The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWhitefish Parking Study - Executive Summary - Final1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBILITY AND CONCEPT DESIGN STUDY PROJECT OVERVIEW/SCOPE Evaluate Four Potential Parking Garage Sites »2nd and Baker St. (Current City Hall Site) (1) »4th and Baker (2) »BNSF Site (3) »2nd and Spokane (4) Preliminary Site Assessment & Parking Study Refresh Surveying and Geotechnical Assessment Preliminary Design Concepts for Preferred Sites Concept Design Re nement »Traffic Impact Analysis Draft and Final Reports City of White sh, MT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City of White sh, MTCity of White sh, MT 2 3Parking Structure Feasibility and Concept Design Study For City of White sh, Montana CURRENT PARKING ADEQUACY Core downtown parking utilization currently ranges from 70% – 94% The Walker Parking Consultant’s study estimated a current parking deﬁ cit of over 200 spaces growing to over 700 spaces if the development associated with the downtown master plan is realized. SURFACE PARKING AS AN ALTERNATIVE? Surface parking contributes to sprawl, not to a compact and walkable downtown Surface parking locations are too far for retail customers to walk The cost of developing surface parking options is nearly as expensive as structured parking (estimated at over $6,000,000 for four surface lots). PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBILITY AND CONCEPT DESIGN STUDY FOR City of White sh, Montana PROJECT SUMMARY Core downtown parking utilization currently ranges from 70%-94% P EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ▐BUILDING UPON YOUR STRENGTHS White sh has a near ideal retail shopping district To achieve it’s full potential structured parking is needed To do nothing may retard growth, opportunity and growth of the local tax base. ▐YOU HAVE BEEN PROPERLY PLANNING FOR PARKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH A LARGER DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN Supports the town’s core strengths You have established funding mechanisms that have produced the capacity to make your strategic investments nancially attainable ▐YOU HAVE A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO LEVERAGE TWO MAJOR PROJECTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY Combining the garage and new City Hall projects can potentially enhance efficiencies and save money With smart planning and quality architectural design White sh can achieve smart, managed growth and preserve it’s unique character and quality of life. ▐YOU HAVE THE FUNDING SOURCE AND THE CAPITAL ASSETS TO ACHIEVE THE PLAN Reinvestment of the TIF funds to provide infrastructure for the TIF district is an important principle which should be encouraged. Follows a community based plan/vision Technical Summary POSITIVE ASPECTS OF STRUCTURED PARKING PARKING AS A STRATEGIC INVESTMENT Identiﬁ cation of structured parking as part of the downtown master plan was the right planning process and a smart recommendation Creating bookended parking assets on 2nd Avenue and Baker and 2nd Avenue and Spokane supports a strong retail core for years to come and provides infrastructure capacity to accommodate future growth A garage on the 2nd Avenue and Baker site is an effective strategy to stimulate further interest in a potential hotel or mixed use development on 1st St. and Central Ave. This feasibility study put you on the right trajectory to achieve new supply before parking becomes truly problematic. Garage at 2nd Avenue and Baker is an effective strategy to stimulate further interest in development west of Baker Avenue. 4 5Parking Structure Feasibility and Concept Design Study For City of White sh, Montana EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ▐PARKING STRUCTURE COST FACTORS Parking Structure Cost / Space is impacted by: Parking Efficiency (SF / Space) Open vs Non-open Parking Structures Above grade vs below grade (below grade is typically 50% to 100% more depending on number of levels below grade) Size of Structure or Footprint (Larger structures bene t by efficiencies with stair/elevators, SF / space, etc.) Type of Structure (Precast vs Cast-in-Place) Level of Service (Higher LOS results in higher $/space) Fire Protection / Ventilation Requirements Architectural Façade treatments Integration with Mixed-Use vs. Stand-Alone PARKING STRUCTURE DATA SUMMARY ▐PARKING STRUCTURE COSTS - LOCALLY 2012 Cost Data – (Northwest MT) Hard Costs Projections – can vary by region, as well as with market timing Current Northwest, MT Projections – for a Parking Structure are: Partially below grade garage $15k - $20k/space $20k - $25k/space $28k - $35k/space Average stand-alone garage ($48.62/sf) (open, base level architectural treatments) Below grade, below another building P P P ▐TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - STUDIED INTERSECTIONS The following intersections were identi ed for analysis in this study following consultation with the City public works department: 2nd Street and Central Avenue 2nd Street and Baker Avenue 1st Street