Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMeeceMemoToBPCResidParkingDists03082018 BOZ E MAN MT Parking Services MEMORANDUM Date: March 2, 2018 To: Bozeman Parking Commission Re: Recommendations for the use of Residential Parking Permit Districts From: Ed Meece, Parking Program Manager In November 2017, the Bozeman City Commission asked the City Manager to study and make any recommendations regarding the creation of additional residential parking permit districts, and/or use of alternative parking management strategies, to the immediate north and south of the downtown core (B-3). As a result, the Parking Program Manager is assisting the City Manager in the development of those recommendations, and in reporting to the City Commission on April 23, 2018. The purpose of this memorandum to is to advise the Bozeman Parking Commission on the status of that effort, and solicit comment on the potential content of those recommendations. Since acceptance of the 2016 Strategic Parking Management Plan. the City of Bozeman has been working its way through a series of iterative tasks to develop a comprehensive system for public parking management. Each successive strategy benefits from previous strategy implementations, hopefully deploying available resources (public and private) in the most effective manner possible. This approach seems to place an emphasis on strategies that are management intensive rather than regulatory intensive; more sharing, partnering, and behavior adaption than enforcement. A challenge of the current study effort is that several other parking management strategies, identified in the 2016 Strategic Parking Management Plan, have not yet been fully implemented - such as changes to code based minimums, and off-street shared use agreements. A critical piece to effectively utilizing RPPDs as a parking management strategy is to clearly define the desired outcome(s) of such a district. Attempting to address parking supply/demand conflicts, in a vibrantly growing community, by simply restricting the public use of on-street parking to nearby local residents, is not a sustainable method for effective parking management. Rather, success resolving these parking supply/demand conflicts will require a more blended, data based, approach. An evaluation of the existing legal framework regarding the creation and operation of residential parking permit districts in Bozeman,would seem a logical first step in 20 © P • :o •East Olive StreetO Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 TDD: 406-582-2301 THE MOST LIVABLE PLACE B0Z E MAN MT Parking Services this process. Comparing this section of the Bozeman Municipal Codel to other jurisdictions, and industry `best practice', it is clear that significant revision is needed so that district creation/operation is responsive to well established changes in how people access and utilize transportation, housing, shopping, and economic transactions. Based on the research2 efforts of the Parking Program Manager, and Parking Policy Intern, a starting place for some updated code elements would be as follows: • Creation of a Residential Parking Permit District o A petition must be signed by 51% of all residents, within the boundaries of the proposed district, for the establishment of a residential parking permit district- ■ The proposed RPPD must be primarily residential in character; ■ The proposed RPPD shall be of no fewer than 10 block faces or 2,500 feet of linear curb; ■ The petition shall be accompanied by a non-refundable administrative fee of$100. o The Bozeman Parking Commission shall consider the petition and vote as to whether to proceed with data collection efforts for the establishment of an RPPD; o If the BPC votes to move forward: ■ The BPC will perform the data collection necessary to determine: • Does peak occupancy of available on street parking spaces within the proposed district exceed 85%? • If so, do at least . �_of the vehicles parked, during peak occupancy, belong to individuals with addresses outside the proposed district? 1 BMC 36.04.330&36.04.350,attached. 2 Considerable research on the structure of residential parking permit district ordinances in other municipalities has been conducted,numerous articles and books discussing the policy implications of utilizing residential parking permit districts have been examined,and we have spoken directly with parking personnel about the creation and enforcement of their residential parking permit programs.Much of this effort is briefly summarized in the attached grid;a bibliography of the most relevant published materials will be distributed as well. (DA20 East Olive Street P.O. Box 1230 406-582-2903 www.bozeman.net Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 TDD: 406-582-2301 THE MOST LIVABLE PLACE B ^ ZEMANMT Parking Services o Upon completion of the data collection, the BPC considers the issue, at a regularly scheduled meeting, and votes regarding a resolution to recommend the creation of an RPPD to the Bozeman City Commission. The results of this vote, and/or the resolution, are forwarded to the Bozeman City Commission. o If desiring to create an RPPD, the Bozeman City Commission would enact an ordinance to that effect: ■ Any ordinance