Off-Street Parking Policy Update

1. Off-Street Parking PolicyUpdate City CouncilOctober 15, 2012

2. Questions to be Addressed How has off-street parking been provided? What public policy objectives are currently in place? How do they work? What are the options for future action?

3. Timeline – Off-Street Parking 1940’s – Zoning Code established parking requirements for parcels in commercial districts 1950’s – PK Overlay Districts formed in residential areas adjacent to Colorado Boulevard and South Lake Avenue - Intended to provide parking for businesses 1960’s – Parking Authority created (PMC §2.25) for purpose of supplying public parking

4. Timeline – Off-Street Parking 1970’s – South Lake Parking Place District created to consolidate parking in Shoppers Lane; Holly Street leased 1980’s – Zoning Code updated to create Zoning Parking Credit Spaces; Old Pasadena garages constructed; Plaza Las Fuentes garage constructed via development agreement 1990’s – No free-standing (City) public parking structures constructed; ZPC expanded to 150% of parking supply

5. Timeline – Off-Street Parking 2000’s – Zoning Code updated to reflect reduced parking requirements in Central District; TOD overlay implemented with further reductions in parking; Marriott, Paseo Colorado, Archstone (Del Mar) Garages constructed via development agreements; Trio garage privately constructed with 324 public spaces

6. Timeline – Off-Street Parking 2010’s – TOD overlay challenged by Pasadena Chamber study and East Pasadena businesses; Public parking removed from Playhouse Plaza project; Zoning Parking Credit Space pool expanded to include Del Mar garage; South Lake Avenue credit program adopted on basis of on-street supply

7. Zoning for Parking Concept in Practice • Reduce over-reliance on street parking • Provide adequate off-street parking supply • Equitable means of providing parking in proportion to use • Each parcel satisfies its own parking demand Shortcomings • Applies only to new uses or change in use • Does not address existing parking demand in already built areas • Cannot be applied retroactively • Restricts adaptive reuse of sites/buildings in older urban areas

8. Pasadena’s Policy Objectives • Reduce proliferation of Code-required parking • Shared Parking/Contracts for off-site parking • Joint management of on- and off-street parking • Facilitate adaptive reuse of existing building stock and parcels in historic areas • Zoning Parking Credit • Facilitate development of compact walkable districts and reduce auto travel • Park Once • TOD Parking Overlay

9. Shared Parking • What it is/does • Allows for land uses on one site to share parking with adjacent sites to minimize the overall space dedicated to parking • Why it works • Takes advantage of the peak parking capacity required of most land uses • Relies on the differences in parking demand by time of day for different land uses • Offices – daytime demand • Cinemas – evening demand

10. Contracts for Off-Site Parking • What it is/does • Allows for one site to contract to use under-utilized parking on a nearby site to minimize the overall space dedicated to parking • Why it works • Takes advantage of existing under-utilized parking capacity • Utility is limited by requirement for contract for deed

11. Joint Management • What it is/does • Pricing system that encourages short-term use of on-street parking and provides for economical off-street parking • Why it works • Old Pasadena Model uses a 90-minute free period in the garages and a modest daily maximum to moderate the shopper and employee demand that would otherwise use on-street parking

12. Zoning Parking Credits • What it is/does • Facilitates preservation of the historic urban form of a district by allowing adaptive reuse of existing building stock and parcels without adding parking on individual parcels • Alternate means (of shared parking) for meeting zoning requirements for adequate parking • Why it works • Central reservoir of public parking provided at sufficient scale to support parking needs of the district

13. TOD Parking Overlay • What it is/does • Facilitates the trip reduction goals of the 2004 General Plan by limiting parking requirements in rail transit-served areas • Restricts the number of parking spaces that can be built without a discretionary action • Why it works • Promotes/facilitates self selection by specific market segmentsinterested in walkable areas • Promotes affordability by reducing the cost of construction

14. TOD Parking Overlay Where it applies

15. TOD Overlay Outcomes Plus • Demographic changes are yielding changes in residents’ travel patterns • Foothill Extension will allow similar options for commuters • Does not preclude the more than minimum parking Minus • Viewed as detracting from the ability to both build and fill commercial space in East Pasadena • Discretionary actions add time to approval process • Financing may be linked to higher parking ratios • Leasing flexibility limited by amount of parking

16. Providing Public Parking • City’s approach has changed over time • Parking Authority – used 1970 – 1980’s • Parking Districts – used once • (Re)Development Commission – used 1980’s – 2010’s • Allow public parking in private development projects • Role of new development in the process • Increased after 1985 shift of tax increment to FPRS • Current approach is to accommodate public parking privately in new development projects • Playhouse Plaza project outcome nullified that approach • Unwillingness of projects to undertake discretionary approvals limits utility of this approach

17. Current Approach – Issues • Issue 1 – Different conditions public to private • Public structures/lots rates, hours and accessibility are governed by City Council; Public parking in private facilities is subject to property owner/parking operator • Issue 2 – Location of spaces/convenience of parking • Private facilities that serve non-retail land uses essentially treat public parking as a secondary activity – access to exits, elevators, etc. are oriented to primary tenants, not nearby retail • Issue 3 – Lack of control over where parking is built • Reliance on development means that siting and timing is entirely dependent on suitable sites and willing private participants

18. Pending Projects/Needs • Civic Center • Currently exploring feasibility and cost of public parking under Garfield • Responding to need to replace Holly Street when lease expires in 2023 • Playhouse District • Two surface parking lots have been evaluated for parking structures • Cost is prohibitive on small sites • $40,000 per space (more without automation)

19. Pending Projects/Needs • South Lake Avenue • Parking District has reached capacity • Expansion hindered by previous agreements • Revenue being depressed by abuse of free period • North Lake Avenue, East Washington, Lincoln, East Colorado • Limited opportunities to site parking structures • Insufficient adjacent parking to form a district • East Pasadena • TOD Overlay being studied

20. Going Forward – Options Issue • The perception that parking is lacking in the Central District • There is a lack of FREE off-street parking • There is a confusing mix of public and private parking and free and paid parking • Parking is limited in isolated instances Options • Revisit priorities for providing public parking • Retention of historic structures/urban form • Facilitating change in use to bolster sales tax base • Revisit Zoning Code • Are goals being met? • What changes are needed?

21. Going Forward – Options Issue • Impediments to the City building/operating public parking • Lack of public resources to site/fund new parking facilities • Funds needed to maintain the existing parking system physical plant Options • Reconstitute the Parking Authority • Consolidate existing parking resources • Pool existing equity • Leverage financing for • Deferred maintenance • New construction • Standardize Operations • Reduce management expenses

22. Going Forward – Options Options • Develop new funding mechanisms • Institute a parking tax • Percentage of transactions or flat rate per space • Define Standards • Maximum cost per space for new parking • Operating parameters • Free periods, cost to park Issue • Impediments to the City building/operating public parking • Lack of public resources to site/fund new parking facilities • Funds needed to maintain the existing parking system physical plant