and Central Avenue 1st Street and Baker Avenue 1st Street and Parking Structure Access The parking structure traffic will not adversely impact traffic operations at the study intersections, except on the side-street approaches of 1st Street to Baker Avenue. The projected westbound approach to Baker Avenue on First Street at the PM peak could experience LOS F, (52.4 second delays). It currently operates at a LOS D (28.0 second delays). The report points out that this estimate may be “overstated” because it is based 2015 traffic estimates during the peak Summer season and due to the fact that traffic driving to current parking locations was not deducted from the intersection before the parking structure was added. The recommended approach to addressing the impacts at the 1st Street and Baker Avenue location is Equilibration and possibly an added turn lane No initial modi cation is recommended to see if the traffic projection is indeed overstated or if “Equilibration” will resolve any modest service level issues. If adjustments are deemed needed, the creation of an added right turn lane is recommended. This would result in a loss of several parking spaces along the north side of 1st Street and would improve intersection performance. DATA ANALYSIS SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS ▐GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Native clay soils to approx. 110-ft Foundation Alternatives Conventional Spread Footings with Ground Improvements »Rammed Aggregate Piers »High ground water – require casings »Vibration during installation – settlement of adjacent structures Mat Foundation »High risk of excessive foundation settlement Deep Foundation - Recommended »End bearing driven piles at 120-ft to 150-ft depth 6 7Parking Structure Feasibility and Concept Design Study For City of White sh, Montana EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ALTERNATIVE # 1a 1 2 Story City Hall along 2nd Street with a third oor for City Hall Council Chambers ALT #1a1: 2 STORY CITY HALL ALONG 2ND STREET WITH 3RD FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS »2-Story City Hall (~ 7,600 SF per ﬂ oor) with a slightly smaller footprint »Alt. #1a1 includes City Hall Council Chambers on a 3rd ﬂ oor ALT #2a: 1 STORY CITY HALL ALONG BAKER AVENUE WITH 2ND FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS »1-Story City Hall (~ 16,800 SF) »1-Story City Hall with 2nd Floor Council Chambers and Retail along 2nd Street ALTERNATIVE # 2A 1 Story City Hall along Baker Avenue with City Hall Council Chambers located on the 2nd Level along First Street looking North 1a1alt FINAL GARAGE DESIGN OPTIONS - TWO ALTERNATIVES 2aalt FINAL GARAGE DESIGN OPTIONS - TWO PRIMARY ALTERNATIVES ALTERNATIVE #1a 2 Story City Hall along 2nd Street ALTERNATIVE #2 1 Story City Hall along Baker Avenue ALT #1a: 2 STORY CITY HALL ALONG 2ND STREET »2-Story City Hall (~ 10,000 SF per ﬂ oor) »Garage and City Hall buildings are separate structures ALT #2: 1 STORY CITY HALL ALONG BAKER AVENUE »1-Story City Hall (~ 17,500 SF) »Includes optional ground-level retail space at corner of Baker Avenue and 1st Street.2alt 1aalt Note: All options comply with current city code and height restrictions. Note: All options comply with current city code and height restrictions. 8Parking Structure Feasibility and Concept Design Study For City of White sh, Montana ▐REVIEW OF GARAGE OPTIONS COMPARISON MATRIX Key Metrics Total # of spaces Total square footage Estimated Construction cost Estimated Project cost Garage efficiency (Sq. ft./space) City Hall Layout PARKING GARAGE ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON MATRIX SITE / GARAGE LAYOUT ALTERNATIVES 2nd and Baker 1-A 1-A-1 2 2-A Signiﬁ cant Design Features Both bays sloping 4.6% Both bays sloping 4.3%; 3rd Floor Council Chambers One bay sloping 5.5%; express entry ramp 8.0% One bay sloping 5.5%; express entry ramp 8.0%; 2nd Floor Council Chambers Total Number of Spaces 216 226 233 212 Number of Levels 2F + 1 2F + 1 2F + 0.5 2.5F + 0.5 Parking Garage Footprint 217-ft x 126-ft 226-ft x 126-ft 297-ft x 126-ft 297-ft x 126-ft Square Feet - Slab-on-Grade 24,192 25,830 15,813 15,813 Square Feet - Framed 53,118 53,970 66,545 60,749 Square Feet 77,310 79,800 82,358 76,562 Sq. Ft. Per Car 358 353 353 361 Total Estimated Construction Cost $4,917,000 $5,071,000 $5,533,000 $5,293,000 Total Estimated Construction Cost per Space $22,764 $22,438 $23,747 $24,967 Total Estimated Project Cost $5,757,000 $5,920,000 $6,410,000 $6,155,000 Total Estimated Project Cost per Space $26,652.78 $26,194.69 $27,510.73 $29,033.02 Existing Surface Parking Loss (40)(40)(40)(40) Net Space Gain 176 186 193 172 Total Estimated Construction Cost per Net Space Gain $27,938 $27,263 $28,668 $30,773 Max Ramp Slope (Parking)4.6%4.3%6.0%6.0% % of Flat Parking (includes slopes 2.5% and less)38%40%76%75% Zoning Height Restrictions below below below below Top Level of Parking FFE 28.75 28.75 29.00 29.00 Top Level of Parking Parapet Elevation 32.25 32.25 32.50 32.50 F = indicates Framed  F + 1 = indicates Framed Plus Slab-on-Grade Level