Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
14. A3 Ord 1905
Page 1 of 22 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Parking Dimensional Standards Municipal Code Amendment NOTE: UPDATES TO THIS STAFF REPORT THAT HAVE BEEN MADE SINCE ITS PRESENTATION TO THE ZONING COMMISSION ARE SHOWN IN RED. Public Hearing Date: Zoning Commission public hearing Tuesday, November 18, 2014 Public Hearing Date: City Commission public hearing Monday, January 5, 2015 Project Description: A text amendment of the Bozeman Municipal Code to revise Section 38.25.020 – Parking stall, aisle and driveway design, add new section; Section 38.25.025 – Structured parking facility development standards; and modify Section 38.34.020.D – Review Authority, allow alternate angled parking options while maintaining minimum stall dimensions. This amendment applies to all zoning districts. Project Location: Applicable throughout the entire corporate limit of Bozeman as it exists now and as it evolves through annexation over time, and applies to all properties. Recommendation: Approval Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-14265 and move to recommend approval of the Structured Parking text amendment. Report Date: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, AICP; Associate Planner Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Unresolved Issues None identified at this time. Project Summary This application proposes to revise Section 38.25.020 parking stall, aisle and driveway design standards to modify dimensional parking stall and drive aisle standards for structured parking facilities. The proposed modifications do not apply to individual residential or multi- 189 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 2 of 22 household garages whether they are attached or detached structures as defined by Bozeman Municipal Code. No change to the number of required parking stalls is proposed. The Applicant proposed modifying the dimensional standards for structured parking facilities and the associated drive aisles as described in Appendix A below. Specifically, the Applicant proposed shortening the depth of a parking stalls from 20 feet to 18 feet and the drive aisle from 26 feet to 24 feet for 90 degree parking configurations. Dimensional standards for other configurations are proposed and are listed below. In conclusion, Staff concurs with the dimensional standards modification. Staff also suggests expanding the modification to surface parking lots and adopting the applicable existing design and building standards found in Section 38.11.070.C and F, BMC, of the Urban Mixed Use District (UMU) to insure full conformance with adopted City plans. The design standards will apply to all zoning districts. Therefore, the proposed text amendment will reduce parking stall sizes for all public and private parking lots and structured parking facilities not associated with individual residential garages. The proposed change will reduce a parking stall area from 180 square feet to 162 square feet for 90 degree configurations, a reduction of 18 square feet plus an additional 18 square feet for the drive aisle totaling 36 square feet per individual stall module. The primary reasoning for the proposed modifications is six fold: 1. Bring code up to industry standard, 2. Reduce land use demand on surface parking facilities, 3. Reduce area for non-point storm water runoff catchment, 4. Anticipating growth of the City by facilitating infill through reducing impediments in construction of structured parking facilities, 5. Creating a more conducive environment for greater density to increase the efficient delivery of municipal services, and 6. Further the goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan. Additional background information can be found in Appendix B. If the Commission approves the amendment Staff will provide revised diagrams and illustrations to meet the new dimensional standards through a resolution coordinating with the final approval of the text amendment ordinance. Alternatives This code amendment may influence significant policy issues such as density, city vitality, and delivery of city services, urban form, and viability of future alternative transportation modes. Surface parking consumes considerable space and is frequently the most challenging aspect of a proposed development. 50 percent of impervious space on a non-residential lot is not uncommon. Modifying the dimensional standards of structured parking facilities may encourage their construction by reducing the per space cost though decreasing module width. 190 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 3 of 22 A parking module consists of two rows of parking with a drive aisles between and is typically 52 to 62 feet wide. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) presently requires a 20 foot parking stall and a 26 foot drive aisle for 90 degree parking which total 66 feet. Incremental increases in module width increases construction cost considerably. Integrating more structured parking facilities will allow increased density of the built environment by decreasing the dependency on surface parking. The Applicant proposed a narrowly focused text amendment based on considerable assessment of other local and regional regulations with similar environmental challenges. To limit possible unintended consequences of this amendment Staff considered a multitude of alternatives from a comprehensive perspective. These considerations and evaluations included but not limited to the following: Whether or not all parking stall dimensions should be modified including surface parking standards; Whether or not additional screening should be required for structured parking facilities; Definition of “structured parking facility” or is excluding “private garage” sufficient; Whether or not compact space dimensional standards should be modified, if they should be eliminated altogether, or whether the allowable number/percentage of compact spaces in any given parking area should be reduced. In addition, whether or not compact spaces should only be used in constrained locations or in remnants of space. Standard practice according to the APA, Planning and Design Standards, John Wile & Sons, Inc., 2006 states the number should not exceed 15 percent of the total number of spaces. We allow up to 25 percent; Requiring additional pedestrian circulation standards within these structures; Exterior design considerations to insure appropriate scale, massing, and compliance with the adopted Bozeman Design Objectives Plan; Addition of multidisciplinary programmatic design requirements; General design requirements such as street treatment, and Other considerations. Alternatives for Commission action are: 1) Adopt the amendments as proposed by Staff, 2) Adopt the amendments with revisions, 3) Do not adopt the amendments and leave the language as it exists. Zoning Commission Meeting Supplement 191 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 4 of 22 The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this text amendment on November 18, 2014. One member of the public provided oral testimony on the matter inquiring about potential detriments of the proposed change. In conclusion, the Zoning Commission voted unanimously (4:0) to recommend that the City Commission adopt the proposed dimensional standards modifications. The video archive of the meeting can be viewed here. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 4 SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............................................................ 5 Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ......................................................................... 5 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 13 APPENDIX A –AFFECTED ZONING PROVISIONS ......................................................... 13 APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND.............. 19 APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ................................................... 21 APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF............................ 21 FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 21 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 22 SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Project Name: Structured Parking Facilities Text Amendment File: Z-14265 Having considered the criteria established for a municipal code amendment, the Community Development Staff recommends the approval of the text. 192 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 5 of 22 The Development Review Committee considered the application on October 1 and 8, 2014 and did not identify any health, safety, and general welfare issues with the proposal and recommended adoption. The Zoning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendments on November 18, 2014. The Zoning Commission recommended favorably with the staff recommended text amendments. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the text of the amendment and provisional adoption of Ordinance 1902 on January 5, 2014. SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Yes. An underlying principle of the Bozeman Community Plan is that public and quasi- public infrastructure is necessary to ensure the health, safety and general welfare of our citizens; and maintain and grow our community. The City of Bozeman’s Vision is detailed in Chapter 1 of the Bozeman Community Plan. The first goal relates to growth management to promote the unique history and character of Bozeman by preserving, protecting, and enhancing the overall quality of life within the planning area. The code amendment relates to a number of specific objects including: Objective G-1.1: Ensure growth is planned and developed in an orderly and publicly open manner that maintains Bozeman as a functional, pleasing, and social community. The proposed text amendment furthers this objective by refining parking standards that reflect realistic standards for the community based on reasoned consideration of the community. A minor modification may create an incentive to reduce surface parking which in turn reduces surface runoff, promotes pedestrian access by decreasing walking distances, and diminishes the visual impacts caused by surface parking by integrating parking structures into the fabric of the neighborhood. Objective G-1.4: Ensure that Bozeman grows in a sustainable manner with consideration for climate change, health and safety, food production, housing, employment opportunities, natural hazard mitigation, and natural resource conservation. The proposed stall dimensions reduce area per space from 180 to 162 square feet. Adding the reduced drive aisle by an additional two feet the cumulative effect over numerous 193 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 6 of 22 developments will multiply. Reducing area used for parking frees up land for other uses, reduces storm water run-off, and other benefits. The quality of our community is related to the ways neighborhoods are designed, the way new development looks, the way our streets feel including our urban forest, parkland, trails, commercial districts, new and old residential neighborhoods, open spaces, views to the mountains that surround the City, the historic and new architectural styles, and the core of Downtown Bozeman. Chapter 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan includes numerous goals and objectives to insure a quality community. Goal C-1 addresses human scale and compatibility with intent to create a community composed of neighborhoods designed for the human scale and compatibility in which the streets and buildings are properly sized within their context, services and amenities are convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated. Objective C-1.2: - Update design objectives to include guidelines for urban spaces and more dense development. The proposed code amendment furthers this objective by codifying existing design guidelines for parking structures, and facilitating infill and more dense development by removing impediments to construction of parking facilities. Objective C-1.4: Achieve an environment through urban design that maintains and enhances the City’s visual qualities within neighborhood, community and regional commercial areas. Design standards for parking structures are proposed in new code section 38.25.025 to promote an active and diverse streetscape. Parking structures are encouraged to be located behind buildings in the interior of blocks or below grade to reduce visual impacts. Parking garages that front streets should line the parking garage at the street level with an active use. Specific design considerations are included in this new code section to promote transparency, functionality, human scale, and design consideration that considers the context of the environment. Objective C-2.5: Explore and encourage innovative parking solutions for both residential and commercial projects including parking best practices, expanded parking districts, cash in lieu of parking, and design guidelines for structured parking. The proposed text amendment furthers this objective by harmonizing the City’s dimensional standards more closely with industry and national standards. In addition modicums of design standards are included to minimize the negative visual impacts and foster connectivity to the surrounding neighborhood. Finally, Chapter 16 of the Bozeman Community Plan discusses implementation tools. The City carries out the growth policy using several practices, including Bozeman Municipal 194 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 7 of 22 Code revisions. A review of requirements for on-site parking has identified desirable changes which will in turn affect land use patterns, environmental quality, and public health. Table 16.1 Implementation Policies and Actions, Chapter 3, part 10.a states an action plan is to “Investigate revisions to parking standards and policies to adequately address real needs while minimizing impacts.” The proposed text amendment furthers the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan by creating an incentive to “maximize underutilized parcels” where there is a finite amount of land for infill projects. It also addresses the regulatory impediments issue as “clear and reasonable zoning and incentives can help remove hindrances to development under current regulations” in the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan (pg. 10). B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Yes. The proposed amendments do not change the breadth of tools available to the City in identifying and mitigating risk from land use and development. The proposed amendment was brought before the Development Review Committee (DRC) for consideration. The DRC did not identify any specific concerns caused by the text amendment. Additional building and fire suppression standards apply to parking structures including fire suppressions systems and ventilation. