Downtown Parking Master Plan
L
[
[
[
[
l
[
[
[
r
Downtown Parking Master Plan
Final Report
November, 2007
, r
I
.~~ .
.'.
Rich and Associates, Inc.
Parking Consultants - Planners
www.richassoc.com
'.
.
.
-.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
CIty..
!:i
SalIna
TctlIe dCo. llenls
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SECTION 1 - Introduction
1.1 Background"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 1-1
1.2 Scope of Services """."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""."""" 1-2
Phase One., ".,,,,,,, ".,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,, ".,,,,,,,,,,, 1-2
Phase Two,.. ,..,..,.., ..., ...,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,.".,..,..,'..,..'.., ..., ...,..,..,.., 1-3
1.3 Study Area """,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.1-4
Map 1: Study Area"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 1-5
~ Rich and Associates. Inc.
~j~l! Parking Consultants - Planners
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2 - Analysis
2,1 Introduction """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""".",,, 2-1
2.2 Parking Inventory""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""",,,,, 2-1
Table 2A: Parking Supply Summary"""""""""""""""""""""" 2-2
Table 2B: Parking Inventory""""""""""""""""""".""""""""" 2-3
Map 2: Parking Supply Map"""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 2-4
2.3 Turnover and Occupancy Study"""""""""""""""".""""".,,,,, 2-5
2.3,1 Observations '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 2-5
Table 2C: Turnover and Occupancy"""""""""""""""""""", 2-6
Map 3: Peak Turnover and Occupancy""""""""""""""""", 2-8
2.3.2 Turnover Results.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,.,,,,.,,.".,2-9
Table 2D: Turnover Summary""".""""""""""""""",,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,, 2-9
Table 2E: Vehicles in Vioiation """""""""""""""""""'''''''''''' 2-10
2,3.4 Occupancy Results""""""""""""""""""""""""""""", 2-10
2,3.5 Occupancy Conclusions """"""""""""""""."""""""" 2-11
2.4 Parking Demand Calculation """""""""""""""".""""""""".2-11
Figure 1 : Interrelationship of Parking Study Methodologies,. 2-12
Table 2F: Parking Generation Factor Comparison """"""''', 2-13
2.4,1 Parking Demand"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 2-14
Table 2G: Parking Analysis Spreadsheet """.""""""""""""" 2-16
Map 3: Surplus and Deficit Map""""""""""""""""""""""". 2-17
2,4.2 Possible Development """"""'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 2-18
Table 2H: Block 5 Possible Development Scenarios""""""". 2-19
2.5 Parking Operational Assessment and Other Information """ 2-20
2.5,1 Operations and Enforcement """.""""""""""""""."". 2-20
.
, tc-1
11/27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CIty..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SdIina
2.5.2 Parking Ticket Statistics ..................................................... 2-20
Table 21: Tickets Issued...............,..,,,......,..,,,,..,,..,,..,,......,........... 2-21
Table 2J: Ticket Revenue..,'....,..,..,..,..,..,..,....,......,..........,..,..,.... 2-21
2.5.3 Parking Permits..,.."..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,."."..,.."..,...,..,..,..,..,. 2-22
Table 2K: Number of Parking Permits Sold Annually"..."..,.... 2-22
Benchmarking,..,..,..,..,.."..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,."..,..,..,.."..,..,...,..,..,. 2-22
Table 2L Benchmarking .."",,,,,,..,,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,......,......,..,.... 2-23
SECTION 3 - Public Input
3.1 Manager Surveys and Results """'"''''''''''''''''''.''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 3-1
3.2 Employee Surveys and Results ..,..,..,..,...."..,..,..,......,..,..,......,..,.., 3-4
3.3 Public Survey Results """'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 3-7
3.4 Stakeholder Meetings ,,,,,,,...,..,..,..,..,.,,.,,.,......,..,..,..,,..,..,..,..,...,...3-8
3.5 Public Forum Meetings..,..,......,..,..,....,..,..,..,..,..,......,..,......,......,.., 3-9
SECTION 4 -Recommendations
Recommendation Summary..,..,..,..,..,......,,,..,..,....,......,..,........,..,.., 4-1
4.1 Introduction "..,..,..,."..,..,..,..,..,..,.".".."."",....,..,.,..,..,..,..,..,,.,..,..,.4-2
4.2 Parking Enforcement and Fines,......,...."..,....,..,..,..,....,..,..,..,..,.. 4-2
4.2,1 Enforcement Personnel..,..,..,......,,,,....,....,..,....,..,......,..,.... 4-2
4.2,2 Handheld Technology for Enforcement ,..,..,..,,,,..,..,..,.... 4-3
4.2,3 Enforcement Vehicles..,..,."..,.."..,,,,.,..,..,.,..,..,..,..,..,..,,..,.., 4-4
4.2,4 Graduated Fine ,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,......"......,..,..,..,..,..,..,......,..,.. 4-4
4.2,5 Overtime Parking.,..,,,,,,,..,..,..,...,..,..,..,.,..,..,,,,..,..,..,,,,,..,..,.. 4-5
4.2,6 Multiple Tickets..,..,..,..,..,..,..,..,...,..,..,..,.,..,..,..,...."..,'..,.."..,.. 4-6
4.2.7 Vehicle Immobilization w /Multiple Unpaid Tickets,..,..,.. 4-6
4,2.8 Courtesy Tickets """'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 4-8
4,3 Parking Management,..,..,..,..,..,..,...,..,..,..,.,.,..,..,..,..,..,,,,...,..,,..,.4-8
4,3.1 Parking Advisory Committee .................,......,..,..,..:......,.... 4-8
4,3.2 Parking Permits,..,..,..,..,..,,,....,..,..,,,,..,....,..,..,......,..,..,..,..,.. 4-10
4,3.3 Parking Duration """'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 4-12
4,3.4 Parking Allocation ......"..,..,......,.."......,............,..,..,.......... 4-13
Map 5: Parking Duration Recommendations,..,......,......,..,.., 4-14
4,3.5 ADA Parking Guidelines....,..........,....,....,..,..,..,....,..,..,..,.., 4-15
4,3.6 Parking lot Improvements/Renovations ........,............,.., 4-16
Inventory of Public Lots......,..,..,..,..........,......,..""",,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,.., 4-17
4.3,7 Privately Developed Parking ""'"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 4-18
~
~ Rich and Associates. Inc,
~I<;l! Parking Consultants - Planners
www.richassoc.com
tc-2
11/27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
atv..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SdIlna
4.3.8 Loading Zones.................................................................... 4-18
4.3.9 Valet Parking...................................................................... 4-18
4.3.10 Taxi Stands........................................................................ 4-19
4.3.11 Bicycle Parking/Enhancements ....................................4-19
4.3.12 Special Events Parking Plan ...........................................4-22
4.4 Pedestrian Enhancements/Activity......................................... 4-22
4.4.1 Pedestrian Walkway Enhancements............................. 4-22
4.4.2 Minimize Surface Lots and Breaks Between Buildings. 4-23
4.4.3 Install Pedestrian Wayfinding Kiosks............................... 4-24
4.4.4 Minimize Pedestrian and Vehicular interaction ........... 4-25
4.5 Signage........................................................................................ 4-26
Figure 4B: Parking Sign Type Examples ................................... 4-27
4.6 Marketing..................................................................................... 4-31
4.7 Parking Requirements for Current and Future ........................ 4-34
4.7.1 Parking Enterprise Fund ....................................................4-34
4.7.2 Parking Development Costs ........................................... 4-34
4.7.3 Timing for Additional parking Development ................. 4-35
4.7.4 New Parking :...................................................................... 4-37
Table 4A Project and Finance Costs 400 Spaces .................4-43
Map 6: Potential Future Sites for Parking Structures.............. 4-44
4.7.5 Impacts on Parking and Related Safety....................... 4-45
SECTION 5 ApPENDIX
Manager Survey
Empioyee SUNey
Public SUNey
~ 'Rich and-Associates. Inc.
!U!;l! Parking Consultants - Planners
www.richassoc.com
tc-3
11 /27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
~
~J.s;!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
""'00
~
salina
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Salina Downtown Parking Master Plan presents a comprehensive examination of
parking needs in downtown Salina, The primary goals of the Downtown Parking
Master Plan are to evaluate the utilization of the City of Salina's existing parking
supply and to determine if the parking supply is adequate to meet current and future
parking demands.
Backgrol)nd research, field work and a review of previous documents and planning
reports were undertaken. The following documents were provided to Rich and
Associates, Inc" by Salina for use as resource material and to develop an
understanding of the community's development goals and objectives:
.:. City of Salina Market-Based Downtown Plan April, 2002
.:. Salina, Kansas Central Business District Long Range Parking Demand & Parking
Facility Locations March, 1985
.:. Salina Downtown Traffic Signals Warrant Analysis May 2006
.:. Salina Comprehensive Plan
.:. Shared vision Statement and Strategic Plan 2006
.:. Downtown Lighting Inspection August 2006
.:. Signage Study Draft February 2007
Public input was a key factor for Rich and Associates to understand the background
of Salina, There were several stakeholder meetings and three public meetings held
to solicit public input:
.:. Kick-Off Meeting with city staff, February 5, 2007
.:. Public Meeting, February 6, 2007
.:. Radio Interview KSAL 1150 AM, February 6, 2007
.:. Public Meeting, February 7, 2007
.:. Public Meeting, February 8, 2007
.:. 16 Individual Stakeholder Meetings
Fieldwork for the study included one day of turnover and occupancy study by Rich
and Associates staff. The turnover and occupancy study involved an examination of
parking area occupancies and vehicle movements encompassing both daytime
and evening requirements on Thursday, February 8, 2007.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
'WWI/II.richassoc.com
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
IOF3
11/28/2007
.",.'"
!l
SalInd
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
The Thursday survey day was specifically selected to account for an average day in
Salina. The turnover and occupancy analysis was completed to gain an
understanding of the way Salina's parking was operating and how individual parker's
were using the municipal and private parking supply. The results showed that the
public parking peak occupancy occurred from 1 :00 PM to 3:00 P.M. In addition. we
determined that of the parkers at two hour spaces. 89 percent stayed two hours or
less, eight percent were parking from two to four hours. one percent from four to six
hours and approximately two percent parked six hours or more.
The study analyzed how many parking stalls are needed to serve land uses in Salina.
The amount of parking needed was derived using sUNeys of different land use types
in Salina, mode is from other communities that have had similar studies undertaken
and from resources such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers and the Urban
Land Institute.
At this current time Salina does not have a deficit of parking in the downtown. There
is an overall surplus of 893 parking stalls. There are areas in the study area that have
shortfalls. though these shortfalls will be lessened with the parking management
recommendations given in Section 4. The recommendations are intended to
enhance the existing parking supply through operational. management,
configuration. parking pricing and allocation changes. These changes will affect the
overall parking experience of customer/visitor and employees of the downtown and
will increase the efficiency of the parking system.
In two or three years a turnover and occupancy study should be completed again.
With new businesses filling vacant space in the downtown there may be shortages in
the future. If the development of the Le'e Warehouse buildings on block 5 occurs.
parking will need to be addressed. There were several sites that were analyzed for
potential future sites of a parking structure. and a New Parking Threshold Calculation
Worksheet (Section 4, pg. 36) was provided to heip the city make decisions on when
it is appropriate to build new parking.
This report is intended to be a tool to use in creating a more efficient and user friendly
parking system. Within this report there are several tools provided to keep up with
changing uses, new development, re-occupancy of vacant space. and the overall
parking demand in the downtown. The parking system was studied using a holistic
approach. recommending changes to the current parking conditions and planning
for future growth in the downtown.
Definitions
The following are definitions used for the analysis:
. Turnover - Turnover is the number of vehicles that occupied a parking space
in a particuiar period. For example, if a parking lot has 100 spaces and during
the course of the day. 250 different vehicles occupied the iot. then the
turnover is two and a half times (2.5).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
20F3
11/28/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\u:;!'!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!1!f1\
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
-..
!l
s.atina
. Occupancy - the length of time a parking space is occupied by a vehicle.
. Circuit - A circuit refers to the two-hour period between observances of any
one particular parking space. For the turnover and occupancy study, a
defined route was developed for each survey vehicle. One circuit of the
route took approximately two hours to complete and each space was
observed once during that circuit.
. Block Face - A number was assigned to each block within the study area.
Each block is then referenced by its block number and by a letter (A B, C or
D). The letter refers to the cardinal face of the block; with (A) being the north
face, (B) the east face, (C) the south face and (D) the west face. Therefore,
a block designated as 1 A would refer to the north face of block 1 .
. Modal Split - Method of transportation (i.e. automobile, mass or public transit
walking, train, etc.).
. Parking Demand - The number of parking spaces generated by a single-
purpose building, multi-purpose building, group of buildings or outdoor
amenity.
. Parking Need - Represents the number of parkers who need to be
accommodated in a given parking facility after the use of alternative parking
facilities is considered. Use is affected by price, location, accessibility and.
user restriction.
. Parking Supply - The number of parking spaces available for use by a
specified group or groups of individuals (i.e. shoppers, employees, etc.).
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WNW.richassoc.com
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
30F3
11/28/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~!f;!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
aty..
~
SdIIna
SECTION 1 PARKING STUDY OVERVIEW
1.1 Background
This parking study, prepared for the City of Salina, serves to examine the Downtown's
existing parking system from both a qualitative and quantitative standpoint. The City
of Salina contracted Rich and Associates to prepare a Downtown Parking Master
Plan which would inventory and review the existing parking and make
recommendations regarding issues such as the development of potential future
parking, operations, management. and enforcement.
Salina had a Long Range Parking Demand and Parking Facility Locations study
completed in March, 1985 by Bucher, Willis and Ratliff. The downtown has changed
since the last parking study was completed and parking has become an issue.
..
f-
tlT<l
^~ ~
~~
fi~
1>>-
!f"!"
,.~ ii'g ;;: lii:.,l'l
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WoNW.richassoc.com
SECTION 1
lOF5
11/26/2007
"""..
!:i
SaIIn.J
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
1.2 Scope of Services
Phase One of developing the Downtown Parking Master Plan is a process of
quantifying and qualifying the parking needs in the study to determine the parking
demand for the study area. This was done through field work. utilization studies.
surveys and a series of public and stakehoider meetings. The fiow chart below details
the process.
Phase One
Parking Supply
land Use
~ Determine bY'f'-Ll!
~ conducting'"
~ bUilding Inventory
~
Utllizatlon
User Surveys
Parking needs analysis
Parking needs determination
SECTION 1
20F5
11/26/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
~!f!i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!HS!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
OIyof
!-;
SdIIIna
Phase Two of the Downtown Parking Master Plan involves reviewing the current
parking system, the existing facilities, parking policy, parking signage and wayfinding,
and enforcement. Rich and Associates then develops recommendations for short
and long term parking improvements that combine the parking system and
management improvements, with capital improvements as needed. The fiow chart
below details the process.
Phase Two
i Preliminary Program
L___~
Design Analysis
-
i System Analysis
I
.~
Results
Parking System
Recommendations
(Policies. Technology,
Pricing. Allocation)
Sites for New Parking
(Surface or Structured
Cost. Feasibility, Timing)
Consensus on Solutions
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION I
30F5
11/26/2007
""..
~
5.1lIn.l
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
1.3 Study Area
The study area, as determined by the City of Salina, is illustrated in Map #1, "City of
Salina - Study Area Map" located on page 1-4, Rich and Associates evaluated the
parking conditions, supply and activity of the 31-block study area. Rich and
Associates focused on the Business Improvement District (BID) area which is bounded
by 8" Street and 4" Street, and Elm Street to South Street, Blocks shown within the
study area though outside the BID boundary were examined for impacts on the
parking system and supply opportunities.
The Salina study area consists of a mix of land uses including residential. retail.
restaurants, bars, a museum and theater, as well as government uses such as the
County Court and medical and dental offices, Salina Regional Health Center is just
outside the study area. The focus of the downtown is Santa Fe Avenue which is the
core of the downtown, From Santa Fe businesses expand both east and west with
railroad tracks crating a boundary to the east and residential neighborhoods
creating a boundary to the west,
Within the primary study area, the parking supply consists of a mix of on street and
off-street parking, The on-street spaces are free, with most signed as two hour. There
are 15 minute, 30 minute, and one hour stalls interspersed throughout the downtown,
The off-street parking supply consists of surface lots primarily signed eight hour and
two hour, with a few 15 minute stalls. The majority of the parking supply within this
area is public owned with several smaller lots privately controlied by individual
businesses or property owners,
SECTION 1
40F5
11/26/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
-;;;::
mS;!!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
o
BLOCK '"
~
........ hrldng COll.a
~Arcllile~t,.[a11
~PI'iII1un
~.'~O,,,.,,,,,,)lJ.
.-.:."II ~~",~r""..';"'""~
~ ;~~ ~~_t~~i~
RI CH ~.~:<.l~~':l:,",",
(tI\liWLIlI.T~ 8~"',,,,,h.,,,,,,,.,,,,,,
t>.RKING STUDY
)R THE CITY OF
SALINA
STUDY AREA
_ _ _ SllJDY AREA
BOUNDARY
SGAl..E,tu.'?>
VATE,02-o:1-o1
DRAHN BY. 6I't:.
fiLE,
SALINA . KANSAS
...... BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT
MAP 1
PAGE' 5 OF 5
-----------------
<\RKING STUDY
lR THE CITY OF
SALINA
PARKING SUPPLY
. PRIVATE I RESERVED . 3HR-
. 2 HR. . UNMARKED (+/-)
. 15 MIN /30 MIN. . HANDICAP
. 8HA. . PEDES1RAN WAU<WAY
~
........ l'arldng Cou~u
~A~llile~t"EoII
~f'rilllJlen
~.!~Ol'''''''.'J1''.J.
~:"""""Iol""';'"'~
~I'l:'''''''~''\''~''
_1>"il','>.1j'.1<l
RICH ~.~:';,h.;~,,~,
&A:iloUU'l.n:; ~~...,..,II.",,,,..,.,,,
SGAU:,tu..,;
DATE,09-06-o1
t>R.AW'lBl', ewe.
FILE,
3ALlNA , KANSAS
MAP 2
PAGE, 4 OF 23
-----------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..."
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
~
SECTION 2 ANALYSIS
2.1 Introduction
This section of the report is an assessment of how the existing parking is
operating and how much new parking may be required based on current and
anticipated future developments. For the analysis. Rich and Associates used
turnover and occupancy data, parking and building inventories, downtown
business owner surveys, previous study work and previous experience with
parking to refine and determine the report's analysis.
The process consisted of a two-part analysis. The first part of the analysis
included a calculation of parking demand by block based on a building
inventory and parking generation factors per 1,000 square feet of gross floor
space. The demand was netted from the available supply and the resulting
surplus or deficit determined on a block-by-block basis.
