HomeMy WebLinkAboutRegulations for Parking Structure Design - Code Amendment 87 Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds-including public
notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County,
California. Number A-6214, dated 29 September. 1961. and
A-24831, dated 11 June. 1963.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Orange Pub1K NohCe •overll"Cover W ON S�
by this srndsvn 9 so n 7 pOlnl /�/1
With 10 PICO C01YInn Width V
I am'a Citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the.age of eighteen
years. and not a party to or interested in the below
entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange
Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the
NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa,
County of Orange, State of California, and that a
Notice of Public Hearing
PUBLIC NOTICE I PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE OF inspection by the public./A
PUBLIC HEARING copy of the staff repor)/will
CODE AME14DMENT be available to interested
of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete N0.87-11 parties at City Ha or the
(Parking Structure Main City
Lib ry (7111
copy, was,printed and published in the Costa Mesa, Regulations Talbert Aven
p I NOTICE IS HEREBY ALL�INTERESTED PER-1
Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley,
GIVEN that the Huntington SONS are invited to attend
1Beach City Council will hold said hearing and express,
a public hearing in the Coun- opinions or submit evidence!
Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna cil Chamber at the Hunt- for or against the application I
One ington Beach Civic Center, as outlined above. If there
Beach issues of said newspaper for 2000 Main Street, Hunt- are any further questions
ington Beach,California,on please call Jeff Abramowitz,
Consecutive weeks to Wit the issue(s) Of the date and at the time in- Assistant. Planner at
dicated below to receive and�536-5271.
consider the statements of HUNTINGTON BEACH!
311 persons who wish to be CITY COUNCIL, By: Alicia
heard relative to the appli- M.Wentworth,City Clerk
ation described below. Dated:March 18, 1988
?March 24 198 $ DATE/TIME: Monday, Published Orange Coast
April 4, 1988,7:00 P.M. Daily Pilot March 24, 1988
APPLICATION NUMBER: Th567
Code Amendment No.87-11 r
198 APPLICANT:City of Hunt-I+
ingtori Beach
LOCATION:City Wide
REQUEST: To establish
198 'regulations for the design of
parking structures by
.amending Article 960 of the
Huntington Beach Ordi-
198 nance Code.
ENVIIRONMENTAL
STATUS: Categorically ex-
empt from the California En-
198 ivironmental Quality Act.
ON FILE: A copy of the
proposed request is on file,
with the City Clerk, City of
Huntington Beach, 2000
Main Stret, Huntington;
I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the Beach,_California 92648,for,'
foregoing is true and correct..
Executed on March 25 198 8
at Costa Mesa, ,California. y�y
Signature
d I �/:� S7
wz
PROOF OF PUBLICATION '
1
REQUES f FOR CITY COUNCIL_ ACTION
iEV
Date June 20, 1988
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administrator��
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Director, Community Developme�
Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11 - TO ESTABLISH REGULATION FOR
THE DESIGN OF PARKING STRUCTURES ov). ,��� "
Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes W New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE•
This item was continued from the meeting of May 2, 1988, in order to
allow further study by the city' s parking consultant . An amendment
to Article 960, f-Street Parking of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code, is needed�t£o specifically address parking structures and
subterranean parking in the code. Standards include minimum stall
and aisle dimensions, ramp slopes, perimeter landscaping and
architectural review criteria
RECOMMENDATION•
Planning Commission recommendation and action on February 2, 1988 :
ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY LEIPZIG, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION VOTED TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11 WITH FINDINGS
AND RECOMMEND ADOPTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Leipzig, Higgins, Bourguignon
NOES: None
ABSENT: Silva, Schumacher (Out of Room)
ABSTAIN: None
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1 . Revisions to Article 960 will create a more systematic and
consistent method for reviewing parking structures .
2 . Revisions to Article 960 will create parking structures which
are more aesthetically pleasing and architecturally compatible
with on-site development and surrounding properties .
3 . Revisions to Article 960 are in conformance with the General
Plan; in particular, the Land Use and Circulation Elements .
Staff recommendation is identical to that of the Planning Commission.
P10 5/85
ANALYSIS•
The attached ordinance would add a new Section 9605 . 1 covering
parking structure standards to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.
It would also amend Section 9608(b) concerning interior landscaping
requirements . In devising the recommended standards, staff
researched parking structure requirements of other communities and
reports prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and
Urban Land Institute.
The recommended ordinance provisions state that parking structures
be subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the
Planning Commission when no other entitlement is required. If
proposed as part of an overall development project, they would be
reviewed with the project ' s entitlement by the appropriate approval
body. Where any deviation to the standards is requested, a
conditional use permit with special permit would always be required.
The proposed standards include required ninety degree parking, a
minimum stall size of 8 . 5 by 18 feet (no compacts permitted) , and
specific maximum ramp slopes .
The Planning Commission spent considerable time discussing problems
with existing structures, especially related to the number of
entrances and exits, and the number of ramps between floors .
Subsection (d) requires that a traffic study be prepared to
determine required ramps and exits whenever a parking structure
exceeds three hundred spaces .
The ordinance also requires Design Review Board approval to ensure
architectural compatibility, proportion, scale, and adequate
landscaping.
A minimum six foot wide perimeter landscape planter would be
required at ground level of the parking structure. Parked cars on
each level would be screened by landscape planters or trellises
and/or decorative screening walls/railings .
Conrad and Associates, the City' s parking consultant, has provided
written comments (attached) on the proposed ordinance. The first
concern raised is the requirement that all parking spaces be ninety
degrees (900) . Second, they offer a modification to the additional
parking space width which may be required where vertical supports
interfere with the functioning of the parking space. The consultant
suggests a more specific requirement that no obstructions be allowed
within the rear fourteen foot length of the space. Finally, the
consultant recommends that the maximum ramp slope be revised to
allow ramps without parking to have as much as a 15% slope, instead
of the specified 10%. In response to these concerns, the Planning
Commission and staff feel that the special permit process will
provide the flexibility needed for individual projects . The
ordinance (under section (h) ) specifically lists ramp slopes and
parking space angles as design standards from which deviations can
be granted. The Planning Commission was uncomfortable specifying
minimum aisleways for angled parking because of other issues that
RCA - 5/2/88 -2- (0027d)
come with allowing one-way circulation. They thought it would be
better to handle such requests on a case-by-case basis, depending on
the specific design proposed, number of spaces and exiting
provisions .
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
The proposed code amendment is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act .
FUNDING SOURCE:
Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may deny Code Amendment No. 87-11 with findings .
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance
2 . Planning Commission staff report dated February 2, 1988
3 . Excerpt from Traffic Engineering Handbook
4 . ULI Report on Structure Design
5 . Memo from Les Evans discussing parking consultant comments dated
April 15, 1988 .