designating an area of the city as a residential permit parking area shall describe: • 1. The designated public street area along which parking will be limited to vehicles registered to or controlled and exclusively used by persons residing in the area; • 2. Hours of each day and days of each week that the residential parking permit regulations shall be in effect; • 3. The individuals eligible to purchase a permit; • 4. Effective dates of annual permits; • S. Any special provisions or exceptions applicable to schools, churches, businesses, public park use, etc. within the residential area; and • 6. Visitor permit or special gathering provisions for the residential area. • 7. The City may permit the sale of `out of district' employee permits based on its understanding of available parking occupancy and capacity. ■ Upon adoption of any ordinance by the city commission designating an area for residential permit parking only, signs shall be erected along the streets identified in the ordinance prior to any enforcement of the residential parking permit regulation pursuant to section 36.04.090. The parking signs erected shall give notice of the general nature of the parking limitation and shall indicate the hours and days when such parking limitations shall be in effect. CA) 20 East Olive Street © • 0 Box Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 TDD: 406-582-2301 THE MOST LIVABLE PLACE O Z E MAN MT Parking Services o Nothing would prevent the Bozeman City Commission from initiating this same process, without any action from the Bozeman Parking Commission. In the above framework, accurate and timely data collection is be important to evaluating the need of an RPPD in a proposed area. The Parking Services Division's recent purchase of mobile license plate recognition technology provides an internal capability to perform these data collection tasks in an on-going basis. Also relevant to this effort, is the expanded parking data collection performed by the Western Transportation Institute in the spring and summer of 2017. In addition to the development of regulatory intensive RPPDs, other communities are utilizing Parking Management Zones in an effort to identify and address parking concerns more on a neighborhood specific level. This approach places data collection and analysis, as well strategy deployment, into the cultural and character context of a local `region'. It is the intention of the Parking Program Manager to further develop how the City of Bozeman might utilize Parking Management Zones to the benefit of our public parking management system, and provide that information to the Bozeman Parking Commission at their April 12th, 2018, meeting. The policy discussions of the Bozeman Parking Commission on March 8th and April 12th are critical to development of recommendations to be submitted to the Bozeman City Commission on April 23rd, and the Parking Program Manager will make every attempt to reflect their content accordingly. 0A 20 East Olive Street P.O. Box 1230 406-582-2903 www.bozeman.net Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 TDD: 406-582-2301 THE MOST LIVABLE PLACE Columnl Column2 Column3 Column4 Column5 Column6 Column7 Columng Column9 New RPPD Requirements for RPPD Occupancy rate Establishment Establishment Fees Permits Nomesidents? Other Minimum 10 block faces,or 1,500 ft.; Bend,OR petition by 60%of Western (pop. residents/owners Cities 91,000) Proposed. in favor Determined by available to Boise Parking Services businesses if (pop. Office,then pubilc capacity after 223,000) feedback establishment 600-unit If capacity after apartment RPPD,permits for building with businesses on inadequate first-come basis parking led to if permits sold first Petition of 10 do not comprise establishment of residents of 70%of available RPPD;also cause neighborhood; spaces, for Fort vote of 51%of all commuter disenfranchismen Collins. 2-hr limited 70%full owners(non- permits may be t of non-owner CO o . parking 8-5 M- (residents or owner residents sold up to 70% residents 10 000 F non) not eligible) occupancy (students) Residents of Downtown downtown public parking Idaho exempt from lots managed by Falls.ID parking lot, semi-private (ppp. not from "Downtown 60 000 meters $15(1/driver) Idaho Falls"entity neighborhood association or business district association;City "complimentary Traffic Engineer permit hours" time-limited must agree on available to res. Area Parking need--or,petition Permit holders- Permit of 501Y.of e.g."99 free District for addresses within hours/days to residents and area to use for parties, Portland workers; 75%occupied, neighborhood/bda funerals,service time-limited OR(POP. varying hours 25%by association, calls,or other parking.Permit 640 000 by district commuters including map n/a needs" hours available. "approval by 60% of property time-limited residents to permits for first to two hours create zone". vehicle available for non- Decommission by $60/first&2nd for discounted residents; vote of 50%of vehicle,third rate for parking property owners. $120,4th$180. "Residents who enforcement more than "Minimum zone 10 Guest passes qualify for other 8-6,limited 75%occupied size of 4 for 24 hrs low income Tacoma police for more than contiguous block available. programs—TANF, WA(pop. enforcement 3 hours(35% faces or 1100 Additional WIC,LIHEAP,SSI, 211,000) 6-8.