The second part of the analysis involved comparing the parking surplus and
deficit patterns to the turnover and occupancy data. This comparison offered a
benchmark, by which the surplus and deficit data was calibrated.
2.2 Parking Inventory
Table 2A summarizes the existing parking supply in the primary study area in
downtown Salina. There are a total of 4,059 parking spaces in the primary study
area. Of theses 905 (22 percent) are on-street spaces and 1,393 (35 percent)
are off-street pubiic spaces. There are 1,761 (43 percent) private off-street
spaces.
Table 28 on page 3 is a detailed parking supply iisting types and durations of
parking by each biock and is followed by Map 2, which is a spatial view of the
parking supply, In cases where parking spaces were not marked, the number of
parking spaces were estimated. For the purpose of the study any parking
marked reserved or privately owned was designated as private parking.
Whereas any parking that is available for use by the general public was
designated as public parking. '
~.
~
!IJf.\!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
10F23
11/27/2007
""'..
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Salin,)
The City of Salina manages and controls 57percent of the parking in the
downtown core. Based on Rich and Associates experience and best practices,
we have found that to successfuily manage municipal parking it is desirable for
the municipality to have control of at least 50 percent of the parking supply. This
ailows the municipality to effectively manage the parking in terms of aliocation,
changing demand, market pricing, and allows the parking to be enforced with
greater efficiency. Salina exceeds this benchmark.
Table 2A
Parking Supply Summary
On-Street Parking Totals
904
Public Off-Street Parking Totals
1.393
Public Parking Totals
2,298
Private Parking Totals
1,761
Total Parking in Study Area
4,059
-'-'"
SECTION 2
2 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
!U~,t!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oty"
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
S-~
Table 28
Parkina SUDDI"
Block> 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 Sum marl,
On-Street
Not Signed 26 15 12 35 2 8 44 3 24 62 24 16 39 28 18 32 388
15 Minute 1 1
30 Minut8 2 5 3 10
One Hour 0
woHour 45 19 7 44 58 22 23 40 57 63 20 2 19 37 2 458
EiahtHour 22 10 5 37
BarrierFree (Handicap) 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 10
axi Stand 1 1
. Total Public On-Street 904
Off-Street
Public
15 Minute 23 23
o Minute 27 27
woHour 31 57 35 40 42 215
hreeHour 81 81
Eil1htHour 158 53 71 67 125 66 115 28 45 82 55 103 979
Motorcllde 3 3
Barrier Free (Handicap) 10 3 4 2 7 6 4 6 4 5 4 4 6 65
Total Pufbic Off-Street '393
P""o'o
Private/Reserved 31 182 20 155 42 44 81 101 43 146 31 18 19 43 128 34 55 10 91 26 151 171 87 1709
Barrier Free (Handicap) 2 4 3 10 2 3 1 .2 8 6 1 5 5 52
. Total Private 1761
Summary 366286 63 174 92 124 249 257 125 154 309 160 172 139 90 213 247 125 34 114 66 186 194 119 4059
Sourte: Rich and Associates fieldWork, Fetruary2006
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~!! vw.tW.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
3 OF 23
11/27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
......
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
~
2.3 Turnover and Occupancy Study
A turnover and occupancy study was undertaken in the downtown study area over
the course of a typical business day, Thursday, February 8, 2007. The turnover portion
of the analysis, where license plate numbers were recorded, applied to on-street
spaces and spaces with time limits iess than eight hours to determine how long
specific vehicles were parked in certain spaces, and if parkers were moving their
vehicles to different spaces to avoid being cited for overtime parking. In the eight
hour spaces and in private off-street spaces the number of parking spaces occupied
was observed during each two-hour circuit. The turnover information also yields an
occupancy result for the parking area and therefore for each circuit a composite
occupancy can be derived.
Turnover is an indicator of how often a parking stall is being used by different vehicles
throughout the course of the day. Turnover is relevant to time periods when time
limits on non metered spaces are being enforced and is most important to short-term
customer and visitor parking.
Occupancy is an important aspect of parking because it helps us to understand the
dynamic of how parking demand fluctuates throughout the day. Likewise, the
occupancy can be used to illustrate how parking demand is impacted by events in
the downtown area. Overall. the occupancy data is used by Rich and Associates to
calibrate the parking demand model. Table 2C and Map 3 are the summary results
of the turnover findings.
2.3.1 Observations
o The turnover and occupancy analysis took place on Thursday, February 8,
2007 beginning at 9:00 AM. with the final circuit beginning at 6:00 P.M. The
analysis covered public and private parking in and around Salina's
downtown core.
o This typical business day was selected to look at turnover and to see how
employee-parking utilization was impacting the parking operations,
o Turnover was recorded from 9:00 AM. through 5:00 P.M. Although a circuit
began at 5:00 P.M" parking spaces are only enforced through 5:00 P.M" and
so the final circuit merely recorded occupancy. During the turnover analysis,
license plate numbers were recorded in virtually all on-street spaces and the
municipal lot spaces that were restricted to less than eight hour parking.
o From 5:00 P.M. until 7:00 P.M. public and private parking was counted for an
occupancy analysis only, no license plates were recorded.
~
~
!HE\!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
5 OF 23
11/27/2007
fi
SdIln.:I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Table 2C
SALINA TURNOVER AND OCCUPA NCY 2/08/07
On-Strest Public
Block IDe sc Actual'#' ,:,:,-,:,.arJl.1 I~ 11"0"~l c".""mJ '-'"'"'P~I, It"~~P'::1 _"10
of stalls 11 :OOam % Gce. 1 :OOpm % Dcc. 3:00pm % Dec. 5:00pm % Dcc. 7 :OQpm Dcc.
po vn-:::.t "" "8" '""70 "" "70 "9' "0-" ~' 00-" " 070
4B On-SI 26 31% 12 46% 35% 27% 11 42%
40 On-St 16 8 50% 6 38% 4 25% 6 38% 1 6%
5B On-SI 12 7 58% 8 67% 7 58% 5 42% 2 17%
50 Bhr On-SI 13 6 460/0 6 46% 5 38% 7 54% 5 38%
50 2hr On-SI 7 3 43% 2 29% 0 0% 2 29% 5 71%
50 8hrOn-51 8 2 25% 6 75% 3 38% 4 50% 0 0%
50 30 min 2 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
60 On.St 16 12 75'% 10 63% 10 63% 9 56% 7 44%
70 Qn-St 13 7 54% 7 54% 4 31% 8 62% 2 15%
80 2hrOn-St 30 8 27% 12 40% 19 63% 10 33% 8 27%
8B 2hrOn-St 9 4 44% 4 44% 2 22% 4 44% 0 0%
9B 2hrOn-St 31 11 35% 12 39% 19 61% 12 39% 11 35%
90 On-St 24 9 38% 11 46% 11 46% 12 50% 7 29%
lOB On. Sf: 16 7 44% 14 88% 7 44% 6 3B% 6 38%
16B On-S 15 9 60'% 8 53% 8 530/0 9 60% 10 67%
17B 2 hr On-Sl 32 6 19% 18 56% 22 69% 24 75% 22 69%
170 On-St lB 6 33% 7 39% 7 39% 5 28% 4 22%
170 30min 3 1 33% 1 33% 2 67% 2 67% 1 33%
18B On-S1 20 4 20% 8 40% 5 25% 6 30% 2 10%
180 2hrOn-St 32 16 50% 17 53% 14 44% 19 59% 19 59%
190 On-5t 17 9 53% 9 53% 11 65% 5 29% 6 35%
200 On-St 14 11 79% 11 79% 10 71% 10 71% 7 50%
210 2 hr On-St 17 7 41% 11 65% 6 35% 15 88% 7 41%
22B 2 hr On-St 29 9 31% 11 38% 17 59% 13 45% 14 48%
220 On-St 23 4 17% 2 9% 4 17% 4 17% 3 13%
23B On-St 24 5 21'% 6 25'% 2 8%. 3 13'% 4 17%
28B On-St 14 14 100% 14 100% 13 93% 9 64% 6 43%
29B 8hrOn-St 2 1 50% 2 100% 1 50% 2 100% 1 50%
290 On-St 16 13 81% 12 75% 13 81% 10 63% 6 38%
30B On-St 6 3 50% 4 67% 3 50% 3 50% 1 17%
310 On-St 11 6 55% 5 45% 6 55% 5 45% 2 18%
n treet ot.
Off-Street ublic
Block IDesc Actual # 9:00am-] I~ 11 :ooa~1, 1 :DOpm~ I ~ 3:00p~ I ~ 5:00P~1 %
of stalls 11:00am % Dcc. 1 :OOpm % Occ. 3:00pm % Occ. 5:00pm % Gcc. 7:00pm Oce.
l!ltyfl}:ounty- l_~m1n 8 ~ ~~~ 1"0 ~~ 1~ ~~~ f3 ~:~ ~ ~::lo/:
3 City/County - 30mln 48
3 City/County - 3hr 81 45 56% 20 25% 61 75% 53 65% 9 11%
3 City/County- 8hr 168 151 90% 125 74% 140 83% 139 83% 77 46%
3 City County- HC 9 6 67% 3 33% 6 67% 5 56% 3 33%
4 (city) Chamber Lot 8hr 53 29 55% 30 57% 34 64% 41 77% 20 38%
4 Chamber - HC 3 0 0% 1 33% 0 0%, 0 0% 0 0%
7 Lot 38 HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
7 Lot 38 Bhr 71 53 75% 55 77% 45 63% 48 66% 16 23%
8 Lot 3A HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
8 Lot 3A2hr 30 3 10% 3 10% 4 13% 1 3% 3 10%
8 Lot 3ABhr 34 29 85% 32 94% 32 94% 32 94% 16 47%
9 Lot6A2hr 67 56 64% 67 100% 56 64% 55 82% 52 78%
9 Lot 6A Bhr 14 13 93% 14 100% 14 100% 14 100% 12 86%
Lot 6A HC 4 0 0% 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
9 LZ 30min 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
9 Old Bank pk 62 37 60% 43 69% 38 61% 29 47% 12 19%
Old Bank pk - HC 3 0 0%. 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
10 Lot6S 126 71 56% 57 45% 64 51% 60 48% 37 29%
10 Lot 68 He 6 1 17% 1 17% 1 17% 1 17% 1 17%
15 Lot5D 69 10 14% 10 14% 13 19% 8 12% 9 13%
15 Lot5D HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0'%
16 Lot5C 96 65 68"/" 66 69% 55 57% 62 65% 27 28%
16 Lot 5C HC 6 1 17% 0 0%. 1 17% 0 0% 0 0%
17 Lot 5ABhr 18 12 67% 15 83% 18 100% 15 83% 11 61%
17 Lot5AHC 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
17 Lot 58 Bhr 10 10 100% 10 100% 10 100% 10 100% 1 10%
17 Lot 58 2hr 35 19 54% 23 66% 18 51% 20 57% 10 29%
17 Lot 58 He 3 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
18 Lot 28 Bhr 25 25 100% 24 96% 25 100% 19 76% 11 44%
18 Lot 28 2hr 31 22 71% 26 84% 24 77% 22 71% 23 74%
18 Lot 28 HC 3 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0%
18 Lot 2A 8hr 20 16 80% 20 100% 16 80% 14 70% 13 65%
18 Lot 2A 2hr 9 2 22% 2 22% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
18 Lot 2A HC 2 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0%
19 Lot 2C 8hr 82 60 73% 60 73% 57 70% 58 71% 21 26%
19 Lot 2C He 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
~1 Lot 186hr 36 36 100% 33 92% 35 97% 36 100% 13 36%
Lot182hr 3 2 67% 2 67% 1 33% 3 toO% 3 100%
21 Lot 18 He 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
21 LotlA8hr 16 16 100% 15 94% 14 88% 11 69% 6 38%
22 Lot 4ABhr 103 85 83% 77 75% 80 78% 73 71% 50 49%
22 Lot 4A2hr 42 12 29% 9 21% 19 45% 13 31% 22 52%
22 Lot 4A HC 6 0 0% 1 17% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Off_ <eet ublc ot. 6 0 60 60% 48
fl' mg:on<*h.tP>intlil:o.<l.R.k;iI~:r"'111.~IJ~titi.;..I..a.114"'= ~U%JlI 1:1::J6-.atlU'%,;;;1..;.1.1titi
"9%
:1.U!l~:)r,-~\:I l.:m.tjbl'-'i>rl""%~1
SECTION 2
6 OF 23
11127/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~-!S:l\
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,: <u 11-~ ~ j' I. 01: . I 1 . Lit J ':1 I"
Block Desc %Occ. %Occ. %Occ. %Occ.
4B On-street HC 1 100% 100% 100% 0% 0%
80 On-street HC 1 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
9B On-street He 1 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
17B On-street HC 1 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%
180 On.street He 1 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%
210 On-street He 1 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
22B On-street He 1 0% 0% 100% 100% 0%
Handica Parking Totals 7 14% 29% 43% 43% 14%
Actual # am- 1: am 1: pm- pm- pm- y,
Block Desc of Stalls 11:00am %Occ. 1:00pm %Occ. 3:00pm %Occ. 5:00pm %Oco. 7:00pm Occ.
3 City County - HC 9 6 67% 3 33% 6 67% 5 56% 3 33%
4 Chamber - HC 3 0 0% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
7 Lot 3B HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
8 Lot 3A HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
9 Lot 6A HC 4 0 0% 1 25% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
9 Old Bank pk - HC 3 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
10 Lot 6B HC 6 1 17% 1 17% 1 17% 1 17% 1 17%
15 Lot 50 HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
16 Lot 5C HC 6 1 17% 0 0% 1 17% 0 0% 0 0%
17 Lot 5A HC 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
17 Lot 5B HC 3 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
18 Lot 2B HC 3 0 0% 0 0% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0%
18 Lot 2A HC 2 1 50% 1 50% 1 50% 0 0% 0 0%
19 Lot 2C HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
21 Lot 1B HC 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
22 Lot 4A HC 6 0 0% 1 17% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Handicap Parking Totals 66 10 15% 8 12% 10 15% 6 9% 4 6%
OVlfaIUHmidlnp arKln!f'ifot~1 , ~n:7~;~:; ~ , 1;t. 18% 'ilIiw9"'~2"AJ
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC. SECTION 2
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS 7 OF 23
!\IE\! www.richassoc.com 11/27/2007
...... - .,
~L1NA . KANSAS
_ 85% - 100%
_ 15%-84%
_ 50%-14%
_ 0-4'1%
~
..-...... hrldn, C<m~1
~Ar<:hile(I"EoI
~PliIDD~n
~lliOl,><",'~"J
~!".'''''M...",,;,;.
~T.I:'''''','''''"
_"""t.J:'~;..w
RICH ~:"i:::'-:::..~,
'l'lUloOGIlTU ._..,0Jd.-..-~""
RKING STUDY
~ THE CITY OF
SALINA
TURNOVER AND OCCUPANCY
2-08-07 FROM 1:00 pm. -3:00 pm.
5GALE, IU,~
DATE, C8-21-G1
DRA>>lBY, 6I'lG
fiLE.
MAP 3
PAGE' D OF 23
-----------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
a.,..
!j
SaIIn.l
2.3.2 Turnover Results
Table 2C and Map 3 are the summary results of the turnover findings. Most of the on-
street spaces observed were signed two hour. Overall, the on-street spaces have a
reasonably good turnover with the rate at 2.52 times. The off-streetturnover rate was
lower at 1.80 times. thus the combined short term parking turnover rate was 2.11.
With parking posted two hour. the optimal turnover rate would be 4.0 for an eight
hour day.
With circuits lasting approximately two hours. presumably. a vehicle could be
observed twice in these spaces and not be in violation. There were 1.155 vehicles
observed parking in two hour on-street spaces with 597 vehicles observed parking in
two hour off-street spaces on the survey date. The turnover summary is broken down
in Table 20 below. The break down of vehicles that remained in a parking space
beyond the posted time is located in Table 2E on page 10. in this table only the block
faces or lots with vehicles in violation are shown.
Table 20
Turnover Summary
Parking Turnover Summary On-Street Off-street
(by type) Parking Parking
2hr parking 2hr parking
Vehicles that remained less
than 2 hours 1110 (96%) 467 (78%)
Vehicles that remained
between 2 and 4 hours 32(3%) 95 (16%)
Vehicles that remained
between 4 and 6 hours 5 (0.40%) 17 (3%)
Vehicles that remained
between 6 and 8 hours 3 (0.20%) 14(2%)
Vehicles that remained
between 8 and 10 hours 5 (040%) 4(1%)
Total number of vehicles
analyzed 1,155 597
Source: Rich and Associates Field Observations, Feburary 8, 2007
~
~
!l-J!;.I;!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
lNVv'W.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
9 OF 23
11/27/2007
Otvol
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
So*Ia
Table 2E
Vehicles in Violation of Two Hour On-Street Parking Duration
Block 4 Hours 1lIiII8llOle.l!Jr.s!lllllll I!J r.
4B 2 1 2
50 1
80 6 1
9B 1
17B 3 2
180 9 1 3 1
210 7 1
22B 3 1
Totals 32 3% 0.40%)
'A total of 1155 vehicles were observed on-street.
Vehicles in Violation of Two Hour Off-street Parking Duration
":~~
Block 4 Hours
8 Lot3A 4
9 Lot 6A 42 8 5
17 Lot 5B 16 3 3 2
18 Lot 2B 19 5 5 2
21 Lot1B 3 1
22 Lot 4A 11 1
Totals 95 (16%) 17 (3%) 14 2%) 4 (1%)
. A total of 597 vehicles were observed off-street.
. 'This chart only shows two hour on-street and off-street parking block faces
and lots where violations occurred.
2.3.4 Occupancy Results
.
The on-street parking in downtown Salina occupancy peaked during the
study at 51 percent with 276 of 541 spaces observed occupied at peak time
on the survey date between 11 :00 AM, and 1:00 P,M. The on-street
occupancies stayed fairly consistent throughout the day, with a low of 35
percent occupancy occurring during the last circuit beginning at 5:00 P.M,
.
The public off-street parking peaked between 9:00 AM, and 11 :00 AM. on
the survey date with 903 of the 1424 spaces occupied, The peak occupancy
averaged between 60 and 63 percent until 5:00 P,M" on the last circuit 5:00-
7:00 P,M. the occupancy dropped down to 34 percent.
SECTION 2
10 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
~\~!;!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
<1Oyof
~
SdIIna
. The 9:00 AM. to 11 :00 AM. circuit was also the peak occupancy period for
the private oft-street spaces on the survey date at 63 percent or 367 of 583
spaces occupied. The private parking occupancy gradually decreased
throughout the rest of the day with the.last circuit occupancy at 21 percent
or 131 of 583 spaces occupied.
. The overall peak occupancy occurred during the 9:00 AM. - 11:00 AM.
circuits at 59 percent occupied with 1,513 occupied spaces of 2.548
observed spaces on the survey date.