DNL:MA:JA:kla
3
RCA - 5/2/88 -3- (0027d)
nuntington beach department %)t community development
SYAf f
RUIOR
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Community Development
DATE: February 2, 1988
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11 - PARKING STRUCTURES
(CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 20, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING)
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach
REOUEST:. To establish regulations for the design of parking
structures .
LOCATION: City-Wide
1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Approve Code Amendment No. 87-11 and recommend adoption by the City
Council .
2 . 0 GENERAL INFORMATION:
On January 20, 1988, the Planning Commission made a motion to
continue Code Amendment No. 87-22 for parking structure design
standards after providing specific direction to staff in the form of
three straw votes .
Staff has followed the direction of the Planning Commission and
revised the draft ordinance in the following manner : First, the
section specifying vehicle clearance heights (already covered in
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code) has been deleted.
.Second, the reduced aisle width (24 feet as opposed to 26 feet) for
residential projects of less than twenty units has been retained.
Third, the special permit section has been revised to specify some
of the deviations that can be allowed by Planning Commission action,
including the provision of angled parking. Finally, language has
been added in subsection (d) with respect to reviewing the number of
ramps between floors and the number of ingress and egress points
required as related to total number of parking spaces within the
structure. A cut-off of three hundred (300) spaces has been set as
the point at which a traffic study must be submitted to document
needed secondary circulation ramps, additional exits, or other
parking management techniques .
A-FM-23C
r
3 . 0 RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Code Amendment No . 87-11 with the following findings and
recommend adoption by the City Council .
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. Revisions to Article 960 will create a more systematic and
consistent method for reviewing parking structures .
2 . Revisions to Article 960 will create parking structures which
.are more aesthetically .pleasing and architecturally compatible
with on-site development and surrounding properties .
3 . Revisions to Article 960 are in conformance with the General
Plan; in particular, the Land Use and Circulation Elements .
4 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The Planning Commission may deny Code Amendment No . 87-11 with
findings .
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Draft Ordinance
2 . Staff report dated January 20, 1988, including:
a. Revised matrix of City parking structures
b. Excerpt from Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook
c. ULI report on parking structure design
d. Sample ordinances from Pasadena, Irvine, and Anaheim.
e. Staff reports dated October 20 and December 1, 1987, and
January 5, 1988
SH:JA:kla
- 3
Staff Report - 2/2/88 -2- (9919d)
ORDINANCE
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11
8. 9605 . 1 Parking Structures . Parking structures above or
below grade shall be subject to approval of a conditional use
permit by the Planning Commission when no other entitlement is
required. If proposed as part of an overall project, parking
structures shall be reviewed concurrently with project entitlement
by the appropriate approval body. All parking structures shall
comply with base district standards as well as the following
requirements :
(a) PARKING SPACE DESIGN AND AISLEWAYS- 90°
Stall Stall Aisle
Width Depth - Width
Commercial/ 8 . 5 ' * 18 ' 26 '
Industrial
Residential 8 . 5 ' * 18 ' 26 '
(20 du or more)
Residential 8. 5 ' * 18 ' 24 '
(Less than 20 du)
* Note: Spaces adjacent to vertical supports may require
additional width depending upon support size and location.
Spaces adjacent to walls over twelve (12) inches in height
shall be eleven (11) feet wide.
(b) Transition ramps which are also used as back-up spate
for parking stalls shall have a maximum slope of five
(5) percent . The maximum slope for transition ramps
with no adjacent parking spaces shall be ten (10)
percent.
A ramp used for ingress and egress to a public street
shall have a transition section at least sixteen (16)
feet long and a maximum slope of five (5) percent .
(c) A noise and air quality report may be required when
the site is adjacent to property zoned residential .
(d) The number and location of all entrances and exits
shall be subject to the recommendation of the
Department of Public Works . Parking structures with
over 300 spaces shall provide secondary circulation
ramps and additional ingress and egress opportunities
as determined by a traffic study prepared by a
registered traffic engineer.
F- 3
(e) Parking structures shall be provided with a minimum
six (6) foot wide perimeter landscape planter_ at .
ground level . Parked cars shall be screened on each
level through landscape planters or trellises and/or
decorative screening wall or railings .
(f) All parking structures shall be architecturally
compatible with existing or proposed structures and
shall be subject to review and approval by the Design
Review Board prior to hearing . The Design Review
Board shall consider the following factors in
reviewing a proposal; bulk, scale,, proportion,
building materials, colors, signage, architectural
features, and landscaping .
(g) All parking structures proposed for conversion to a
fee parking arrangement shall be subject to the
approval of a conditional use permit .
(h) A special permit subject to approval by the Planning
Commission through the conditional use permit process
may be granted to deviate from any of the design
standards contained in this section, such as ramp
slopes , parking space angles, number of exits and/or
landscaping requirements . The following findings
shall be made where applicable:
(1) A traffic study prepared by a registered traffic
engineer has been submitted which document the
impacts of the request .
(2) The deviation will not adversely affect the
circulation and safety of the use, structure or
site, or adjacent land uses .
(3) The deviation will result in a more effective
circulation pattern and parking layout .
(4) The deviation will enhance the general appearance
of the development and its surroundings .
(5) The deviation will not be detrimental to the
general public health, safety, welfare, or
convenience, nor injurious to property values in
the vicinity.
S. 9608(b) Interior Landscaping. One minimum thirty (30) inch box
tree for every ten parking spaces shall be located throughout the
parking area . Trees located in front and exterior side yards shall
not count toward this requirement . Trees planted within planters
less than ten feet in .width shall be provided with a twenty-four
inch deep plastic root barrier.
F �- 3 Iq
CA 87-11• -2- (9281d)
No interior landscaping shall be required for parking spaces
located inside of parking structures, except that the Design Review
Board may specify landscape treatment be provided for the top level
of an above-grade structure. Landscaping shall be provided as
specified in Section 9605.1.
CA 87-11 -3- (9281d)
EXISTING AND PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURES
(Revised January 14. 1988)
i
RAMP SLOPE/ EXITS/
PROJECT LOCATION USE STALL SIZE DRIVE AISLE NO. OF RAMPS TYPE ENTITLEMENT TRAFFIC FLOW
NO. OF SPACES
MERCURY Edinger and Office 9' x 19' 27' 1:15 above AR 84-40 1 exit, 2 way
SAVINGS Parkside Stall against wall 1 ramp Unknown
12'6" wide.
