geary_app_f perancangan terminal bus

7/28/2019 Geary_App_F Perancangan Terminal Bus

1/7

O:\BRT\Geary\CAC\Meeting 17 - 3.23.06\Parking MEM.doc Page 1 of 7

Memorandum

Date: 3.20.06 RE: Geary Citizens Advisory CommitteeMarch 23, 2006

To: Geary Citizens Advisory Committee

From: Julie Kirschbaum Senior Transportation Planner

Through: Tilly Chang Deputy Director for Planning

Subject: INFORMATION Provide Input on the Preliminary Parking Analysis for the GearyCorridor Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Study

SummaryMinimizing on-street parking loss is a high priority for the Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Study and isarticulated in both the study goals and the design principles. Each unique combination of physical designs and serviceplans was evaluated from Van Ness to 33 rd Avenue. Changes in the on-street parking supply vary by design andlocation. One option increases the net parking supply by 3 percent, while the remaining four options decrease theparking supply (if considered without mitigations). Mitigation strategies were developed to off-set reductions in theparking supply. Mitigation strategies include modifying the allocation of parking spaces by type and time period;converting metered parking on the side streets from parallel to angled; modifying the center-running designs tomaintain some angled parking; installing signage to identify off-street parking lots; and identifying opportunities forshared parking/valet parking. All of the potential mitigations will require extensive community involvement, inaddition to more detailed design work.We are seeking input on the preliminary parking analysis for the GearyCorridor BRT Study.

BACKGROUND

The Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Study is evaluating conceptual designs and service planchanges that improve transit travel times and reliability, as well as improve pedestrian safety andurban design on Geary Boulevard. The study team is currently in the process of evaluating theproject benefits and impacts by examining multiple metrics that group into the following categories:

Benefits.Transit Operations & Performance; Transit Rider Experience; Pedestrian Safety &Access; and Urban Design and Landscaping

Impacts/Constraints.Traffic & Parking Impacts; Capital & Operating Costs; andConstruction Impacts

Understanding how the proposed alternatives impact the existing parking supply is a key piece ofthe Studys evaluation framework and is part of the Traffic & Parking Impacts category. The rest ofthe evaluation results will be presented to the Geary Citizens Advisory Committee (GCAC) at theApril and May meetings. The completed evaluation framework will then be presented to thecommunity at the 3rd series of public workshops in June 2006.

The first part this memo documents the current estimates of parking impacts for each of theStudys alternatives. The second part of this memo describes potential mitigation strategies foraddressing locations where the on-street parking supply may be reduced.


2/7

O:\BRT\Geary\CAC\Meeting 17 - 3.23.06\Parking MEM.doc Page 2

DISCUSSION

The importance of retaining on-street parking has been part of the GCAC dialogue since theCommittee first started meeting in 2004. Not only does on-street parking benefit auto users, it alsoprovides a valuable buffer for pedestrians. Concerns about on-street parking loss are also frequentlyraised by local merchants and residents at community meetings. And minimizing on-street parking

loss was identified as one of the highest ranking priorities by participants at the December 2005public workshops.

All of the conceptual designs and service plans being considered for the Geary Corridor BRT Studywere developed based on the design principles and guidelines approved by the GCAC in December2006. One of the key design principles under Neighborhood Access is maintain on-street parking.Maintaining on-street parking is also consistent with the third study goal, Neighborhood Livability andCommercial Vitality and the objective to minimize the negative impacts of the project on localresidents and businesses.

On-street parking is currently provided on all blocks between Van Ness and 33 rd Avenue, with theexception of the short block between Park Presidio and 14th Avenue. For the majority of the

corridor, the on-street parking is parallel to the roadway; however, 30 degree angled parking isprovided on several block faces west of Park Presidio. Most of the parking is metered to increaseavailability and turnover for people who shop, eat and have appointments on Geary; although,several blocks near Masonic Avenue and west of 28th Avenue are not metered. The majority of themeters are enforceable from 9 am to 6 pm; however, we have heard from community members thatturnover is more limited at certain times of the day due to lax enforcement.

Parking Impacts: The parking impacts vary by alternative and by location. The total number of on-street spaces gained or lost per scenario is summarized in Table 1 and represents a conceptualplanning level estimate. The numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5 to reflect the conceptualnature of this stage of the study. As we refine the street designs over time, it is anticipated that theestimated parking impacts may change, and be higher or lower than the current estimates. For

example, blocks that require right turn pockets will lose an additional 2-3 spaces, and blocks withcurb extensions may lose 0-2 spaces, depending on the design of the bulbs.