2.3.5 Occupancy Conclusions
. There are five municipal lots signed eight hour parking that are maintaining
90-100 percent occupancy for the majority of the day.
. The two hour parking in Lot 6A was between 82-100 percent occupied
between the hours of 3:00 P.M. - 5:00 P.M.
\
. The handicap parking is underutilized with the peak occurring between 1 :00
P.M. - 3:00 P.M. at 18 percent occupancy (13 of the 73 spaces occupied).
.
2.4 Parking Demand Calculation
Analyses were performed to determine the current and future parking demands and
needs for'the study area. The following data collected and compiled by Rich and
Associates to calculate the parking demand included:
. An inventory of the study areas on and oft-street parking supplies.
. Turnover and occupancy studies for public and private on and oft-street
parki ng areas.
. Block-by-block analysis of the square footage and use of every building in the
core study area. The footprint of each building was scaled and estimated
from an aerial photograph and cross referenced with Rich and Associates
field notes regarding use arid the number of floors per building to determine
an approximate gross floor area for each building. It should be noted that this
methodology does not result in exact reporting of square footage of land use.
though. is rather a relatively accurate estimate of building size.
'J
The Parking Demand Analysis sections of the report contain two levels of parking
analyses to determine the number of parking spaces needed. First is a mathematical
or hypothetical model of parking demand based on the building gross floor area.
The mathematical model multiplies a parking demand generation ratio by the area
of specific land uses to derive the number of spaces needed. The second is a
method of using field observations to calibrate the mathematical model and help to
establish projected parking spaces needed.
~
~
!U~.1l
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS. PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
110F23
11/Z7/Z007
01>01
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SdIina
Rich and Associates reviewed proposed and potential developments with City Staff,
various downtown developers and stakeholders. Several developments were
discussed that would potentially impact future parking demand. An assessment of
potentiai development and redevelopment were factored in the demand analysis.
Future parking demand was in part accounted for by the assumption of vacant
space re-occupancy at a rate of 40 percent in five years and 80 percent in ten
years.
A point to consider regarding the parking supply and demand is that motorists in
general perceive off-street spaces with occupancies greater than 85 percent to be
at capacity, depending on the overall capacity. The greater the capacity, the iess
this perception is valid. When this occurs, motorists will begin to re-circulate to seek
more parking, adding to downtown traffic congestion and the driver's perception
that there is no parking available in the downtown.
Figure 1: Interrelationship of Parking Study Methodologies
PARKING - Determined by I
SUPPLY conducting on-
street and off. COMPARISON OF
street
inventories SURPLUS &
DEFICIT PARKING
BY BLOCK
Determined by Multiplied by
LAND conducting a parking -.-l
- building '- generation
USE inventory for factor rates.
each block
TURNOVER &
OCCUPANC'I Reveals spatial
distribution of PARKING DEMAND
STUDY - parking -
utilization. (Current & Future)
----Data Gathering Techniques & Survey Results----
--Parking Demand Analysis---
Figure 1, "Interrelationship of Parking Study Methodologies" graphically illustrates how
the various parking methodologies are employed to evaluate Salina's parking
system. Section Two offers an assessment of the results of the on-street and off-street
parking space inventories and the on-street and off-street turnover and occupancy
studies. The results of the studies, surveys and inventories are used in conjunction to
establish and calibrate the Salina parking analysis.
SECTION 2
12 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
W\W{.richassoC.com
~
4
!us;.\.!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Table 2F
Parking Generation Factor Comparison
1 . 2 3
Rich & Associates City of Salina Zoning
Salina Model ITE
(stalls per 1,000 GSF of (Does not apply to C-4, (stalls per 1,000 GFS)
Land Use gross noor area) CBO/stalls per sf)
Office 227 1 for every 300 sf 2.79
Retail 1.13 1 fa revery 250 sf 3.97
1.Furniture, hardware and
appliance stores . 1.13 1 for every 400 sf 3.32
Mixed Use 170 n/a 3.25
Medical Office 1.86 1 for every 200 sf 3.9
Service 1.15 nfa
1.BarborfSalon 1.15 2 per chair nfa
2 per servcie bay + Hor
2. Auto reparifService 1.15 each employee nfa
1 for every 50 sf or 1 for
each 3 persons based on
Restaurant 4.93 max occupancy 1249
Night Club 3.00 n/a nfa
Theater 1 for each 4 seats . 0.26-0.38 (per seat)
Museum 0.75 n/a 0.71
2.00 per unit (1st 20),1.5
Residential 1.00 thereafter 1.50 (per unit)
Government 2.85 n/a 4.15
1 for each 3 persons based
Community & Civic Org. 0.75 on max occupancy 3
Church 0.30 1 for each 4 seats 7.81 (Sundays)
1 for each 600 sf or 1 for
Commercial 0.40 each 2 employees nfa
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(1) Source," Rich and Associates Fieldwork & Swveys,
(2) Source: City of Salina, Zoning Ordinance
(3) Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 2005
Table 2F identifies the specific parking demand generation ratios used to calculate
parking demand far each block. These ratios are assigned according to the type of
use present in the buildings. The parking generation ratios were established from
surveys distributed to managers, business owners and employees throughout the
downtown area. The surveys helped establish how many people were in a given
business at various times of the day, how they arrived and how much parkLng was
necessary to support each business type.
The demand factors for each land use type include an estimate for employees and
patrons to that particular land use. The overall effect is that each type of downtown
visitor. whether an employee, business owner or resident is accounted for in the
demand model for Salina. Once parking demand has been calculated for both
current and future conditions, a comparison with the existing supply of parking is
made. The resulting figures are parking surplus or deficit figures for each block.
I
I
I
~
~
JUS!;!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
13 OF 23
11/27/2007
""'of
!.i
Sdfin.l
.
.
The survey method of establishing parking generation ratios customizes the parking
generation model specifically to the study area. The ratios are used in conjunction
with information from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Urban
Land Institute (ULI). These two sources are the generally accepted standards for
parking generation. Rich and Associates uses experience and the Salina survey
results to modify or customize the parking generation ratios specifically to the study
area. Column' 1 on Table 2F represents the parking generation factors used for this
analysis.
I
I
I
""..
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SdIlnd
Assumption 1: It was assumed that parking demand per block was dependent on
the gross floor area contained in the block. Parking demand
computed for one block was not affected by the amount of gross
fioor area available on surrounding blocks. Therefore, a block with
surplus parking supply is not used to offset shortfalls on adjacent
blocks.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Once a parking generation model is developed that illustrates the surpluses and
deficits of parking numerically and graphically, we then compare themodel with
actual field observations, specifically the turnover and occupancy counts. The
comparison serves as a test of the demand model and allows Rich and Associates
staff to make further revisions or adjustments where necessary to ensure accuracy, as
well as to fully understand the overall parking dynamic in the downtown area,
The assumptions used for the parking demand calculations are:
Assumption 3: Parking demand is not affected by parking availability, use, location
and price,
I
I
I
I
I
Assumption 2: The parking demand calculations were derived under the assumption
. that currently occupied properties would remain occupied at existing,
or higher than existing levels, into the future,
2.4.1 Parking Demand
The following are issues that are considered when developing the number of parking
spaces needed:
. Building size, purpose and special use conditions,
. Socioeconomic characteristics of the downtown populations and visitors of
the downtown.
. Aiternative modes of transportation, which includes availability, use,
attractiveness and policy impacts.
. Proportion of the downtown trips that are multiple-use or linked.
. Vehicle traffic,
. Cost of parking.
I
I
I
SECTION 2
14 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ~
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS ~
www.richassoc.com!~I~!;!
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
.
'.
.
.
.
.
.
I
I
.
.
.
I
.
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
aty..
~
5.1IIn.l
The demand factors develop'ed for each land use reflect the peak daytime
conditions. This correiates with the observed needs within the downtown.
One parking concept that does not yet apply to Salina is shared use. Shared use
means that there are parking demand generations (business types) that have
different times when they are experiencing a peak need for parking. A good
example is an office use next to a restaurant that has a' significant evening
patronage. In this case, the same parking spaces that are used during the day for
the office employees and customers are unused at night allowing the restaurant and
the office building to share the parking.
Shared use allows for the potential reduction in parking generation rates. The overali
block parking demand generation ratios may be lowered if shared use is possible.
At this point, there is not the 'level of entertainment or similar activities at night within
the downtown that would warrant further reducing the parking generation rates to
account for higher shared use. As these developments increase, Rich and Associates
would recommend to revisit the demand generation factors in the future for shared
use opportunities that may decrease the overall parking need.
The gross square footage of individual buildings was collected and then sorted by
land use categories. The different land uses for each block are in general muitiplied
by a parking generation factor of parking spaces required per 1.000 square feet. The
resulting number of parking spaces demanded is deducted from the available
parking supply on each block and a surplus or deficit for each block is then
calculated. A summary of the parking demand is located in Table 2G.
The results of the analysis show a current overall surpius of approximately + 893
parking spaces within the study area. There are however pocket areas within the
study area that have shortfalls. These areas do have parking available on an
adjacent block or within two blocks of the areas with shortages. There are a few
areas where there are shortages of employee parking, and this issue is addressed in
the recommendations (Section 4, pg.12).
The five year future scenario assumes a re-occupancy of vacant space at a rate,of
40 percent and the ten-year assumes and re-occupancy rate of 80 percent. The five
and ten year scenarios still generate parking surpluses, with the five year at
approximately + 615 and the ten year at approximately + 337. Because these
scenarios only include re-occupancy of vacant space any new developments that
occur within the study area may greatly increase the parking demand. especially if
any of the development occurs on a surface parking lot.
Although at the present time the analysis indicates that there is a surplus of parking in
the downtown, it is important to begin to plan for future development in the
downtown. There were several sites identified in the downtown suitable for future
parking structures. An analysis for feasibility of a potential parking structure is offered
for each site in Section 4, pg.36.
~
-~
!\Jf.\!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
15 OF 23
11/28/2007
~~(JJ
~O'lm
"'on
~'TI~
NNQ
gwz
" '"
"
>
;u
2S
z
Gl
n;:l
on
ZI
(JJ>
Cz
~o
~>>
Z(JJ
-i(JJ
, (JJO
~. '0
0;"-
~~~
"'zm
g ZYl
nm-
o;uz
3cn0
i~ ~)))
-
Table 2G
Salina Parking Analysis Spreadsheet
A , C D E F G H , J K l M N D P Q R S T U V W X
Meocal (per4:re~s) 5yr, 10yr Sulji.JSI ","'" SUp''''
'0" Oifce Retail Mixed 00" Se:vce Restaurant Q<b Thealer Museum Residenti~ Go< CommlIllty CImh COOlmercial Vocenl Demill1d F"~ Peak Peak P<rklng Deoot Defcit Defdl
DBV1irne 2'l1 1.13 170 "I; 115 493 3CO lCO 075 lCO 295 075 Oll 040 247 I,."" M", Demand Demert! &,>p, lIrrenl r;years) 10 years
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147.243 0 0 0 0 420 0 420 420 liS .s4 ,54 .s4
4 48.733 5,!ill 0 5,!ill 15ffXl 2,817' 4,33) 0 0 0 0 0 8,073 0 176 0 176 176 :!Ii 110 110 110
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5!ill 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,078 m!ill 19 352 1m em 63 44 ,97 ,ZJ7
5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47.5al 0 0 0 0 135 0 135 135 174 :Jl 39 39
7 0 0 0 0 911 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62132 1 153 62 124 92 ~ II .:J2
8 lll84 24084 0 0 5250 0 51lll 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~,284 III 53 159 100 124 ,14 ;l; 56
9 9734 58QZJ 0 5875 19,EEO ",1ll4 glXXJ 0 0 0 0 121XXJ 0 0 29,!ill li6 73 'Ej 324 249 .17 .46 .75
10 15995 0 40ll 0 164&; 5"" 0 0 0 ll,7" 0 0 0 0 13,::65 12\1 33 141 154 51 129 116 103
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 0
15 27,794 5!ill 0 1445 8873 1200 0 0 0 51152 0 12.0c0 0 0 0 11ll 0 11ll 11ll JJJ 2ffi 2ffi 2ffi
17 97328 56"" 0 4[{() 51lll 51lll 0 0 0 0 0 5,Illl 0 ll,%O 3,IXXJ 323 7 :f6 329 1m ,163 .166 .169
le 18.315 73172 0 0 9.310 6415 0 1,297 0 5,!ill 0 5,!ill 0 0 5ll) "" 15 Ill4 511 172 .:f6 :m .:ill
19 11748 14,EDt 0 0 49347 0 0 0 57'" 0 0 2"" 0 0 0 100 0 100 100 139 33 31 31
20 0 3!ill 0 0 915 0 0 0 0 21'" 0 0 1,014 0 3,IXXJ 8 7 10 13 'Xl 82 00 77
11 37,fffJ 15f1ll 2O,m; 19l; 11,400 0 0 0 0 14,311 0 7,W! 0 0 0 175 0 175 175 m Jl Jl Jl
22 e995 9,100 43003 0 5262 0 0 0 0 0 0 10400 0 0 0 118 0 118 lle 147 129 129 129
23 0 9,003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1841 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 12 125 113 113 113
2\1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,C(() 0 0 6 0 5 5 ffi ED ro ro
29 0 0 0 0 50c0 1 !ill 0 0 0 0 0 52fl14 0 0 0 51 0 51 51 '''' 131 132 132
II 8~2 0 0 0 0 1 !ill 0 0 0 !ill 0 0 0 0 0 J3 0 26 J3 194 '''' 1IlJ ''''
31 0 'lJ577 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "" 0 0 0 0 0 :ll 0 28 :ll 119 ~ 91 91
912003 El-ili sum 19,9:6 15Qro< 46l1il 24700 1287 5Bl 69931 19471lJ 100,004 22.014 44111 199161 2TfJ 695 3,016 3,194 3.704 B93 515 W
s1alls slalls slals s1ells) sta!ls (s1als) sla's sla!ls
. Block 5- Future Includes pOSSible development worst case Serl9lfO 203 parking splices
. Block 1S. municipal parking supply only,buildng inventory hasnct been include [
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
i"i
(')
=<
o
"TI
en
)>
....
Z
)>
o
~
z
a
:::E
z
~
'"
2S
z
G>
s:
~
....
m
'"
."
s:
Z
-
-
!\RKING STUDY SURPLUS-DEFICIT ~(1arldnlr.OD'u
=s:: A.-.:bil~ct~'lall
Pla.DD~I5
lR THE CITY OF ~ ~l'iOl'''''''""".J.
~"""I"d'l""'i""
-...:: '1:~ ~f..~~:l:~~~
SALINA KEY RICH ~.~:';li';"':;,"M
(lrA:l'ii()(lAT~ ~."...,IL"'",I.l~1<.
- -100 . 5CALE,H.T.5
- -qq --I DAlE,05-2I-01
- 0-'1'1 DRAHN BY, 6I'lG
SALINA KANSAS - +100 FILE,
MAP 4 PAGE' 11 OF 23
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
.....
~
SdIInd
2.4.2 Possible Development
A separated parking demand anaiysis was done for possible scenarios with the Lee
Warehouse buildings on block 5 (see Table 2H). The analysis is a shared use model
that demonstrates how much parking is actually needed for a development that
includes a mixture of uses, such as residential, office and retail. The figures provided
in Table 2H tcike into account the current demand and parking supply on block 5.
The developer interested in the Lee Warehouse site has offered three options that
involve a mix of residential and mixed use commercial. Development Option One
includes 100 residential units and 32,000 square feet of mixed use commercial. This
development will result in a parking deficit of - 196 spaces, assuming no additional
parking is provided on site. Development Option Two includes 103 residential units
and 25,000 square feet of mixed use commercial. This development will result in a
parking deficit of -205 spaces. The last development Option Three includes 114
residential units with 12,500 square feet of mixed use commercial. This development
will result in a parking deficit of -159 parking spaces.
The deficit varies between -159 and -205 parking spaces. Salina Zoning Code does
not require off-street parking for development in the Central Business District except
for residential. Option One would require 80 stalls for mixed use, Option Two would
require 43 stalls for mixed use and Option Three would require 22 stalls for mixed use
development. The City would be required to provide between 22 and 80 parking
spaces depending on which development option was chosen, to satisfy the mixed
use parking deficit. Unless other provisions are made, the developer would be
responsible for the remainder of the parking spaces for the residential development.
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~!f.tl W'MV.richassoC.com
SECTION 2
18 OF 23
11/27/2007
......
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SdIIn.a
Table 2H
Block 5 Possible Develocment Scenarios
Option 1
Parking Supply 63
Current Daytime Demand -19
Net Surplus 44 spaces
New Development:
1) Residential - 100 Units
2.00 per unit (first 20), 1.5 thereafter -160
2) Mixed Use Commercial - 32,000
sf. .
2.50 per 1.000 sf -80
Demand Summary -240 spaces
Existing Surplus 44
Surplus/Deficit -196 soaces
Option 2
Parking Supply 63
Current Daytime Demand -19
Net Surplus 44 spaces
New Development:
1) Residential - 103 Units
2.00 per unit (first 20), 1.5 thereafter -206
2) Mixed Use Commercial - 25,000
sf
2.5 per 1,000 sf -43
Demand Summary -249 spaces
Existing Surplus 44
Surplus/Deficit -205 soaces
Option 3
Parking Supply 63
Current Daytime Demand -19
Net Surplus 44 spaces
New Development:
1) Residential - 114 Units
2.00 per unit (first 20), 1.5 thereafter -181
2) Mixed Use Commercial- 12,500
sf
2.5 per 1,000 sf -22
Demand Summary -203 spaces
Existing Surplus 44
Surplus/Deficit -159 spaces
SECTION 2
19 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS. PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
!\J.S:.\!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
CIty..
!l
SdIInc1
"
2.5 Parking Operational Assessment and Other Information
2.5.1 Operations and Enforcement
The parking operations in Salina are overseen by several different departments.
Salina Downtown Inc. issues parking permits and the Police Department
oversees parking enforcement. Public Works oversees parking maintenance and
the District Courts collect all fees from parking fines.
Currently there are two Community Service Technicians (CST) working in the'
downtown providing parking enforcement. The CST's are on duty from Monday
through Saturday from 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. Both CST's are full time working 40
hours a week on parking enforcement. Signs are posted indicating
enforcement hours are from 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday.
Where parking is regulated two hours or less. enforcement officers' use chalk to
track which vehicles are in violation. The ticket fine boxes are emptied daily.
When the weather is inclement raining, snowing, or less than 20 degrees, the
CST's do not enforce parking.
2.5.2 City of Salina Parking Ticket Statistics
The fine for overtime parking is $2.00 if paid within forty-eight hours. If not paid with in
the forty-eight hours the fine is increased to $5.00 dollars. If the violation is not paid
within five days the fine is increased to $25.00 (as provided by the City of Salina).