(24 hours) commuter) Pinear curb ft. Si/pass time-limited SNAP,etc" New RPPD Requirements Establishment RPPD Occupancy rate for Establishment Fees Permits Nonresidents? Other Montana Butte(por Cities 34.000) N/A "The City of Great Falls has a contract with Standard Parking Corporation to enforce downtown parking and Great Falls manage the off- 112 one district,3-hr times street parking 59.0001 oarkiniz S25 res facilities" Petition of 50%of $100 Helena Two types:A:2 hr parking properties affected by new processing,sign Removed old loop. except residents;B: building activity;zoned intallation= 2/household;2 guest RPPDs in 2014 b/c 31.0001 residents only residential area 52.25/ft Dasses/household of disinterest Missoula 3 areas surrounding U of M Owners&Renters;2 visitor boo. since 1986;Residents only, permits/owner,1 72,0001 M-F 8A:30 N/A N/A N/A visitor/renter 3 types of NPP permits available: A:Residents beyond time restriction B:Commuter—Non residents can park in a designated zone area (assigned block)beyond Time restricted areas,with time restriction 3 different permit levels,as C:Business Employee—An Commuter permit- Boulder.CO determined by individual employee of a business in a $100/Quarter;Business College (DOD. neighborhood needs(see: residential zone can park in in NPP Zone--Employee permit not a Towns 108.000 Permits) a designated area(block) =575/vear guarantee of space Petition of 51%of all properties.Petition to provide map of boundaries.Minimum district size:10 block faces. Then vote(1 vote/property of tenent or owner) (postcard mailing). Proposed districts Corvallis, downtown to be reviewed OR Yes,3.Timed-limited by Parking Committee 151,0_00L parking(2 hrs),M-F,8-5. 75%full(any) after vote. No fee 3/address;by car Packs of 10 guest permits free—one day/permit; Exemption from 2 hr timed service parking permit also Eugene.OR parking available Timed parking 1 block within residential Exemption from staggered zone may petition;signed M-F 9-5"no parking" by 51%of residents— $45,guest permits& Ithaca.NY regulations(some area of 75%full at lesser of 1 resident per no fee— construction/work permits— (DOD• all blocks open to visitors, peak hours on dwelling unit or 2 decision by $10/10 days (max 8 per Yes,every block has on- 31000) not signed) two days residents per tax parcel Public Works year) street parking available Issue more permits Madison WI than spaces available, (ooD. 2-hr Parking;mulitiple 51%+occupied 50%residents must be sometimes 2-3 times 252,000) RPPD districts 8-6pm by commuters ipetitioned&in favor no more $50,must have iustded in Determination by City zone for 5 months;special Portland, council as to desire and permits issued to HS ME(pop. time-limited to one or two need of residents,scarcity students in area by high 67,000) hours of off-street parking school RICK WILLIAMS CONSULTING Parking & Transportation City of Bozeman Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan White Paper—85%Rule February 28, 2018 I. BACKGROUND Bozeman's 2o16 Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan resulted in implementation as a policy and organizational action strategy adopting"the 85%Rule as the standard for measuring performance of the parking,supply and triggering specific management strategies and rate ranges.11 The plan also approved Guiding Principles for"active capacity management"call for the"use[of]the 85%Rule as a parking occupancy standard to inform and guide decision-making."' Since approval of the 2o16 Plan, City staff and downtown stakeholders have requested more information related to best practices related to the on-the-ground implementation of the 85%Rule. This summary provides more detail and examples from other cities as to how the 85%Rule supports strategic parking management decision making and active capacity management of varying types of parking supply. II. "85%RULE"—WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN FOR YOUR PARKING"SUPPLY?" Anyone who talks about parking these days will inevitably run across the phrase the"85%Rule." Though this standard for parking management has been a common tool within the parking industry for decades,the concept was elevated to wider public attention by UCLA Professor Donald Shoup, in his zoos book, The High Cost of Free Parking.3 On-street parking Shoup's focus is with on-street parking and suggests that any single block face that routinely exceeds 85%should be priced to ensure that there is always a 15%buffer of available parking"at the curb." As such, higher rates should be charged on block faces with high occupancies and a lower rate(or no rate) on block faces that have lower occupancies;a system called variable rate or performance based pricing. According to Dr.Shoup,charging a higher, "fair market price"for parking at constrained curb spaces facilitates turnover(which is beneficial to business sales), reduces congestion, improves air quality and generates a revenue source for cities to re-invest back into the districts from which parking revenue is derived. 