KAISER 5762 Bolsa Office 816" x 19' 25' 1:15 above AR 86-4 1 exit, 2 way
GTE 8' x 15'* 1 ramp 228 spaces
Stall against wall
9' wide
MOLA — Beach and Warner Commercial 9' x 19' 25, unknown above CUP 85-12 2 exits, 2 w
CHARTER 8' x 15'* 1 ramp 880 spaces
CENTER
ONE PACIFIC 7767 Center Commercial/ 815" x 19' 27' 1:15 above CUP 79-22 2 exits, 2 way
PLAZA Office 8' X 151* 1 ramp Unknown
HOLIDAY INN 7667 Center Hotel 9' x 19' 25' 1:15 below CUP 83-28 1 exit, 2 way
8' x 181* 1 ramp 184 spaces
MOLA 1200 Pacific Residential 9' x 19' 25' 10% enter below CUP 84-19 1 exit, 2 way
PIERHOUSE Coast Highway 8' x 151* 15% exit 222 spaces
Stall against wall 2 ramps
12' wide
MORRIS — North Side of Pier Recreational 8-1/2' x 18' 26' 1:20 (floor grade) below CUP 87-30
PIERSIDE 1:8 (parking ramp) pending
PIERSIDE South Side of Pier Commercial 8-1/2' x 18' 26' 1:20 (floor grade) below CUP 86-43 696
Proposed 1:8 (parking ramp)
* Compact size
(9292d)
CU
{
,E INSTITUTE
OF
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS
1
9
�M
ui
rp ,
T -
AND
I_R%AFFIQ ENGINEERING
HANDBOOK
V5
5
}
SECOND EDITION
Wolfgang S. Homburger
Editor
Louis E. Keefer and William R. McGrath
Associate Editors
t
i'
PRENTICE-HALL, INC., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632
Landscaping. Landscaping of parking facilities is de- economy. Although this permits the marking of more stalls
si►dble but should be limited to types that will not interfere per given length, vehicles tend to encroach upon adjacent
with the parking function.Care should be taken to use shrub, stalls so that one or more'spaces are unavailable for use.
plant, and tree types that can withstand auto fumes and the The end result is no gain in actual space usage,but a parking
concentrated heat arising from a large,paved surface. Land- condition surrounded by confusion.
scaping can be an effective means in controlling pedestrian Table 21-2 is based on a stall length of 18.5 ft (5.6 m).
paths. Planting of hedges can serve to funnel pedestrians The stall length should be sufficient to accommodate the
into desired walk patterns within the site. length of most cars expecting to use the space. However,
Sufficient setback must be provided for all plants so that mane of the "luxury" U.S. cars exceeded 18.5 ft (5.6 m)
the front and rear overhang of cars does not destroy them. in 197�.
Extreme care should be exercised in locating shrubbery or Aisle width is a function of the parking angle and stall
other plants near entrances and exits so that sight distances width. One-way aisles are generally used with angle park-
are not restricted. This will require that the growth pattern ing, whereas two-way circulation is generally used with 90°
of the plant be considered so that the small plant of today parking.
will not develop into a major sight restriction in future years. In designing parking facilities,a common unit of measure
is the: parking module. A module consists of the width of
Lighting. Adequate lighting of the parking site is very the aisle, plus the depth of the parking stalls (measured
important. Mounting height and spacing of luminaires perpendicular to the aisle)on each side of the aisle. In many
should be sufficient to distribute the desired lighting inten- instances, parking modules are completely separated from
sity to the entire facility. A normal lighting level is 1.0 to each other. Such modules are represented by the wall-to-
2.6 footcandles with a uniformity ratio(average illumination wall dimensions shown in Table 21-2. Another type of
divided by the lowest level) not more than 6:L' The lu- module available for angle parking is the interlocking mod-
minaire units should be placed so as not to obstruct vehicle ule. The most common, and preferred, interlocking module
movement and parking. Where raised islands are used to is the one that places the bumpers of vehicles in adjacent
separate adjacent parking stalls, the poles can logically be stalls next to one another. This layout is illustrated in Figure
placed on the island. In any event, they should be placed 21.1, together with parking dimensions for various angles
between adjacent stalls and at the ends of the parking rows. of parking. At 45°, a nested interlock is possible where
Care should be taken to prevent excessive light spillover adjacent aisles have one-way movement in the same direc-
into adjacent residential areas. lion. This places the bumper of one car adjacent to the front
fender of another car and is not recommended, as the like-
Parking dimensions and layout. The long-term trend lihood of damaged fenders is much greater than with other .
in U.S. automobile designs had been toward longer and parking layouts.
wider vehicles. This trend was reversed in the 1970's. In
the 1978 model year, cars range up to 19.4 ft (5.8 m) in
length and 6.66 ft (2.03 m) in width. However, increasing TABLE 21_2
costs of fuel and vehicles has seen the U.S. fleet size grow- Typical Parking Dlmenalow*(f1)
ing smaller. Many cars now being manufactured are in the
range 14.5 to 16.3 ft 4.4 to 5.0 m) in length and 5.4 to Modules;
$ ( $ ,i � stall stall stall
6.2 ft (1.7 to 1.9 m) in width. Observations indicate that Width Depth Depth Wall interlock
fleet dimensions vary in different arts of the United States. parallel to to Aislet to to
P to Aisle wall Interlock width wall Interlock
In California, as many as 40%of the vehicles are considered
of compact size, whereas in some southern states and in 45deg.
Canada as few as 5% are compacts. It is estimated that as 9. stall 2. 19.5 16.5 13 52 4
P 9.00 1
stall 1�77 19.5 16.5 12 51 45
long as 15 years may pass before there is any significant 9.5 stall 13.4 19.5 16.5 a 50 44
change in fleet size in some parts of the United States. 60 deg
8.5 stall 9.8 20.5 18.5 18 59 55
Typical parking dimensions vary with the angle at which 9 0 stall 10.4 20.5 18.5 16 57 53
the stall is arranged relative to the aisle (see Table 21-2). 9.5 stall 11.0 20.5 18.5 .15 56 52
Stall widths (measured perpendicular to the vehicle when 75 deg
Pew 8.5 stall 8.3 20.0 19.0 25 65 63
Parked)range from 8.5 to 9.5 ft(2.6 to 2.9 m). In attendant 9.0 stall 9.3 20.0 19.0 23 63 61
Parking facilities, attendants can park standard-size cars in 9.5 stall 9.8 20.0 19.0 22 62 60
spaces as narrow as 8.0 ft (2.4 m). However, the minimum 8.5gstall .8.5 18.5 18.5 28 65 65
stall size recommended is 8.5 ft (2.6 m) for self-parking of 9.0 stall 9.0 18.5 18.5 26 63 63
long-term duration. For higher-turnover self-parking,a stall 9.5 stall 9.5 18.5 18.5 25 62 62
width of 9.0 ft (2.7 m) is recommended. Stall widths at dimensions are for 18.5-ft-length stalls,measured parallel to v c e,ana
supermarkets and other similar parking facilities, where are based on results of a special study to evaluate the effects of varied aisle and stall
age packages are prevalent, should desirably be 9.5 or wilt for the different parking angles shown.The study was conducted in December
even 10.0 ft (2.9 to 3.1 m) in width. Conversion sio�the Federal
I ft =�0.305 way ministration and Paul C. Box and Associates.