Table 21 on page 20 shows the number of tickets issued for the last two years. All
statistical information on the number of parking tickets, the revenue from parking
tickets and Table 21 and 2Jwas provided by the Salina Municipal Courts. The
number of tickets issued in 2005 was 14,536. The number was higher in 2006 with
15,515 tickets written, The biggest difference between the two years was in January,
2005 there were around 550 tickets written and in 2006 there were 1,200 tickets
written for the' same month. This could be due to colder weather or more snow in
2005 than in 2006.
Table 2J (as provided by the City of Salina) on page 20 shows the revenue from
tickets issued for the last two years. The ticket revenue from 2005 was $34,997.83. In
2006 the revenue was higher due to 979 more tickets being written bringing the
revenue to $39,604.68. There are currently 408 outstanding unpaid tickets from 2005
and 763 from 2006. The uncollected revenue from these tickets is $29,275 based on
the $25.00 fine for late payment. All fines are paid to the Municipal Court and the
money from the fines goes into the City's General Fund.
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
!\!f.ti www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
20 OF 23
11/27/2007
fi
SaIlna
L___.
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Table 21
.
I 1800
.
City of Salina
OVERPARKING 2005- 2006
-1
1100
112005Iol81$
'4,536
02006 totals
15,515
1400
! 1200
1000
~ 100
100
~
~ 400
I
,
, 200
0
>~ "," .;rr:t r- ~ ","- ~ ,:. ./ cF 0"
. -s' -s' .,<i' '"
"
. -
'"
~ G~ph by M. Ma"hall I
Table 2J
City of Salina
OVERPARKING 2005-2006
REVENUE
$4,500.00 ~,:~tGj;' rf;' '~r .. c""l''i!lI:ijp ~ i~ItI'4U1 "'.~~:~.;
i~ iii "t ,.tt~-, ... r
il: 1lil ltil' ~~.. ,tl~f~ (":1 - IT .,~ ~ .
~,OOO.OO ~ lk -, id "" ffo,"
Ij< '0< .. 't
-, J
$3,500.00 ~\~ r -- 'F~ h'-
~~,~; C' .r,. i~;,,~,t! \IliF '1':":'
-,0 lH ~ ~ ~;
i-'- ""- I- h h H .<}. I
$3,000.00 1\, "'- ~ " r~.'
.. ,,' ~ ;i
$2,500.00 I~ ~ I- ~ y h-- 'i :~ .
J ~l:' j;; J, ~; ~. o 2006 TOTAL
~J 34,991.83
k r
$2,000.00 l- I- l- f- tl i---'" . 2008 TOTAL
.~_. 39,604.58
l- . he f- l- t-: 10;; ~ I- - I-
$1,500.00 .,. 'I ~;
JI' I . " iii1 II'-
~ t- "i ~. fl.
$1,000.00 -'- l- I-- I--- l- I-"- l- I-. "" q
~ ,
.:1~
$500.00 -- ~ I-- l- I-- l- I- ~ I-:- - l-
i .,
{J '.' J; .t, :1;
"
$- I-- L,. L-,- L,. ~ L,. ~ L,. :..;.' L,.
>~ .~ /~ ($>'V ~ ","- ~ ,:. !fJ'" ,y'" 0" ",'"
~ s' s' 0" .. '" 0
~
Graph by: M. Marshall,
SECTION 2
21 OF 23
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WWIN.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
~
1
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ III'
~!S.~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
aty..
!l
SdIIn.l
2.5.3 Parking Permits
There are three types of permits, all are sold through Salina Downtown Inc.
Contractor $2,00 per job, Temporary Day $0.30 per day, and Residential $12.00
per year (sold annually in January and pro-rated for someone signing up after
January). Residential permits are the only permits that are transferable, though
only one permit per resident is issued.
Residential permits are only for residents of Santa Fe Avenue, E. Iron Avenue (100
& 200 blocks). and W. Iron Avenue (100 block). Table 2K below details permit
sales for years 2002 through 2004,
Table 2K
Number of Parking Permits Sold Annually 2002 - 2004
2002 2003 2004
Construction 35 44 3
Temporary 168 36 42
Residential 19 13 7
* Numbers provided by Salina Downtown Inc.
Benchmarking Parking
Rich and Associates have compiled information benchmarking Salina's parking to
other communities in the area (Table 2L), It was felt by City staff and stakeholders that
Hutchinson, Lawrence and Manhattan were most similar in size, location, activity, and
parking needs to Salina. The benchmarking chart on the next page has detailed
parking information on Hutchinson and Lawrence, Manhattan was contacted but
did not respond to our survey,
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~t! www.richassoc.com
SECTION 2
22 OF 23
11/27/2007
,
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
4
!\c!f"~
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
aty..
!:i
salina
SECTION 3 PUBLIC INPUT
3.1 Business Owner/Manager Survey Results
Business surveys were sent to the business owners and managers. Data obtained
from the owner/manager surveys was one of the factors used in determining short
and long-term parking supply and demand. A total of 73 manager surveys were
returned to Rich and Associates. Managers were asked the number of full and part-
time empioyees employed at their business, the average number of customers or
visitors that come into their business and the percentage of those customers or visitors
who are downtown for other purposes (I.e" employed in the downtown),
Owner/Manager Survey Summary
1, Type of business?
a) Retail........................,... ......., 26%
b) Office Professional....................... 31%
c) Medicai Office...................... ..........4%
d) Public Use/Government,.............. 3%
e) Restaurant....... ............................... 6%
f) Service ........................................... 10%
g) Financial......................................... .. 6%
h) Other................................................ 14%
other
Service
Public Use/Government J
Medical Office
2. Own or lease this location?
Own
40%
Lease
60%
RICH AND ASSOCiATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 3
lOFlO
11/27/2007
I
m~
""..
~
5.lIIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
3. Where do your employees park?
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Public Lots
On-Street Private Lots
Other
Owner/Monooer Survey Summorv (Opinion Questions)
Scale Key: respondents were asked to indicate opinions using a scale of 1 to 5; 1 being
strongly-disagree (left side), 3 being neutral (middle) and 5 being strongly-agree (right
side). The red dot indicates the average response from the returned sUNeys.
~'\ 0 ~lb ~'\
" 0 >80 00
~o <;:80 0"
.,.'" ~0'" ~~ q,...s ~0e
c:;: .~'l} Q'
r I ... I I r""
Below is a summary of the opinion questions:
A) The cost for providing new parking should be shared by the City, private sector and
users.
~'\
~~ ~00
c:;: .~'l}
r
o
'f?-~0
I
~....
0"
c:::.~ 00
r~
o
>80
.,.'"
Q'
I
",,'iY
c...r'"
SECTION 3
2 OF 10
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
W\NW.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\1fl!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~!S:"~
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
aty..
~
SdIIna
B)
f:-~~ 0
~O ~0
~ -S'lJ.
r
C)
~~"4, 0
>;<S.O r:8ei
'5 'f:>"lJ
r
Only the city should pay tor parking improvements.
'0'0
'S'?>r:$
0'
I
~'\
0"
C'::J'<S 00
r~
~.:v.
~'o"
I
'0
c.~<k'O
I would encourage my employees to park further away in order to provide more
parking for customers and visitors.
'0
~'O
..,'"
0'
I
",Cii'\
C:J~05..00
r<lJ
~?;:-
~
'0
~4;tzj
I
D) I would encourage my employees to park further away at a parking deck.
",-t--\ 0
'!S.o r:80
~ .s1>
r
'0'0
_s'l>c8
0'
I
~~..:;
cJ~O 5..00
r<lJ
,,;}
~0..;).~
~
'0
?,-4;0
I
E) I would encourage my employees to park further away and use a shullle.
~'\
"'~ '0
~o r:80
c:;: ,s'lj
t'
'0
~'O
..,'"
0'
1&
'0
'i?"-4;0
I
~~..:;
~..s.O 00
r~
~-s.
~'O"
I
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WVoNI.richassoc.com
SECTION 3
3 OF 10
11/27/2007
<>yo<
!l
SclIln.1
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
3.2 Employee Survey Results
Along with the monger surveys, employee survey forms were also distributed. Initially
three employee forms were included with each monger survey. However, managers
were encouraged to photocopy the surveys if they needed more to ensure that 011
employees at that business hod on opportunity to participate. A total of 96
employee surveys were retuned to Rich and Associates. These surveys were used os
part of the parking analysis for Salina study.
1. Employment Status
Part-time
7%
Full Time
93%
Other
-~
=::::
~!E!;!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I :
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2. Employment Classification Clerical
Medical Professional
0) Professional 52%
Service
b) Retail Soles 6% (including
c) Service (including restaurant) 16% restaurant)
d) Medical 0% Retail Sales
e) Clerical 13%
t) Other 14%
SECTION 3
4 OF 10
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
'NWN.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~!f.\!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
"""..
!:i
SalIna
3. How do you generally come to work downtown?
100%
90%
80%
60%
50%
40%
1%
20%
10%
0%
Drive and Dropped Ride with Walk
Park off friend or
relative
Bus
Bicycle
Other
4. II you drive when you come downlown where do you usually park?
90%
80%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
City Lot
Privately OWned
Lot
On-Street
Residential
Street
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 3
50F 10
11/27/2007
Ooyol
~
SdIin.l
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
5. Who pays lor your parking? Employer
pays
a) Employer pays 3%
b) I pay 14% Combination
c) Combination 0%
d) It's free 68%
e) I do not pay 15%
It's free
Below are Ihe employee responses 10 the opinion questions on the survey:
A) There is an adequate number of parking spaces lor downtown employees.
"",\
O<:;:-''-!> 0'0
<:>>cS. 'l>~
'0,..
f
",'"
.s'lJ.r:fj
'0'
I
~?;:-
~",,,,
~
'"
..,..,*0
I
,,<,;;'\
C::>~o ~ee
rCli
B) The available parking lor downtown employees is reasonably close 10 my place
of work.
>.'\
o<:;:-'cs e,0
C:>~ '7><:8
<j'~
f
",'"
.s'b-q;
'0'
I
~7;-
~",,,,
I ..It.
'"
~r:$e
I
,,<,;;'\
~o _Po
1~~"-
C) II Ihe City constructed a well-designed and secure parking slructure I would use it.
>.'\
0,\:,<::$ era
C:J'<S 'l><$
(::l~
f
",0
.c..'l>~
'0"
I
~tlJ.
~0'"
I A
",0
~~
I
~'\
0'"
t::>'<S ~e0
rCli
~
~
~!S:.\!:
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 3
60F 10
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
l/IfWW.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~!f~
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
""..
!l
SdIIna
0) I would pay more to park closer to work.
",,\
,,~ "
~(j fk0
g .~'lJ
f)'
<"",
_s'l>C8
<:>'
I .&
"
?,-~0
I
f'$'\
0'"
c::,~ 00
rQ}
~~
-<-,,<>
I
3.3 Public Survey Results
Public surveys were posted on the Salina City Web site. A total of 21 employee
surveys were retuned to Rich and Associates. These surveys were used as part of the
parking analysis for the Salina study.
A) There is an adequate number of parking spaces for downtown employees.
>.'\
C('-C5 00
c:;,-s. Q}
f""''''
'"
~"
.~."
<:>,-
I
"
'i?'-,*0
I
"es'\
C:>~O ~00
r'8
~~
-<-,,<>
r-I
B) The available parking for downtown employees is reasonable close to my place
of work.
",,\
,,~ "
~o r$0
Cj .~'li
r
"
~'"
.",'"
<:>'
I
"
~~e
I
"es'\
C::>~o ~e,0
r'8
~~
-<-,,<>
I ...
C) If the City constructed a well-designed and secure parking structure I would use it.
",,\
,,~ "
~o r$0
Cj .s"li
r
'"
~'"
.",'"
<:>'
I
"
~~0
I
f'$'\
0'"
C;;)'<$. ~00
r'8
~tlJ.
-<-,,<>
I A
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 3
7 OF 10
11/27/2007
a.,..
!:i
5.lIIn.1
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
0) I would pay more to park closer to work.
...'\
~'1) ee
~o f8
<2) .~'?J
f'
"
rfi"
's'"
Q'
I A
~~
-ii-"->
I
"
,,?,-~e
I
~'\
0"
0~ ~e
r<l>
3.4 Individual Stakeholder Interviews
Rich and Associates conducted several individual stakeholder interviews and group
meetings throughout the month of February. We have also conducted several
telephone interviews throughout the course of our research. This allowed
stakeholders to voice their concerns and suggestions regarding the parking
conditions in Downtown Salina. This information is vital to determining the parking
needs of the community. Rich and Associates views stakeholder input as a key
component in obtaining community involvement in the parking study, along with
gathering criticai input from the peopie dealing with parking on a daily basis.
Throughout the stakeholder interviews there were several common themes. The
majority of people interviewed felt that Downtown Salina did have enough parking.
Many stated that the biggest concern was employee parking; the problem being
that there is not enough employee parking.
Stakeholders noted that the employees were parking on the streets taking the prime
visitor parking spaces because they were not getting tickets on a regular basis or the
price of the ticket is worth the risk of parking in an inappropriate space. Other issues
of concern revolved around loading zones, and requests for better signs to guide
visitors.
The following is a list of individuals who were given the opportunity to discuss parking
concerns in Salina:
Mike Montoya
Jim Ravenkamp
Jim Maes
Tony Dong
Jock
Hinnenkamp
Ben Frick
Larry Britegam
Dennis Louver
Ken Ebert
Murray Gorman
Brad Steuwe, MD
Jane Gates
Alan Weber
Todd Davidson
Andy Anderson
Susan
Hawksworth
Rick Affholder
SECTION 3
8 OF 10
11/Z7/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WWVI/.richassoc.com
~
~
~!f!!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\lSJ!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
""'..
!j
SdIIna
3.5 Public Forum Meetings
Rich and Associates held three public forums in conjunction with Downtown Salina
Inc" and the City of Salina. The purpose of the meetings was to hear and understand
the communities concerns and ideas about downtown parking. as well. as to
educate the public on the process and time line of the Downtown Parking Master
Plan. The meetings were held at City County Building Room 107. 300 W. Ash. The
meeting minutes can be found in full in the Appendix. The dates and times:
. Tuesday February 6, 5:30 - 7 P.M.
. Wednesday February 7, 7:30 - 9 AM.
. Thursday February 8, 11 :30 AM.-1 :00 P.M.
Comments and Concerns
. Lot layouts
. Most people cannot see signs
. Walking distances are too far, people are only willing to walk one block
. Lack of signage
. Signage is confusing
. Employee parking is an issue
. There needs to be education and marketing of appropriate parking areas
both for customers and employees
. Angled parking is easier than parallel parking
. There needs to be more consistency of enforcement
. . 24-hour parking is an issue
. During City/County court days cause issues with parking around the courts
o Add a raised parking level to the lot
. Safety concerns in the lots during early morning and late night
o Employers do not want employees to have to walk very far during
these times
. Complaints of vandalism to company owned vehicles that remain in the lots
overnight -
. Do not want meters
. A review of previous concerns
. Shopping mall effect
. Review Lighting
. Security in lots is an issue
. Need to educate and create maps of where long term parking is located
. Signage is inconsistent
. 24-hour parking should not be allowed on city streets
. Company vehicles In lots creates issues
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 3
90F 10
11/27/2007
""..
!j
5.llIna
. Possibly create a special customer permit
. Biggest complaint is the parking signage
. Many employees are moving vehicles every two hours to avoid tickets
. New technology to improve enforcement
o Handheld ticket writers
. Handicap parking is an issue
o There is not enough
o Curb cuts make parking difficult
o Some stalls are not appropriate handicap stalls
o The location of some of handicap stalls is not useful
o There are post and obstacles to maneuver around
o Some are not functional
. Loading zones
o Is it possible to create parking stalls that are loading zones during
certain hours?
. Valet parking
. Off-street allocation
o Two hour is not long enough for some downtown customers
o Employees park in the two hour stalls so they do not have to walk
o Employees park in the two hour stalls when the eight hour is full
o There should be additional options, three or four hours
. On-street parking should be longer than two hour
o It is not enough for customers
. Parking permits for employees to keep employees from parking in the
customer stalls .
o Needs to be a reasonable cost
. Develop maps to market parking
o Need to show parking time limits
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, ING. ~
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS ~
www.richassoc.com!U~...ti
I
I
I
SECTION 3
10 OF 10
11/27/2007
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SECTION 4
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recom mendation
Recommendation Summary
Budoet
ReSDonsibiritv
.E
1m Diem entation Time
Frame
Cateaorv
On going
N/A
City/Police
4.2 Parking Enforcement and
Fines
4.2:1 Enforcement.staffing personnel are
suffident
Sprtng 2008
4.2,Parking_ Enforcement and'
Fines
4.2.2 Purchase handhelds ticket writers
and software
$5,000 fore earn handheld ticket writer
and $10,000 for software (one:time)
City/Police
57,000;.$15,000 per vehide
Cit>j/PoIice/CourtslSDllParking
Advisory Committee (PAC)
Spring 2008
4.2 Parking- Enforcement and
Fines
4.2.3 Enforcement vehicles need to be
replaced
City/Courts
Sprtng 2008
4~2.ParkingEnforcement and
Fines
4.2.4 Implement graduated fines
Negligible. Use.of. handlields facilitates
graduated fine system.
Spiing 20080r 6 months
after the purd"Jase of
handheld-ticket writers
4.2 Parking,Enforcement.and
Fines
4.2:5 Ina-ease overtime p,ar1<ing fines to $6,
ticket not paid within 10 days $15, and if
not paid within twenty'five daYs $35
Nooe
City/CourtslPellcelSDIIPAC
Peliey
City/Courts
4.2 Parking Enforcementand
Fines
:4.2.6 COntinue issuing multiple tickets
No change
Spong 2008
4.2 Parking Enforcem_ent and
Fines
42TCreating an,ordinance to use a
vehide immobilization (boot) with multiple
,unpaid par1<ing tickets
Budget $450-530 for each boot Two
boots necessary; one for each'CST
vehicle'
City/Courts/Peli celSDllPAC
City/Courts/PelieelSDIIPAC
Spring 2008
4:2 'Parking, Enforc~ment and
Fines
4.2.8 Implement courtesy tickets
Loss of revenue from first ticket issued to
.an individual. Requires use of handheld
.ticket writers.
City/CourtslPelieelSDI/PAC
Sprtng 2008
4.3"Parking Management
4.3.1 Consider implementing a Par1<ing
Adv.is.ory,Committee
'There wiU ,t?e_'addibonal costs
Sprtng 2008
4.3.Pa rking, Management
4.3~2 Track and monitCf the sale of parking
permits. Increase,the price of the -
temporary par1<ing,permit and cons~ction
permit to 51.00 per day.
SDI is monitoring now. budget $2:00()"
,$5,9JOfor printing' of permits and'
applications
SDI/City/PAC
Covered under sign program
City
Sprtng2008
4.3 "Parking _ Management
4.3.3 Par1<ing'Duration. ch~nge:2 hroff-
street par1<ing to 3 hrs.