1 City of Bozeman, Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan, Project Summary and Recommendations for Parking Management(July 5, 2oi6), page ii. 2Ibid. Guiding Principle 3(a),page 7. 3 Donald Shoup(20o5),The High Cost of Free Parking, Planners Press. The same approach is taken for off-street parking facilities, using the 85%occupancy standard to calibrate rates for hourly,daily and monthly permit parking. Lots or garages that maintain high levels of occupancy,charge higher fees than those that maintain lower occupancies. An example is illustrated in Figure A from Leavenworth,Washington. In Leavenworth,occupancy data from off-street facilities is compiled in a heat map format,which allows their parking managers and Advisory Committee to evaluate use and pricing from a demand perspective. Lots in excess of 85%will be priced accordingly in relationship to other facilities with lesser demands. Figure A: Example of Using 85%Rule for Decision-making(Leavenworth,WA) GO 13 25 ��K ^,ue.te 3- _ jam•_ J� `! V �,' � u 'f y• <f`_ E - 44, i�- —Y'r Off-Street Parking Utilization-Weekday >65% July 20,2017 Q �°^Parking Study Boundary 70 2:00-3:00 PM Peak Hour 69%-55% RICK WILLIAMS CONSULTING Fee! Par k.n g B Tr.-.n s p o r t a t on <55% 0120240 480 720 960 The City of Salem, Oregon also uses the 85%rule to trigger pricing decisions and manage monthly parking permits. When a facility routinely exceeds 85%peak hour occupancy, monthly rates at the facility are increased and/or the number of permits sold at the facility is reduced to ensure that visitor trips are not jeopardized. Salem further calibrates off-street rates against their highest occupied garage. As such, if the highest rate charged for monthly parking at the most constrained facility is sioo per month, prices of permits at other garages with(for example)6o%peak occupancies will charge$6o 2 1 P a g e per month for permits;at 40%occupancy permits will be $40.The purpose being to charge higher rates at high density"premium"garages,with lower rates at underused garages. The varied rates also serve as an incentive for users to seek out lower priced supply;spreading parking demand over all facilities in the Salem public system,as opposed to a system(as in some cities)where rates in all public facilities are the same—regardless of demand. In both the Leavenworth and Salem examples,the 85%Rule serves as the trigger for initiating discussion and decision-making regarding rate increases and/or managing permit sales. Resideniiaf Neighborhoods The 85%Rule is also used in situations where spillover of visitor and employee parking from commercial corridors into residential AAM neighborhoods that abut commercial corridors. In these situations,the ' 85%Rule serves as an effective measure of constraint indicating that access to parking by residents is adversely impacted by non-residential users. This situation also occurs in areas where large institutions(e.g., hospitals, college campuses)abut or locate within an area that is ZONE Q 13 ZONE primarily zoned for residential use. Cities that use an occupancy ' "u 'tt;oc*4 measure to trigger neighborhood parking management strategies include Boise, Idaho; Boulder, Colorado; Bend, Corvallis and Portland, Oregon; and Tacoma, Washington (to name only a few). In each of these cities, when the occupancy standard is exceeded, a policy framework has been established that allows a neighborhood association to request action, discussion and/or initiation of strategies to prioritize parking access on residential streets for residential users.The most common solution implemented is creation of a residential parking permit zone (RPPZ). RPPZs allow parking management, usually through parking permits and time limits that give preference to residents and their guests when instances of constraint create conflicts between residential and commercial parking demands.. Those who live in the area may be provided or purchase a permit to allow parking beyond a posted visitor time limit within the residential parking permit zones III. APPLYING THE 85% RULE STANDARD Whether in on-street,off-street or residential contexts;the"85%Rule"is truly a strategic and beneficial tool to include in any parking management plan, particularly as the use of this standard underscores and facilitates parking problem solving within an objective, measurable framework. Unfortunately,the national hype over The High Cost of Free Parking has led some cities to jump into strategy 4 In most cities requests are made through a community initiated petition. 5 Provisions are made in some cities that allow for the sale of non-residential permits(e.g.,employee permits from an adjacent commercial district)within RPPZs if there are demonstrated surpluses of parking within the zone that would allow for the sale of such permits without adverse impacts on access for residents and their guests. 