The following combinations of physical designs and service plans have unique parking impacts:

Option 1A

physical design:Curbside BRT

service plan:All services in busway (BRT/local)

Option 2A

physical design:Center BRT with side platforms

service plan:All services in busway (either BRT/local or skip-stop service)

Option 2B physical design:Center BRT with side platforms

service plan:BRT in busway, local at the curb

Option 3A

physical design:Center BRT with center platforms

service plan:All services in busway (skip-stop service only)


3/7


Option 3B

physical design:Center BRT with center platforms

service plan:BRT in busway, local at the curb

The number of current on-street metered parking spaces was obtained from parking diagramssupplied by the Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA). Field work was done to verify the number

of on-street spaces without meters. Existing white zones were not included in the analysis and areassumed to remain in the future as they are today. In addition, there are two block faces withmotorcycle parking between Wood and Collins Streets and 2nd and 3rd Avenues. In all scenarios, thisparking was not counted in the parking analysis.

For all alternatives, the most significant parking change occurs west of Park Presidio where angledparking is converted to parallel parking. The 30 degree angled parking requires approximately17 feet of linear curb per space, whereas parallel parking requires 20 feet of linear curb per space.Converting a typical block from angled to parallel parking reduces the on-street spaces from 14 to12. Parking is also removed in locations with sub-standard bus stops. Option 3A and 3B also requireremoving some parking to accommodate left-turns. Parking is added where existing bus stops areremoved or shifted to the center busway.

Table 1 provides a summary of the estimated change in parking supply before mitigations. Table 2, atthe end of the memo, provides a revised estimate of parking supply changes after some of thepotential mitigations are included.

Table 1: Estimated Parking Gains and Losses not including mitigations

Exis ting Option 1Option

2AOption

2BOption

3AOption

3B

Van Ness to Divisdero 245 215 265 235 255 225

Divisdero to Collins 160 150 160 145 155 140

Collins to Arguello 130 100 140 105 105 80

Arguello to Park Presidio 185 170 205 175 155 130

Park Presidio to 23rd Ave 200 155 190 160 140 115

23rd Ave to 33rd Ave 140 125 160 125 120 85

Total 1060 915 1120 945 930 775

% Change -14% 6% -11% -12% -27%

Note: the parking statistics are rounded to the nearest 5 to more accurately reflect the conceptual nature of this stageof the study.

Option 2A has the fewest parking impacts, primarily because all of the bus stops are moved to the

center of the roadway and the previous bus stops can be replaced by new on-street parking. In fact,when viewed over the full length of the study area, the supply of on-street parking increases by 6percent. Option 3A has the highest parking impact, because parking is removed to accommodateleft turn pockets and the local bus continues to stop at the curb. Over the length of the corridor,this alternative reduces the on-street parking supply by 27 percent. For the remaining three optionsthe parking supply is reduced by less than 15 percent. The parking loss in all scenarios may bemitigated by the potential solutions described in the subsequent section.

Parking Mitigations:The study team is currently evaluating a variety of potential mitigation strategies to


4/7


address the parking impacts identified above. Many of these will require close partnerships with thecommunity to identify appropriate opportunities. A description of each is provided below:

Modify the allocation of parking spaces by type and time period. On-street parking is aconstrained commodity that is best managed in a commercial corridor by encouraging short-term usage and frequent turnover. A parking spot that serves 10 customers a day is significantly

more productive than a spot where someone parks early in the morning and then feeds themeter until 6 pm. There are several ways to increase the productivity of the existing on-streetparking supply including:

Reallocating the mix of commercial loading/unloading and passenger parking spaces;

Tailoring the maximum time limit of a space to match the adjacent business. For example, awine store or coffee shop might benefit from 15-minute spaces, where as a restaurant wouldbenefit from a longer time limit; and

Expanding the hours of the parking meters to match the hours of business activity.

To develop appropriate mitigations, the current on-street parking supply should be evaluated

with local merchants to determine if there are opportunities to better match on-street supplywith demand.

Add additional parking on cross-streets. Converting the existing parallel parking to angledparking on streets that intersect Geary Boulevard has the potential to significantly offsetreductions in the on-street parking supply. Angled parking is also a valuable traffic calmingtechnique, which slows the speed of cars and increases pedestrian safety. The streets beingconsidered for angled parking are the lower volume streets, to minimize the impact on trafficoperations.

The diagrams below show two examples of parallel to angled parking conversions. The firstexample has already been implemented on 11th Avenue between Geary and Clement. By

reducing the sidewalk width from 15 ft to 8 ft and converting the metered parallel parking to 60degree angled parking, MTA was able to increase the number of spaces from 6 to 11. Thesecond example shows a potential conversion on 20th Avenue, which has not been implemented.Reducing the width of the sidewalk from 15 ft to 8 ft and converting the parallel meteredparking to 60 degree angled parking on the west side of 20th Avenue would increase the numberof metered spaces from 8 to 16. More sidewalk width could be maintained if both the east andwest sidewalks were reduced a smaller amount or if the street were converted from two-way toone-way. In the examples, only existing metered spaces, which are in close proximity to Gearybusinesses, were converted to angled parking. The supply of residential parking could also beincreased if the non-metered parking on the rest of the block was also converted. This wouldalso have additional traffic calming benefits.