City
Sprtng2008
4.3 Parking Management
4;3,:4 Parking directly behind businesses
should be OJstomer parking only.
Covered under track and monitor the
sale of parking permits. and handheld
ticket writers
Policy
N/A
City/Police
4.3-Parking Management
4.3.5 Handicap Par1<ing Guidelines
Sprtng2008
4.3 Parking Management
4.3.6 Par1<ing'lot improvements/renovatioos
Varies
City/Courts/PelicelSDi/PAC
Policy
N/A
SOl/City
4.3,Parking'Management
~lt37 Discourage future development of
private surface parking lots in,the core
downtown
Fall 2007
4.~_Parking N!~n-agement
4.3.8 Qeate loading zones
Minimal, will need signs and painting of
stalls
City/Police
Minimal
City/CourtslPoIice/SDIIPAC
Long TermlVvtlen Needed
4.3'Parking Management
4.~_:gConslder valet parking as downt~n
Salina grows.
Sprtng 2008
Minimal
Clty/Courts/PelieelSDI/PAC
4~3'Parking Manag~ment
4.3~,10 Consider taxi stands
Spong 2008
4.3 - Parking-,Management
4.3.1,1 ACId biCYge parkinglenhal')cements,
Between $5.000 and 550,000 depending
on hay! many racks;signs and the level
of marketing
City/CourtslPelicelSDIIPAC
Sprtng 2008
Minimal
City/PelieelSDI/PAC
4.3 Parking Management
.4.3.12 Create a special events pali<ing plan
Sprtng 2008
Varies
City/SOl/PAC
4.4, Pedestrian
Enhancements/Activity;
4.4,-1 Walkways from parking lots to Santa.
F:e.need addition_al lighting and Consider
murals
Policy
Varies
City/SDI/PAC
4.4 Pedestrian
Enhancements/Activity
4.4.2 :Minimize.surface lots and large
breaks between buildings to promote
walking in thed~nto'!Vn.
Summer 2008
4.4,Pedestrian
Enhancements/Activity
4.4.3 Consld~ adding pedestrian
wayfinding to the downtown.
Should pe_included in:~gn:study
City/SOl/PAC
Policy
Varies
City
4.4 Pedestrian
Enhancements/Activity
4.4.4 Minimize pedestrian and vehicular
interaction
In process of sign program
4:5 Signs
4,5 Rich and Associates recommends five
types of parking'S!gns thafincrease drivers'
wayfinding
Between $50,000 and $200.000
depending on the number and type;of
'signs.
City/SOl/PAC
Cootinuing
City/SDI/PAC
4.6.Marketing
4.6_-Mari<eting.ofthe parking sy?tem-is very
important
$7,000 per ye~rfor on~going marketing
effcrts
Srping-2008
4.7 Parking Requirements for
Current and;Future
4:7..1:Create a,Paridng Enterprise Fund
Varies
City/SDt/PAC/Courts
Policy
N/A
City/SDI/PAC
4.7 Parking Requirementl,> fo~
Current and'Future
4.7.2 Pa_rking, developme,nt costs. parking
improvement costs and finandng
Ongoing;
Dependant on FUture
Development
4.7-Parking, Requirements for
Current and Future
4:1 Parking Requirements for
Current and Future
4,7:3 Timing for addi~on.al par1<:ing
development
4.7:4 .New Parking
N/A
City/SOl/PAC
Varies
Clty/SDI/PAC
~:o::: RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
!t.!f..ti www.richassoc.com
SECTION,
IOF
11/28/200:
-----------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!l.lf"~
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Cftyof
~
SdIJna
4.1 Introduction
The recommendations presented in Section 4 are intended to enhance the
existing supply of parking through operational, management, configuration,
parking pricing and allocation changes aimed at increasing the efficiency of
the parking system. The recommendations provide a holistic approach to
improving parking downtown today and plan for future growth in the
downtown.
The first step in the process should be the formation of the Parking Advisory
Committee (4.3.1). This will then provide a basis for implementing the
recommendations.
4.2 Parking Enforcement and Fines
4.2.1 Enforcemenf Personnel
Community Service Technicians (CST) staffing levels need to be adequate to
ensure that all of the parking is routinely monitored for the entire duration of the
applicable regulations according to the day of the week. Specifically, one CST
can monitor between 600 and 800 parking spaces per day. This ratio assumes a
mixture of long and short-term parking, the use of handheld ticket writing
technology. the electronic chalking of vehicles and the staff patrolling in
vehicles. Assuming an individual is full time and in a vehicle, one person can
then typically monitor a specified route of 800 to 1. 100 parking stalls up to four
times during a standard shift.
In Salina there needs to be enough staff to cover 1.318 spaces. This total is
made up of 2.297 public spaces of which 979 are eight hour spaces that do not
need daily enforcement. Additionally, there needs to be enforcement
coverage from 9:00 AM. until 5:00 P.M. daily. six days a week for 52 weeks (with
the exception of holidays). Using the ratio of parking spaces to officers and the
time frames that need to be covered for enforcement, Salina requires two CST
positions (assumptions: six days, 9:00 AM. until 5:00 P.M. enforcement of 1.318
public parking spaces using handheld ticket writers patrolling in a vehicle. Any
additional parking created may require additional CST staff. Ultimately. there
are 96 hours of enforcement that needs to be covered each week. Currently,
Salina has enough CST staff.
Guidelines on efficient and effective parking enforcement include:
. Routing of officers so that a complete circuit is followed every two hours in
the downtown area.
. Officers should use handheld parking ticket writers that track license plate
numbers.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
2 OF 46
11/27/2007
(Joy"
!j
SdIIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
. Every parking space, whether occupied or not, is then entered into the
handheld.
. The handhelds should be programmed to issue tickets for overtime
parking and vehicle shuffiing (moving vehicle to a different on-street of
off-street space every two hours throughout the day to avoid a ticket).
. Staffing should be at a level adequate to assign one officer to monitor
between 800 to 1,100 parking spaces per shift,
. Parking enforcement officers should be dedicated to parking duties, only
being re-assigned during emergencies or special circumstances that may
arise.
. Street signs shouid indicate that parking is enforced to 5:00 P.M
4.2.2 Handheld Technology for Enforcement
Rich and Associates recommend that Salina
purchase and begin the use of handheld ticket
writers to enforce parking. The handheld units
increase efficiency by storing the license plate
numbers of vehicles, thus negating the need to
physically chalk tires. This will allow enforcement
to occur during inclement weather, whereas
marking tires with chalk cannot be done in the
rain or snow because the chalk gets washed
away and does not mark weii on a wet tire,
Casio IT-3000 EZTaq
~
~
~!f!!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Handhelds units can also store a "hot list" with Information such as stolen
vehicles, warrants, previous offenders, shuffling of vehicles, and unpaid tickets,
When the vehicies license plate gets put into the handheld, the plate gets run
through a database and if it is an offender the handheld responds with the
appropriate information. If a vehicle needs to be booted or towed because of
multiple unpaid tickets, the information will come up on the screen of the
handheld. This helps make the entire parking system more efficient and
enforcement more effective.
With the purchase of the handheld ticket writers there also needs to be a
central computer, A home base needs to be set up where the handhelds can
be downloaded and updated daily with pertinent information regarding
parking violations and information from the Police Department as well as be
recharged. Finally, there will be software, much of which is available with little
or no modification required. The software should also be used to process and
file tickets.
Summary
Cost:
$5,000 for each handheld ticket writer and $10,000 for
software (one time).
SECTION 4
3 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WVIIW.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\Iq-!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
"""of
!"j
SalIna
Benefif: Consistent enforcement targeted towards discouraging
improper parking while minimizing the negative impact
on downtown customers and visitors.
Acfion Time: Summer 2008.
Responsibility: City/Police
Issue Addressed: Discourages improper parking activity such as repeat
or multiple offences. shuffling by employees improperly
parking on-street. Increases turnover of the most
important parking in the downtown area.
Customer/visitor friendiy efforts consistent with the
downtown goals.
Additional Comments: Consider working with the courts to create an
ordinance on collecting parking fines. At this time
there no consequence for not paying a parking ticket.
Until there is an appropriate consequence for non-
payment the enforcement will not be fully effective.
4.2.3 Enforcement Vehicles
The existing enforcement vehicles are old and are in need of replacement. The
new vehicles need to be energy efficient such as electric or hybrid and should
be capable of driving in all types of weather.
Summary
Cost: Starting from $7.000 per
vehicle and should also
include a maintenance
contract after the first
year warranty.
Benetit: New vehicles will allow
the CST to provide
parking enforcement
during all but the most
inclement of weather.
Action Time: Summer 2008.
Responsibility: City /Poiice
4.2.4 Graduated Fines
Global Electric Motorcar used by
Fulton Missouri parking enforcement.
Designed by Chrysler
Consider introducing a graduated fine system to aid in discouraging multiple
infractions by individuals. The use of handheld computer technoiogy
compliments this effort, as the software can track license plate information and
the infraction particulars. The software can then identify muitiple infractions
within a given time period and issue a ticket accordingly. An example of a
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
l/IIWIN.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
4 OF 46
1112712007
""'..
!j
Salina
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
graduated fine schedule may be increase each subsequent ticket issued in a
one-month period by $1 .00. Based on the current fine schedule the first ticket is
$2.00. the second in a month would go to $3.00 and so on. The fine for not
paying the ticket within a 30 day period would remain the same. The current
ordinance reads that the fine doubles if not paid within 30 days. The handheld
software can assist in tracking fine payment.
Summary
Cost: Negligible. Use of handhelds facilitates graduated
fine system.
Benefit: Facilitates fine revenue collection and aids in
discouraging repeat infractions, increasing the
efficiency of the overall parking system. There is the
potential for added revenue from the additional
charge on multiple tickets.
Action Time: Summer, 2008.
Responsibility: City Finance Department/Police Department
Issue Addressed: A graduated fine system will help alleviate repeat
offenders, though some of the acceptance of
possibly getting a ticket is the fact that enforcement
is not consistent. This results in the reduced
probability of receiving a ticket.
Additional Comments: Parking regulations are implemented to increase the
efficiency of the parking system by allocating certain
parking areas to given users. When the regulations
are not followed the system efficiency is degraded.
4,2,5 Overtime Parking Fine
Consider increasing the overtime parking fine to $6,00 per infraction from the
current rate of $2.00 per infraction if paid within 48 hours. Additionally, the cost
for a ticket not paid within five days would increase to $15.00 from $5.00
currently, and if not paid within twenty-five days the fine would increase to
$35.00 from $25 currently. The fine money would go into the parking system
and be used to maintain and make improvements to parking in downtown
Salina. As discussed in the preceding recommendation on graduated fines,
parkers were observed knowingly violating parking regulations for the
convenience of parking close to their destination. The choice of violating
parking is logical to the consumer because the fine rate is comparable to the
cost of parking in Salina.
The fine rates should be reviewed in two years and raised according to inflation
and the demand for parking.
Summary
Cost:
None
~
-~
-.
!\1S:.\!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
50F46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS. PLANNERS
www;richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!l~!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
CIty of
!:i
SdIIna
Benetit: Encourages patrons to use parking as designated by
the parking regulations, increasing the efficiency of
the system and effectively providing more parking
opportunities in the downtown area. Fine income
could potentially increase to help fund new initiatives.
Action Time: Spring 2008 or six months after the purchase of hand
held devices.
Responsibility: City/Police Department/Courts
Issue Addressed: An increased fine will aid in encouraging parkers to
choose appropriate parking areas for their needs
and to pay for parking.
Additional Comments: Parking regulations are implemented to increase the
efficiency of the parking system by allocating certain
parking areas to given users by allocation. When the
regulations are not followed the system's efficiency is
degraded and the effective supply of parking is
diminished. When this occurs, business customers and
visitors are the first groups of parkers to suffer from the
lack of available parking. The possible revenue
increases to be determined.
4.2.6 Multiple Tickets
Currently Salina issues multiple tickets to a vehicle who parks at a short stay
space all day. This policy is constant with the policies of many other
communities surveyed by Rich and Associates. Similar to graduated fines,
multiple tickets for the same infraction also aids in discouraging individuals from
knowingly violating parking regulations as an alternative to paying for parking.
The use of handheld computer technology will compliment this effort as the
software tracks license plate information and the infraction particulars. The
ticket writer can then identify were multiple infractions occur and issue tickets
accordingly.
Summary
Multiple Tickets: Continue to issue multiple tickets
4.2.7 Vehicle Immobilization with Multiple Unpaid Parking Tickets
Consider implementing an ordinance allowing the
use of a tire boot. This device is a lock that is applied
to the wheel of a vehicle, which makes it immobile.
The circumstances under which such a device is
used are:
. Non-payment of parking fines.
. Repetitive abuse of on-street parking.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
60F46
11127/2007
......
!:i
Salina
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Currently; there is some difficuity being experienced in the collection of parking
fines and with repetitive offenders. The boot is easily applied by an individual
and can be carried in the rear of an enforcement vehicle. When the CST
identifies a parker with a history of parking violations (possibly with the
accumulation of five or more unpaid tickets over a six month period), he/she
simply locks the boot around the tire of that vehicle and places a ticket on the
windshield in the usual manner (the ticket would have specific instructions on
how to proceed in getting the boot removed). The boot then remains in place,
immobilizing the vehicle, until the fines are paid and the CST unlocks the device.
There may be the necessity to have a police officer present when the boot is
being put on a vehicle and or when the boot is being removed. Installation
typically takes less than one minute.
. Comparison to other communities:
. Ann Arbor, MI - 4 or more outstanding parking citations subject to
impound
. Chapel Hill. NC - 4 or more outstanding parking citations subject to boot
.
. Colder, CO - 4 or more outstanding parking citations subject to boot or
impound
. Royal Oak, MI - 6 or more outstanding parking citations subject to
impound
Summary
Cost:
Benetit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Additionallntormation:
Budget $450-530 for each boot. Two boots
necessary, one for each CST vehicle.
Encourages patrons to use parking as designated by
the parking regulations, increasing the efficiency of
the system and effectively providing more parking
opportunities in the downtown area. Fine income will
increase to help fund new initiatives.
Spring 2008
City/Police Department/Courts
Changes behavior of habitual parking offenders.
Towing vehicles due to multiple unpaid parking
tickets can create confrontations due to the amount
of time it takes to hook a vehicle to a tow truck.
Booting a vehicle rather than towing also eiiminates
the possible damages to a vehicle in the towing
process.
~
~
!\LS\;!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
7 OF 46
[ [/2712007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~lS;!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
""'of
!l
SdIina
4.2.8 Courtesy Ticket
Rich and Associates suggests that from a public relations standpoint Salina may
want to consider courtesy tickets for the first offense during a specific period of
time. This would require the use of handheld ticket writers described in 4.4.2,
and storage' of data for a long period of time. If a vehicle parking at a short
stay space has not received a ticket during a specific period of time (the last
six months as an example), then a courtesy ticket could be issued that would
first thank trie parker for coming to downtown Salina and state that their
patronage is appreciated. Then the courtesy ticket would go on to alert the
parker to the fact that they were in violation and then give the parker a map
with alternatives to where they can park for longer periods of time,
Summary
Cost:
Loss of revenue from first ticket issued to an individual.
Requires the use of handheld ticket writers,
Public relations are championed in Salina and the
customers of the City's businesses are less impacted
by more stringent parking enforcement or by other
policy and management changes that enhance
parking regulations.
Fall 2008.
City/Police Department/Courts
Public relations and improved business relationships
between local business and the City due to the
creation of a customer friendly atmosphere while still
increasing the effectiveness of parking enforcement.
Benefit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
4.3 Parking Management
4.3.1 Parking Advisory Committee (PAC)
The City of Salina uses an interdepartmental approach to managing parking.
Several City departments are responsible for some aspect of the parking system
from enforcement by the Police Department to permits by the SDI to the Courts
collecting the fine revenue. The City's parking system is becoming large
enough to consider having one person heading up the parking to oversee the
whole parking function and act as a liaison between the City Commission, City
departments and the public, One of the best ways to oversee a parking system
is by having a singie source of management.
Having a single parking management source expedites decision making and
allows for better integration of the various aspects of parking. The revision to
the parking system under the direction of one person would benefit the parking
system from an ability to adapt to changes in the downtown. Rich and
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
8 OF 46
11127/2007
ClOy..
!:;
Sclfina
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
As~ociates recommend the following approach to the management of parking
in Salina: '
. Form a PAC consisting of members of the business community, SDI,
Chamber of Commerce and City staff, The PAC will advise City
Commission on the implementation of the parking plan, review proposals'
for parking improvements and requests for changes to the systems such as
time duration limits, allocation of parking etc.
. Appoint a staff member of the City or the director of SDI as the parking
director. As parking director, this person will be responsible for
coordinating the various departments that deal with parking such as
Finance, Police, and Public Works. This person would also be the
coordinator of the PAC.
. Establish a separate parking enterprise fund that wouid take in the
revenue from parking tickets and permits. There would be a separate
budget prepared for parking including normal operating expenses,
capital expenses, and projections of revenues from parking permits and
fines. Allocating or re-directing a portion of the parking revenue to a
capital improvement fund will benefit the City on the long-term by using
savings and interest to help pay for future new parking facilities.
Additionally, a managed parking system is also able to adapt to changes in an
urban area that are brought by new business moving in or out of a Central
Business District or by development. Some communities are also abie to create
a whole new philosophy for the parking system by changing the traditional
parking enforcement role into one where the enforcement officer acts as an
ambassador on behalf of the community.
Applications to develop parking facilities or lots on private property and
zoning related requirements for parking would still be handled through
the respective City departments (Building, Planning and Engineering).
Summary
Cost:
Will involve city staff and SDI time that should be
assigned to the parking operations,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
9 OF 46
11/27/2007
Benefit:
Having the parking function handled by several City
departments works well for small communities with
limited parking. However, Salina's parking system is
becoming larger and more cumbersome to manage
using the interdepartmental approach,
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Establish Parking Committee as soon as possible.
City or SDi to be responsible for parking, then
formation of a Parking Advisory Committee.
Brings singular management to a system that
currently uses an interdepartmental approach.
Parking benefits from having a 'face' for the public.
Issue Addressed:
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
!tIC\!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~!f!:!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
CIty..
r;
SdIina
Additional Comments:
It is becoming common practice for Downtown
Development organizations to head the parking
due to the fact that they are typically the most
involved with the owners and merchants of
downtown businesses.
4.3.2 Parking Permits
Currently permits are purchased through SDI. These permits are recorded by
type of permit sold. Rich and Associates recommends that the SDI track and
monitor the sale of parking permits so that the number of permits sold for a
particular parking location are recorded and each parker is registered. Each
type of permit should have a different color so it is easy to distinguish between
types of permit. Additionally. SDI should track who purchases the parking
permits for which vehicle.