3 1 P a g e implementation before clearly developing a reason to do so. There can be several"problems"with a straight up Shoup-like approach to the 85%Rule, particularly in smaller cities that have traditionally operated with free supplies of parking. The first issue to explore is the definition of"parking supply"that is driven by the 85%Rule. For Shoup,the '-- definition of supply is the supply at any single block face. Others in the industry would broaden the supply of parking to a more identifiable use area,for instance a retail district, I ' "Main Street"or defined parking management zone. For Ef example,the City of Vancouver,Washington has identified11 FT �• � five parking management zones in its downtown; Bend and Canby,Oregon have three unique zones and the City of N Portland thirteen in its downtown. The City of Bend establishes residential parking permit zones for areas as `f I small as 10 block faces or 1,5oo lineal feet of curb space. .lJ Rather than managing to the block face with the 85%Rule, < � �. these cities manage to an identifiable,walkable area or ' ,.�/IX DowMwn Bmd F4un2 o..+ , zone that uses the Rule to ensure convenient access to P.ro., �Am�� ��w.. parking spaces within the zone.These management areas Bend,OR:Parking Management Zones(2002 are usually uniquely land use based (e.g.,retail core, Parking Management Plan) government district,university district, residential cluster, etc.)where the primary land uses(and the priority parker forthose land uses)drive parking activity. Each is uniquely managed to the 85%Rule standard. This is the approach that private operators of off-street garages have used for many years. It is rare that you experience different pricing on each floor of a garage; rather such pricing occurs when the entire facility(or zone) reaches 85%. Also,different facilities("zones"or"districts")have different rates. For an on-street system, picture a parking management zone as levels of a garage spread over a manageable area. Intersections are elevator lobbies and sidewalks are stairwells. The outcome is to manage a supply of parking to ensure that there are available parking stalls(a minimum of 25%)and a convenient time factor involved in getting a priority user parked and to their desired destination. For Main Street downtowns,it is not only important to ensure a convenient parking stall near destinations, but to reap the benefit of customers walking an area to experience other destination opportunities they may not have been aware of. In short,the 85%Rule is a common standard. How it is applied in different settings depends on how intensely a City wants to manage a unique supply. If the parking management area is too small(e.g.,at the block face)"rules of use"of the parking in an area can be confusing to the user and costly to the City. If the area is too large, reaching 85%may never occur and sub-zones of constraint within that larger supply may never receive problem solving attention or action. 4 1 P a g e Illustrating this dynamic is to use another example from Leavenworth,WA. Figure B provides a summary of on-street occupancy for parking in what is the downtown parking management district— comprised of 846 stalls. As the figure shows, peak occupancy reaches 59.3%weekdays and 72.6% weekends. If the 85%Rule were in play for the entire management district,one might argue that there is no need for immediate action. Figure B: Hourly Occupancy for Downtown Parking Management District(Leavenworth,WA) 2017 Leavenworth Parking Utilization All on-street stalls:Weekday vs weekend occupancies(846 stalls) ■Weekday Weekend 80.0% ao Li Ln rZ fIn Ln In t0 50.0% f a 40.0% 30.0% 20.0 10.0% 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 12:30 PM 1:30 PM 2:30 PM 3:30 PM 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 6:30 PM 7:30 PM Figure C(next page)evaluates a more concentrated area of the larger parking management district identified as the Core Zone. For most in Leavenworth,the Core Zone clearly represents the historic downtown Main Street and highest concentration and cluster of businesses. This sub-zone is comprised of 53.2 on-street spaces. As Figure C demonstrates,weekend occupancies exceed 85%occupancy in nine of the ten surveyed hours. In fact,occupancies are over go%most hours and actually exceed s00%in one hour(signs of illegal parking activity). Weekday occupancy does exceed 85%in one hour and approaches 85%in three other hours. Within this sub-zone,the 85%Rule would suggest additional parking management strategies and actions are needed. The point here is that the 85%Rule should be used strategically within a framework that uses the rule to reasonably measure the impact of parking—constraints and/or surpluses—within defined and recognizable impact zones. The purpose is to set a standard that encourages decision-making when problems arise. The industry has found that the 85%Rule is an objective measure of constraint and for 5 1 P a g e targeting problems within a parking system. The Rule is understandable to stakeholders and allows what might be difficult decisions to be made where they might otherwise be avoided. Figure C: Hourly Occupancy for Downtown Parking Management Sub-zone(Leavenworth,WA) 2017 Leavenworth Parking Utilization Weekday vs weekend Core Zone on-street occupancies(512 stalls) ■Weekday Weekend ;e 120.0% o `0o Ln ;e NCh Ln f I 00 00 M 00 C NGo cc rl OD 00 0Cp0 oe 80.0% M n n eh 071 00 tD �O 60.0% -I 40.0% 20.0% 0.W. 