Substandard stall and aisle widths prove to be a false tMeasu ea between ends of stall litres.
Mounded to nearest foot.
#For back-in parking.aisk width may be reduced 4.0 ft.
'Parking PrincOlar, Special Report No. 125.Highway Reseandt Board,Wash- SotmtE:Parking Principle:,Special Report No. 125,Highway Research Board,
�.D.C., 1971.p. 1(r Wtubington,D.C., 1971,p. 101. a )5
4 Parking, Loading,and Terminal Facilities 6"
3 , f
TABLE 21-3
L Parking Dimensions for Import-Size Veh1tlm 0"Lea )•
wall '( \ �f�� .�� curs ors�
x X wla.
at Right
\ Parking stall Aisle Angle to Aisle Wall-to-wall
/ \ / Angle(deg) Width Length/Stall Aisle Width Module
45 7.5 10.5 16.0 11.0 43.0
60 7.5 8.7 16.7 14.0 47.4
i 75 7.5 7.8 16.3 17.4 50.0
0 90 7.5 7.5 15.0 20.0 50.0
/ �A
v 1 ft. = 0.305m
KI *These measurements are inadequate for average American compacts.Each stall
depth should be increased about 1 ft(2 ft total for the module)to accommodate ft
J usual range of compact sizes.
( D E \
-`I��Interlock Interlocking Interlock t Cuo�
Wall to rb I SotrncE:Parking Principles,Special Report No. 125,Highway Research Board,
+--------F- >= G-- H 01 Washington,D.C., 1971.p. 102.
Module Module Module
X=Stall not accessible in certain layouts TABLE 214
Parking Standards,Europe
Parking layout dimension(in ft)for 9 ft X 18.5 ft stalls
at various angles stall stall Aisle Bay
Width Length Width Width
On
-Angle (ft-in.(m)) [ft-in.(m)l (ft-in.(m)) (ft-in.(m)l
__Dimension diagram 45° 60° 75° 90° General 7-10 to 8-2 15-7 to 16-5 18 to 19-6 50.10 to 52-6
Stall width,parallel to aisle A 12.7 10.4 9.3 9.0 (2.4-2.5) (4.75-5.0) (5.5-6.0) (15.5-16.0)
Stall length of line B 27.5 23.7 20.9 18.5 Belgium 7-10 to 8-2 16-5 52-6
Stall depth to wall C 19.5 20.5 20.0 . 18.5 (2.4-2.5) (S.0) (16.0)(90")
Aisle width between stall lines D 12.0 16.0 23.0 26.0 5 (10
Stall depth,interlock E 16.5 18.5 19.0 18.5 (I5.0)(60�
Module,wall to interlock F 48.0 55'0 62.0 63.0 Pans 7-10(2.4) (90) 16 5 S.0)
Module,interlockingG 7-3(2.3) (3n 16-5�0) ,
45.0 53.0 61.0 63.0 7-3(2.2) (30°) 165(5.0)�
Module,interlock to curb face H 46.0 52.5 59.5 60.5 U.K. 7-10 to 8-2 15-7 to 16-5 50-10 to 52-6
l3umper overhang(typical) 1 2,0 2.3 2.5 2.5 (2.4-2.5) (4.75-5.0) (15.5-16.0)
Offset J 6.4 2.6 0.6 0.0 Madrid 7-10(2.4) 165(5.0) 50-10
Setback K 13.1 9.3 4.8 0.0 7-3(2.2)• 13-1(4.0)• (15.5)
Cross aisle,one-way L 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Barcelona 7-10(2.4) 15-7(4.75) 50-10
Cross aisle,two-way - 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 05.5)
Germany 7-6 to 7-10 16-5 to 18-1
Figure 21.1. Stall layout elements. SoultcE: Based on Parking (2.3-2.4) (5.0-5.5) -
Principles, Special Report No. 125, Highway Research Board,
Washington, D.C., 1971, p. 99. •25%spaces,for Spanish subcompacts,may be this size.
SouRcE:Jots+GtaNvfu.E,Provision,Location and Design of Porksng Facilities
in Europe,International Road Federation,Washington,D.C. 1970;Orro Smi.,The
Recommended parking dimensions for imported cars- Construction of Parking Facilities,Bauverlag GMBH.Wiesbaden-Berlin, 1%8.
15 ft (4.6 m) in length-differ from recommendations for
standard U.S.cars(see Table 21-3). Table 21-4 summarizes
European parking dimension standards. Stall lengths and ally be aided by placing a row of parking completely around
widths are recommended at 15 ft (4.6 m) and 7.5 ft (2.3 the perimeter of the site. With adequate site dimensions,
m), respectively. If a number of these smaller-size spaces this places parking stalls on both sides of the aisle,including
are to be included in a facility, they should be placed to- end aisles. ,
gether in a prime location to encourage their use. If these When pedestrian walks are used in parking facilities,
spaces are not convenient, small-car drivels will park else- they should direct pedestrians toward the major parking
where in standard-size spaces. Because of difficulties in generators. Raised sidewalks can be used in larger facilities
predicting the amount of usage and in controlling the spar, between rows of cars to aid pedestrian flow. However,many
most U.S. parking facilities are being designed with all pedestrians will still use the aisles and the need for raised
spaces of sufficient size for standard American cars. How- pedestrian walks is debatable.
ever,6n the west coast of the United States, many facilities
are being designed to accommodate a percentage of compact Relative efficiency factors. Relative efficiency factors
cars. can be calculated for various parking angles and stall widths
In the actual layout of the parking stalls and circulation (see Table 21-5).The figures represent the number of square
aisles, it is always desirable to have a row of parking on feet per stall plus one-half of the aisle width for a distance
each side of the aisle. This gives the most efficient design. equal to the stall width measured parallel to the aisle.Those
In addition,the greatest efficiency can generally be obtained dimensions were obtained from Table 21-2. Stalls arranged
by placing aisles and rows of parking parallel to the long at 90a to the aisles provide the most efficient design, and
dimension of the site. Greatest parking efficiency can usu- the efficiency decreases as the parking angle decreases.
660 Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook
TABLE,21-5 age,signing, and marking. Land cost is often the factor that
Relative Efficiency Factors' determines economic viability of surface parking. As land
width or stall(ft) costs incrrase, it often becomes economically justified to
expand parking vertically in a parking structure,rather than
., Angle(deg) 8 S 9.0 9.5
;, �-g expanding horizontally by the acquisition of additional land �--
45 108 324 Sao for surface parking.