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Yes. The proposed amendments do not change the requirements for provision of water or sewer systems, provision of emergency response capability, or similar existing standards. The proposed dimensional standards appear to be industry standard and utilized by numerous other municipalities with similar weather related challenges. A survey of adopted parking standards found a variety of dimensional standards: Municipality Stall Width Stall Length Drive Aisle Module Width Bozeman, MT 9 20 26 66’ Billings, MT 9 18 23 59’ Missoula, MT 9 16’6” 26 59’ Denver, CO 8’6” 15’6” 23 54’ Boulder, CO 9 19 24 62’ Chicago, IL 8 18 22 58’ Spokane, WA 8’6” 18 24 60’ South Lake Tahoe 9 19 24 62’ Boca Raton, FL 10 20 26 66’ 195 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 8 of 22 Sarasota, FL 8’6” 18 22 58’ Assumes 90 degree parking, two-way drive aisles. The Development Review Committee considered the proposed text amendment and did not identify any public health, public safety, and general welfare issues. However, structured parking facilities pose unique challenges to integrate into an existing neighborhood. Properly sited, designed, and maintained facilities that are developed in a context and multidisciplinary manner will mitigate potential public health, public safety, and general welfare issues. The regulatory provisions established through the City’s municipal code under Chapter 38, Unified Development Code (UDC), BMC, will adequately address the issues of health and general welfare. Further development of any particular property may also require review and approval by the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Quality, City Engineer's Office, Director of Public Works, Development Review Committee, and Design Review Board. D. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Neutral. The proposed text amendment does not directly affect publicly required transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other systems. However, encouraging structured parking facilities within the City will allow greater density to evolve which, in turn, will affect demands of public infrastructure including transportation, water, sewerage, schools, and parks. Established procedures will provide for mitigation of impacts as they occur. Currently the City has three primary types of parking spaces. 1. On street 7’ x 24’ 2. Multi-purpose - Individual residential garage 9’ x 20’ (plus 1 foot) 3. Surface parking 9’ x 20’ The proposed configuration will create a fourth. 4. Structured parking 9’ x 18’ (proposed) As noted earlier, although the Applicant focused on structured parking facilities, Staff is recommending applying this modification to both surface and structured parking facilities. The proposal is to reduce the depth of each stall by 2 feet and reduce the drive aisle accordingly. These reductions will not impact these systems. In addition, The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Update 2006, ©2006 by the American Institute of Architects, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and Planning and Urban Design 196 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 9 of 22 Standards, 2006, American Planning Association, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. suggest reasonable parking space size is 9 feet wide, an increase from 8 feet 6 inches due to increasing automobile size, and perpendicular parking requires a module—bumper wall to bumper wall—of 58 to 62 feet, with a 60-foot module (18-foot parking space plus 24-foot drive aisle plus 18-foot parking space) being the most common. In 2005 the 85th percentile passenger vehicle was the Ford Expedition, which is 5 feet, 7 inches wide by 17 feet, 1 inch long. Additional data of common vehicle size is included below under part F. Industry standards suggest local design of parking stalls should accommodate a vehicle size equal to the 85th percentile. Based on empirical evidence this size allows efficient movement and circulations for most vehicles without overdesigning the parking facility. Four Vehicle Size Examples (image may not represent referenced vehicle): 2012 Ford F150 SuperCab with 8’ 6” bed 2012 Chevrolet Suburban 2012 Subaru Outback 197 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 10 of 22 2012 Honda Fit E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Neutral. Regardless of the minimum parking dimensional standards, parking structures must be designed and constructed in accordance with appropriate building, fire and mechanical codes that address adequate light and air. Provision of light and air is not applicable to surface parking which is inherently open to both. Additional parking structures may allow the City’s built environment to densify. All new structures and development will be required to meet or exceed the minimum zoning requirements for setbacks, lot coverage, height limitations and lot sizes to ensure the health, safety and general welfare of the community. These standards have been reviewed to meet this criterion. Pursuant to Section 38.01.050 of the UDC, the City of Bozeman has the authority and power to require more stringent standards than the minimum requirements if it ensures the best service to the public interest. A detailed analysis of the specifics of future development proposals will enable the determination of whether a greater than minimum standard is required. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Neutral. There is insufficient information at this time to determine whether or not a modification to structured parking facilities will have a significant impact on Bozeman’s transportation system. As the community grows and population increases with time there is potential the result will be greater demand for multi-modal transportation including 198 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 11 of 22 Streamline and/or other transit alternatives. Providing incentives for structured parking may encourage utilization of alternate transportation modes. On the other hand, if the stall size poses structural impediments to its construction use of these facilities may diminish. As noted in The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Update 2006 the average area per parking space is a measure of “parking efficiency.” This is determined both by the actual size of the parking spaces and by the functional design of the space. The width needed for parking spaces varies with the size of passenger vehicles in the overall passenger vehicle fleet. In the 1980s, when gasoline prices increased drastically, automobile manufacturers downsized overall vehicle sizes both in length and width and the accepted one-size-fits-all space was 8 feet, 6 inches wide. Since then, however, the increase in wider sports utility vehicles and pickup trucks has caused some parking planners to increase the typical parking space width to 9 feet. In 2005 the 85th percentile passenger vehicle was the Ford Expedition, which is 5 feet, 7 inches wide 85th by 17 feet, 1 inch long. This size is likely to go down in the future as fuel prices rise once again. Case study in Calgary, Alberta performed by Bunt & Associates (transportation, planning and engineering firm with offices in Vancouver, Calgary, and Edmonton) undertook a review of the current (2008 and 2009) vehicle fleet to establish an appropriate design vehicle for the Calgary market. In all, 3,225 vehicles models, comprising of 785 Cars, 1068 SUVs, 74 Minivans and 1298 Pick-up Trucks were analyzed. Based on the selected sample size, a total of 289 vehicle lengths, 169 vehicle widths and 226 vehicle heights were analyzed (the summary report is attached to this report). The results are as follows: Width Length 85th Percentile 6’-6” 18’-7” Whether angled parking or perpendicular parking is more efficient is the subject of an ongoing argument in the industry. Perpendicular parking requires a module—bumper wall to bumper wall—of 58 to 62 feet, with a 60-foot module (18-foot parking space plus 24-foot drive aisle plus 18-foot parking space) being the most common. Angled parking modules may be as small as 46 feet with 45-degree angled parking. Angled parking is most efficient, with modules of 52 to 56 feet in angles of 60 to 70 degrees, respectively. Another parking design argument is whether to use “one size fits all” parking spaces or design some spaces for large cars and some for small cars. The problem with different spaces is that drivers of small cars, which easily fit into large-car spaces, may use them if the large spaces are more convenient to stairs and elevators. Sometimes, midsize or large cars use small-car spaces and block the use of a space between them. Thus, the trend has been to design “one size fits all” parking spaces with judicious use of small car spaces on the ends of parking rows to promote ease for turning. 199 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 12 of 22 Five different angled parking options are listed in Table 38.25.020. Although these angles appear to be industry standard many other alternatives may be needed to suite a particular situation. Block length, width or other constraint may dictate a parking angle that is not listed. Staff is proposing that the City Engineer be granted the authority to review and allow an alternate parking stall angle without a variance, deviation or other administrative process. This authority is limited only to the parking angle all other dimensional standards remain including length and width and number required. Modification to any other dimensional standard may require additional review by the city. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Yes. The proposed text amendment may support the construction of structured parking facilities. As stated by the Applicant, greater use of structured parking will encourage infill development and redevelopment and reduce negative impacts of surface parking lots. H. Character of the district. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not make material changes to the character of the established zoning districts. The proposed requirements for design exterior of parking structures will insure they are consistent with district character, see also Criterion J. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not make material changes to land uses. The more intensive uses are still reserved for appropriate zoning districts. The Applicant has provided additional statements in regard to this criterion. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Neutral. The Applicant states structured parking facilities often contribute to increased property and building values, however no evidence is provided to support this statement. However, reducing the minimum parking stall size by 18 square feet and the drive aisle by 2 feet (for two-way drive aisle) may make it easier to construct additional parking structures. Although the parking structure may increase the value of some buildings others may be negatively impacted. The design and siting of a structured parking facility is a complex undertaking. Comprehensive approach must include: Encourage structured parking to decrease dependence on surface parking and associated negative environmental impacts. All parking facilities shall employ an integrated design approach to insure functional/operational utility to provide for safe and efficient passage of the automobile. Minimal visual impact. The structured parking structure should not dominate the building site. Through a combination of planning, architectural, and landscaping elements, the visual impact on the surrounding streets and developments can be minimized. For example, structured parking is generally located to the rear or side of the 200 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 13 of 22 building and away from the street or street intersections, while providing direct pedestrian access to the buildings. Reasonable effort shall be made so that the architectural style of the surrounding architecture is integrated and must be sensitive to historic preservation to lessen potential impacts on the architectural context. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Neutral. The proposed amendments do not make material changes to the zoning districts. PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF EITHER THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. APPENDIX A –AFFECTED ZONING PROVISIONS CURRENT TABLE AND TEXT Section 38.25.020. - Stall, aisle and driveway design. A. Parking dimensions. The following shall be the minimum parking space dimensions: See also Figure 38.25.020 in Appendix A to this chapter. Table 38.25.020 Width1 Length Angle Standard Disabled6 Compact5 Standard Disabled Compact5 Aisle Width 90 9’ 13’ 8’ 18/202 18/202 16’ 263 60 9’ 13’ 8’ 18/202 18/202 16’ 18/234 45 9’ 13’ 8’ 18/202 18/202 16’ 15/234 Notes: 201 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 14 of 22 1 As measured by a line perpendicular to the stall line at a point on the outside end of the stall, except when the stall is on the inside edge of a curve, in which case the point of measurement shall be on the inside end of the stall. 2 18 feet if measured from a curb on the inside edge of the stall; 20 feet if measured from a painted line on the inside edge of the stall. 3 For 90-degree parking, aisles are two-way; 4 First number refers to one-way traffic and the second number to two-way traffic. If the aisle is needed as a fire lane, a 20-foot minimum is required. 5 Unless otherwise approved, all parking spaces shall be of standard width and length. In any parking facility containing 20 or more parking spaces, a maximum of 25 percent of the provided parking spaces may be reduced in size for small cars, provided these spaces shall be clearly identified with a sign permanently affixed immediately in front of each space containing the notation, "Compacts Only." Where feasible, all small car spaces shall be located in one or more contiguous areas and/or adjacent to ingress and egress points within parking facilities. Location of compact car parking spaces shall not create traffic congestion or impede traffic flows. 