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 12:30 PM 1:30 PM 2:30 PM 3:30 PM 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 6:30 PM 7:30 PM IV. BEING COST EFFECTIVE The second issue related to the 85%Rule is the potential costs associated with its implementation at the level described by Whether at the block face or zone Shoup. Cities that already have parking revenue collection level, the 85%Rule is a powerful equipment(meters and/or pay stations)are better equipped to management tool and trigger for decision-making that supports the initiate programs that stratify rates by demand,whether at the unique parking and economic block face(as in San Francisco)or by zone(as in Bend and development priorities of a Portland,OR).6 However, in many smaller towns and cities, downtown or sub-district. The 85% the cost of equipment necessary to implement parking rates Rule should be a key decision-making might be too costly to cover the expense of installing and and action trigger,intended to managing flexible rates, particularly in downtowns that have initiate tailored parking pockets of high demand surrounded by underutilized supply. management strategies based on demand(85%Rule)and supportive To this end,the first step toward effective use of the 85%Rule of area plans and visions. begins with calibrating time stays to the needs of priority 6 In Portland different parking districts have different hourly rates because of occupancy/demand variations between districts(e.g., Downtown=$1.60/hr.,Central Eastside=$1.25/hr.and Lloyd District=$1.00/hr.). 6 1 P a g e users,desired turnover levels and appropriate enforcement.Also,as a parking zone or management district reaches 85%occupancy,the economics of demand(and equipment costs) make it easier to transition that area to paid parking(meter or permit zone),as opposed to an approach that is simply block by block. V. INTEGRATED PARKING MANAGEMENT The third issue is the relationship of on and off-street parking and the 85%Rule, particularly for commercial districts. There is an adage in the parking industry that states"on-street parking is a finite supply."Theoretically, an on-street supply could reach a point where the entire supply exceeds 85% occupancy(see above example of Leavenworth,WA). It is at this point that a parking management plan needs to ensure that in implementing strategies to create a 15%buffer within the supply(e.g., reducing time stays,enhanced enforcement and/or pricing)that the overall number of trips to the commercial area is not reduced. It would be counterproductive to price parking to maintain a specific "buffer"only to find that fewer customers are coming downtown. To achieve this,the 85%Rule is most powerful when applied to an"integrated access system"that grows trip capacity in a downtown through maximizing turnover on-street(based on customer need), adding more customer trips into the off-street system and enhancing other access options(transit, bike,walk and rideshare)for employees and customers. To achieve this,downtowns must integrate management of their off-street supplies into the overall parking management equation. Where cities own off-street supply(lots and garages),this may be easier. In cities that have little control of the off- street system,then partnerships and shared use arrangements with private stakeholders is critical. A 2oo6 paper on parking guidance systems noted that any successful strategy for effective parking management needs to understand that: • Increased rates on-street should be correlated to lower cost options off-street. • If higher and variable "premium" rates on-street are employed to manage supply availability, then options must be in place off-street or in other modes for customers who won't or can't afford the on-street premium.' VI. SUMMARY The 8S%Rule is an operating principle and industry-based best practices management tool for coordinating a parking supply and increasing trip capacity(within the supply itself or in tandem with other modes).When occupancies routinely reach 85%in the peak hour, more intensive and aggressive parking management strategies are called for to assist patrons in finding available parking.The 85% Rule standard will facilitate a City's and community's ability to make reasonable and effective decisions 7 See: Ingenieurgruppe IVV GmbH&Co. KG,Parking Guidance System for Downtown Seattle,Conceptual Framework(October zoo6),page 5. 7 1 P a g e regarding time stays,enforcement and other decisions related to capacity management.The 85%Rule is an objective standard that supports priorities for parking—getting the right car to the right space. 8 1 P a g e City of Bozeman Municipal Code(excerpts) 03/02/18 Sec. 36.04.330.