide for new developments has traditionally rested with local zoning authorities. By establishing the responsibility for parking policy development, administration; implementation, and enforcement upon a countywide authority ( 163.3 J 71 [2 ]) and by that authority maintaining a consistent approach to parking as a manageable asset, certain conditions ofparkirig supply can be set. This approach may be based on the type and size of the development; its distance from existing and future public mass transit facilities; its potential impact on existing and future transportation corridors; and countywide compliance with the Clean Air Act and ISTEA requirements. Flexibility, adaptability, and cooperation are the keys to controlling parking space quantities across a wide and varied jurisdiction such as Dade County. 34 J>lan, pp.l-20 31 Plan, pp.I0-12 32 Plan, pp.13-15 1 4

PAGE 17

The various planning and regulatory powers identified in the State statutes indicate the State's recognition of the importance of parking policies in development and redevelopment, road transportation congestion relief, tourism, commerce, and industry. This requires a creative, positive, progressive, proactive, and cooperative approach to parking pol icy. The Dade County Transportation Demand Management & Congestion Mitigation Study comprehensively addresses the necessary components -institutional and instrumental-needed to attempt such an approach in Metropolitan Dade County. VI. Implementation Considerations . : l Parking policy can be a tool towards govenunent control o f land use through zoning-based planning programs; however, it is also an important tool in transportation planning and transportation policy implementation Past mistakes in the use of zoning regulations to affect parking user demand beha v ior may make parking reform a "difficult sell" to political officials, lenders, developers, employers, and commuters. An areawide parkin g policy education program that includes state, county, and municipal officials; developers, lenders, and employers; public and private sector employees; and other affected parties, has the potential to produce the most equitable policy. The development of a consisten t and areawide approach to parking issues may result in the most efficient use of land zoned for parking. It is important to develop an areawide parking policy in order to make areawide transportation policy deve lopment (mandated by the state as the primary role for metropolitan planning organizations) more effective. Additionally, parking can be an invaluable municipal revenue generation resource; however, some degree of public sector control of the parking market is an obvious prerequisite to such generation. Metered on-and off-street public parking, a parking tax, vigorous enforcemen t of parking statutes and ordinances, and areawide regulatory authority are potential assets for developing such market control. While political judgements will determine how much market control is possible, a clear presentation to the various affected stakeholders of the benefits of parking policy reform can make the political decision-making process less controversial politically and more efficient economically. The role of parking in economic growth and development attractiveness has been one that has been distorted by the local zoning code conventions now in use Th ese conventions were based on rules of thumb that are incorrect for 15

PAGE 18

cw:rent development goals. A basic lack of communication among the actors involved has resulted in a de facto perpetuation of these conventions as de jure codes. Today's economic circumstances have presented the public sector with an opportunity to change the private sector's perceptions regarding parking's role in development attractiveness. Again, public sector education of the private sector is the key to parking policy cooperation. Therefore, an area for further investigation wou ld be th e "marketing" of parking policy refonn to the various actors in Dade County. Many metropolitan areas have already faced the situations that the MetroDade MPO faces now. Some have not come to grips with parking problems. However, those that have seem to have continued to grow and develop through coordinated public/private cooperation. Areawide parking policy reform, the education of private sector actors, and intergovernmental cooperation can be used as a focal point for positive approaches to the institutional issues circulating around development financing and economic growth. Other metropolitan areas that have been the core instigators of progressive and comprehens ive parking management programs and development policies have not appeared to have suffered in the least from parking policy reforms. On the contrary, positive quality of life and civic responsibility issues have tended to overcome ne gative fust intpressions of parking policy reform strategies. However, these areas (Los Angeles San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, etc ) have done so under mandates imposed by state governments or federal air pollution mitigation requirements. In the absence of the imposition from above of such mandates in Dade County, the MPO does not face the political pressures to reform parking policies that were felt by governments in these areas. Of particular interest in Dade County shou ld be the future possibilities in public/private j oint developments in present and future transit corridors. Parking policy reform offers opportunities to create interest in such developments by making them more attractive to the private sector. Parking management is not the only answer to traffic congestion mitigation However, parking management strategies are some of the more significant tools in the traffic congestion mitigation toolbox. Parking management strategies include: peak-period pricing, transportation demand management (TDM) programs, and a parking tax. The availability of all of these strategies creates the opportunity to adapt incremental changes geared to specific geographic areas within metropolitan Dade County, but only if there is some cross-jurisdictional 16