6 The first disabled accessible parking stall shall meet the standards of section 38.25.040.A.4.a. 7 If parking stalls within the interior of an individual residential garage are counted toward a development's required parking needs, then they shall meet the standard parking stall width of nine feet and the standard parking stall length of 20 feet with a minimum of one foot clear on all exterior sides of the stall. . . . . [the remainder of the text of Section 38.25.020 omitted]. PROPOSED TABLE AND TEXT Section 38.25.020 - Stall, aisle and driveway design. A. Parking dimensions. The following shall be the minimum parking space dimensions: See also Figure 38.25.020 in Appendix A to this chapter. 202 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 15 of 22 Table 38.25.020: Dimensions of Parking Spaces & Modules Parking Angle Stall Length (A) Stall Width (B) Projection (C) Parking Aisle One- Way / Two-Way (D) Module One-Way / Two-Way (E) Interlock Reduction (F) Standard Parking Space – surface and structured parking facilities 30° 18’ 9’ 16.79’ 13’ / 21’ 44.58’ / 51.58’ 2’ 45° 18’ 9’ 19.09’ 13’ / 21’ 51.18’ / 58.18’ 2’ 60° 18’ 9’ 20.09’ 16’ / 21’ 56.18’ / 61.18’ 1’ – 6” 75° 18’ 9’ 19.72’ 16’ / 21’ 55.44’ / 60.44’ 1’ 90° 18’ 9’ 18.0’ --- / 24’ --- / 60.0’ --- Compact Parking Space – surface and structured parking facilities 30° 16’ 8’ 15.79’ 13’ / 21’ 42.58’ / 49.58’ 2’ 45° 16’ 8’ 17.69’ 13’ / 21’ 48.38’ / 55.38’ 2’ 60° 16’ 8’ 18.36’ 16’ / 21’ 52.72’ / 57.72’ 1’ – 6” 75° 16’ 8’ 17.78’ 16’ / 21’ 51.56’ / 56.56’ 1’ 90° 16’ 8’ 18.0’ --- / 24’ --- / 56.0’ --- Individual Residential Garage Dimensional Standards – subject to 38.25.010.A.4 Number of Stalls Stall Length (A) Stall Width (B) Special Conditions 1 20’ 9’ Additional one foot on all exterior sides of the stall 2 or more 20’ 9’ Additional one foot on all exterior sides of the stalls Notes: 1 Unless otherwise approved, all parking spaces shall be of standard width and length. In any parking facility containing 20 or more parking spaces, a maximum of 25 percent of the provided parking spaces may be reduced in size for small cars, provided these spaces shall be clearly identified with a sign permanently affixed immediately in front of each space containing the notation, "Compacts Only." Where feasible, all small car spaces shall be located in one or more contiguous areas and/or adjacent to ingress and egress points within parking facilities. Location of compact car parking spaces shall not create traffic congestion or impede traffic flows. 203 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 16 of 22 2 The first ADA accessible parking stall shall meet the standards of section 38.25.040.A.4.a. . . . . [Subsections B – Q to remain unchanged]. 204 Page 17 of 22 Figure 38.25.020 Parking Dimensional Standards from Table 38.25.020 205 Page 18 of 22 PROPOSED NEW TEXT Section 38.25.025. – Structured parking facility development standards. A. All above ground structured parking facilities, regardless of location within the city, shall conform to chapters 1 through 4 of the design objectives plan established in article 17 of this chapter. In the event of a conflict between the design objectives plan and the standards of this section, the standards of this section shall govern. 1. Except: single- household dwellings and individual townhouse and condominium units, and duplexes with physically separated individual driveways. Physical separation is provided when at least one of these options are provided: individual garage doors for each interior parking space, a vegetated planter not less than four feet in width between the parking spaces in the driveway area, or a wall not less than four feet in height and length is provided between the parking area in the driveway and dividing the garage entrance. B. Building standards. 1. Intent: To promote an active and diverse streetscape, parking structures should be located behind buildings in the interior of blocks or below grade. Parking garages that front streets should line the parking garage at the street level with an active use. a. Street designs accommodate on street parking and pedestrian mobility. Parking lots and garages rarely front the streets, and are typically relegated to the rear of the lot and the center of blocks. b. Parking garages should be located in the interior of blocks. Parking garages that front onto streets shall provide a lining of retail, office, or residential use at the street level along the entire street frontage. Parking garages that provide this lining of retail, office, or residential use at the street level are classified as mixed-use buildings. 2. In all districts, all commercial floor space wrapping a parking structure on the ground floor shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. 3. Structured parking facilities shall provide transparency along at least 50 percent of the linear length of the building's façade. This may be achieved with windows, displays, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both frontages of a building located on a corner lot. a. The bottom edge of any window or product display window used to satisfy the transparency standard of this subsection B.3 may not be more than four feet above the adjacent sidewalk. b. Product display windows used to satisfy these requirements shall have a minimum height of four feet and be internally lighted. 206 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 19 of 22 4. Street-level openings on parking structures shall be limited to those necessary for retail store entrances, vehicle entrance and exit lanes, and pedestrian entrances to stairs and elevator lobbies. Parking structures adjacent to streets shall have architectural detailing such as, but not limited to, standard size masonry units such as brick, divided openings to give the appearance of windows, and other techniques to provide an interesting and human-scaled appearance on the story adjacent to the sidewalk. 5. Buildings shall be articulated with modules, architectural detailing, individual floors visually expressed in the facade, and rhythm and pattern of openings and surfaces shall be human-scale. 6. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent public or private street. Section 38.34.010. – Review Authority. D. The city engineer shall review and upon recommendation from the DRC, DRB, ADR or WRB or other advisory body as needed approve, approve with conditions or deny the following site elements and processes. 21. Allow alternate parking angles for surface and structured parking stall configurations listed in Table 38.25.020. All other numeric standards apply. APPENDIX B – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Project Description This application proposes to revise Section 38.25.020 Stall, aisle and driveway design to modify dimensional parking stall and drive aisle standards for structured parking facilities. Current code does not differentiate between surface and structured parking stall size. The request is to reduce parking stall dimensions from 9 feet wide and 20 feet deep to 9 feet wide and 18 feet deep within structured parking facilities. No change was proposed by the applicant to surface parking lots dimensional standards. However, staff supports applying the same dimensions to surface parking lots as in structured parking facilities. In addition, the amendment reduces drive aisles for two and one-way aisles from 26, 23, and 18 to 24, 21 and 16 for 90 degree two-way, 60 degree two-way and one-way, and 45 degree two and one-way drive aisles respectively. Analysis of our code revealed other code provisions that need to be added or modified to eliminate unintended consequences and to rectify other known deficiencies in the code. Therefore, Section 38.25.025 is added to address structured parking facility development 207 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 20 of 22 standards. Section 38.34.020.D – Review Authority, is included to grant the City Engineer the ability to consider alternate angled parking options while maintaining minimum stall dimensions. Project Background The Bozeman Municipal Code includes specific parking stall and drive aisle dimensional standards that apply to all situations in all zoning districts. As noted in the Executive Summary there are five (5) structured parking examples in the downtown area. Four of the five do not meet current dimensional standards. Staff and the development community have been aware that modern standards for module parking facilities specify smaller parking stalls and drive aisles than the Bozeman Municipal Code currently permits. Although there are administrative solutions, the granting of variances or deviations from our code requirements is not a reliable or appropriate solution. Subsequently, the Department of Community Development received a request to modify our code to bring our parking and drive aisle dimensional standards in line with established standards in anticipation of increasing demand for structured parking facilities. The refinement and modification of dimensional parking standards for structured and surface parking facilities recognizes the evolution of development within the City of Bozeman and in particular the city core area. Although few structured parking facilities have been constructed in Bozeman most facilities do not meet current parking standards of nine (9) feet wide and 20 feet deep with the appropriate drive aisle width for the given parking configuration. Examples are: Snowload Building - Located at the terminus of South 8th Avenue on the north side of Main Street. Received Final Site Plan approved in July, 2007. Constructed 22 underground parking spaces. All spaces and drive aisles meet current standards. Bozeman Multi-modal Facility – Located between Black and Tracy on Mendenhall Street. Granted variances to decrease the minimum parking stall length from 20 feet to 18 feet, and to decrease the minimum aisle width from 26 feet to 24 feet. Willson Residences – Located on the corner of West Main Street and 3rd Avenue. Utilized the existing underground parking area. Parking spaces meet minimum dimensional standards; project granted variances from drive aisle standards. Baxter Hotel parking structure – Located between Wilson and Grand south of Mendenhall Street. Visual inspection revealed parking stall dimensions of 9 feet by 18 feet and a drive width of 24 feet. The Village Downtown – Located east of the intersection of East Mendenhall and North Broadway. Standard width stalls. Granted relaxations to minimum design standards through PUD to reduce stall length to 18 feet and drive aisle to 24 feet. 208 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 21 of 22 The purpose of this code modification addressing parking facilities is to establish and encourage innovative parking solutions. Specifically, the revised parking facility dimensional standards, and the new structured parking facilities design and building standards are intended to be used for the creation of developments that: i. Create quality usable public spaces. ii. Ensure high standards of design for buildings, and infrastructure. iii. Guarantee a high degree of pedestrian and vehicular connectivity. iv. Locate buildings close to the street, so that streets and squares feel enclosed. v. Avoid unnecessary complexities in the development process. APPENDIX C – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT The notice was submitted Tuesday, October 28, 2014 for publication as a legal ad on Sunday, November 2 and 16, 2014. Copy of the notice is also included on the City’s website. Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the Zoning Commission on Tuesday, November 18, 2014 and City Commission public hearing on Monday, January 5, 2014. There is no requirement for posting specific properties. This Structured Parking and Drive Aisle Dimensional Standards Text Amendment applies to the entire corporate limits of Bozeman as it exists now and evolves over time through annexation, and it applies to all properties. No public comment has been received as of the writing of this report. APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Applicant: Mendenhall Partners, LLC, 20 North Tracy Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative: CTA Group, 411 East Main Street, Suite 101, Bozeman, MT 59715 Report By: Tom Rogers, AICP; Associate Planner FISCAL EFFECTS No fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this text amendment. 209 Z-14265, Staff Report for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Text Amendment Page 22 of 22 ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. A. Parking Lot Design, Theory & Design, University of Idaho, National Institute for Advanced Transportation Technology B. Parking Planning, Carl Walker, PE & Haahs, PE, Excepts from The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Update 2006. C. Parking Dimensions, Calgary, Alberta D. City of Bozeman Parking Commission Resolution E. Zoning Commission minutes 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 Page 1 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. 1905 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA AMENDING CHAPTER 38, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, BMC TO REVISE SECTIONS 38.25.020 PARKING STALL, AISLE AND DRIVEWAY DESIGN; ADD NEW SECTION 38.25.025 STRUCTURED PARKING FACILITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AND REVISE SECTION 38.34.010 TO ALLOW ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION OF PARKING STALL ANGLES. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman (the “City”) is authorized by the City Charter and Montana law to adopt land development and use standards to protect public health, safety and welfare and otherwise execute the purposes of Section 76-2-304, MCA ; and WHEREAS, the provision of functional and properly designed parking stalls further Bozeman’s Community Plan and is essential for the safe and functional operation of a city; and WHEREAS, the dimensional standards for parking stalls were adopted more than 40 years ago and the median size of vehicles has changed over that time, demand for parking has increased, and the supply of parking spaces has been determined to not meet the needs of the City; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA: 219 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 2 of 7 Section 1 Legislative Findings: 1. The City relies upon the standards and definitions within Chapter 38, BMC to enable the development of the City in a manner which avoids conflicts between land uses, provides efficient delivery of services, enables public notice of and comment on development which may affect residents and land owners, and provides predictability in government actions. 