As the parking system grows and more permits are sold it may become
necessary to track permits using the permit software and a comprehensive
application form. The form would ask for the parkers name, home and business
address, phone numbers, vehicle type(s), and license plate number(s) of those
vehicles. Additionally, the application should list the rules and what penalties
are possible if they park where they are not supposed to or do not pay on a
timely basis. This .contact information will assist in contacting the owner of the
vehicle if there is any damage in a lot or a vehicle is inappropriately parked. At
this point it may also be necessary to change to a permit that is difficult to
reproduce using holograms, or plastic permits.
Recommended Permit Rates
Current Recommended
Temporary Permits $.030 perday $1.00 per day
Construction Permits $2.00 per job $1.00 per day
Residential Permits- $ 12.00 per year Do not raise at this time
Commercial Permits NjA $ 12.00 - $20.00 per year
Vehicles should not be allowed to park in the lots over night without a permit.
Because the City is trying to promote and develop more residential units along
with business in the downtown, permit rates for residential parking should remain
unchanged at this time. The rates should be reviewed in two years taking in to
account infiation and the demand for parking in the downtown. Porkers with
these permits should only be allowed to park in the long term designated
parking except for Monday through Friday 5:00 P.M. through 7:00 AM" and on
weekends. The short term parking is prime parking for businesses and is
extremely important to the success of businesses in the downtown.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
10 OF 46
11/27/2007
""'01
!:i
ScllIn.l
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
All temporary permits should be raised to $1.00 per day, due to the fact that the
parking spaces being utilized are prime parking for downtown businesses.
Construction vehicles should be encouraged to move out of the on-street
parking spaces to the parking lots as soon as possible. Temporary permits
should be priced at an affordable rate, though not at a rate so low that the
permits are abused, Consider selling temporary permits to bar owners so it does
not become a deterrent to customers leaving vehicles overnight who should
not be driving. Vehicles with the permit would be allowed to leave the vehicle
until 8:30 A.M. without receiving a ticket. Temporary permits would only be
valid for one day and must have the date and time issued clearly written on the
permit.
Commercial permits would be sold to businesses that do not have private
parking for their business vehicles. These permits would allow overnight parking
for the vehicles. The vehicles should not be allowed to park in the short term
parking and should be moved as residential vehicles every 24 hours to allow for
cleaning and maintenance of the lots.
Long term parking spaces do not need to be enforced. though overnight
parking does need to be enforced. The long term parking needs to be
monitored daily by recording license plates into the handhelds on the first route
in the morning and the last route in the evening. There should not be anyone
parking overnight who does not have a parking permit. Permit holders should
move their vehicle once every 24 hours to accommodate snow removal,
cleaning and lot maintenance.
Summary
Cost:
Budget $2,000-5,000 annually for parking permits and
application form printing.
Tracks permit sales and allows for the City to be able
to limit permits for certain areas.
Spring 2008
City
The allocation of long-term versus short-term parking
can be adjusted to suit the City's needs by
monitoring permit sales through the use of the permit
tracking software.
Rich and Associates recommend that eventually the
entire parking system be gradually updated and
actively managed by a central authority. Permit prices
should be evaluated every three years and raised
according to inflation and the demand for parking.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'""'
~
!\1f.tl
I
I
Benefit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Additional Comments:
SECTION 4
IIOF46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
filS!!
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
. ClIy..
!:i.
SclfIna
.4.3.3 Parking Duration
On-street
Two hour parking should be the dominant duration for on-street parking as it
suits the needs of the majority of customers and visitors. Individuals requiring
more than two hours for parking should be directed to off-street parking areas.
The other duration that should be found on-street is fifteen minute or thirty
minute parking for use as pick-up and drop off spaces or very short-term
parking. The fifteen-minute parking should be located as either the first or last
space on the block face where needed.
Off-street
The two hour parking in lots should be changed to three hour parking to
accommodate the customer/visitor wanting to spend more time in the
downtown. Finally, in areas where there is no demand for customer-visitor
parking, long term parking can be used to add to the overall long-term parking
supply. Map # 5 on page 14 is a representation of the changes recommended.
The addition of three hour parking should reduce the number of temporary
parking permits that need to be sold. The parking is free and convenient
without a need to carry a permit back to a vehicle.
The eight hour parking should become long term parking, no overnight parking
without a permit. This will allow employees to park for the day without getting a
ticket or moving their vehicle.
Summary
Cost:
Benetit:
Covered under sign program
Parking efficiency is maximized through simplicity.
Long-term parking takes place in lots where permits
and hourly parking can be utiiized. Short-term
parking is located on the streets near the business
where it is needed the most for customers and visitors.
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Spring 2008
City
Creates longer term parking for customers/visitors
visiting the downtown that is located close to the
businesses.
Additional Comments:
Using three hour parking should deter employees from
parking in these spaces, due to the fact that they
would have to move their vehicles three times over the
course of a day.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
120F46
11/2712007
CIIy..
!j
SalIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
4.3.4 Parking Allocation
CustomerjVisitor parking should remain close and convenient, while employee
parking should remain toward the back of lots. It is expected that employees
will walk farther. typically 600-800 feet while a customer/visitor to the downtown
will typically only walk 300-500 feet to run an errand when the intent is not to
shop around. This is why it is extremely important to educate employees to park
in the appropriate spaces, l<3aving on-street parking as well as parking that is
near the backs of the businesses for customers.
Salina shouid complete occupancy studies on the three hour parking in the lots
every six months to determine if the parking is under utilized or over utilized. If
the three hour parking is underutilized, then this parking should be used for
premium parking permits for employees.
Summary
Cost:
Benetit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Additional Comments:
None. Handheld ticket writers will run utilization
summaries.
Parking efficiency is maximized through simplicity.
Long-term parking takes place in lots w,here permits
and hourly parking can be utilized. Short-term
parking is located on the streets near the business
where it is needed the most for customers and visitors.
Spring 2008
City
Creates longer term parking for customers/Visitors
visiting the downtown that is located close to the
businesses.
Sales of premium parking permits can generate
additional revenue into the parking system.
~
~
!\I<;'1;!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
13 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3AUNA . KANSAS
_ 31'R
_LONCllEll.l
_ f'Cl8IlIlU;RS1\IE_
PBIIT LOCA11ON
~
..-...... (,uld"" C"".
~Ar.;:"ile~".1l
~l'latUl~n
~11tOl"'''.'~>1
~~".."r.",-.,;",;"
~~'~I:'''''''','':~'
-....: J~'" ......,J.....IO
RICH ~~~'M~_.s:.,
Il-AliWl:IATU ...w-"'<II."....~,
~RKING STUDY
IR THE CITY OF
SALINA
PARKING DURATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
5GAL.f,N.T.5
MAP 5
DATE. 10-23-07
l:'iPAl+lBY. 61<-
F....
PAGE' 14 OF 4~
-----------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!1!!;.l;!
awof
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
Sc1IIna
4.3.5 ADA Parking Guidelines
As part of the parking analysis, Rich and Associates was asked to review
handicap standards in Salina, specifically are there sufficient handicapped
parking spaces provided. Listed below is a chart that gives the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) parking guidelines.
Aiong with the parking guidelines it is important to make sure that once a
person is parked they will be able to access the sidewalk from where they are
parked. All intersections should have sidewalks that are handicap accessible.
It was noted by Rich and Associates during stakeholder meetings that there
were complaints about not enough handicap parking and in some areas
where there were accessible parking spaces the sidewalks were not accessible.
Based on our review there are sufficient handicapped spaces provided in
parking lots that meet the ADA guidelines. On~street spaces are not covered
by the guidelines with respect to the number of spaces required.
ADA Parking Guidelines
Total ParkinQ in Lot
1 to 25
26 to 50
51 to 75
76 to 100
101 to 150
151 to 200
201 to 300
301 to 400
401 to 500
501 to 1000
1001 and over
Required Minimum
Number of Accessible
Spaces
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
2 percent of total
20, plus 1 for each
100 over 1000
One in every eight assessable spaces, but not less than one. shall be served by an
access aisle 96 in (2440 mm) wide minimum and shall be designated "van
accessible" .
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
15 OF 46
11/27/2007
~
!:i
SdIlna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
=~
=~
~~I;!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.3.6 Parking Lot Improvements/Renovations
The chart below shows a review of the existing City parking areas. Overall, the
parking lots are in good shape. Common to all the parking lots Is the need for
changes to the signage (see Section 4.7). Other issues are the landscaping,
alley interface with the parking iots and dumpsters in parking lots. The primary
concern with the landscaping is that it needs to be maintained at a height that
someone can not hide behind and surprise a pedestrian. Lots that could have
this issue are Lots 2A 2C, 3A 5C and 6A. In other locations the landscaping
needs to be better maintained (Lots 1 A and 1 B).
Lots 2A 3A 4A and 5C have issues with the alley and the parking lot. In most
cases the alleys create very tight turns going from one module to the next. One
solution would be to eliminate spaces at the end of the aisles where conflicts
occur so the area for the turn is wider.
In several cases the dumpsters in alleys could allow a place to hide behind. in
or near the enclosure. and then be able to surprise a pedestrian. Better lighting
around the dumpsters would help. Consider creating uniform Parking Lot
Design Standards and hiring a lighting specialist to consult on lighting issues.
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) recommends the
following design criteria for parking lot lighting in the 9'" edition of The IESNA
Lighting Handbook Reference and Application:
. Parking lot lighting levels should be illuminated to a minimum horizontal
luminance of 0.5 foot candles (fc) maintained as measured horizontally
on the pavement surface without any shadowing effect from parked
cars or columns.
. A minimum maintained vertical illuminance of 0.25 fc should be
achieved as measured 5 feet above the parking surface at the point of
lowest horizontal iliuminance.
. Maximum of Minimum uniformity ratio should be 15: 1.
Summary
Cost:
Benefif:
Acfion Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Varies
Resolves lighting and landscaping issues.
Summer 2008.
City
Well lighted properly maintained parking lots often can
change the perceptions that the parking lots are
unsafe.
SECTION 4
160F46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Otyol
~
SalIna
I
CITY OF SALINA INVENTORY OF PUBLIC LOTS
Lot#. Liohls Stribina Sianade AlleV Landscaoind Comments
fA OK - onlylour light po~s in OK Poor OK Needs tending, but ~ood One wa.y west oound only
113 of lot
OK. only fou(lightpoles in Poor- see picture of2 Dumpster issue? VValks around dumpster
18 11301 lot OK hOlJf~gri NIA ,Needs)en-ding but ~ood ciJilldbe hiding placerr people along
pedestriaripath
2A Very Gqod OK (jopd: Tlghfturh",thtruci< H~11 oh~stre~t~jge"co~lct Tt~c~sunload for ~uc!get Furniture (nhollr!y
9r~~te-s~y@i jssye spafes.
28 _Good OK 'Small, needs NIA Notan-'issue Has restrooms -2'dumpsters Restrooms
jmR-rove~ent may b~_secudtyissU'e
2C Only one pole, may not be OK Small, needs Crosses allex Same on 5th St side. need Must use streefto get from module to moc!ule
enough II!htin! improVement nilhitoringfoi height
3A-North Good OK 'Small, needs NIA Needs monitoring for For number of 2 hOUfSpaCe5,. notwelJ signed
imprOVement hei~htof landScape
3A-South P9!e ~~9 faI ea~t, ne~d.s OK Sm~ll, n,eeds V~iyJoug~ t~rn in ;3Jley ~arid.:;caRi.n'g maY,b_e too' ~~ally "ba~ ~urn i'nall~y~o go around' lot: -
. .
mqre lighting iinpr9Y~Gl,ent to gettl?rnod_ul~ h~h
3$ !y1iddle lo.t ~eed?r:nore, OK ~rnall, n~eds yerytighl Not'm~c~: J,aT!~s.capi"~ga~d
I~hting irnprov~J!1,e:nt it'sl,D'wY
Chamber Lot Good OK No'identification at all NIA OK
Old 8ank Lot Gqod OK N9~entifiC<ltion at all. NIA OK
--c- Confusing with 2 and 8
Issu'ewith loadin'gand Walnut sid (needs
4A Good OK hour spaces, ,notwel1 unlo~ding !rirriiTling
placed
Other-signage higes LandsCapin'~f.c6uld be_an
5A OK -one"four ne'adlight OK parking',sign OK iSs:u.~,aiiq m'ust be
.maintained
Laridsc~pin'g'could be an AirO~.9f1.paveirienfw/qne/~ray dir'eCtion ,not
58 Good ,$_e~ ~ote 'Nee.ds.irnprQl{em,ellt NIA ,isS,ue: ?Ild muM. b~
maintained applicable?
OnepoJe ~.2Ii9hts on:alley_ Ti~hfturns in2ndf3rd LandscapingcouJd be
5C on~y'wes:thalfbf lot not OK Needs improvement issUed iiduture,ofi 8th ~
lighted iOOdule south side needstrirnrning
50 No lights OK Small, needs NIA NIA
improvement none:
6A Very v.elilighled OK q9nfu_si_ngWjt~ :2 and_ ~ Landscaping he'ight'coujd
hour spaces; not well NIA
nlaced be an issue
68 961y ~ ori.7ti:1 Stside~nd OK Nq id~nWicati~n at "!II T"ig'httyrn 9k~ ~Wgr9vi~g DUrT}p5:t~,~ on n9t endose~ 7f~ $r~ets!de
no_ne in bCl~R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9: RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
!t~!! www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
17 OF 46
1112712007
Qtr9':
!:i
SdIlna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
4.3.7 Privately Developed Parking
Discourage future development of private surface parking lots in the Downtown
core. Small surface parking lots disrupt pedestrian activity and reduce density.
A better option for Salina is to have control over parking and to build new
parking as required using the revenues from the parking system.
As discussed in Section 2-2 page 2, Salina is in control of 57 percent of the
parking in the Downtown. The rule of thumb when examining this statistic is that
it is desirable to have municipal control of over 50 percent or more of the
parking. This is very important because it allows the City to manage, enforce
and regulate the price of parking. The City can then regulate parking more
efficiently. keeping the cost down and benefiting the downtown economically.
4.3.8 Loading Zones
Loading zones should be added as required to serve local businesses. On-street
(20 minute) loading zones should only be designated on an as needed basis
and where necessary. Loading zones should typically be the first or last parking
space of the block face. and where necessary on long block faces they should
be placed in the center of the block.
Alleys are typically used for loading and unloading in Salina, and there are
some 30 minute parking spaces for loading and unloading on-street. Though,
there are some businesses that may benefit from loading zones such as the
theater and restaurants that have several take out customers.
Summary
Cost: Minimal. for signs and painting of parking spaces.
Benefif: Allows for customer pick-up and drop-off areas.
Action Time: Summer 2008
Responsibility: City
Issue Addressed: Would create patron pick-up and drop-off for
businesses, like the Stiefel Theater.
4.3.9 Valet Parking
Valet parking is currently not used in downtown Salina. As land uses change
and evolve, especially along Santa Fe Avenue, there is the potential for use of
valet parking for restaurant and entertainment venues that makes coming
downtown a more attractive adventure. Though the City would not necessarily
operate the valet parking. the City should have a policy in place for regulating
how valet operations would be run and where vehicles are parked. This policy
should include using public parking areas and private off-street lots as valet
parking storage and on-street spaces for vehicle drop off and pick up. The
policy should specify rental charges for on-street parking spaces used for pick-
up and drop-off by valet operators so that the operator can rent as many or as
few spaces as they need for their operation.
SECTION 4
180F46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
;~
=~
RICH
~..",."..",
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!1!f;!!
""'..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
S.aJina
Overall, the policy should specify valet operation standards, the use of and
design of permissible signs, on-street parking space rental charges and the
necessary parking area lease agreements with private parking owners or with
the City to provide the valet with evening parking privileges. Further more the
policy and agreement should specify penalties and or the revoking of the valet
operator's license for violation of the policy regulations.
Summary
Cost: Minimal.
Benefit: Tracks and regulates valet operations through a
comprehensive operating agreement and license
structure. Any cost associated with administration
would be re-cooped through user fees and on-street
parking rentals.
Action Time: Spring 2009
Responsibility: City
Issue Addressed: Will develop policies prior to the need or request for
valet parking. Policy will help to control the amount
of on-street parking dedicated to valet operations by
applying a rental charge to spaces used for the
operation, should the requests start.
4.3.10 Taxi Parking
Similar to the valet recommendation, the City should have a policy in place for
taxi stands to allow taxi operators to lease or rent on-street parking from the City
for use as taxi stands. Begin with weekend (Thursday-Sunday) nights after 8:00
P.M. first and extend hours as program becomes more popular.
Market the program to both college students visiting the restaurants and bars
during the weekend as well as people attending the theater in downtown. The
beginning marketing expenses can be a joint effort between the City, SOl and
a taxi service or services. As the taxi service expands they can then initiate their
own marketing.
Example: "Come enjoy the downtown without worrying about
parking. Enjoy door to door service."
Summary
Cost:
Benefit:
Minimal
Tracks and regulates taxi operations through policy
framework and allows the City to re-coup some of
the costs associated with the on-street parking being
used for taxi stands. Again, any cost associated with
administration would be re-cooped through user fees
and on-street parking rentals.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
19 OF 46
11/27/2007
""'..
~
SdIind
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Action Time: Spring 2008
Responsibility: City/SOl
Issue Addressed: Will create another form of transportation to the
downtown during peak needs. Helps Salina create a
more walkable user friendly downtown and also helps
cut down on drunk driving.
4.3.11 Bicycle Parking/Enhancements
In following Salina's Strategic Plan consider making the downtown a more
bicycle friendly downtown and provide adequate and useable bicycle
parking. Consider creating a bike route to the downtown and creating a
marketing program to promote bicycle use as an alternative to driving. Install
new bicycle racks in the downtown and institute a marketing program to
promote new locations to park bicycles. Create a special event to promote
bicycles in effort to help create alternative modes of transportation, which in
turn cuts down on the number of parking spaces needed.
Guidelines on Bicycle Racks:
. Racks should allow bike frame to make contact at two points.
Two examples of recommended bike racks
. Should allow for more than one bike per rack.
. Needs to allow for popular "U" shape lock.
. Racks should be placed where they will not
impede upon pedestrian traffic, though need
to be readily identifiable.
({;Jill
.
Bicycle parking sign
Should be clearly signed with a bicycle parking sign.
~
~
R!fB
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
SECTION 4
20 OF 46
11/27/2007
L__
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~\f!;;!
""'..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
Marketing Bicycle Ridership:
. There is National "Ride Your Bike to Work Day/Month" in May, There are
several communities throughout the U,S, that participate, Information can
be found through the League of American Bicyclists www,bikeleaaue,ora,
. Bicycle Friendly Community Campaign
(www,bicvclefriendlvcommunitv,ora) awards communities who are
bicycle friendly and promote walk-able, safe communities,
"Communities that are bicycle-friendly are seen as places with
a high quality of life, This often translates into increased
property values, busIness growth and increased tourism.