PAGE 19

overall parking policy consensus developed by the County and the municipalities involved. Developers tend not to remain within the municipal boundaries of one jurisdiction. Large developers -and especially lenders-operate all across the m etropolitan area and it is to their advantage that a consistent, comprehensive, countywide parking policy is developed, adopted, and implemented. As more regjonal planning coordination takes p l ace in sr?wing metropolitan areas, areawide parking policy development becomes politically more difficult on one hand (as m or e actors and issues are identified), and somewhat easier (as policy decisjon-making becomes less "local ) . on the other. That is, attempts to develop a countywide parkitjg policy must take into consideration the values regarding parki n g space provisions that are held by municipalities that range from a few hundred residents occupying a few square blocks to the cosmopolitan sprawl of greater Miami. The MetroDade MPO is in the position-due t o its state-imposed mandateto develop comprehensive transportation programs which include parking policies." Economic instruments, including employer cash-out programs, parking taxes, and in-lieu offees, can be important modifiers of parking user behav ior. The political question is: MmL they be implemented? Strategjc area-wide parking policies that are based on sound research and analysis (and on a well-developed political foundation) are policies that may lead to an integration of parking policy with general transportation and developme n t planning. Identification of all the relevant issues and actors (and their hierarchial roles and individual agenda) is important to the success of parking policy reform. VII. Summary Off-street parking policy reform in metropolitan Dade County is necessary, not for specific land-use problem resolution, but as an important component of areawide transportation policy. Dade County is in the enviable position of having an existing rapid mass transit system as an available option for commuters Parking policy reform can have a two-fold purpose: first, to help reduce commuter dependence on the single occupant vehicle, thereby reduc i ng traffic congestion and noxious vehicular emissions; second, to help boost mass transit as a viable .339.175 F.S. 17

PAGE 20

commuter transportation mode choice, thereby acting as an economic benefit to the County transit system. These are rational benefits from parking policy reform. Localized parking policy reform by itself may simply chase parking users around the county, never actually helping alleviate areawide congestion or mitigate air quality problems. However, areawide parking policy reform, combined with intelligent overall transportation policy. implementation, can be a primary method of efficiently addressing the equally areawide traffic congestion and air quality dilemmas. Efforts directed at traffic congestion mitigation will likely be less successful if parking policy is excluded than they otherwise could be if areawide parking policy strategies are implemented. The State of Florida's statutes leave parking policy up to lo cal county govenunents or metropolitan planning organizations. 34 The county and municipal ordinances extant represent a collec tion of"rules of thumb," "copy-cat" regulations, guesswork, and conjecture, and result in excess complication in development planning. Nevertheless there remains the opportunity for the development of an areawide parking policy th a t may be effectively coordinated with other public policy strategies to address the areawide goals of transportation improvement, air quality enhancement, and economic development. 34 See: Florida Statutes TiUe XI, Chapter 125, .125.01; Chapter 163, Part II, .I63.3161 through 163.3202; Title XII, Chapter 170, .170.01; Title XX!ll, Chapter 316, .316.002 through 316.1967; Title XXVI, Chapters 334 through 339, specifically .339.175. 18