2. The dimensional standards for parking stalls were adopted over 40 years ago and have not been evaluated since for adequacy to current conditions. 3. The eleven zoning criteria listed under 76-3-304 Mont. Code Ann. support the proposed text amendments. The amendments further numerous goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan; promote public safety by meeting national parking standards; promote public health by minimizing impermeable surfaces needed for vehicular parking; and support the compatible urban growth and the character of the district. A full analysis of the amendments is contained in the Structured Parking staff report dated January 5, 2015. 4. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Chapter 38, BMC as set forth in section 38.01.040. Section 2 That the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended by revising Section 38.25.020 Stall, aisle and driveway design to read as follows: A. Parking dimensions. The following shall be the minimum parking space dimensions: See also Figure 38.25.020 in Appendix A to this chapter. 220 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 3 of 7 Table 38.25.020: Dimensions of Parking Spaces & Modules Parking Angle Stall Length (A) Stall Width (B) Projection (C) Parking Aisle One- Way / Two-Way (D) Module One-Way / Two-Way (E) Interlock Reduction (F) Standard Parking Space – surface and structured parking facilities 30° 18’ 9’ 16.79’ 13’ / 21’ 44.58’ / 51.58’ 2’ 45° 18’ 9’ 19.09’ 13’ / 21’ 51.18’ / 58.18’ 2’ 60° 18’ 9’ 20.09’ 16’ / 21’ 56.18’ / 61.18’ 1’ – 6” 75° 18’ 9’ 19.72’ 16’ / 21’ 55.44’ / 60.44’ 1’ 90° 18’ 9’ 18.0’ --- / 24’ --- / 60.0’ --- Compact Parking Space – surface and structured parking facilities 30° 16’ 8’ 15.79’ 13’ / 21’ 42.58’ / 49.58’ 2’ 45° 16’ 8’ 17.69’ 13’ / 21’ 48.38’ / 55.38’ 2’ 60° 16’ 8’ 18.36’ 16’ / 21’ 52.72’ / 57.72’ 1’ – 6” 75° 16’ 8’ 17.78’ 16’ / 21’ 51.56’ / 56.56’ 1’ 90° 16’ 8’ 18.0’ --- / 24’ --- / 56.0’ --- Individual Residential Garage Dimensional Standards – subject to 38.25.010.A.4 Number of Stalls Stall Length (A) Stall Width (B) Special Conditions 1 20’ 9’ Additional one foot on all exterior sides of the stall 2 or more 20’ 9’ Additional one foot on all exterior sides of the stalls Notes: 1 Unless otherwise approved, all parking spaces shall be of standard width and length. In any parking facility containing 20 or more parking spaces, a maximum of 25 percent of the provided parking spaces may be reduced in size for small cars, provided these spaces shall be clearly identified with a sign permanently affixed immediately in front of each space containing the notation, "Compacts Only." Where feasible, all small car spaces shall be located in one or more contiguous areas and/or adjacent to ingress and egress points within parking facilities. Location of compact car parking spaces shall not create traffic congestion or impede traffic flows. 221 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 4 of 7 2 The first ADA accessible parking stall shall meet the standards of section 38.25.040.A.4.a. . . . . [Subsections B – Q to remain unchanged]. Section 3 That the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended by adding a new subsection 21 to Section 38.34.010.D Review Authority to read as follows: D. The city engineer shall review and upon recommendation from the DRC, DRB, ADR or WRB or other advisory body as needed approve, approve with conditions or deny the following site elements and processes: 21. Allow alternate parking angles for surface and structured parking stall configurations listed in Table 38.25.020. All other numeric standards apply. Section 4 That the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended by adding a new Section 38.25.025. Structured parking facility development standards to read as follows: A. All above ground structured parking facilities, regardless of location within the city, shall conform to chapters 1 through 4 of the design objectives plan established in article 17 of this chapter. In the event of a conflict between the design objectives plan and the standards of this section, the standards of this section shall govern. 1. Except: single- household dwellings and individual townhouse and condominium units, and duplexes with physically separated individual driveways. Physical separation is provided when at least one of these options are provided: individual garage doors for each interior parking space, a vegetated planter not less than four feet in width between the parking spaces in the driveway area, or a wall not less than four feet in height and length is provided between the parking area in the driveway and dividing the garage entrance. 222 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 5 of 7 B. Building standards. 1. Intent: To promote an active and diverse streetscape, parking structures should be located behind buildings in the interior of blocks or below grade. Parking garages that front streets should line the parking garage at the street level with an active use. a. Street designs accommodate on street parking and pedestrian mobility. Parking lots and garages rarely front the streets, and are typically relegated to the rear of the lot and the center of blocks. b. Parking garages should be located in the interior of blocks. Parking garages that front onto streets shall provide a lining of retail, office, or residential use at the street level along the entire street frontage. Parking garages that provide this lining of retail, office, or residential use at the street level are classified as mixed- use buildings. 2. In all districts, all commercial floor space wrapping a parking structure on the ground floor shall have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 12 feet. 3. Structured parking facilities shall provide transparency along at least 50 percent of the linear length of the building's façade. This may be achieved with windows, displays, building lobbies, building entrances, display windows, or windows affording views into retail, office, or lobby spaces. This requirement shall apply to both frontages of a building located on a corner lot. a. The bottom edge of any window or product display window used to satisfy the transparency standard of this subsection B.3 may not be more than four feet above the adjacent sidewalk. b. Product display windows used to satisfy these requirements shall have a minimum height of four feet and be internally lighted. 4. Street-level openings on parking structures shall be limited to those necessary for retail store entrances, vehicle entrance and exit lanes, and pedestrian entrances to stairs and elevator lobbies. Parking structures adjacent to streets shall have architectural detailing such as, but not limited to, standard size masonry units such as brick, divided openings to give the appearance of windows, and other techniques to provide an interesting and human-scaled appearance on the story adjacent to the sidewalk. 5. Buildings shall be articulated with modules, architectural detailing, individual floors visually expressed in the facade, and rhythm and pattern of openings and surfaces shall be human-scale. 6. Buildings shall be oriented to the adjacent public or private street. 223 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 6 of 7 Section 5 Repealer. All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 6 Savings Provision. This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 7 Severability. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. Section 8 Codification. This Ordinance shall be codified as indicated in Sections 2 – 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption. 224 Ordinance No. 1905, Parking Dimensional Standards Page 7 of 7 PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the 5th day of January, 2015. ____________________________________ JEFFREY K. KRAUSS Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ day of ___________________, 2015. The effective date of this ordinance is _____, __________, 2015. _________________________________ JEFFREY K. KRAUSS Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ STACY ULMEN, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 225 226 “Parking Planning” was originally published in The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Update 2006, ©2006 by the American Institute of Architects, published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The AIA provides a contract document designed especially for alternative architectural services. B102–2007, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect without a Predefined Scope of Architect’s Services. AIA Document B102–2007 is a standard form of agreement between owner and architect that contains terms and conditions and compensation details. B102– 2007 does not include a scope of architect’s services, which must be inserted in Article 1 or attached as an exhibit. Special terms and conditions that modify the agreement may be included in Article 8. The separation of the scope of services from the owner/architect agreement allows users the freedom to append alternative scopes of services. AIA Document B102–2007 replaces and serves the same purpose as AIA Document B141–1997 Part 1. For more information about AIA Contract Documents, visit www.aia.org/contractdocs/about May 2011 The American Institute of Architects 10 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA227 To accommodate these needs of today’s mobile society, planners, designers, and architects will be called upon to provide convenient and safe parking. Whether indi- vidual passenger vehicles of tomorrow will be powered by petroleum or other fuels, the need for parking planning will be with us for the foreseeable future. To achieve maximum parking efficiency, parking lots are typically laid out in perpendicular parking with spaces laid out around the full perimeter of the lot. At shopping centers and malls, parking is not allowed adjacent to the buildings when this drive area is also a fire lane. In some instances, however, an angled parking layout will be more efficient than a perpen- dicular parking layout. Traffic impact.Getting to and departing from a parking facility is important. The streets surrounding a planned parking facility are analyzed for the ease of accessing the facility from expressways and arterial roadways. One-way street patterns, and the possibility of changing these patterns, are also analyzed. The success of a parking facility can be compromised by failure to adequately consider the arterial thoroughfares used to access the parking facility and its entrance/exit locations. Parking access and revenue control.The most common access route to a pay parking facility is an entry drive with a ticket dispenser and gate arm. For exiting, the ticket is given to a cashier, a cash or credit card transaction is completed, and the parker leaves. Some automated cashiering systems allow the driver to prepay at an automatic cashiering machine and then to exit by placing the prepaid ticket into a gate activator. Another system uses the same credit card to activate the entrance and exit gates, and charges the parking fee directly to the credit card account. For contract parking users, a key card or automatic vehicle identi- fication (AVI) system may be used to gain entry and exit. In the future, it is expected that uni- versal AVI systems will be available for use on toll roads and in parking facilities. Security.An environment in which parkers feel secure is critical for a successful parking operation. Security can be provided in two ways—actively and passively. Personnel who peri- odically patrol a parking facility provide active security. Built-in elements of the structure itself can provide passive security by creating an atmosphere in which criminals feel uncomfortable plying their trade. Two essential elements for passive security are good lighting and openness (e.g., elimination of potential hiding places and views to the exterior). The Illumination Engi- neering Society’s (IES) lighting manual provides guidelines for the proper levels of lighting in parking facilities. Openness can be provided by employing long-span construction, open stairwells, and, where allowed by building codes, glass-backed elevators. Ventilation.Open parking structures are naturally ventilated by outside air flowing through the parking structure. Exterior façade openness requirements are established by building codes. Parking structures that do not meet these requirements, such as under- ground facilities, are required to have mechanical fresh air ventilation and a fire suppression or sprinkler system. Drainage.Good drainage is necessary to maintain the durability and customer friendli- ness of parking facilities. Where codes allow, the use of PVC piping rather than cast iron or steel is more economical and visually acceptable. Provision of potable water to each parking structure floor is recommended for washing the facility. Signage.Signage is an integral part of a parking environment. Signs are used to commu- nicate directions, warnings, and other information to drivers and pedestrians, and their graphics can add architectural life to a parking facility. Other types of graphic features can also be used to create a more pleasant atmosphere for users. Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA 9228 Parking structure planning involves consideration of a number of factors that affect the overall design of a parking facility: Flexibility.Given that most new parking facilities are designed to last fifty to sixty years before major repairs and renovations are required, new parking structures should be designed to accommodate changing vehicle sizes, new methods of revenue control, and new methods of directing parkers to available parking spaces. Functional design.The layout of circulation routes and parking spaces is the primary creative challenge in parking facility design. Traffic flow can either be one-way with angle parking or two-way with 90-degree or perpendicular parking. The choice of angle or perpen- dicular parking is affected by a number of factors, including the building or land use gener- ating the parking, the parking turnover (the number of parkers using a parking space in a day), the number of bays or modules that can be developed, and site dimensions. Vehicle circulation.In a parking structure, vehicle circulation can be via continuous ramps, express ramps, or a combination of the two. In continuous ramping, the floor is designed so vehicles drive and park on the same sloping surface. Typically, the slope for a parking ramp should not exceed 6 percent; however, slopes of up to 7 or 7.5 percent are not uncommon in central business districts where site geometries dictate higher slopes. The dis- tance a parker is expected to circulate to find a parking space should not exceed 500 to 600 parking spaces. Larger facilities should have divided circuits. Often, parking for monthly or all-day parking is in one area or circuit, while transient or hourly parking is in another. In larger parking structures, such as at airports, the parking floors may be level with access and egress from each level via express ramps. (Note: Even functionally level floors are sloped for drainage.) Express ramps, of either straight or circular configuration, can have grades of up to 15 percent or more. However, maximum slopes are usually limited to 12.5 percent because this is the maximum pedestrian ramp slope allowable in most building codes. Typically, drive aisles are also pedestrian aisles. Lots and parking structures are laid out whenever possible with the drive aisles between the parking rows oriented so they flow toward the pedestrian destination. Sometimes pedestrian walkways across drive aisles are delineated with painted stripes. Parking efficiency.The average area per parking space is a measure of “parking effi- ciency.” This is determined both by the actual size of the parking spaces and by the func- tional design of the space. The width needed for parking spaces varies with the size of passenger vehicles in the overall passenger vehicle fleet. In the 1980s, when gasoline prices increased drastically, auto- mobile manufacturers downsized overall vehicle sizes both in length and width and the accepted one-size-fits-all space was 8 feet, 6 inches wide. Since then, however, the increase in wider sports utility vehicles and pickup trucks has caused some parking planners to increase the typical parking space width to 9 feet. In 2005 the 85th percentile passenger vehicle was the Ford Expedition, which is 5 feet, 7 inches wide by 17 feet, 1 inch long. This size is likely to go down in the future as fuel prices rise once again. Whether angled parking or perpendicular parking is more efficient is the subject of an ongoing argument in the industry. Perpendicular parking requires a module—bumper wall to bumper wall—of 58 to 62 feet, with a 60-foot module (18-foot parking space plus 24-foot drive aisle plus 18-foot parking space) being the most common. Angled parking modules may be as small as 46 feet with 45-degree angled parking. Angled parking is most efficient, with modules of 52 to 56 feet in angles of 60 to 70 degrees, respectively. Another parking design argument is whether to use “one size fits all” parking spaces or design some spaces for large cars and some for small cars. The problem with different spaces is that drivers of small cars, which easily fit into large-car spaces, may use them if the large spaces are more convenient to stairs and elevators. Sometimes, midsize or large cars use small-car spaces and block the use of a space between them. Thus, the trend has been to design “one size fits all” parking spaces with judicious use of small car spaces on the ends of parking rows to promote ease for turning. Parking Facility Planning Factors 8 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA229 this, a financial feasibility study is completed. Throughout this progression, decisions are made regarding whether parking for excess or future demand will be provided with surface parking lots, parking structures, or a combination. Usually the financial feasibility study is the lead-in to the actual construction project. Consultation Tasks for Parking Facility Design The consultation process for parking structure development generally embodies the familiar project phases of predesign, design, construction documentation, bidding/negotia- tion, and construction. The activities and tasks involved in this process are described in the following text as they occur during these phases. Predesign.The first step in a project is to confirm the need for and viability of a new parking facility with a comprehensive study that addresses parking supply and demand, site selection, conceptual design, and financial feasibility. Sometimes the pro- gramming has already been done in the conceptual design phase of the comprehen- sive study. The financial feasibility study must be accurate because it is often used as the basis for financing or bonding the project. While financing and operating cash flows can usually be projected accurately, future revenue projections are often a problem and can be a source of future financial problems. Thus, the financial projec- tions should be done by a consultant with a great deal of experience in parking facility finances. Design.Sometimes the schematic design and design development phases are lumped together into a preliminary design phase. At this time, the parking consultant will provide the functional design—vehicle circulation and parking space layouts. Entry and exit concepts will also be developed. Construction documentation.Parking projects are generally developed in the same manner as conventional buildings, with contributions by the A/E team of archi- tects, structural engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, and other special- ties such as traffic engineering, landscaping, and graphics. Often a parking consultant will design the interior signage and consult regarding security, parking operating equip- ment, lighting layouts, and drainage locations. The structural engineer must be someone who recognizes that parking structures have unique durability requirements. Some clients may choose to have the A/E team develop performance specifications or bridging documents, which are bid on a design-build basis. Usually these documents include drawings showing the client’s preferred functional design and architectural façade. With this approach, the A/E team should maintain an advisory role with the owner. Bidding/negotiation.Conventionally, bids are received from qualified builders. Sometimes the design-and-construction increment can be shortened by using fast-track scheduling. This can involve selection of a construction manager (CM) prior to bidding. (It is advantageous to select the CM early in the design process, as then the CM can be responsible for project budget control and provide value analysis services.) Construction.During construction, the parking consultant should carry out tasks to help ensure the work the consulting team specified is properly executed. This includes review of shop drawing and equipment submittals, observation of construction, and job site meetings. Sometimes the final location of operating equipment is best done in the field by driving a vehicle through the area. It is wise to keep the parking consul- tant involved in a project through completion of the one-year warranty review. THE EVOLVING ROLE OF PARKING PLANNING Many older urban areas in North America were planned in an era when workers walked to their job and when railroads and the horse and buggy were the primary means of travel. To revitalize and renew these areas, provisions for consolidated residential and business parking will be required. For nonurban surface parking, the challenge is to create well-landscaped and reasonably scaled solutions that fit within the overall project. In some suburban office park developments, clients often desire architecturally compatible parking structures to preserve green space, hide cars, and provide shelter from severe weather conditions. Parking has evolved from being considered a “necessary evil” to an important amenity in the built environment. Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA 7230 Professional licenses are not required for those who conduct parking studies and functional design consultation services. Of course, professional architecture and/or engi- neering licenses are required for the design and construction of parking structures. Parking Consultants Parking planning emerged as a discipline after World War II, when the automobile rapidly grew as the primary means of personal transportation in the United States. Many early parking consultants came from structural engineering firms that specialized in designing long-span concrete structures. More recently, consultants have come up through the ranks of established parking consulting firms or A/E firms with considerable parking design expe- rience on larger projects. Most of these consultants have acquired their knowledge through on-the-job experience working under architects and engineers experienced in parking plan- ning and parking facility design. Because parking planning services are not regulated, architects and engineers can expect that a variety of firms will offer such services. For example, prior to the Enron and Arthur Andersen debacle, a number of large CPA firms, touting their alleged finan- cial expertise, offered to perform financial feasibility parking studies. Such offerings are likely to reappear when such abuses in the public accounting field have faded from public view. In selecting a qualified parking consultant, consideration should be given to the consultant’s experience with the project type and services required, knowledge of the geographic area of the project, client references for similar projects, and experience of the project leader. In addition, the quality of work that can be expected by the consul- tant may be indicated or predicted by the thoroughness and quality of the consultant’s proposal. PROCESS Most parking studies include the basic steps of defining the problem and scope, gathering data, analyzing and evaluating data, and developing solutions or concepts. Depending on the project, various combinations of parking studies may be called for. For projects involving parking structures, the parking planning process generally tracks with the tradi- tional phases of building project delivery (e.g., predesign, design, documentation, bidding/negotiation, construction, etc.). Progression of Parking Planning Studies A comprehensive parking study generally follows a defined progression, with the results of one study phase becoming the input for the next study phase. For example, existing parking supply and demand comes first, then future demand, then studies of sites (with purchase costs, if any) available for future development. Following site selection, a concep- tual design is developed to establish project land acquisition and construction costs. After Establishing a scope of work for parking planning consulting services first requires the identification of the perceived parking issues and a brief discussion of ways to address parking supply shortages or design challenges. With this information in hand, the owner or the architect can request a proposal that will include a description of the services by phases or items, a work schedule, and fees. On some projects, a parking study may have cutoff points—points at which the owner may choose to end the study if, for example, a project that was to create a future parking demand is canceled. Typically, fees for parking planning studies are driven by the amount of time required to collect and analyze data. However, when the client already has much of the required infor- mation (e.g., land use data, existing parking maps, or land maps showing areas available for additional parking), fees may be lower. Scope of Work and Compensation 6 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA231 concrete, precast prestressed concrete, hybrid, and composite structural systems are all viable approaches for parking garage design. SKILLS Parking planning requires knowledge of functional design, traffic engineering, structural concepts, behavior of materials, security and safety, and parking operations. This knowledge is applicable to the various planning studies previously described as well as to consulting services for the design of parking structures. Parking Planning Knowledge Planning for all parking facilities requires knowledge of access control, vehicular circulation systems, and parking efficiency, as well as how parking spaces are arranged and configured. Knowledge of revenue control methods is also required so that access systems and equip- ment can be selected and specified. For parking structures, knowledge about the performance and durability of struc- tural components (particularly concrete) is especially important, along with under- standing the maintenance and repair of materials, given that parking structures are intended to last as long as fifty to seventy five years. To make parking facilities secure, parking planning can apply both active and pas- sive security concepts and principles. In concert with security is the use of appropriate lighting and well-planned signage to direct both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. To determine the financial feasibility of parking facilities, knowledge of costs for designing, constructing, and operating such facilities, as well as the ability to estimate revenue from paid parking operations, is essential. Familiarity with ventilation systems, elevators, and drainage systems is necessary to achieve properly functioning parking structures. Knowledge of applicable regulations including zoning and building codes that affect the design and safety of parking lots and structures is essential. Education and Licensing Currently, schools of architecture and engineering do not offer formal training in parking planning or parking facility design. However, several organizations provide programs that address aspects of these subjects. The International Parking Institute offers the Certified Administrator of Public Parking (CAPP) program, and the National Parking Association has the Certified Parking Facility Manager (CPFM) program. (See the “For More Information” section at the close of this topic for further information on these organizations, as well as several publications that address the subject of vehicular parking.) The key to parking planning is recognizing that the parking structure is expected to provide both convenient, easily accessible vehicle