5/7


Figure 1 Angled Parking on 11th Avenue. On 11th Avenue, MTA replaced 6 metered parallel spaceswith 11 angled spaces.

Figure 2 Angled Parking on 20th Avenue. If the metered parallel parking spaces on the west side of20thAvenue were converted to angled parking, the existing 8 spaces could be converted to 16 spaces.

Modifying the Center BRT alternatives between 14th Avenue and 28th Avenue to allowone side of the street to retain angled parking. In the outer avenues, both traffic and transitvolumes are relatively low compared to the rest of the corridor. Therefore, it is possible that the

N

N


6/7


existing transit ridership could be accommodated on a narrower platform to allow more spacefor angled parking. The minimum platform width is 8 ft, which is needed to accommodate awheelchair lift. Figure 3 shows a potential design modification for the Center BRT with centerplatforms; a similar alternative could also be developed for the Center BRT alternative with sideplatforms. In Figure 3, angled parking is maintained on the north side of Geary by reducing the

width of the transit platform from 14 ft to 9 ft and reducing the auto and bus lanes slightly. Thismitigation strategy would restore on-street parking in the segment of the corridor with the mostsignificant reduction. It may also require turn restrictions and other transition treatments thathave not been fully evaluated yet. In the example shown, the angled parking increases themetered spaces on the north side of the block from 12 to 14. For this sample analysis, weassumed 30-degree angled parking, which is currently used on Geary. If the 30-degree parkingwere replaced with 45- or 60-degree parking, additional spaces could be added.

Figure 3 Center BRT with center platforms.Angled parking can be maintained on the north sideof Geary by reducing the platform width from 14 ft to 9 ft and reducing the auto and bus lanes slightly.

Install signage to identify off-street parking lots. Directing drivers to existing off-streetparking lots has benefited drivers in Chinatown and reduced congestion caused by circling foron-street parking spaces. Locations on Geary with off-street parking lots, including Japantownand the mall near Masonic Avenue, could benefit from the installation of similar signage.

Identify opportunities for shared parking/valet parking. Shared parking opportunities exist

where off-street spaces are not at capacity at predictable times of the day. For example, adoctors office that is only open during business hours may lease spaces to a local restaurantwith night-time clientele. We would look to the community to help identify opportunities suchas these and potentially work with the parties to identify ways to address liability concerns andother issues.

Other potential parking strategies include identifying funding sources to increase enforcement,investing in new meter technology with more convenient payment options (e.g., credit cards), andpricing. The Authority is currently undertaking a citywide parking management study to evaluate the


7/7


potential of a variety of parking management techniques to increase on-street parking turnover incommercial corridors. The findings from this study will be applicable to Geary and will be availablethis coming fall.

Table 2 provides a summary of the estimated change in parking supply if: 1) 30-degree angledparking is maintained on one side of the street from 14th Avenue to 28th Avenue; and 2) 60-degree

angled parking is added on 12 sample cross streets between Arguello Boulevard and 33rd

Avenue.With these mitigations the net increase in on-street parking supply for Option 2 changes from6 percent to 16 percent and the on-street parking loss for Options 1, 2B and 3B is less than5 percent. Option 3A continues to have the heaviest parking loss, but is reduced significantly from27 percent to 17 percent. Additional mitigations would ease the parking loss even further.

Table 2: Estimated Parking Gains and Losses with some mitigations

Exis ting Option 1Option

2AOption

2BOption

3AOption

3B

Van Ness to Divisdero 245 215 265 235 255 225

Divisdero to Collins 160 150 160 145 155 140

Collins to Arguello 130 100 140 105 105 80

Arguello to Park Presidio 185 205 240 210 190 165

Park Presidio to 23rd Ave 200 215 250 220 200 170

23rd Ave to 33rd Ave 140 140 175 140 135 100

Total 1060 1020 1225 1050 1035 875

% Change -4% 16% -1% -2% -17%

% Change withoutmitigations

-14% 6% -11% -12% -27%

Note 1: the estimate in Table 2 assumes 30-degree angled parking on one side of the street from 14th Avenue to

28th

Avenue and 60-degree angled parking on 12 cross streets between Arguello and 33rd

Avenue.Note 2: the parking statistics are rounded to the nearest 5 to more accurately reflect the conceptual nature of thisstage of the study.

Table 2 presents one of many combinations of mitigations that could be applied to minimize theparking loss. Furthermore, both the estimated impacts and the mitigation strategies will be refinedin future phases of the project. Determining the best mitigation in any given location requires adetailed block-by-block analysis and close collaboration with community stakeholders. This level ofanalysis goes beyond the scope of this conceptual study and will be worked out in the next phasesof the project.

We are seeking input on the preliminary parking analysis for the Geary Corridor Bus RapidTransit Study.

geary_app_f perancangan terminal bus

Documents