PAGE 21

Bibliography Barton-Ascbman Associates, Inc. Interim Parl\ing Plan !981-1985 Central Miami. Florida (Evanston, IL: Bartoo Asclunan Associates, 1981 ) ----------------------------. "Dade County Transportation Demand Management & Congestion Mitigation Study" (Miami FL: Metropolitan Dade County Florida, 1992) Bhatt, Kiran. "Local Zoning Codes and Parking Supply: A White Paper. in Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Pro c eedings orthe Commuter Parkins Symposium (Seattle, WA: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, 1990) Ce n ter for Urban Transportation Research. Facto rs Related to D:ansit u., (Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, 1989) --------------------. Iran:;,portation Demand Development of TOM Programs in Florjda (Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, 1989) Dade County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). "Metro -Dade Transportation Plan and Improvement Priorities, Long Range E l ement(to !he year 2010) revised November !991 (Mian1i, FL: Metropolitan Dade County, F lori da) ------------------------------. 'Transportation Improvements Program, Fiscal years 1988-1992 June, 1987 ------------------------------."Comprehensive Development Master Plan Adopted Components'' FL: Metropolitan Dade County Florida, 1993) "First Interim Report of the Transportation, infrastructure and ConCUJTeney Task Force," Jeffrey Bercow, Chairman. FL: Metropolitan Dade County, May 28 1991 F lorida Departme n t of Transportation (IDOl'). Excem t s from tho Dade County Park & Ride Lot Plan & Justificatjon Reports (Tallahassee, FL: FOOT, 199 3) Koening, John 'Down to the Wire in Florida." Planning (October 1990) Kuner, Rick. Downtown Parking Policy Analysis." Transportation Quarterly Vol.37, no.4, (Octo b er 1983) pp.559-566 Levinson, Herbert S. "Zoning for Parlcing -G l obal Perspective. JTE Journal Vol.54, no.ll (November 1984) pp.l8-22 -------------."Whither Parking in !he City Center?" Transportation Research Record951 (1984): pp.77 -79 ------------& Charles 0. Pratt "Est imating Downtown Parking Demands: A Land Use Approach. Transportation Research Record957 (1984): pp.63-66 McShane, Mary & Michael D. Meyer. "Links Between Parking Pol i cy and Urban Goals: Key Issues. Working Memorandum #1, Center for Transportation Studies Massachusetts Institu t e of Technology, Cambridge MA: Sept 1979 -----------------------. "Parking policy and urban goals: linking strategy to needs Transportation Quarterly VU: 2, 1985 19

PAGE 22

Mesa, Jose-Luis. "Trailspo11a!ion Issues in Motropolilan Dade CoWlty: A Preliminary Assesarldng Task Fon:o. Ecogpmjc lmvac;S ofMjng Po!jcv Ojzljml' (Annapolis, MD: Hunt.,. &: Assoc:iat .. I 986) Mierzejewski, Edward A & WiUiarn L. Ball. Center for UrbiUl Transportation Research. ''New Finding.s on Factors to Transit Use. ITE J o urnal Vo!.60, no .2 (February 1990) pp.34 M orris, Marya. ''Patl
PAGE 23

Swanson, W "Parking: How Much Is Enough?" Planning Vol.SS, no.7 (July 1989) pp .14-17 Tanaka, Josue & Michael D. Meyer. "Implementation of a regional parking policy: institutional and political considerations." Transportation Research Record 816 TenHoor, Stuart J. & Steven A. Smith. Model Parkjng Code Provisjons 10 F.ncourage Rj(!esharing and Transit Use (Washington DC: Federal Highway Administra tion, 1988) Ulberg, Cy. "Parking Policy Ref o nn: A White Paper" from Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Pro c eedings of the Gonuuutcr Parkiml Symposium (Se attle, WA: Muoicipality ofMctropo!ilan Seattle, 1990) Urban Consortium for Technology Initiates. Flexjble ParJsjpg Reauirements (Washington, DC: U.S.-Department of Transportation, 1982) V alk, Peter J. "Leasing Practices and Parking." in Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. Proceedings of the Commuter Parking Symposium (Seattle, WA: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle 1990) Witheford, David K & George E Kanaan. Zonine Par!sjno. and Traffic (Westport, CT: Eno Foundation for Ttansportation Inc., 1 972) 21


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 cam 2200229Ia 4500
controlfield tag 001 025500415
005 20110926125428.0
008 100917s1996 flua l000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00329
035
(OCoLC)664350524
040
FHM
c FHM
d FHM
043
n-us-fl
090
TL175
b .B73 1996
1 100
Bradley, John.
0 245
Toward a common parking policy :
a cross-jurisdictional matrix comparison of municipal off-street parking reguations in Metro Dade County, Florida /
John Bradley.
260
[Tampa, Fla. :
University of South Florida, Center for Urban Transportation Research,
1996].
300
21 leaves :
ill. ;
28 cm.
500
"960911."
5 FTS
504
Includes bibliographical references (p. 19-21).
530
Also issued online.
FTS
650
Parking facilities
z Florida
Miami-Dade County.
2 710
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.329
FTS
y USF ONLINE ACCESS
951
10
SFU01:002323037;
FTS