! bo :ee z9s 3►o parkin garage construction costs at 1979 rites v
75 g g g P �'
90 176 284 2295 from approximately$3000 per car space to as high as$6000,
with an average being approximately$4000 to$4500.These
'"` i' .•�uan feet per .tall area plus one nalf aisle area:does not include end aisle cir-
At',4 tenor,areas or unusable area at ends of parallel parking rows. are construction COSLS WI[hOu[ land, and the variation IS
caused by topography, expensive vs. economical architec-
s4xrace:Bused on data includ d in Table 21-2. tural treatment, sophistication of revenue control devices, .
r
foundations,and other factors.If land costs are not included,
Handicapped parking. Most jurisdictions require that the cost of a parking structure is approximately four times
€ „
a certain number of pal-icing spaces be set aside for parking the cost of an equivalent parking space in a surface lot. On
; - the other hand, if the land cost is included, the figures cart
IM; for the handicapped. Most requirements are that approxi
rnately 4% of the total number of spaces within a facility change rapidly.
pr
be set aside for handicapped, with a maximum of 9 or 10 As an example, a 340-ft2 per car lot would cost$850 per
in the entire facility regardless of size. In small facilities car space for grading, paving, and lighting. If land is cal-
of 25 spaces or less, q pp y culated at$15 r square foot,this adds$5100 r car the number re uired is a roximatel per q per P
;!P one for each such facility. for a $5950 total cost. On the other hand, if a five-level
garage is constructed and the land cost is prorated over the
Fhe handicapped stall layout is shown in Figure 21.2.
In addition to the stall layout, the spaces should be marked five floors, the same amount of land costs would only be
with a sign at the face of the stall. Stencilling or painting $1020 per car space. When added to the$4000 per car space
of the handicap symbol on the pavement is not recommended- in construction costs, the total cost for a parking garage
since it is difficult to see while driving and can be obscured space would be slightly above $5000, and it would be less
by snow and other obstructions. In general, the handicap expensive per car space to build a parking garage than a
spaces should be located immediately adjacent to the exit surface lot.
of the lot or garage. Many other factors must be considered in making the
^`;?n decision between surface and structured parking. In the case
Sign with handicapped of private developers, these include demand characteristics,
Curb symbol,mount at least 4'-0"nigh taxes, and financing. The primary considerations for all
4 —' parking must be the walking distance of the patrons, main-
tenance,security,operation,and the availability of land.and
Y'y f
a' s' a' g q' traffic access.
S;
t g'
Garage design
Site characteristics. Many of the factors that affect the
location and design of surface lots also affect the design of
Figure 21.2. Handicapped parking stall dimensions. Sotmct: parking garages. Site characteristics such as size, shape,
James Madison Hunnicutt&Associates. and topography are important factors in garage design. The
topography of a site may allow direct entry to more than
Drainage. Adequate slope should be provided to surface one level of the garage. This will affect entry and exit
lots to minimize the possibility of low or flat spots. The locations as well as the interfloor travel system within the
ponding of water in a lot is undesirable for both vehicle and structure.
pedestrian movement. This is particularly true in cold cli-
mates,where freezing may lead to icy spots. Recommended Access points. The location of entry and exit points is
minimum grades are 1.0% for asphalt surfaces and 0.5% even more critical in garage design than in surface lot de-
for Portland cement concrete surfaces.2 sign, because of the increased number of spaces available
in structured parking. Street capacities, location of traffic
Y Surface vs. structure parking. Development costs at controls, and other external factors must be carefully ana-
1979 prices for surface parking lots normally are $2 to $3 lyzed to assure a design that is compatible with the sur-
per square foot exclusive of land, with an average figure ; rounding street system.
approximating $2.50 per square foot. This includes all im-
provement costs, such as grading, paving, lighting, drain- Major use of the facility. As in surface lots, the dom-
inant type of use,.whether by short-term or long-terra par-
1Parbng PrJnciples, special Report No. 125.Highway Research Board,wash- keys, or whether the facility will serve special events, will
ington..D.C., 1971,p. 107. influence the design. Where vehicles enter and exit in short
3 �17
Parking, Loading, and Terminal Facilities 651
i
f I
�s
Yf
P
f
1'
^ ', ® JEL
a "
I)esign oi' Siructures ..
{
t
Richard C. Lich and Michael Moukalian
A parking garage receives. holds, and dis- Stall Design
char es cars: the garage's efficiency determines parking facility patrons generally find it easier
its usc;fulness to both developers and patrons. to maneuver into, an angled parking stall. At a
Fc� v parkin„ decks or lots are built where no good angle. the parking stall can easily be ma-
need or demand exists. Demand is created by neuvered into. The square-foot-per-car ratio is
people driving to places of concentrated ac- somewhat greater in a garage with angle parking
tivity—a Cf3D, an airport, a sports facility, a col- than in one with perpendicular stall configura-
fe e campus, a shoppinI center, a factory, or an tions. 'fhe automobile parked at an angle takes
o,ffirr building. "fhe type of parking changes as up more floor area than one parked perpendicu-
Ow demand varies. CBD parking serves a num- lady.
ber of varied generators—office buildings, stores. The major advantage of a sloped fluor design
restaurants, hotels, and theaters; thus, these with one-way traffic is that traffic can logically
!ols are in use most of the day, with some operat- move through the structure in a defined pattern.
in ; around the clock. Other lots serving shop- '['his movement decreases the amount of search
pin'T centers, factories, and hospitals receive time if the sloped flour rises two levels in a com-
m4ore limited and specific use. plete 360-degree revolution. The patron can
No matter where the parking facility is locat- reach the top floor or roof in one-half the time it
+ d, a basic vehicular storage function exists. [n would take if the floor rose one level per revolu-
f.ict, the average -kmcrican automobile is parked lion.
approximaw1v 94 percent of its life. Since a parker generally finds it easier to ma-
One factor vital to the success or failure of a- neuver into and out of an angled parking space,
p:rrking development is the functional design." circulation within the parking structure usually
'flre 1'u1!uwing discussion'dctails the best methods takes less time. One-way movement permits the
by which functional design can be accomplished parkers to follow a defined path through the
and Mill provide an easy flow that is both eco" building and then logically channels the patron
I feasible and that meets the criteria of toward the exit or cashier area. Compared to a
all patrons using the parking facility. 90-degree design, angle parking dues not require
as large a parking module; a narrower overall
a width consequently results, making it readily
a 'a adaptable to smaller sites.
