This document summarizes the Right Size Parking project which aims to balance parking supply and demand. It finds that on average, multifamily buildings supply 1.4 parking spaces per unit but only utilize 1 space per unit. A statistical model was developed that can predict parking demand. Code analyses found that most jurisdictions require more parking than predicted. Demonstration projects are assessing parking pricing, shared parking districts, and developing model codes and parking management strategies.

1. Rail~Volu6on
-­‐
October
23,
2013
Dan
Bertolet
–
VIA
Architecture
and
Planning
TOOLS
TO
BALANCE
SUPPLY

2. • Best
prac6ces
research
• Parking
u6liza6on
surveys
• Online
demand
calculator
• Stakeholder
engagement
• Model
code
• Parking
management
• TDM
and
pricing
• Demonstra*on
projects
OUR
PROJECT
OUR
PARTNERS
Op*mize
parking
in
mul*family
buildings

3. WHAT
IS
RIGHT-­‐SIZE
PARKING?
Right-­‐sizing
parking
means
striking
a
balance
between
parking
supply
and
demand.
• Oversupply
can
be
an
impediment
to
achieving
a
wide
range
of
community
goals
• Undersupply
can
create
the
risk
of
neighborhood
impacts
and
loss
of
real
estate
marketability

4. WHY
DOES
RSP
MATTER?
• Parking
is
expensive
to
build
• The
cost
of
parking
raises
housing
prices
• Excess
parking
compromises
ac6ve
transporta6on
modes,
transit
efficiency,
and
urban
design
• Parking
encourages
driving,
which
congests
roadways
and
increases
greenhouse
gases
emissions

5. WHAT’S
THE
PROBLEM?
???
• Exis6ng
tools
and
data
are
general
and
outdated
• Dysfunc6onal
market
for
parking

6. UTILIZATION
SURVEY
FINDINGS
• Surveyed
parking
u6liza6on
at
220
mul6family
buildings
across
King
County
• On
average,
parking
is
supplied
at
1.4
spaces
per
dwelling
unit,
but
is
only
used
at
1.0
spaces
per
unit

7. PREDICTIVE
MODEL
Geographic
Variables
• transit
service
• popula6on
+
job
density
Building
Variables
• bedroom
count
• parking
price
• affordable
units
• residen6al
density
• average
rent
R2
=
.80

8. www.rightsizeparking.org
THE
RSP
WEB
CALCULATOR
Map-­‐based
Parcel-­‐level
es*mates
Customized
scenario-­‐building
Impact
of
unbundling
rent
and
parking
price

9. CODE
GAP
ANALYSIS
Outside
Seaale,
82%
of
parcels
require
parking
greater
than
model
predic6on

10. MODEL
CODE
• Market-­‐based
Approach
Ø Remove
parking
minimums
• Context-­‐based
Approach
Ø Op*mize
minimums
with
context-­‐based
adjustments
hap://metro.kingcounty.gov/up/projects/right-­‐size-­‐parking/pdf/140110-­‐rsp-­‐model-­‐code.pdf

11. PARKING
PRICING
• 62%
of
proper6es
surveyed
unbundled
parking
price
from
the
price
of
rent
• Residents
charged
>
10%
of
monthly
rent
for
parking
used
only
half
as
many
spaces
as
residents
charged
<
5%
• Elas6city
is
stronger
in
urban
areas
where
there
are
beaer
alterna6ves
to
driving

12. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS
Policy
and
Model
Code
Pricing
and
TDM
Shared
Parking
Four
ci*es:
Seaale,
Kirkland,
Tukwila,
Kent
Two
affordable
housing
providers:
Beacon
Development
and
Hopelink
CDC
partner:
District
shared
parking
for
Capitol
Hill
neighborhood

13. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
CODE
Kirkland,
WA
(pop.
84,000)
• Assess
minimums
for
mul6family
citywide
• Gap
analysis
and
u6liza6on
surveys
showed
minimums
significantly
above
demand
in
several
MF
zones
• City
has
ini6ated
process
to
update
code:
Ø MF
minimums
will
be
standardized
across
zones
and
set
approximately
in
line
with
the
RSP
calculator
Ø Adding
context-­‐based
adjustments
for
unit
bedrooms

14. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
CODE
Kent,
WA
(pop.
124,000)
• Assess
MF
minimums
and
on-­‐street
management
for
historic
downtown
with
commuter
rail
sta6on
• Code
review
and
gap
analysis
indicate
MF
minimums
could
be
reduced
modestly
to
reflect
transit
access
• U6liza6on
surveys
found
excess
supply
of
both
public
on-­‐
street
parking
and
commercial
off-­‐street
parking
Ø In
near-­‐term,
city
will
focus
on
op*mizing
the
on-­‐
street
system,
e.g.
signage,
striping,
refined
*me
limits,
enforcement
Ø Longer-­‐term
intent
to
encourage
shared
parking

15. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
CODE
Tukwila,
WA
(pop.
19,000)
• Evaluate
parking
issues
in
light
rail
sta6on
area
• Is
Hide
&
Ride
an
issue?
Ø Sound
Transit
parking
surveys
showed
25%
u*liza*on
on
surrounding
streets;
confirmed
by
recent
observa*on
• Is
the
RSP
calculator
valid
for
immigrant
popula6ons?
Ø U*liza*on
surveys
of
24
mul*family
sites
showed
no
significant
differences
in
demand
• Web
survey
showed
61%
of
residents
pay
for
parking
at
home

16. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
CODE
Sea^le,
WA
(pop.
620,000)
• Residen*al
Permit
Zones
Ø Research
found
li^le
innova*on
in
other
ci*es
Ø Pricing
refinements
could
improve
management
• Shared
parking
Ø Rules
on
sharing
are
unclear
and
limit
op*ons
Ø Code
should
explicitly
define
a
“share
list,”
as
in
Portland
Ø Code
should
explicitly
allow
sharing
below
the
minimum
• Parking
Maximums
Ø Tie
maximums
to
mode
split
goals

17. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
TDM
El
Centro
de
la
Raza
and
Beacon
Development
• Planned
112-­‐unit
affordable
housing
project
Ø Developing
a
comprehensive
TDM
Plan
for
the
project
to
support
a
balanced
parking
supply
and
minimize
neighborhood
impacts
Hopelink
• Exploring
mul6ple
TDM
strategies
at
several
of
their
exis6ng
low-­‐income
housing
proper6es
Ø Bike
parking,
Car2Go
memberships,
subsidized
transit
passes,
resident
“travel
training”,
on-­‐street
management

18. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
SHARED
PARKNG
District
Shared
Parking
Pilot
• Partnered
with
Capitol
Hill
Housing,
a
Seaale
CDC
• Rapidly
growing
n’hood
with
a
goal
to
reduce
need
for
new
parking
Ø Assess
poten*al
for
district
shared
parking
to
provide
be^er
access
to
currently
underu*lized
supply
Ø Develop
tools
and
incen*ves
to
create
a
system
of
priced
parking
that
will
connect
customers
with
providers

19. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS:
TRANSIT
PASS
ORCA
Mul*family
Development
Passport
• Comprehensive,
annual
transporta6on
pass
program
available
to
mul6family
property
owners
or
managers
• Reduced
price
-­‐
amenity
for
residents
• Reduces
demand
for
on-­‐site
parking
• May
qualify
projects
for
credit
in
green
building
cer6fica6on
programs
such
as
LEED

20. WHAT’S
NEXT:
PARK
&
RIDE
IN
MULTIFAMILY

21. RESOURCES
Right
Size
Parking
Calculator
www.rightsizeparking.org
Metro
Transit’s
Right
Size
Parking
Website
kingcounty.gov/RightSizeParking
Dan
Bertolet
VIA
Architecture
and
Planning
dbertolet@via-­‐architecture.com
206-­‐284-­‐5624
Daniel
Rowe
King
County
Metro
Project
Manager
Daniel.Rowe@kingcounty.gov
206-­‐263-­‐3586

22. Search
Instruc*ons
Map
Based
and
Video
View
Regional
Technical
Background
Parking
Use

23. Select
a
Parcel
or
Area
View
Parking
Ra*o
Build
a
Scenario

24. Adjust
Building
and
Parking
Specifica*ons
View
Change
in
Update
Parking
Ra*o

25. Adjust
Loca*on
Characteris*cs
View
Change
in
Update
Parking
Ra*o

26. Research
Objec6ves
1. Iden6fy
independent
variables,
both
from
a
theore6cal
framework
and
a
prac6cal
development
and
planning
standpoint,
to
be
tested
in
regression
analysis
2. Conduct
variables’
significance
in
predic6ng
parking
use
3. Develop
a
model
using
regression
analysis,
maintaining
that
all
variables
be
significant
and
highly
correlated.
4. Develop
a
website
tool
enabling
interac6ve
use
of
the
model
by
interested
stakeholders

27. Demonstra6on
Project:
Pricing/TDM
Project
Revenue:
Parking
Price
Elas*city
Project Description
Residential Units 150 150 150
Parking Spaces 75 150 300
Parking Ratio 0.5 1.0 1.5
Levels of Parking 1.3 2.6 3.9
Cost/ Profit
Stall Margin
$150 23% 19% 15%
$100 21% 15% 9%
$50 19% 11% 3%
Urban
Project
Pro
Forma
• 25,000
sf
site
• 6
story
building
• 640
sf/unit
• Underground
parking
• Land
at
$100/sf
• Unit
rent
at
$2.2/sf
• Cap
rate
at
5%

29. PARKING
PRICING
ELASTICITY
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Elas6city
at
$130
Countywide:
-­‐9%
Urban
:
-­‐47%
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Parking
U*liza*on
per
Unit
Monthly
Parking
Price
per
Stall
Countywide
Urban

30. STATISTICAL
MODEL
Independent Variable Transformation Coefficient Individual R Square Stepwise R Square
Constant NA 1.980910 NA NA
Gravity measure of Transit Frequency Natural log -0.066639 55.5% 55.5%
Percent of Units designated Affordable Square root -0.022966 27.6% 67.1%
Average Occupied Bedroom Count Inverse -0.360291 34.3% 73.7%
Gravity measure of Intensity (population + jobs) Inverse 35,353.047567 53.3% 76.2%
Units per Residential Square Feet Inverse 0.000139 17.1% 78.7%
Average Rent Inverse -154.420722 6.7% 80.0%
Parking Price as a fraction of Average Rent Square root -0.334655 18.1% 81.0%

31. CODE
GAP
ANALYSIS
• 61%
of
King
County
parcels
have
requirements
>
RSP
predic6on
• Outside
Seaale:
82%
of
parcels
have
requirements
>
RSP
predic6on
• Outside
Seaale:
ci6es
require
43%
more
parking
than
is
predicted
by
the
RSP
model

32. DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS
• Assess
the
market
for
pricing
and
financing
parking
• Develop
TDM
strategies
to
support
a
balanced
parking
supply
Policy
and
Model
Code
Pricing
and
TDM
District
Shared
Parking
• Develop
model
code,
parking
management,
and
neighborhood
mi6ga6on
strategies
designed
to
promote
RSP
outcomes
• Assess
poten6al
for
district
shared
parking
based
on
supply
• Develop
tools
to
price
parking
and
connect
customers

33. View
Impacts