storage and a means for drivers and passengers to proceed safely to their destinations, usually by walking. Effective parking planning recognizes how people use parking lots and structures. The parking facility is where drivers and passengers become pedestrians. Thus, the design team must realize that parking areas are used as support, secondary, or adjunct units to promote the seamless travel of parkers from their vehicles to their destinations. The objective is for drivers to find convenient parking spaces easily, park their vehicles, and walk safely to their destinations. Vehicle-pedestrian conflicts occur in parking locations, but typically vehicle traffic moves slowly and pedestrians keep to the sides of the drive aisles. Pedestrian entry and exit points, which are usually adjacent to stair-elevator lobbies in parking structures, are located so most people will not have to walk across a vehicle entry or exit point. Particular attention must be given to requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and similar local regulations, as some states have requirements more stringent than the federal law. Some ADA spaces must be van accessible with a minimum overhead clear- ance of 8 feet, 2 inches. Often, parking structures are designed throughout for this clearance to eliminate height restrictions and provide a more spacious interior. The “People” Dimension in Parking Planning Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA 5232 Condition audits, maintenance, and renovation. In a sense, all parking facili- ties are “static machines to park cars” and need periodic maintenance. Parking spaces need to be re-striped, potholes filled, lights replaced, and signage upgraded. In northern regions, parking structures are particularly susceptible to deterioration caused by deicing salts carried from the road into the parking structure. These facilities should be periodically reviewed to assess their condition and determine if repairs are required. Also, as parking facilities age, they need to be renovated to remain attractive to users. Analyses of the need for repairs and upgrades help owners maintain their structures. Parking Structure Planning A significant portion of urban parking is accommodated in structures, which may be located adjacent to or remote from the buildings they serve or within buildings that house other functions. Depending on specific project needs, planning for these structures may require particular technical expertise. A combination of the studies previously described may help the project team make decisions about the design and technical requirements of parking structures. Most abovegrade parking structures have open façades to provide natural ventila- tion on the interior, as prescribed by building codes. Classified as open-air parking garages, these structures typically do not require mechanical ventilation or fire protec- tion sprinkler systems (except in California). Many urban markets, such as Chicago, are placing significant emphasis on the architectural appearance of parking structures, requiring them to appear more like surrounding buildings. The resulting architectural treatment often means the garage cannot be classified as open and thus must include ventilation and sprinklers. Due to rising land and real estate costs, parking is more often proposed and con- structed as part of mixed-use projects than as traditional freestanding parking garages. Mixed-use projects may combine parking with retail, office, or residential uses where parking serves both the needs of the property users and the public. The challenge in designing mixed-use facilities is to combine the column grids and building core require- ments for the different uses and still allow for a functional parking layout. Underground parking structures usually cost between 150 and 200 percent more to build per parking space than open, aboveground structures. This added cost comes from the additional excavation, retaining walls, groundwater management, mechanical ventilation, and fire protection (sprinkler systems) these facilities require. Often, parking structures are constructed beneath a building. In these integrated garages, the column spacing is often dictated by the building structure above, which can cause inefficiencies in the traffic flow and parking space layout. Parking structures (sometimes referred to as parking garages or parking decks) are generally classified as either “static” or “automated.” In automated parking facilities, which are more common in Europe, a vehicle is driven into an elevatorlike device that automatically deposits it into a “cubbyhole” storage slot. In static parking structures, vehicles are parked by an attendant or by the driver. The latter is the most prevalent type of parking structure in the United States. Automated parking facilities are typically more expensive than static parking struc- tures—both to construct and to operate. However, they can be built on narrow or small sites where it is not possible to construct functional static structures. Thus, automated parking facilities might be feasible in cities with higher parking rates, such as New York or San Francisco, and in areas where large tracts of land are not available. The system manufacturer usually executes the design of an automated parking facility, which means the primary architectural challenge is to design the exterior cladding and lobby areas. In the early 1950s, prestressed concrete was introduced in North America. This technology made possible the design of parking structures with longer spans so the deck could clear both the parking module of a drive aisle and adjacent parking spaces without column support. These clear-span solutions eliminated the “fender bender” obstruction of intermediate columns and allowed for flexible parking space geometry as the passenger vehicle fleet changed in size over time. Many types of long-span framing systems are now available for parking structures. Structural steel, cast-in-place post-tensioned Today’s “open” parking structure is a unique hybrid of a building and a highway bridge, exposed to heat, cold, rain, snow, and deicing salt. Understanding this concept is key to durable parking structure design. 4 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA233 Alternative site. Possible sites for parking development are identified and com- pared to determine the best way to address documented parking demand. In addition to the distance of a site from the parker’s destination, other factors to be evaluated include topography, geotechnical or structural foundation characteristics, and overall plan dimensions. Typically, a self-park facility requires at least two 54- to 62-foot parking mod- ules, or a site 110 to 125 feet wide. Site length is typically 200 feet or greater. Smaller sites can be developed, but they will not be as economical. Conceptual design. The functional design of a proposed parking facility is devel- oped to a level of detail that communicates the project outcome to the interested par- ties. A conceptual design is necessary in the study phase to obtain approval to proceed with design and funding of the project. Traffic impact. Current and future traffic volume, recommended improvements, and traffic issues generated by the proposed parking facility are analyzed in a traffic engi- neering report. Financial feasibility. In this type of report, projected cash flow and methods of financing are analyzed. The development of a single stand-alone facility or a parking system that may include street parking, parking lots, parking structures, and parking fines can be studied. Subjects covered in a financial feasibility analysis include the following: •Estimated pproject costs.Included are estimates for construction cost (hard costs), design, site acquisition, geotechnical and land surveys, testing, contingen- cies, and legal consulting (soft costs). •Cash flow.This covers revenue, operating expense, and debt service esti- mates. •Financing.Will the facility be privately financed with a mortgage or publicly financed using government bonds? This includes the term of the loan, interest rate, capitalized interest, and any other special, unique, or creative financing features. •Legal concerns.Some legal firms specialize in public or private financing. Consultation with bonding or financing counsel regarding the nuances of long- term financing is recommended. The most difficult part of determining financial feasibility is accurately projecting rev- enues. Unpredictable factors such as changes in the characteristics of parking sources can greatly affect revenues, which makes it wise to employ conservative revenue projections. Parking access and revenue control. A determination must be made about which of a number of options will be employed to operate a particular parking facility. Curbside parking spaces on the street can be controlled with parking meters and parking enforcement personnel. Sometimes, networked multispace meters are used for revenue collection in on-street parking areas, parking lots, or parking structures. Traditionally, many parking lots and parking structures have been controlled with exits staffed by cashiers. In this arrangement, parking fee calculations are often auto- mated by tickets with magnetic stripes or bar codes. Automated cashiering is popular in Europe and is more frequently being incorporated in North American operations, espe- cially in dense central business district areas. Automatic cashiering or pay-on-foot sys- tems have many benefits, including these: • Reduced operational costs • Reduced risk of employee theft • Ready compatibility with other cashiering options, such as “credit card in— credit card out” • Greater control of validations Electronic “space availability” systems are popular for large facilities such as airport parking structures. These systems, which employ a variety of electronic technologies, operate overhead red-green lights that identify the location of available parking spaces. The elimination of long circuitous searches as parkers look for a spot reduces unneces- sary parking garage traffic, fuel consumption, and vehicle emissions and has the added benefit of reducing user frustration. Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA 3234 Meeting Parking Demand Except in large cities with well-developed, widely used mass-transit systems, parking for new developments must meet total patron demand. Even new high-rise developments in larger cities like New York, Chicago, and San Francisco have limited (usually extremely expensive) parking for building VIPs and guests. Parking planning is an essential ingredient in master planning for medical centers; uni- versity campuses; industrial, research, and business parks; and larger community develop- ments. Sometimes, particularly for universities, parking planning is coupled with planning for a shuttle bus system. This arrangement allows for the economical placement of parking on the perimeter of the campus, while people are shuttled to the core campus. Community zoning codes often specify the amount of parking for designated land uses. For example, shopping centers may be required to have five parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area, or office buildings may have to provide three. Land use parking ratios are frequently used to cross-check the parking demand in an area. These ratios, also called parking generation rates, can be found in a number of parking resources, including publications of the Institute of Traffic Engineers and the Urban Land Use Institute. The combined parking demand for various land uses in an area is often higher than the actual demand. A true shared parking demand can be determined by a study of hourly parking demand requirements throughout the day for each type of land use. An example of shared parking demand is a shopping mall with office buildings on the same site. The office building parking demand will be Monday through Friday during the day, while the mall demand will be in the evenings during the workweek and all day on weekends. Some land uses have seasonal parking demands. The peak demand in shopping centers occurs during the Christmas holiday season. Airports, although they have varying seasonal demands, must provide space to meet their peak demand, even if this includes free parking in an adjacent undeveloped field. Central business districts are sometimes difficult to master plan because actual building development is primarily driven by real estate economics. Nonetheless, zoning regulations can require parking based on land use ratios. In downtown areas, the viability of the local mass transit system has a large effect on these ratios. True parking demand is also affected when building users seek alternative parking (e.g., remote curbside parking and lots) to avoid more expensive lots or garages adjacent to an office or commercial building. For suburban land uses where more space is available, however, parking is often provided for the total demand. This is particularly true when parking is free. Assessing Parking Needs Parking studies targeted to address specific issues and circumstances are used to assess parking needs. Proper data collection and analysis coupled with experienced professional judgment is best for undertaking these assessments. The traditional parking study includes analysis of parking supply and demand, site alternatives, and financial feasibility. Studies may consist of one or more of these components. Common types of parking studies are described here: Parking supply/demand.This basic analysis provides a determination of the current and future parking supply and demand for a project. Carrying out such a study can ensure construction of the most efficient number of parking spaces, reducing construction cost and yielding environmental and land use benefits. In addition, provision of an adequate, appropriate supply of parking will increase the viability of any development. The cost of a parking supply/demand study is often less than the cost of constructing two or three parking spaces in a parking structure. Market research. This type of study involves researching demand, available parking supply, competitive climate, and prevailing parking rates in the area where a building will be located and projecting the number of parkers the facility may capture. Shared parking. The need for parking in mixed-use or multiuse development areas is analyzed to identify variations and relationships in parking demand generated by different land uses according to time of day, day of the week, and season of the year. A parking study usually commences when the client has a parking difficulty— often when the parking demand appears to exceed the parking supply or when a developer desires to estimate demand for a proposed project. 