BIcycle-friendly communitIes are places where people feel
safe and comfortable ridIng their bikes for fun, fitness, and
transportatIon. With more people bicycling, communIties
experience reduced traffic demands, improved air quality and
greater physical fitness," www,bicvclefriendlvcommunitv,ora
. Source of possible grant funding through Bikes Belong Coalition,
htto:/ /bikesbelona,ora
. Pedestrian and Bicycling Information center is a great link that offers
advice on funding and marketing bicycling in downtowns,
htto:llwww,bicvciinainfo,ora
Summary
. Bicycle Parking Enhancements/Marketing
Cost:
Between $5,000-$50,000 depending on the number of
racks, signs, and the level of marketing,
As mentioned, bicycle friendiy communities draw
peopie and activity into the downtown areas,
promoting economic and social activity,
Spring 2008
City/SDI
Benefit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Creates a more pedestrian friendly downtown and
encourages alternate modes of transportation,
Investigate State and Federal funding sources for
bicycle initiatives, Multi-modal efforts are endorsed
through severai grant programs including Next-TEA
(US Federal - Revised, Transportation Equities Act),
Additional Comments:
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
21 OF 46
11/27/2007
""'..
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SdJln.l
4.3.12 Special Events Parking Plan
Rich and Associates recommend that a plan be developed for parking
during special events. This plan should include a selected remote lot location
(public school, church, city or county owned lot) and if necessary an
agreement with the lot owner, as well as some form of shuttle service possibly
arranged with the local transit service.
The need for adequate and quality event parking will enhance visitors overall
downtown experience. The City can also promote parking areas as car-
pooling resource that will enhance the community as being conservatively
progressive.
. 4.4 Pedestrian Enhancements! Activity
Pedestrian movement is a very important aspect of parking. It is extremely
difficult to get people to park beyond the front door of their destination if there
is any concern regarding safety or the experience is not pleasant. Lighting and
landscaping can greatly change a perception of safety in lots and along
sidewalks. There are several light manufactures that specialize in outdoor
lighting that is very bright. though the light is reflected downward to avoid
creating light pollution. Murals, art. window decorations and flowers can
create a pleasant walking experience during the day and night. In addition a
police presence riding bicycles or walking in the downtown after dusk can
create a feeling of safety.
4.4.1 Pedestrian Walkway Enhancements
The walkways from the parking lots to Santa Fe are very important to the
parking system in Salina because they make the parking extremely convenient
in the downtown. The covered walkways need enhanced lighting and new
paint to brighten these areas up so pedestrians will feel safe. Murals work
extremely well to create a bright pleasant area for pedestrians walk by.
If the walkways (covered and uncovered) are well lighted and inviting, there
should not be any reason people would not use them day or night. The lighting
needs to continue beyond the walkways to the sidewalks and parking lots.
Cameras that are monitored would be another option to create a safe
environment in the covered walkways. Pictured on the hext page are two
examples of walkways with better lighting, one with and one without .murals.
:=s
~
!H,~!j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
22 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
lNWW.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
'.
.
atyaf
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
I
I
"-______.--1
~~~
.,~'!FS~~~_~
~-_._,-~---,
\;~~
~ ~"
- I
t
l"l
Example of walkway with better lighting and mural.
Example of walkway with better lighting.
All pedestrian walkways in downtown Salina are important to future growth and
development of businesses along Santa Fe Avenue, Fifth Street. and Seventh
Street. These walkways, both covered and uncovered shorten walking
distances and are especially important with the long blocks in downtown
Salina.
4,4. 2 Minimize Surface Lots and Breaks Between Buildings
Minimize surface lots and large breaks between buildings to promote walking in
the downtown. People tend to walk further without complaints if the walk is
pleasant. enjoyable and engaging. Landscaping, murals, and decorated store
windows tend to create an experience worth walking. Parking areas are
important. though large parking lots without landscaping can be viewed as
unsightly and unsafe.
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
RICH www.richassoc.com
."""",.",
SECTION 4
23 OF 46
11/27/2007
...,..
!':j
s.aw
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
~
~
!H\;.\;\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.4.3 Install Pedestrian Wayfinding Kiosks
Consider adding pedestrian wayfinding to the downtown. Kiosks near parking
areas and on busy corners with maps and listings of businesses in the downtown
are very helpful in directing visitors/customers of the downtown. Pedestrian
wayfinding will work hand-in-hand with marketing and signage in the
downtown. The maps show where long term parking should occur without the
worry of a parking ticket.
Two examples of pedestrian wayfinding kiosks
SECTION 4
24 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
""..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
4.4.4 Minimize Pedestrian and Vehicular Interaction
Minimize pedestrian and vehicular interaction by creating a clear differential
between the street and sidewalk. This can be done by using texture, colors,
trees, or planters between the sidewalks and streets. The pictures below show a
clear distinction between the street and sidewalks. It is also important to
provide handicap accessibility at all intersections. When all sidewalks are
accessible it is then possible for someone with less mobility to park at a non-
handicap designate parking space when designated handicap spaces are full.
,. .~~'-'-
~
.1:2.1
....
Example of a sidewalk separating pedestrians
from vehicles with texture color and light poles.
This example is also handicap accessible
Another example of using color and texture to
create a clear path for pedestrians. This
example uses planters to protect pedestrians
waiting to cross the road.
~
~
~!f"l;,j
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.rlchassoc.com
SECTION 4
25 OF 46
11/27/2007
""'of
!l
SdIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
~~
~
~!!;,\!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
4.5 Signage
Rich and Associates recommend the following five types of parking signs that
increases drivers' wayfinding experience. Often signs are combined in
wayfinding sign programs, in this case it is not necessary to use two signs that
serve the some purpose.
These include:
Introduction:
Directional:
Location:
Identification:
Wayfinding:
Introduction parking signage alerts drivers approaching the
downtown of the locations of the publicly owned, off-street
parking lots. This type of signage is distinctive in color and size,
and it con be characterized by unique logos. The signs display
the names of the off-street parking lots and the names of their
streets. The signs are located on the street, and are mounted on
poles of standard heights.
Directional-parking signage is distinct in color, size and logo and
directs drivers to off-street parking areas. The signs are mounted
on poles at standard heights, on the streets.
Parking location signage complements the directional parking
signage. The signs hove arrows pointing to the off-street lots. The
signs are mounted on poles at standard heights and located on-
street.
Identification signage is placed at the entry of each parking lot.
The nome of the parking area is identified and the type of
parking available at the parking area is listed on the signage.
The identification signage is distinctive in color and size, and it is
located on 0 pole at 0 lower height.
Wayfinding signs are placed at the points of pedestrian
entry/exit to parking lots and structures. The sign is 0 mop
illustrating the downtown area that points out the various shops
or attractions that con be found. These types of signs are
placed at locations easily found by 0 pedestrian and ore
intended to help that person orient themselves to the downtown
area, such that they con locate their destination and then be
able to return to where they parked.
SECTION 4
26 OF 46
11/27/2007
,
L
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
""'of
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
Figure 48: Parking Sign Type Examples
Introduction SiQn
Location SiQn
Direction SiQn
~
~
~\$l!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
27 OF 46
11/27/2007
""'..
!;i
SdIIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Identification Sian
This identification sign has 4" text lettering. The parking symbol or identification logo is
approximately 26 inches in height.
SECTION 4
28 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
R,\s;t\
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!1'S;!!
a<yo<
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
WavfindinQ SiQn
, <
":~
>',',c
^ '.
, ~,..<~
@
,~,.~-<"",-,.-.-."
'~,
~c.,:~,.--'-'~";
J
I
"
This is an example of combining a vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding sign. The use of a
map for the pedestrian wayfinding is very beneficial.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
29 OF 46
11/27/2007
""..
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
S.aIIn.1
The general qualities of good signage include the tollowing aspects:
. Use of common logos and colors.
. Placement at or near eye level.
. Use of reflective, durable material.
. All five types used in conjunction to guide motorist and pedestrian
activity .
o Entrances to the downtown need introduction signage.
o Routes through the downtown need directional and location
signage.
o Pedestrian routes to and from major customer /Visitor parking
areas need wayfinding signs.
. Parking areas need identification signage.
o Conveying parking rates, hours of operation. maximum
durations, validation availability, and name of parking lot.
Desian Specific Criteria Recommendations:
. In general, sign lettering should be 4 inches in height. Smaller lettering
may be difficult to see and cause traffic slow-downs as drivers read signs
before entering a parking area.
. Depending on the location for the signs, some may need State
Department of Transportation approval before installation. The City
Engineering Department will need to be consulted on specific locations
that fall under State control and the various regulations that may need to
be met.
. Logos and sign colors can be customized to suit the communities desired
design criteria. The important eiement is to be sure that signs can be read
easily by being a distinctive color that stands out from background colors
of adjacent buildings.
. The signs colors and logos need to be consistent for ease of
understanding and quick visual reference by drivers.
. Sign programs are usually best undertaken at a City-wide level and
Include all the City's signs. The comprehensive nature of a large scale
sign program helps ensure that all forms of wayfinding signs (vehicular and
pedestrian) are taken into account.
. Vehicular wayfinding needs to be laid out initially in a coordinated fashion
to determine what the preferred entry points to the community should be.
Often directed traffic flow is a more efficient option that allows the
community to take advantage of planned vehicle routes and entry
points. A key 'rule of thumb' is that fewer, well thought out and weil
placed signs are far better than too many signs scattered randomly
throughout a community.
SECTION 4
30 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!U!;.\;\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
~
!\!f;1!
a.,,,,
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
Satina
. Vehicular wayfinding should include directional arrows to key destination
places such as theaters, museums, shopping districts, etc" used in
conjunction with the parking directional signs to allow a driver to quickly
orient themselves to their destination and best parking options. Arrows
should always be oriented to indicate forward left or right movement,
Reverse arrows or arrows indicating that a destination has been passed
should be avoided to reduce confusion.
Summary
. Signage
Cost:
Between $50,000 and $200,000 depending on the
number and type of signs.
Customer/visitor experience of Salina will be greatly
enhanced by a comprehensive new sign program,
as will the overall perception of Salina as a quaiity
destination place.
City is working with consultant
City /SDI
Existing signs are poor at best and should be
replaced. Navigating from the highway to the
downtown and back to the highway is difficult for
people unfamiliar with the City and a number of
the parking signs are confusing.
Consider the associated costs as an investment
with long-term results that will champion Salina's
image. Salina should consider naming all of the
parking lots to aid in customerjvisitor wayfinding.
Naming can be colors or street intersections (keep
it simple).
Benefit:
Action Time:
Responsibility:
Issue Addressed:
Additional Comments:
4.6 Marketing
Marketing is one of the most important aspects of a successful parking system.
Marketing should be used every time there is a change to the parking system and
should be directed towards downtown employers, employees and
customers/visitors. It is very important to help encourage downtown employees
to park in the long-term parking areas to preserve the on-street parking for
customers and visitors. Additionally, an individual's perception of Salina is greatly
enhanced if they know ahead of time where that can park and what it may cost.
Materials can include direct mailings, brochures, maps, kiosks, on-line web pages
or articles in magazines, newspapers, etc. Information contained in the
marketing material should include location, up-coming changes, pricing,
regulations, fine payment options and any other information relating to the
parking system.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
31 OF 46
11/27/2007
...,..
!i
SaIln.l
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SDI has created a flyer that lists the downtown businesses and has a map of
parking in the downtown. The parking map would become even more beneficial
II it included the durations of parking both on-slreet and off-street. It would be
helpful to promote free parking in the downtown as well as the locations 01 long
term lols lor customers/visilors who plan to spend the entire day downtown.
These maps could be placed on kiosks, handed out by businesses, as well as
parking enlorcement slaff. An example of a detailed parking map is shown on
the nexl page.
Signs are a useful way to market parking. Catchy phrases that designate long
term lots can be used to let customersjvisitors know where to park. Banners can
be used to identify parking areas according to color schemes, names 01 parking
lois, or themes letting customersjvisitors know where they parked.
Example 01 using banners 10 define a districl or area in
Lawrence, KS. Banners can also be used to market parking.
Manhattan, KS uses
banners within a
parking lot.
SECTION 4
32 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
'NWW.richassoc.com
8l:
~
!Hf~
I
I
""''''
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
On-Street Parking 2 hours free unless
otherwise noted.
Public Off-street Parking
I:.lm
. 2 hour free wstomer parking
. 8 hour free employee and customer long-term parking
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC,
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~~!! www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
33 OF 46
11/27/2007
Otr9f
!l
5aIIn.l
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Summary
Cost: Budget $7,000 per year for on-going marketing
efforts, Banners could be covered under the sign
program.
Benetit: Customerjvisitor experience of Salina will be greatly
enhanced. Also helps to encourage employees to
park in long-term lots, providing a greater effective
supply of parking for customers and visitors
Action Time: Spring 2008 - ongoing monthly
Responsibility: City ISDI
Issue Addressed: Employee parking on-street and the general
misconception by downtown employers that on-
street parking should be used by employees.
Additional Comments: Consider combining parking information with other
promotional and downtown publications to help
lower costs and reach a larger audience.
4.7 Parking Requirements for Current and Future
4.7,1 Parking Enterprise Fund
Parking operations in Salina should be treated as an enterprise fund where all
revenues from parking go into the fund and the fund pays for the operation of
parking. Currently, all parking revenues go into the General Fund.
One concept would be to continue the revenue (less expenses) that currently
goes into the General Fund. and then deposit any revenue above and beyond
that to the parking fund, Ideally though, the parking enterprise fund would
receive all parking revenue and be responsible for all parking related expenses.
This would include enforcement as well. This also means that the General Fund
would not receive parking revenue.
4.7.2 Parking Development Costs, Parking Improvement Costs and
Financing
While there were no immediate recommendations for a parking structure, this
section covers possible parking structure development costs and how they may
be financed, The construction costs for a parking structure of approximately 300
spaces which would be considered the minimal number of spaces for scaies of
economy, Is estimated to range from $15,000 to $18,000 per space, Project soft
costs without iand costs are generally between 17 and 20 percent and then
finance costs are between 7 and 10 percent of the project costs.
SECTION 4
34 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
~
~
!V!;~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\lfM
""'..
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
Scltina
There are other costs tor parking improvements such as new signs, lot
improvement etc, No specific funding mechanism has been identified though
there are several options.
. The first is to fund projected capital costs and increased operating costs
from increased revenues based on the General Fund receiving the net
revenue from parking fixed at the projected 2007 level.
. Use the existing Business Improvement District to fund improvements,
. Federal funding with highway/transit funds may be possible depending on
the project which would have to incorporate some type of multi-modal
functions. The process is lengthy and there is competition from other
projects/cities for these dollars.
4,7,3 Timing for Additional Parking Development
Parking deveiopment in downtown Salina will need to be coordinated with
demand to ensure that as development occurs the City will have the ability to
decide when to begin to consider a parking structure.
Deciding when to initiate the parking structure will depend first and foremost on
financial constraints, However, deciding when development demands warrant
the parking structure is a relatively straightforward calculation. Rich and
Associates prepared the following formula to assist the City as a decision making
tool. The way the model works is to use building gross floor area (existing and
proposed) as the variable in a decision making flow chart that will assist with
determining when new parking demand justifies a new parking structure,
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, ING.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
35 OF 46
11/27/2007
atpt;Jt!
!:i
SdIIna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
New Parking Threshold Calculation Worksheet
Part A: Determining Floor Area
Total Built Gross Floor Area For Entire Downtown:
(+) Proposed New Gross Floor Area:
(=) Total Existing and Proposed New Gross Floor Area:
Part B: Determining Parking Need
Total Existing and Proposed New Gross Floor Area:
(X) 2.37 Parking Stalls Per 1,000 Square Feet Or 0.004:
(=) Total Parking Stalls Demanded:
(-) Existing Off-Street Parking:
(=) New Parking Demanded:
Part C: Decision Guide
New Parking Demanded:
(X) 85%:
(=) Minimum New Parking Needed:
(if) Minimum New Parking Needed Is:J Optimal Capacity of the New Parking
Structure
Then: Initiate Project
(Or) Minimum New Parking Needed Is: Optimal Capacity of Next New Parking
Structure
Then: Delay Initiation Until the Above Condition Is Met
SECTION 4
36 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
WWW.richassoc.com
~
~
~!S!!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~~
~
!\!fJ!
Otyof
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SdIfna
4.7.4 New Parking
While it has been determined that additional parking is not required at this time or
in the immediate to near future, Rich and Associates did identify five potential
sites that could be considered for long term public parking. The criteria for the.
site selection were:
. city ownership of the property
. location of the site in relationship to current and future demand generators
including properties that may be reoccupied
. ingress and egress points for vehicles and pedestrians
. no buildings were torn down as a result
Map 6 on page 46 shows the location of the five sites. All of the sites are existing
surface parking lots, therefore, the added spaces provided in the parking
structure will be reduced by the surface parking spaces lost to generate a net
add figure. .
To review each potential site, Rich and Associates obtained scaled engineer
drawings from the city. These drawings did not indicate any buried utility
information or utilities on poles. Several of the lots contained trash dumpsters that
are used by adjacent businesses.
The city code for parking calls for a parking space dimension with a minimum of
eight feet-six inches of width and a 24 foot wide drive aisle, assuming 90 degree
parking and two way traffic. With angled parking (60 degree) and with one way
traffic, the code calls for an aisle width of 17. These dimensions affect the site
feasibility of potential parking structures on these sites. If we consider a two
module parking structure (a module consists of a stall/aisle/stall configuration)
and the out-to-out dimension (including the column protrusion), then the
dimension needed for a layout with 90 degree stalls and a two way traffic aisle is
126 feet wide. With a layout (of parking spaces) at 60 degree with a one way
traffic aisle, the width needed to build a parking structure is 118 feet.
The typical code for parking dimensions when using 90 degree parking is 18 foot
long parking stalls and 24 foot aisles for a total of 60 feet. For two modules
including column protrusion, the total out-to-out width would be 122 feet. If the
City of Salina's code could be modified, this may make a parking structure on
some sites feasible. .
The following is a diagram of parking space dimensions.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
37 OF 46
11/27/2007
Clr)'91
!':i
Sd:Ilna
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
I] ~lr flllr
i !>'....}
. ?(
)' :r
~ ~
.f"'.....f
S>~
r\~
ill
9
~
917 PARJ<INCl
SNC1E ClfI DOUII..E 81RIPlN<l
9~
t~
ANClLE PARJ<INCl
ONE WAY
i>~
.~ ~
TVl
VARIES
FROM <=1'-=-6"
TO 12'-1"
DEF'ENOIN6 ON ANGLE
ANClLE PARJ<INCl
TWO WAYS
'" FROM 11'."..