61
One of the. major disadvantages of a one-way ibility and the space'to maneuver out of the park-
,hqwd design is the probability of slightly higher ing stall without restricting traffic in the aisles.
construction costs because of the square-foot- They also enlarge the pedestrian area. Security
p!•r-car ratio. Other disadvantages, including a functions within the parking structure are facili-
h"ber discharge time, might result due to traffic tated since drivers and pedestrians are ►nore easi-
layout and design of exits; with the one-way de- ly visible.
sign and narrow aisles, the exit maneuver can be There are corresponding disadvantages with a
difficult due to a high volume of traffic in the two-way, 90-degree design. The two-way traffic
aisles. With a 90-degree stall configuration, the pattern generally results in several cross traffic or
patron generally finds it more difficult to maneu- cxmflict points within the structure, a longer
ve•r into and out of the parking stall. searching time for the driver, and a larger build-
The design of an efficient layout should maxi- ing in overall width.
mize the number of cars parked in a defined Another factor influencing structural design
area. As a rule. the most efficient design is and layout is the topography which exists on the
achieved with the use of 90-degree parking stalls site. Streets. site width and length, slope, and the
"ith aisles running parallel to the long dimen- amount of required excavation are all related to
In of the site. the site and its effect on the garage design. In
There are various advantages to a two-way traf- both angle and perpendicular stall configurations.
fic flow, 90-degree design. The advantages of a the site plays an important role in determining
larger modular width and two-way aisles include the best possible solution to the overall design.
III(. fac•.t that they allow the driver greater vis-
344' = overall dimension
upbound.circuit
! V•
i
downward circuit
10-1 Parking Efficiency Factor
Breakdlown
Example 1 Example 2
stall size 8'6" 9101,
angle of barking 600 60`
cars per flour 126 116
area per flour 39.216 38.528
sq. ft. per car 311.2 332.1
Note: _
No consideration has been made• fur location of ele%ator and (Q
I
tair tuNers.
62
a �
Traffic Flow. A recirculation or reentry point to the struc-
fhc internal traffic flow and ramp system in a ture's internal flow should be designed into every
p;crkin.; structure are dictated by the size and to- parking facility; reentry usually occurs at the
I,,,,-raphv of the site, the vertical height of the ground floor or first supported level.
ga-
rage, and patron characteristics. 'These factors In a two module, flat fluor design served by
exert an important influence regarding the ramp straight-run ramps or a helix—spiral ramp—the
tNpc and floor system which best serve the over- driver can recirculate through the complete fluor.
all design objectives. In a three module design with one module slop-
lit a continuous flow system, drivers should not ing the flour-to-floor height and the other two
l,a\F.. to pass more than 600 to 750 spaces in an modules remaining flat, the two flat sections can
upward or downward driving circuit in finding a be recirculated by the driver. In a continuous
parking space. A one-way, angle ark, sloped sloped floor system. the driver should make no
I p y g p p more than five to six revolutions to the end of the
floor ���stem usually does not allow recirculation
,�f car spaces passed; a scissor type design, how- upbound circuit or to the exit, whether on a
(: ,r. offers an opportunity to cross over raid- sloped flour or spiral ramp.
dock k from the upbound or downbound circuit to The length of the driving aisle in the average
reach an available parking space. two or three module parking structure does not
usually present a problem. Garages that exceed
344' overall dimension
♦— slope up ♦— slope up
i
— 4 slope down a— slope down
:,
p�
—� flat floor
10-2 Parking Efficiency Factor
Breakdown ,
Example 1 Example 2
stall size 8'6" 9'0"
angle of parking 60° 60°
cars per flour 192 182
area per floor 58.480 57,488
sq. ft. per car 304.5 313.6
.020 Note:
.F-.3No consideration has been made for locati,m of elevator and
stair towers.
400 feet in length. however, should incorporate a live turning radius from the aisle in one module
cross aisle'mid-length to break up the driving dis- to the aisle in another module. An acceptable
Lance between ends. Although the number of walking distance for the patron to the elevators is
cross aisles on a typical parking floor is deter- between 250 and 300 feet, with the elevators Io-
ntined by the overall length of the building, the c•ated near the point of destination. Travel dis-
approximate distance from One aisle to the next, tance to exit stairs is dictated by state and local
depending on operation and use of the facility, codes.
should not exceed 350 feet. The width of the The basic element of a parking layout and de-
cross aisle is determined by the parking angle sign is the,module, representing a combination of
and the width of the module. For angle-and per- stall depth and aisle width. The parking module
pendicular parking, the minimum cross aisle is an aisle with a row of cars on one or both-sides:
width is approximately 18 feet and 24 feet respec•- it can consist of either one-way or two-way tr-af-
tively. These dimensions are based on the effec- fie. The parking module is influenced by its exte-
344' overall ditnensicin
♦--slope up slope up
flat floor
ray=
N J.: ,ajj' .• � 'l:t.. �9°4' :�a.•,w ;��:' .f. :tit .;,}i*• ;, L.,ry',y
C
flat floor
4
—,1 slope down ----► slope down
10-3 Parking Efficiency Factor
Breakdown
Example 1 Example 2
stall size 8'6" 9'0„
angle of' parking 600 00`
cars per floor 256 241
area per floor 77.400 76.368
sq. ft. per car 302.3 312.9
Note:
No consideration has been made for location of elevator and V
stair towers.
t�t
('40114111MIls—Wall to wail. wall 14) presents tit) pr4i,bit-Ill 14) Ihe driver. Oil the aver-
iniermt- to interior. a,,e. It is safe I() keep the 4)pe of the parkill"
The Ililult� Is c.mnimsed of three varlables: tilt' tlimrs at'a inaximuni of*5 to ).05•-
percent.
parking. the stall width, and the niodu- The roll out potential (effect) applies to the per-
lar width. Variations can be made in modular cent of grade that the car is parked on, and the
till, with resultant changes in either the angle effect this grade has on keeping the car from roll-
<tall width dimension. For example, a right an- ing out of its parking space. this condition
,,I(. (90-degree) parking module 4 8-foot 6-Inch sometimes creates a problem for the angle
r- - r-
Malls requires a modular width of 64 f'eet, while parker, but because the right angle or 90-degree
lilt, same right angle parking module with a 9-foot stall is perpendicular to the floor slope, there is
stall requires only a 624(mt 6-inch modular little or no roll out potential. Also. since moist
A I h. cars have automatic transmissions and special
Llwal roles Or conditions s,)rnetlmes place re- wheel-locking devices, there should be no r4oll Out
sirlctions on Ili(- design of the floor and ramp potential.
overall building height, and stall widths As previously mentioned, the length ()f' the
and angles. Cmnnimi sense would dictate not put- floor slope is In direct relationship to the length of
tin-, a ramp with a 15 percent grade in the flat the aisle. Under normal conditions, it is best to
country Of the Midwest. vet in San Francisco), keep both ends of the building relatively flat. ex-
Pittsbut-A. or Duluth where s4)me of the streets cept for the tl,)or pitch needed for drainage, and
have a 22 percent grade. a high degree of slope design the floor to slope between the two flat
ends.
corner notch optional
%
slope up slope up
-7
7
U
C%
k.
Z
; PR
V&O W
V.
>
flat floor
., aS
_s.
TO
Lcorner notch optional
10-4 Parking Efficiency Factor
Breakdown
Example I Example 2
stall size 8'6" 91011
angle of parking 90o 90"
cars per floor 150 142
area per floor 720 43,688
sq. ft. per car 298.1 307.0
No)te:
Nu consideration has been made flor !m-ation of vlevati,r and
stair towers.