-Procedure for the establishment of a residential on-street parking permit regulation program. A. Pursuant to the powers granted to local governments pursuant to state law to regulate the standing or parking of vehicles on public streets, the use of public streets and traffic upon public streets, the city commission may, after holding a public hearing on any residential parking permit proposal, create, pursuant to ordinance, areas of the city to be designated as residential parking permit areas during specified times of the day and week if the city commission finds that the residential area under consideration for such a designation is: 1. Predominantly residential in character; 2. An area the streets of which are regularly congested with vehicles parked by persons not residing in the area; and 3. An area where limiting the parking of vehicles along the public streets better provides adequate motor vehicle parking for residents of the area; and finds that the creation of a residential parking permit area in the residential area under consideration would further one or more of the following objectives: a. Promoting tranquility among commuters and residents; b. Reducing noise; c. Reducing traffic hazards; or d. Reducing litter. B. Any ordinance designating an area of the city as a residential permit parking area shall describe: 1. The designated public street area along which parking will be limited to vehicles registered to or controlled and exclusively used by persons residing in the area; 2. Hours of each day and days of each week that the residential parking permit regulations shall be in effect; 3. The individuals eligible to purchase a permit; 4. Effective dates of annual permits; 5. Any special provisions or exceptions applicable to schools, churches, businesses, public park use, etc. within the residential area; and 6. Visitor permit or special gathering provisions for the residential area. C. Upon adoption of any ordinance by the city commission designating an area for residential permit parking only, signs shall be erected along the streets identified in the ordinance prior to any enforcement of the residential parking permit regulation pursuant to section 36.04.090. The parking signs erected shall give notice of the general nature of the parking limitation and shall indicate the hours and days when such parking limitations shall be in effect. (Code 1982, § 10.32.350; Ord.No. 1345, § 1, 1992; Ord.No. 1376, § 1, 1993) Sec. 36.04.350.-Residential parking permits. A. Application procedure. Applications for residential parking permits shall be submitted to the city on a prescribed form and shall be accompanied by proof in a form satisfactory to the city of the applicant's place of residence within the residential parking permit only area, as well as proof of registration of use and control of each vehicle for which a residential parking permit is sought. Each application 1 shall be accompanied by the appropriate fee for each vehicle for which a parking permit is sought. No part of the parking permit fees shall be refundable. The amount of the fees shall be established by resolution at the level that covers the cost of administration and enforcement of the residential parking permit regulations in the residential area. B. Form and issuance. 1. Upon approval by the city of the application of any person residing in a residential parking permit only area, a residential parking permit shall be issued for each vehicle receiving approval. Upon approval by the city of the application of any person residing in a residential parking permit only area for a temporary visitor's permit, such permit shall be issued by the city. No more than two temporary visitor's parking permits shall be issued annually for a single residential dwelling unit. Temporary visitors' parking permits shall be used only by visitors of the dwelling unit to which the permits were issued and are valid only while visiting that dwelling unit. 2. Each residential parking permit issued by the city for a vehicle shall set forth at least the date of issuance and the license number of the vehicle for which it is issued. Each temporary visitor's permit issued by the city shall set forth at least the date of issuance and the address of the resident to which it is issued. Annual permits shall be required. A permit shall be valid for no longer than the permit year of issuance and is not transferrable. The issuance of a residential parking permit does not serve as a guarantee that there will always be a parking space available for the permit holder on the public streets within the designated residential parking permit area. C. Lawful display required. 1. Unless otherwise agreed to by a city parking control officer in writing, residential parking permits shall be affixed to the left rear bumper and temporary visitors' permits and employee permits shall be hung from the interior rearview mirror facing the windshield. It is unlawful to either fail to display or improperly display a residential parking permit, or to attempt to use a residential parking permit from another area in a designated residential area. 2. It is unlawful for the holder of a residential parking permit to fail to surrender it when directed to do so. 3. It is unlawful for any person to represent in any fashion that a vehicle is entitled to a residential parking permit authorized by subsection A of this section or other applicable provisions when it is not so entitled. The display of a residential parking permit on a vehicle not entitled to such a permit shall constitute such a representation. 4. It is unlawful for any person to duplicate, by any means, a parking permit authorized by subsection A of this section or other applicable provisions. It is also unlawful for any person to display on any vehicle such a duplicate parking permit. (Code 1982, §§ 10.32.370-10.32.390; Ord.No. 1345, §§ 3-5, 1992; Ord.No. 1383, § 1, 1994; Ord.No. 1401, §§ 1, 2, 1995) 2