IlJ TO 1<=1'-8'
~ OEPENDI"" ON AN6LE
"
'" FROM 11'."..
w TO 1c:!'-8'
~ DEPENDI"" ON AN6LE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
~,!S;;\;!
I
I
SECTION 4
38 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, ING.
PARKING CONSULTANTS. PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!\,~S;!;;!
""'01
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN f";..
SalIna
The following is a review of the potential sites:
Site 1
This site consists of two parking lots (lots 6C and 6D) on Ash Street between Santa
Fe and 7th Street. The lot contains approximately 109 parking spaces. The
approximate site dimensions available for a parking structure are 243 feet in the
east/west dimension and 154 feet in the north/south dimensions. These site
dimensions allow for a 90 degree two way traffic flow design.
The drawback to this site is that a parking structure would eliminate access to the
alley from the north. Parking structure layouts developed for this site would
typically contain up to 86 parking spaces per floor. .
Site 2
This is city Lot 6A and is located on 7th Street between Ash Street and Iron Avenue.
The lot consists of approximately 85 spaces. The site is approximately 335 feet long
and 117 feet wide. At this width, a two module 60 degree layout would need at
least.118 feet of length. Therefore, either the code would need to be changed or
there would need to be encroachment either on the sidewalk or alley side of the
site. The layout on this site would be a two module structure with both sides
sloping in opposite directions (called a scissor design). There could be
approximately 94 spaces generated on each supported parking floor.
This site contains an area for trash receptacles, and the truck access to these is
from the lot entrance off of 7'h Street. If a parking structure was placed on this
site, the trash receptacle would have to be moved to allow access by the waste
truck and any deliveries by trucks would need to be outside of the parking
structure.
Site 3
Site 3 is a city owned parking lot (Lot 4A) and is located on the corner of Walnut
and 7th Street. The lot contains approximately 151 spaces. The lot is
approximately 494 feet long and 120 feet wide including the sidewalk on the
alley side (east side of the lot). The lot contains two trash receptacles: one in the
southeast corner and the other on the east side of the lot approximately 120 feet
from Walnut Street. In addition there is a small building in the middle of the lot
(restroom). A two module 60 degree angle parking layout can be developed on
this site. With such a long dimension in the north/south direction, oniy a portion of
the site would be needed for a parking structure footprint. This would allow for
several options.
. First. a parking structure could be developed for part of the site (minimum
length between 290 and 330 feet) and to its maximum desired height
(possibly three supported levels or about 44 feet to the top of the finished
floor), The remainder of the parking lot could continue to operate as a
surface parking lot. Potential expansion of the parking structure would be
horizontal, which is the least disruptive to the existing parking and
potentially less costly than a vertical expansion.
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
39 OF 46
11/27/2007
oty9'!
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SdIlnd
. The second option would be to build the parking structure to the desired
capacity as above, but then utilize the balance of the parking iot as a
development site for another building type. This option would provide
repiacement parking, additional parking for the areas and parking for the
development.
Since there are currently two trash receptacles in the existing parking lot,
consideration would need to be given to relocation them, preferably to the
remaining surface lot.
Site 4
Site 4 consists of the city lots 3A and 3B. The site is on 5" Street north of Iron
Avenue. Due to the limited width of this site, 60 degree angled parking would be
required. The current length of the site is insufficient to accommodate a parking
structure. If. however the bank drive through to the north could be acquired, this
would allow enough length to accommodate a parking structure.
Site 5
Site 5 consists of City lot 2B. The site is located on 5'h Street south of Iron Avenue.
Due to the width of this site (approximately 120 feet) 60 degree angled parking
would be required. The length of the site (235 feet) is insufficient to
accommodate a reasonable, angled parked, one way traffic flow parking
structure.
Parkina Development Costs
Rich and Associates prepared Project and Finance Costs for a hypothetical
parking structure to demonstrate the costs involved. First the construction costs
were estimated. For this exampie we assumed 2007 dollars. Underground site
issues such as utility relocation, underground streams etc. would require a
separate assessment and therefore these costs are not included. We also
assumed spread footings and a fa<;:ade that was pre cast with brick on the stair
and elevator towers In this estimate of development costs.
Table 4A on the next page shows the example calculation of project and finance
costs. We have assumed a 400 space parking structure with general obligation
bonds.
1. Construction Costs: Based on average costs per space is approximately
$17,500 (assuming 2007 construction). This cost assumed an architectural
fa<;:ade as described above. The assumptions also assumed spread
footings which will need to be confirmed by soil borings and a
geotechnical report.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
!1~!;!
I
I
SECTION 4
40 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a.y",
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SdIina
2. Professional Fees: These are the design fees and reimbursed expenses. It
assumes a conventional design/bid scenario.
3. Insurance: This is insurance held by the City for the project and does not
eliminate insurance provided by the designer and the contractor.
4. Legal and Accounting: The legal and accounting costs for the City during
the course of construction.
5. Geo- Tech and Survey: Fees for a survey and topographical of the site
and soil borings and report on foundations.
6. Contingency: Rich has used a 10% contingency for the design and
construction to cover possible design issues and other issues during
construction.
7. Project Costs to be Financed: Project costs represent the construction
hard and soft costs.
8. Finance Term: The term of the bond is 20 years. A longer amortization
schedule is also possible.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9. Interest Rate: Based on an un-rated bond issue with no insurance and
rates as of the second quarter of 2007. The rate assumed a general
obligation type bond issue.
10. Term of Construction: The construction period is estimated at 1 year. This
depends on the time of year that the project is started and site availability
for lay-down for example.
11. Interest During Construction: All bond proceeds are received up front and
draws are made on these funds to pay for construction. This represents
capitalized interest for the term of construction.
12. Interest Income: The bond proceeds are put into an interest bearing
account and generate interest income that is used to offset costs.
13. Legal and Accounting Fees: These are the legal fees and accounting
fees of the bond issuer.
14. Debt Service Reserve: No debt service reserve was assumed.
15. Financing Fees: These are the points paid to the bond underwriter.
I
I
I
16. Cost of Issuance: These are expenses such as printing of offering/official
statements. \.
17. Total Financing Fees: Total soft costs for financing.
18. Addition of the Project Costs: from line 7.
19. Total Amount of Bonds: Total of lines 17 and 18.
I
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~I~!! www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
41 OF 46
11/27/2007
atrl?'
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
SalIna
20. Debt Service: The annual principal and interest payment. assuming a
level payment each year.
In this example, the annual principal payment would be $713,000. In addition
there would be operating expenses that would vary depending on the method
of operation. The range in 2007 dollars would be from $175 for a cashier-less
system to over $300 for a system with cashiers.
~
~
~!f!t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
42 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
""'Of
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
Sdtina
Table 4A
C:ITY OF SALINA
EXAMPLE PROJECT AND FINANCE COSTS
400 SPACE PARKING STRUCTURE
1 Construction Cost 400 x $17,500
2 Profes'sional Fees (ArchitecturallEnglneer1ng& Reimbursed)
3 Insurance
4 Legal and Accounting
5 G,eotech and Survey
6 Contingency
$7,000,000
$365,000
$30,000
$25,000
$35,000
$700,000
7 Project.Cost to be Financed
$6,175,000
8 Financing Term
9 Interest Rate
1.0 Term of Construction
Financing Costs
11lntere~t Du'ring C:onstrllction
12 Interest Income
40% @ 1%
'13 Legal & Accounting Fees
14 Debt.5ervice Res'erve
@ 1.00%
15 Financing Fees (Points)
16 Cost of Issuance
@2,00%
@ 0.50%
20 Years
5%
12 Months
$444,000
(~44,oOO)
$89,000
None
$178,000
$44,000
17
18
19
20
Total Financing Costs
+ Project 90!it to Be Financed
Total Amount of Bonds
Debt Service
$711,000
$8.175.000
$8,886,000
$713.000
~ RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
~ PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
~~!;! www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
43 OF 46
11/27/2007
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
-
- -
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
CING STUDY POlENTlAL FUTURE SITES ~rlrld"'CO
~AI'lO:"ilt("
Pll.lIIlen
FOR PARKING STRUClURES ~ ~"~".."."
[HE CITY OF <-00''''''''0''''
~ J~~:;.1:~:';';
IALlNA 0 RICH *~'.~~-::..
BlOGK . ftIUiW(;\ATU .~...1l'''''''''''
5CH.f,N,T.5
DATE,1O-02-o1
. DRAHi BY'. 6l't:.
51\Dr """^
NA KANSAS lOGA noN ''''
. MAP 6 PAGe 44 OF'
-----------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_of
CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN ~
SalIna
4.7.5 Rich and Associates was requested to look into the impacts on
parking and related safety if:
1. Santa Fe Avenue was converted to a three-lane roadway rather than
four-Jane.
Overall, this would tend to have a positive impact on the parking on Santa Fe
Avenue. Typically. fewer lanes of traffic tend help to slow fraffic down and
create a more pedestrian friendly area. Thus, it would most likely be easier for
pedestrians to cross the road, and vehicies to park due to a slower rate of
speed on Santa Fe Avenue.
There are occasions where reducing the number of lanes by widening the lanes
can speed up traffic rather than slow it down. Vehicles can be slowed with
traffic calming options such as medians or bump outs. These as well as other
traffic calming options should be considered before removing a lane.
If it is decided to reduce the number of lanes on Santa Fe Avenue, a
transportation engineer should be hired to determine if bike lanes can be
added. This could potentially help in slowing traffic and also promote a more
pedestrian friendly downtown. This will also promote the use of alternate
modes of transportation, thus possibly creating a slight ease in parking demand
in the future.
2, Santa Fe Avenue had a median within the inner lane for beautification,
except for the area needed for intersection leff-turn movements.
This is option is very simiiar to the option above though in itself is a traffic
calming measure. Overall, this would tend to have a positive impact on the
parking on Santa Fe Avenue. Typically fewer lanes ot traffic tend to slow traffic
down and create a more pedestrian triendly area. The roadway can become
easier for pedestrians to cross as the median creates a safety zone to rest on a
wide road. A median couid make it easier for vehicies to park due to a siower
rate of speed on Santa Fe Avenue.
Again, if it is decided to reduce the number of lanes on Santa Fe Avenue, a
transportation engineer should be hired to determine if bike lanes can be
added. This couid potentiaily help in slowing traffic and also promote a more
pedestrian friendly downtown.
This option would create a gateway or entrance into the core downtown
creating a clear definition of where the downtown begins and ends. This
option best enhances the overall pedestrian experience in the downtown.
~
~
~1S:!!
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS - PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
SECTION 4
45 OF 46
11/27/2007
""..
~ CITY OF SALINA DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN
Sdllna
3. Backup movements angled vs. parallel:
Traffic Flow Impediments (1): The ingress and egress time for a vehicle to park
needs to be taken into consideration. Parallel parking takes on average 21
seconds for a vehicle to complete a parking maneuver. Conversely, angle
parking takes 11 to 12 seconds helping to reduce the impediment time to other
traffic.
Accident Incidences (1): Diagonal parking is considered by some experts to
increase the opportunity for accidents along a roadway. However, what is
misunderstood is that the diagonal parking also acts as a traffic-calming device,
reducing travel speed and statistically accident rates attributed to diagonal
parking are only higher on high speed, high traffic volume roadways. While
diagonal parking may increase the number of accidents, the severity of the
accidents is often reduced by slower travel speeds and if the traffic flow is low
and the speeds correspondingly low, the severity of accidents can be found to
be less.
Pedestrian Safety (1): Diagonal parking increases the distance between the
vehicle travel lane and pedestrian activity on the sidewalks. Also, diagonal
parking allows the driver of a vehicle to enter and exit in relative safety being
away from the travel lane. Parallel parking on the other hand forces drivers to
enter and exit vehicles adjacent to a travel lane. Further, the reduction of Santa
Fe from four to two lanes reduces the distance that a pedestrian has to travel to
cross Santa Fe. Lane reduction to two travei lanes, traffic calming (slower vehicle
travel rates) and the use of bump-outs at intersections all add to enhance
pedestrian safety by reducing thepotentiai for vehicle/pedestrian conflict.
Economic Activity (1): Additional on-street parking, slower travel and greater
pedestrian activity are the key elements of the most successful urban areas. This
is particularly important in areas with contiguous commercial and retail space.
The benefits of diagonal parking have been found in most instances to outweigh
the potential problems and this is most clearly defined by recent position
changes being expressed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). This
authoritative body comprised of traffic engineering and planning professionals
has identified the benefits and misconceptions about diagonal parking over the
past several years.
The 'rule of thumb' (1) is that if there are more than 10,000 vehicles using a given
roadway per day, then parallel parking is recommended. If however, less than
10,000 vehicles use a roadway per day than angle parking can be considered.
(/) The information and statistics provided are adopted directly from "Changing On-Street Parallel
Parking to Angle Parking" by John Edwards PE, ITE Journal. FebnJary 2002.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
==:0:
!H~.li
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 4
46 OF 46
11/27/2007
RICH AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
PARKING CONSULTANTS. PLANNERS
www.richassoc.com
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:~
~
~
RICH
/I. ASSOCIATES
CIty'"
~
Sc1IIna
~_n
City of Salina - Manager Suryey
In order to assist the City of Salina with planning its parking needs for the Business Improvement District, we ask for your
cooperation in completing this brief survey. Please return the survevs bv Februarv 16. 2007 via fax to Salina Downtown,
Inc. (785)825-7216 or mail to Salina Downtown, Inc., PO Box 1065, Salina KS 67401 OR via fax to Rich and Associates
(248) 353-3830 or mail to Rich and Associates, Inc., 21800 W. 10 Mile Road, Suite 209, Southfield, MI 48075.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1. B'usiness Name:
2. Business Address:
3. Type of Business: D Retail D Office Professional D Medical Office D Public Use/Governmental
D Restaurant D Service D Financial D Other
4. Own D or lease D this location?
5. Square Footage Totals:
Primary selling or office space:
Storage:
Total:
6. Parking Availability within the Downtown:
Number of Owned Parking Spaces:
Number of Leased Parking Spaces:
7. Where do your employees park?
8. How many parking stalls are dedicated for your employees?
9. Do you subsidize employee parking? DYes D No
10. If yes to # 9, how much per employee? $
11. Number of employees: Full-time:
s.f.
s.f.
s.f.
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Business Hours
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
Part-time:
/ Day:
Night:
12. Number of daily customers or visitors: Summer
Daytime (until 6 P.M.)
Evening (after 6 P.M.)
Winter
Daytime (until 6 P.M.)
Evening (after 6 P.M.)
13. In your estimation, what percentage of your customers or visitors are people already downtown for another purpose
such as work, shopping, business, etc.: %
14. Please circle your response or fill in the blank to the following opinion statements:
1-strongly disagree 2-disagree 3-neither agree or disagree 4-agree 5-stronglyagree
a) The cost for providing new parking should be shared by the City, private sector and
users.
b) Only the City should pay for parking improvements.
c) I would encourage my employees to park further away in order to provide more
parking for customers and visitors.
d) I would encourage my employees to park further away at a parking deck.
e) I would encourage my employees to park further away and use a shuttle.
f) Off-street parking for customerslvisitors usage should be no more than?
g) The monthly cost of parking for downtown employees should be?
h) The daily cost of parking for downtown employees should be?
i) The fine for overtime parking should be?
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
$ per day
$ per month
$ per day
$
15. Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking on the back of this page.
Thank you for your participation.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ ~
~
;;:000
RICH
& ASSOCIATES
CIty..
!:.i
Sc1Iina
City of Salina - Employee Survey
~o.n
The City of Salina has undertaken a' Parking study to aid in address'ing current parking issues and to help develop a
strategy for future parking improvements for the Business Improvement District. This survey has been developed
specifically for employees of downtown businesses, Please take a few moments and complete the survey bv Fridav.
Februarv 16. 2007. Surveys can be returned to your empioyer or via fax to Rich and Associates (248) 353-3830 or mail to
Rich and, Associates, Inc., 21800 W. 10 Mile Road, Suite 209, Southfield, M148075.
1. Employment Status:
D Full-time (more than 30 hours per week)
2. Employment Classification:
D Professional
D Retail Sales
D Part-time (lesS than 30 hours per week)
D Service (including restaurant)
D Medical
D Clerical
DOther
3. How do you generally come to work downtown?
D Drive and park D Ride with friend or relative
D Dropped off D Walk
D Bus
D Other
D Ride bicycle
4. If you drive when you come downtown to work where do you usually park?
D City lot D Privately owned lot Dan-street
5. Who pays for your parking?
D Employer pays
D Combination
D I pay
D It's free
6. How much does your parking cost, if not free? $
7. Please circle your response or fill in the blank to the following opinion statements:
D Residentiai Street
D I do not pay
1-strongly disagree 2-disagree 3-neither agree or disagree 4-agree 5-stronglyagree
j) There are an adequate number of parking spaces for downtown employees.
k) The parking for downtown employees is reasonably close to my place of work.
I) If the City constructed a well-designed and secure parking structure I would use it.
m) I would pay more to park closer to work.
n) Off-street parking for customers/visitors usage should be no more than?
0) The monthly cost of parking for downtown employees should be?
p) The daily cost of parking for downtown employees should be?
q) The fine for overtime parking should be?
r) How many of the downtown shops or services do you typically visit during the week?
s) Name of the city/town/township where you reside: (CitylTownlTownship)
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
$ per day
$ per month
$ per day
$
9. Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below or on the back of this page.
Thank you for your participation.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ ~
~
;;:"llo
RICH
& ASSOCIATES
CIty'"
!:i
Salina
"'_0
City of Salina - Public Survey
The'City of Salina has undertaken a Parking study to aid in addressing current parking issues and to help develop a
strategy for future parking improvements for the Business Improvement District This survey has been developed
specifically for employees of downtown businesses. Please take a few moments and complete the survev bv Fridav.
Februarv 16. 2007. Surveys can be returned via fax to Rich and Associates (248) 353-3830 or mail to Rich and,
Associates, Inc., 21800 W. 10 Mile Road, Suite 209, Southfield, M148075.
8. Please circle your response or fill in the blank to the following opinion statements:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1-strongly disagree 2-disagree 3-neither agree or disagree 4-agree 5-stronglyagree
t) There are an adequate number of parking spaces downtown. 2 3 4 5
u) The parking for downtown is reasonably close to the places I frequent downtown. 2 3 4 5
v) If the City constructed a well-designed and secure parking structure I would use it 1 2 3 4 5
w) I would pay more to park closer. 1 2 3 4 5
x) Off-street parking for customers/visitors usage should be no more than? $ per hour
y) Off-street parking for customers/visitors usage should be no more than? $ per day
z) The fine for overtime parking should be? $
aa) How many of the downtown shops or services do you typically visit during the week?
bb) Name of the city/town/township where you reside:
(City/Town/Township)
10. Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below or on the back of this page.
Thank you for your participation.
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
I
'I