Continuity in the design of a sloped floor sys- also possible. The location of such visual blocks
Win is an important feature. If the floor slope in a not only hampers patrons driving through the
Module varies in degree from one end to the structure but also endangers patrons stepping
other, a roller coaster effect is created for the from a stair or elevator lobby into an aisle or por-
driver; therefore, slopes throughout the building Lion of floor that is not clearly visible to drivers.
should be kept constant between modules.
A poor design practice is to place stairs, eleva- Ramp Systems
tors, elevator lobbies, shear walls, and any visu- The ramp system used within a structure is of
al obstructions at the end of a parking row or at a prime importance in channeling vehicles into and
turning aisle. These elements should be located out of the garage. In a straight-run system—a
:in the most convenient and least obstructive area ramp with no parking stalls on either side—the
of the parking floors. Ideally, the elevators and ramp angle is between 10 to 15 percent, depend-
stairs should be located in a flat corner of the ing on local conditions and the length of the run.
floor not used for parking; external locations are The shorter the ramp, the higher the percentage
344' overall dimension
1"',:.;:-+x.:. �.,-rr'.x "••�"in -..:. -..•ate',= . .. - "y.:•. ?%" .i
slope up slope up
. •'`y ,rT.'�!'.:�'�•,*.. .:L9��}"1s'as?�.:-.F. ,:r,....`+y3.^'-,' ;'_•�!ty:v.:.. ."i+ ;,,.,;'* `,�'r'!... J`{`. ,,.i.t�:
:5 .a,•�,,,-,t„_.:r..., ;�,,. . ,:'.�r.�,;� - .;:r,::..'::::r,,. ,tee•„wti:
flat floor
� .:r• "' -�.�. ��lr,i y�:a'�"r.'d�,�"}.°::': '.p.:��'„•,�..:..e:i, n..; 'i.3.'`•..i'°"="',..�?l.:
:� +fir rf""'!,"t`t. �' .e"-. a, ,e,'(y.��'t.K":7�•:e. Y,•... �.i"K-.�a�i-.^i 7,:
1w� £rti%'.•
♦! flat floor
- r-
corner notch optional
10-5 Parking Efficiency Factor
Breakdown
Example 1 Example 2
stall size 8'6" 9101,
angle of parking 900 900
cars per floor 224 212
area per floor 66.736 65.188
sq. ft. per car 297.9 307.4
Note:
No consideration has been made for location of elevator and
stair lowers.
66 �_�
Of slope: correspondingly, the longer the ramp, cases'with a one-way ramp on a staggered floor,
�- the more gradual the slope. In a staggered floor there can be some superelevation—a pitch in the
or split-level garage, ramps are shorter and usu- ramp slab—at the base and top of the ramp
ally have a 12 to 15 percent slope. depending on leading to a one-way traffic flow'on the parking
the floor-to-floor height. floor.
,;lost straight-run ramps are crowned for For a normal straight-run ramp, the width of
drainage and have little pitch since cars should the drive path should be kept at a minimum of 12
be, kept level while on the ramp. However, in feet curb-to-curb. If the ramp has a sharp ap-
344' overall dimension
77.
4 slope up slope up
Ir �A;� y :a..+Tl-.�� „` ''eX�,,.��f:;er•C'. !- - ;'
'i^:: .x''�.'�. ::�%'...;s` •r .p� : s•• .,+.t. .:a `tom.
flat floor '
tr C !•"!azf,,�, '���. .�!.. �'�y`tt.�:'•,'��.�t gyp,.. ;$ti�t},•:. iµ:,:Y:nry�',;';="y.'-_ ;7".r t"!:
.`k• .`� f: 4 k- y�'� +i' 4•4Vr`;:;x
Lf-
flat f1wor
..d:a "�,Ti - _.,�n 5",S•,,.i.•� ;�,�!7��f'3t.. "1;_ `..�>.r :. �:_:,�.yy z.,:ret
�_
.'.-.. r1' .:�:`•., —
'F+y!':, ,`�� �•�`:itt;..L'"'^Y''yf.,• '1>"^ _w.yivl��.:C.�..-�'"�',:+L' _r,;?'��.ie:.�� _
..CAN. t.J"`.. :�...+ J' •.. -•_'
�.'. •`A�r•.
slope up slope up
•.; C:'b� s� i :.xi "A�.. ..,:•r'.�_.. 5_ T•p .J. "`1 `
corner notch optional
10-6 Parking Efficiency Factor
- Breakdown
Example 1 Example 2
stall size 8'6" 910"
angle of parking 90° 90°
cars per floor 296 282
area per floor 88,752 86.688
sq. ft. per car 299.8 307.4
Note:
No consideration has been made for location of elevator and
. stair towers. '
proach'or 90-degree turns; the curb=ti►-curb di- Care should be taken io keep all turns on the
mension should range fi•oin 15 to 16 feei. 'ramp superelevated (banked), or at least level
The veriieal curve transition is based on the. without a negative superelevation: The banking
angle of the car at depariure, the angle of its ap on a ramp 70 feet in diameter should have.be-
proach; and the bfeakover angle as the cai reach- tweeri 6 and 9 inches of slope, depending on sin-
es the iop of the Tamp. The change in grade gle or double dropping characteristics.
should generally be equal to one=half the, ramp One of the mist imp�irtant design features of a
grade (see Exhibit 10--7): circular ramp is ih6 continuity of grade. If the
Access points to and ffaih ramps should be de- percentage increase in the grade is'661 standard-
veltlped so that they Blend 'arid do hot produce irreg- ized throughout the run; patrons will be hesitant
ularit es in the ramps a discomfort to the patron. to drive the ramp:
On circular ramp systems, outside diaifieters Years ago; circular ramps were designed with a
vary ffea an absolute inininiutn 6f 67 feet;• with solid core for structural 4fid other design consul
na limitation on the niazim`um: The average di= erations. Gircular rammps'should hoi be enclosed
ameter of an express eircular exit ramp is be= with solid walls on the inside or outside diarne-
tween 70 and 72 feet: If the circular ramp is an ters; solid walls tend to cause an adverse psycho-
express-entrance. the outside diametei should be logical effect on drivers. The same is true for
kept to a minirfivm of 75 fe'et: sifaighi=run ramps since people often object to
The percent of grade tin a circular 'ramp' var- driving in tunnels: If the ramp must be enclosed
ies with, the floor`-io-floor" height; the width of the for'.s'o'me reason; the drive path.area and access
driving path, th"e n`umb'e'r of drops per revol(i- points should b-6 well lighted and marked with
tion, and the civerall diameter of the fdffip: The signs:
percentage is basically ca'lc.'ulated, at" the hater Cuibing sh'o'uld be provided cif' all circular
wall, the center line of the 4fi've path; an'd tie"in- tamp "systems and located at both 6utside and in-
ner wall side'walls' of the drive path. It protects cars and
drivers wh'iie.'also facilitating prciper' drainage (sec
E hr'biii 10'=8'): The width,of the drive path de-
F2' minimum"
5
P•ran'sitiiin'
parking (Tour— w l'U%' slr`�pe" 12' ki'6A"Iom"'
w, 14rU4 Niir
10-1 S'ecti'ori—ramp" design.