2 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA235 Given today’s reliance on the automobile, incorporating vehicular parking into the built environment is essential. Creating safe, func- tional, pleasing, and cost-effective parking requires careful planning that draws upon special knowledge and expertise. Today the automobile is the dominant mode of transportation in the United States, where more than 150 million passenger vehicles are in use. Despite their centrality in the U.S. transportation system, these vehicles are not in operation approximately 95 percent of the time and must be parked in various locations, including open lots, buildings in which parking is an ancillary function, or in structures dedicated solely to parking. Architects and building design professionals can usually address the parking planning aspects of projects that must accommodate small or moderate numbers of vehicles. However, architects and their clients may seek special parking planning expertise and design assistance for projects that involve large quantities of parking or that have complexi- ties regarding such issues as vehicular access and egress, security con- cerns, financial feasibility questions, and concerns about structural durability, among others. CLIENT NEEDS The majority of parking spaces are found on streets or in parking lots because this is the most economical way to provide parking. But in densely populated business areas (e.g., central business districts, office parks, airports, sports facilities, mixed-use complexes, retail centers, med- ical centers, and universities), concentrating parking in multistory parking structures—either aboveground or below grade—allows for close-in parking, protects vehicles from weather, and frees up other areas for open or green space. Parking facilities are also incorporated into large, complex structures such as those com- bining cinemas, shops, offices, and restaurants. Parking Planning Carl Walker, PE, and Timothy Haahs, PE CARL WALKER has more than forty years of experience in structural engineering and parking consulting. Currently managing director of CWConsulting, LLC, he is active in the National Parking Association and other technical parking-related organizations. TIM HAAHS formed Timothy Haahs & Associates, Inc., Structural Engineers, Architects, & Parking Consultants, in 1994. With more than twenty years of structural engineering and parking con- sulting experience, he sits on the board of directors of the International Parking Institute. PARKING PLANNING SERVICES Why a Client May Need These Services •To analyze and evaluate a parking need or problem •To determine the feasibility of a project with respect to parking •To obtain expert advice during the planning and design of a parking structure Knowledge and Skills Required •Knowledge of parking concepts, parameters, and standards •Knowledge of parking operations, security, and safety •Knowledge of parking control systems •Knowledge of construction materials (especially dura- bility) •Familiarity with structural concepts and systems •Familiarity with mechanical and other building service systems •Ability to determine financial feasibility Representative Process Tasks •Planning study tasks: problem definition, data gath- ering, data analysis and evaluation, concept develop- ment, and recommendations •Parking facility consultation: tasks that track with tra- ditional project delivery phases Summary Excerpt from The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Update 2006 Supplemental Architectural Services ©2006 AIA 1236 OVERVIEW In June 2008, the City of Calgary implemented the new Land Use Bylaw (LUB 1P2007)1. To ensure that the new Land Use Bylaw continues to be an effective document to regulate land use planning in the City of Calgary, the City established a Sustainment Team to continually reevaluate existing regulations and to identify emerging trends. The LUB Sustainment Team identified that some of the parking stall requirements may be excessive and/or restrictive. As well, the team recognizes that the Land Use Bylaw currently does not make provisions for private storage within public parking facilities, specifically above the parking stall. STUDY OBJECTIVES The objectives of this program were to review the City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw in order to gain an understanding of the specification and regulations related to parking stall dimensions as well as to determine the maximum allowable projection into a parking stall. EXISTING CITY OF CALGARY BYLAW PARKING DIMENSIONS A review of the City’s of Calgary Bylaw parking dimensions was reviewed to gain an understanding of the requirements and/or any deficiencies that should be addressed as part of this study. The majority of the Bylaw parking stall dimensions are consistent with the preceding 2P80 Bylaw2 standard. The results of the review are summarized in Table 1. ASSESSMENT OF OTHER CITIES As part of this review, the City of Calgary parking dimensions were compared to 18 other North American municipalities, including Vancouver, Toronto, and Seattle. The selection of the municipalities was based on characteristics such as a high rate of growth, size of municipality, and demographics. Basic statistical analyses were performed on the parking stall dimensions. The results of the comparative assessment confirmed the following key findings: •The City’s existing parking dimensions requirements are for the most part consistent to those used by other municipalities. • The majority of the municipalities do not provide small-vehicle parking stalls. It is clear that most municipalities are incorporating a one size fits all approach. • The parking stall widths could vary depending on the number of barriers next to the parking stall. PARKING STALL GEOMETRICS BASED ON EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS Stall Width A typical stall must accommodate the size of the design vehicle when its doors are open. The width of an opened passenger vehicle door is typically 0.55 m (22 inches). As such, the minimum stall width should be the width of the design vehicle plus 0.55 m (22 inches). For areas that exhibit high turnover, 0.61m to 0.68m (24 to 27 inches) should be provided to accommodate wider door opening THE PARKER | 2ND QUARTER 2010 | 2IÉME TRIMESTRE 201O EZEKIEL DADA AND MIKE FURUYA Parking Dimensions CITY OF CALGARY MINIMUM DIMENSIONS (IN METRES) – 1P2007 Parking Angle Aisle Width Depth Stall Width Dwelling Units Commercial 90 7.20 5.40 2.50 2.60 75 6.12 5.64 2.59 2.69 60 4.82 5.49 2.89 3.00 45 4.00 5.00 3.54 3.68 The City of Calgary, in continuation of its Land Use Bylaw review, sought to bring parking stall dimensions in line with the current sizes and types of vehicles on the City’s roads. Analyses of the design vehicle dimensions and review of other cities’ Bylaws indicated that the City of Calgary existing stall and module dimensions are adequate to accommodate the current vehicle fleet. It was, however found that stall sizes adjacent to physical barriers need to be reviewed. Recommendations were made for the size of intrusion into parking spaces by overhead storage and stairwell in both residential and commercial parking lots. A review of the City of Calgary’s Bylaw parking dimension requirements confirmed the following in addition to those stated in Table 1: • Other than the requirements for structural column and minimum vertical clearance requirements, the Land Use Bylaw does not make provisions for parking stall encroachment. • At present, the 3.1 m requirement for those stalls abutting a physical barrier applies to both the one-sided and two- sided scenarios. 1. The City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw 1P2007, The City of Calgary, 2008 2. The City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw 2P80, The City of Calgary, 1980 1 Parker2Q10_pdfs 6/14/10 4:27 PM Page 16 237 THE PARKER | 2ND QUARTER 2010 | 2IÉME TRIMESTRE 201O clearance. Conversely, if the turnover is expected to be very low, the door opening clearance could be reduced to 0.51m (20 inches). Opening Door Clearance Abutting a Physical Barrier Opening door clearance between two adjacent cars is shared within both parking spaces. The stall width requirements next to physical barriers will vary depending on whether-or-not the parking stall is adjacent to physical barriers on one-side or on both sides of the parking stall, as follows: • If there is a physical barrier on one-side of the parking stall, the minimum size of the stall should be the width of the design vehicle plus 0.83 m (33 inches) or the stall width plus 0.28 m (11 inches). If the physical barriers are on both sides of the parking stall, the minimum size of the stall should be the width of the design vehicle plus 1.12 m (44 inches) or the stall width plus 0.55 m (22 inches). Handicapped Stall Widths Depending of the jurisdiction the requirements for handicapped parking will vary. For the most part, the stall widths do adhere to the standards set by the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. As outlined in Section 4.6.3 of UFAS, parking spaces for disabled people should be 96 inches (2.44m) wide and have an adjacent access aisle 60 inches (1.53m) wide, for an overall width of 4.0 m (2.44 + 1.53 = 3.97 m). Stall Depth Stall depth is defined as the sum of the length of the design vehicle and bumper clearance. As such, the minimum depth of stall must accommodate the length of the design vehicle plus a minimum of 0.15 m (6 inches) for bumper clearance. Aisle Width Aisles are specifically designed to accommodate the width and the turning capability of the design vehicle. Elements related to pedestrians, traffic circulation, and parking angle will influence the width of an aisle. Based on first principles, a two-way aisle should be wide enough to accommodate two- way vehicular flow (6m) and pedestrian movements on either side of the aisle (0.6 m on each side for a total of 1.2m for a total of 7.2 m. Parking Module Dimensions A parking module consists of the lengths of parking stalls and the aisle. A parking module is either single loaded or double loaded. A single loaded module consists of an aisle with stalls on one side. A double loaded aisle consists of an aisle with parking stalls on both sides. Literature recommends a minimum of 12.6 m (42 feet) as the width of a single loaded module, and 18 m (60 feet) for double loaded module if the parking angle is 90 degrees. Stall Height Covered parking facilities often require minimum ceiling or clearance height in addition to the depth and width of stalls. The minimum height clearance has been generally designed as 2.1 m (7 feet). Higher heights between 2.3 m (7 feet 8 inches) and 2.5 m (8 feet 2 inches) are needed to accommodate handicap vans and vehicles with roof racks. Design Vehicle The basis for establishing the parking stall dimension is linked to the width, length, and height of the design vehicle. The current transportation infrastructure is a limiting factor for vehicle widths. Typically, a design vehicle is taken as not larger than the 85th percentile vehicle. Bunt & Associates undertook a review of the current (2008 and 2009) vehicle fleet to establish an appropriate design vehicle for the Calgary market. In all, 3,225 vehicles models, comprising of 785 Cars, 1068 SUVs, 74 Minivans and 1298 Pick-up Trucks were analyzed. Based on the selected sample size, a total of 289 vehicle lengths, 169 vehicle widths and 226 vehicle heights were analyzed. A review of sample size confirmed that cars and SUVs exhibited the greatest variance in overall vehicle dimensions when compared to the other types of vehicles. It is noted that Minivans have the least variations in their sizes. The 74 Minivan models analyzed exhibited only 9 different sizes. The results of the vehicle dimensions analysis are summarized in Table 2. OVERALL COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Having established an appropriate design vehicle for the current vehicle fleet and the resulting parking stall dimensions associated with the selected design vehicle, Bunt & Associates compared the results of empirical analysis to the City’s Bylaw and other cities throughout North America as well as to other sources of parking information. This analysis formed the basis for developing the recom- mended parking stall dimensions for the City of Calgary. Based on this analysis, stall depth was found to vary from 4.88-6.1 m, width varies from 2.3 to 2.7 m, height varies from 2.0 to 2.5 m, aisle width varies from 6.0 to 7.3 m and a parking module varies from 15.85 to 18.2 m. RECOMMENDED PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS Considering the practice of other Cities and development of parking dimensions based on the empirical assessment, the following parking dimensions summarized in Table 3 is recommended. PROJECTIONS AND STORAGE REVIEW Typically, the minimum vertical clearance is based on the limitations set by Alberta Building Code. The City requires a minimum vertical clearance of 2.1 metres and when compared to other known literatures, 2.1 m (7 feet) represents the minimum clearance. Desirably, 2.5 m (8 feet 2 inches) is the preferred vertical clearance as it provides vertical clearance for vehicles used by the disabled and enhances a sense of space. Of the municipalities reviewed in Canada and the United States, a single reference was found that specifically addressed intrusions and overhead storage requirements. An intrusion and/or overhead storage requirement may be permitted within the first 1 m (3 feet) from the wall and the base of the intrusion or overall storage unit should be 1.83 m (6 feet) above grade (or 0.3 m from the lowest point of the ceiling). RESULTS OF THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS – ALL 2008 AND 2009 VEHICLE MODELS Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Average 5.02 1.98 1.76 Median 4.89 1.87 1.78 85th Percentile 5.66 1.99 1.95 90th Percentile 5.81 2.01 1.97 95th Percentile 6.20 2.03 2.01 Minimum 3.88 1.68 1.39 Maximum 6.68 2.44 2.06 2 The key findings are summarized here: • The 85th percentile length (5.67m) is longer than those of 96 percent of Car, 100 percent of Minivans, 98 percent of SUVs and 62 percent of Pick-up Trucks. • The 85th percentile width (1.99m) is wider than those of 96 percent of Car, 99 percent of Minivan, 90 percent of SUV and 52 percent of Pick-up Trucks. • The 85th percentile height (1.95m) is higher than those of 100 percent of Car, 100 percent of Minivan, 87 percent of SUV and 72 percent of Pick-up Trucks. Parker2Q10_pdfs 6/14/10 4:27 PM Page 18 238 Considering the typical dimensions of standard personal vehicle, the typical length of a hood ranges between 1.0 m to 1.5 m, and the net difference between the hood of the vehicle and the top of the cab is approximately 1.0 m. There is therefore a potential for the space between the hood of vehicle, ceiling, windshield, and outside wall to permit an intrusion and/or accommodate an overhead storage unit. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the data collected, research completed and analysis undertaken a number of recommendations regarding stall dimensions have been developed as summarized below. • Maintain the existing parking dimension. That is, length 5.4m, width 2.5/2.6m aisle 7.2 m, height 2.1m and module 18 m. • Modification to the minimum parking stall requirements for those stalls abutting a physical barrier are recommended as follows: o Physical barrier on one-side of the parking stall: The recommended minimum stall width for both residential and commercial uses should be 2.85 m. o Physical barrier on both sides of the parking: The recommended stall width for parking spaces placed in a commercial setting should be 3.1m and 3.0 m for a residential setting. • Although not part of Bylaw 1P2007, modification to the current 4.0 m wide requirement for handicapped use is not required. •The one-stall fits all approach should be maintained. • The limits of the intrusion and/or overhead storage unit should be limited to a depth of 0.3 m and not exceed a width of 1 m. • The base of the intrusion and/or overhead storage unit should be placed at least 1.83 m above grade. • Based on the typical vehicle dimensions, projections up to 0.5 m stall could be accommodated. •Projections beyond the 0.5 m limitation would require additional depth to ensure a minimum depth of 5.4 m. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The City of Calgary initiated and funded this project. Bunt & Associates is grateful to the City for allowing the materials from the project to be presented and published. THE PARKER | 2ND QUARTER 2010 | 2IÉME TRIMESTRE 201O RECOMMENDED PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS DIMENSION RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL (High Turnover)(Low Turnover) Width 2.5m 2.6m 2.5m 2.85m – physical barrier 2.85m – physical barrier 2.85m – physical barrier abutting one side abutting one side abutting one side 3.0m – physical barrier 3.1m – physical barrier 3.0m – physical barrier abutting both sides abutting both sides abutting both sides Depth 5.9m – private garage 5.4m 5.4m 5.4m – parkade/surface Aisle 7.2m parkade/surface 7.2m 7.2m Module 18m – parkade/surface 18m 18m Conference Planner 2010 is the year of champions in Whistler, BC. Keynotes and presentations will bring the parking educational component to new heights, and your equipment and service suppliers will be the champions of the trade show, to be held in the Sea to Sky Ballroom at the Telus Conference Centre. canadianparking.ca For complete program of events, visit us online or call 613-727-0700. The Canadian Parking Association invites all parking champions to attend the Annual Conference and Trade Show, being held in the heart of Whistler Village. Just steps from Whistler and Blackcomb mountains, delegates will be treated to a superb event from start to finish. Arrive early so you don’t miss anything. Preliminary Program Saturday October 2 Golf Sunday October 3 Whistler/Blackcomb Peak to Peak Tour Mountain Biking Zip Lining and much more October 3 – 5 Trade Show Exhibition Sector Round Table Discussions Topical Educational Sessions Parking Accessibility Workshop Parking Tax Panel Discussion Parking Tours of Whistler and Vancouver Airport 3360° OF PARKING EXPERTS INFORMATIONPRESENTATIONS CONNECTIONS October 2-6 3 Parker2Q10_pdfs 6/14/10 4:27 PM Page 20 239 240 241 242 243 244 1 AGENDA CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING COMMISSION, CITY COMMISSION ROOM, CITY HALL 121 NORTH ROUSE AVENUE TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2014 6:00 P.M. To see the minutes that is linked to the video http://www.avcaptureall.com/Sessions.aspx#session.71c2e967-2ef8-4057-a4b1-b62ce4c2404e Council Member - Erik Garberg: Present Board Member - Julien Morice: Present Board Member - George Thompson: Present Board Member - Dan Stevenson: Absent Board Member - Laura Dornberger: Present ITEM 1. 06:02:16 PM CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairman Garberg called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. ITEM 2. 06:02:18 PM PUBLIC COMMENT (Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Commission and not scheduled on this agenda. There is a three-minute time limit per speaker.) ITEM 3. 06:02:22 PM MINUTES OF OCTOBER 07 & 21, 2014 06:02:32 PM Motion and Vote to approve the Minutes as submitted. Board Member - George Thompson: Motion Board Member – Julien Morice: 2nd Council Member - Erik Garberg: Approve Board Member - Julien Morice: Approve Board Member - George Thompson: Approve Board Member - Laura Dornberger: Approve ITEM 4. 06:02:52 PM PROJECT REVIEW 1. 06:03:00 PM Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Municipal Code Amendment Application Z14265 (Rogers). A Municipal Code Amendment Application requested by Mendenhall Partners, LLC, 20 North Tracy Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715 and represented by CTA Group, 411 East Main Street, Suite 101, Bozeman, MT 59715. This application proposes to revise Section 38.25.020 parking stall, aisle and driveway design standards to modify dimensional parking stall and drive aisle standards for structured parking facilities and other related standards and codes. The amendment is applicable throughout the entire corporate limit of Bozeman as it exists now and as it evolves through annexation over time, and applies to all properties. 06:03:11 PM Garberg recused himself from this discussion because he is employed by the Applicant representative and handed the Gavel to member Julien Morice to preside over this item. 06:03:44 PM Staff presentation Mr. Rogers gave the Staff presentation for the Structured Parking Dimensional Standards Municipal Code Amendment Application Z14265. 06:15:10 PM Questions for Staff 245 2 Mr. Thompson spoke regarding structured parking and building structure and how that affects parking space size and lighting concerns. Mr. Rogers spoke on regarding dimensional standards. Mr. Thompson clarified his question to specify actual size of the internal columns and how it will affect size of spaces and the lighting question clarification of the location of the pole. Mr. Rogers spoke on compact spaces and pointed out that the lighting is more of a building element. Ms. Dornberger spoke on the dimensions and the to clarify proposed dimensions. Mr. Rogers clarified lot size proposal. Mr. Morice spoke on had questions on the handicap parking dimensions. Mr. Rogers stated that those parking spaces are federally mandated and will not change. 06:21:02 PM Applicant Presentation and Questions for Applicant Jimmy Talarico with CTA Architects at 411 E. Main St. didn’t have much to present as Tom did a good job addressed economic impact of a development he also addressed Mr. Thompson’s question about structure of parking size. If there are any questions he would be available to answer. Mr. Thompson asked about turning radius how the reduced size of space will impact that. Mr. Talarico spoke on turning radius and the national standard takes that into consideration. 06:24:31 PM Mr. Morice opened public comment period. Mr. Pape wanted the panel to ask what the perceived detriment of this change would be. 06:26:03 PM Closed public comment and brought it back up to board for Discussion and or Motion 06:26:20 PM Mr. Thompson moved, having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, to hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-14265 and recommend approval of the Structured Parking text amendment. Ms. Dornberger seconded. 06:26:48 PM Discussion on the Motion Ms. Dornberger wanted to see slide on parking size requirements. Mr. Morice had comments that his initial reaction because of the big truck he drives, but agrees that it would be a good thing and thinks in future cars will be smaller and would support motion. Mr. Thompson asked the question of what detriment to the smaller size aside from those with big Trucks and how the vehicle height is addressed. Mr. Rogers stated that the detriments are outweighed by the positives. The detriments are the ability to navigate in tighter spaces and cars will incur more door dings for those who don’t take the time to care for objects around them. The positives by furthering the Growth Policy by decreasing one more impediment to density within the downtown area will overwhelm the possibilities for the detriments. The vehicle height is addressed through the building code. Mr. Morice commented on height restrictions and the requirements of specific signage for height restrictions upon entry. Ms. Dornberger commented on how it was taking the standard to far going to small but it does fit into what is appropriate and what is happening around town and would be supportive of new standards. 246 3 06:33:22 PM Vote on Motion carried unanimously. Board Member - Julien Morice: Motion Board Member - Laura Dornberger: 2nd Mayor - Jeff Krauss: Absent Board Member - Julien Morice: Approve Board Member - George Thompson: Approve Board Member - Dan Stevenson: Absent Board Member - Laura Dornberger: Approve 06:34:02 PM Mr. Garberg returns for second item on agenda 2. Broadleaf Zone Map Amendment Application Z14280 (Brekke) A Zone Map Amendment application requested by Broadleaf, LLC, 536 Oxford Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715, and applicant, Benjamin Elias, 512 E. Fridley Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The application would allow the establishment of an initial zoning classification of R-4 (Residential High Density District) for approximately .34 acres of the property contingent upon annexation into the City of Bozeman, and rezoning of approximately 1.326 acres of the property from R-1 zoning (Residential Single-Household, Low Density District) to R-4 zoning. The property is legally described as W1/2NW1/4SW1/4 of Section 13, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana and Tracts 26A and 27A of Beatty’s Alder Court Subdivision and Tract 1A of Certificate of Survey No. 2639 situated in the SW1/4, Section 13, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. 06:34:11 PM Staff presentation. Ms. Brekke gave presentation for the Broadleaf Zone Map Amendment the application would allow the establishment of an initial zoning classification of R-4 (Residential High Density District) for approximately 0.34 acres of the property contingent upon annexation into the City of Bozeman, and rezoning of approximately 1.326 acres of the property from R-1 zoning (Residential Single Household, Low Density District) to R-4 zoning. 06:40:02 PM Questions for Staff Mr. Thompson asked a question about a parcel in the southwest corner, would that still be county designated. Mr. Thompson also had questions about services (impact fees) adequate water/sewer for this project going forward. Ms. Brekke responded to those questions. 06:41:29 PM Applicant Presentation and Questions for Applicant Ben Alias, representative for Broadleaf, LLC gave presentation. 06:42:04 PM Mr. Garberg opened public comment period. Ms. Mary Price of 1615 Alder Court, spoke about the subject property being under bank ownership for the last six years and is a mess, with people cutting through at all times. The development should be done with care so it does not affect the Alder Court residents. She also spoke about concern of traffic and parking congestion occurring on Alder Court with future development of the subject property. 247 4 Mr. Ryan Diehl of 1523 Alder Court also spoke about the single-family housing character of Alder Court and that the development should be considerate. Mr. Don Lent of 406 Princeton Place, and a Hawk’s Ridge Condominium property owner, supports the rezoning but hopes the pedestrian path that cuts through the subject property would retained. Mr. Jerry Pape, spoke about Gallatin County withholdings within the City of Bozeman as being a problem. He also spoke on the anticipated density of development of the subject property being respectful to its neighbors. Lastly, he made a recommendation to the Alder Court residents to create a neighborhood association and come forward with an annexation request into the City. 06:52:50 PM Closed public comment and brought it back up to board for Discussion and or Motion 06:53:10 PM Mr. Thompson moved, Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z14280 and move to approve the Broadleaf Zone Map Amendment with contingencies required to complete the application processing. 06:53:33 PM Mr. Morice seconded motion. 06:53:35 PM Ms. Dornberger clarified question on Annexation. 06:54:04 PM Mr. Thompson spoke on the zoning of R-4 and depending on how the developer handles the change, he would not have problems with the increased density. Mr. Morice had comment on similarity of other projects around it. Alder court has 35% primary residence and with that said and thinks it would be an improvement to the lot. Would support motion. Ms. Dornberger commented on the R-2 designation seems more dense than the R-4. There can be appropriate ways that it can be done and help buffer against the single family homes. Mr. Garberg comments on the designation for the size and shape of lot and would be in favor of change. 06:59:00 PM Vote on Motion carried unanimously. Board Member - George Thompson: Motion Board Member - Julien Morice: 2nd Council Member - Erik Garberg: Approve Board Member - Julien Morice: Approve Board Member - George Thompson: Approve Board Member - Dan Stevenson: Absent Board Member - Laura Dornberger: Approve ITEM 5 NEW BUSINESS 06:59:20 PM no new business ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT 06:59:34 PM This meeting is open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact ADA Coordinator, James Goehrung, at 582-3200 (voice) or 582-2301/582-2432 (TDD). 248