13' Co'16" drive-path 6" to 8" parapet
Val
16-8-Circular ramp.
68
pends on the overall outside diameter of the cir- the first space available; however,.in a shopping
cular ramp, with the width increasing as the center, a parker prefers to roam the building
diameter of the ramp decreases. looking for the available space closest to his des-
The number of revolutions of a single dropping tination. The all-day parker can be assigned to a
circular ramp should be kept to a maximum of particular floor; rather than roaming the parking
five to six, and the ramp should be capable of areas, this parker can then go directly to the des-
handling between 600 and 800 cars per hour. ignated floor.
While a circular downward ramp peaks at ap- Simplicity and parking ease are the basis to a
proximately 800 cars per hour, an inbound ramp good parking design, whether it is a parking
handles"a maximum of 700 cars per hour. With a structure or lot. The driver should be able to fol-
1-hour discharge time as a standard, the garage low a logical traffic pattern throughout the'park-
ramp system should have at least one ramp cir- ing system.
cult for every 700 to 800 cars.
A circular ramp system should be designed Stairs and Elevators
with counterclockwise circulation whenever pos- The two major vertical transportation forms in
sible. This continuous left turn travel pattern a parking garage are elevators and stairs. Build-
keeps the driver near the inside diameter of the ing code requirements generally dictate the exit
ramp, where visibility and the driver's ability to travel distance to stairs, thus limiting their luca-
judge distances are under optimum conditions. tion. The factors involved in the provision and lo-
7�� cation of stairs are influenced by the number of
Module Design parking levels in a structure. If stairs are the only
It is generally more efficient in both lots and means of vertical transit, as in a one- or two-
structures to develop the parking modules paral- level building, they should be located near the
lel to the long dimension of the site. Efficient cov- patron's destination. If there are four or more
erage is then developed by finding the repetitive parking floors, the stair locations may not be as
Module increments which best develop the width. critical—except to meet building code require-
The next consideration is the use of the park- ments—because most patrons will use the eleva-
ing structure or lot with regard to.the following: tors. .
the type of generator and whether or not there is If at all possible, a stairway should be located
a high transient turnover mixed with all-day park- adjacent to the elevator tower. If the elevator is
ing or all-day parking mixed with a few transient not operating, patrons will walk down, and even
spaces. Employee parking, downtown parking, if the elevator is only slow in operating, patrons
suburban medical centers, and shopper parking often prefer to walk down the stairway rather
all have different turnover characteristics which than wait.
must be considered in the design of a parking Stairs and elevators should be located at the
facility. corner of the structure, preferably on the external
In most cases, development of a parking struc-
ture for high turnover parking in a downtown
area should be a combination of the following:
• One-way traffic flow—however, some major chain stores prefer 90-degree parking with two- , 1 ENTR A®®ICE
way aisles because it offers shorter travel dis-
tances, less driver regimentation, and wider
areas for parking visibility.
• Long-span construction.
• Gradually sloped floors. _ `
• An express ramp system to facilitate exits.
At shopping centers where parking areas are
much larger, flat flours with in and out express - ` -
ramps are usually satisfactory. For all-day park-
ing, a repetitive floor pattern and express ramps
to and from the floors are normally required. It
has been found that the downtown parker will cir-
c ulate throu-,h a buildin and generall ark in 10-9 Patrons should not have to use the automobile
g generally p entrance to reach the stairways.
- 3 ,� e q.1�
'the number of elevators provided for a parking
{ facility varies with the total capacity of the
structure. The general standard is one elevator
X I for up to 250 spaces; two elevators for up to 500
�. spaces. and three to four elevators for up to 1,000
Yc
� M spaces.
The most common elevator size in a parking
. facility has a capacity of 2,500 pounds with a 5-
p 1 -- foot by 7-foot cab. The vertical speed of the ele-
vators should not be less than 200 feet per min-
ute. The two basic types of elevators are eletric
c
or hydraulic, each with its own characteristics,
advantages; and disadvantages.
x As previously mentioned, the exterior finish
can be made of any material but should be aes-
thetically pleasing and conform to the overall de-
sign of the project. Glass=backed elevator cabs
with a glass-backed tower have been incorporated
1040 if possible, a stairway should be loeaied into the elevator tower design for security pur- .
adjacent id the elevator towel: poses. An intercom system should be installed in
the elevator to feed back to the main cashier
booth or manager's office so that the elevators
wall of the building or designed in such a man- can be monitored. Security also dictates the loca-
ner so that the least number of parking spaces tion of elevators and the arrangement of lobbies.
are lost. The cost per car space is thus minimized Lobby areas throughout the building should face
because the design maximizes the total number- a street and be glass=enclosed so that people can
of spaces. be seen standing in the lobby from the sur-
Depending on local code requirements; the rounding area: The ground floor should be highly
stair tower design can be either completely en= visible with no bends or blind areas leading to
closed with solid walls, enclosed with glass on the elevators. The elevator tower and lobby area
one or more sides, made of all glass, or be open; at the ground floor should be located in view of
The exterior finish of a stair tower can be of any the cashier area or manager's office. If this pre-
design the architect finds compatible with the ex seats a problem, a closed circuit TV surveillance
terior appearance of the structure and the sur- system should be incorporated into the design.
rounding area. The aesfhestics of the stair and
elevator towers depend on the owner`s budget. Car Size
Materials vary from brick. precast concrete, and In the past few years, the small car has cap-
block to the many- different types of form liners Lured a significant portion of the new car market.
used with poured-in-place or precast c•onc•tete. It would be foolish not to provide special park-
Fcir security reasons, at least one or two sides of ing stalls for small cars in plans for new facilities.
the stair tower should include glass running vet= (See Chapter 11 for a discussion on small cars.)
tically the height of the tower. In existing parking structures or lots, space
The elevators should lie located in the portion for small cars should be considered so that all, or
of the parking facility nearest to the patrons des= portions cif; areas for standard size cars c•an be
tination. In addition to a letter and numeral sys= converted to compact stalls in the future. Exhib-
tem, color coding of flours should be used for its 10-11 and 10-12 illustrate how certain initial or
identification. Buttons on the elevators inside base designs can be converted to parking facili-
panel should contain the color, letter, or number ties for small cars.
corresponding to the various flciors in the struc=
lure. This subtle security method helps a patron
recall tire correct parking level; thus, fewer peo-
ple will wander floors in search of vehicles:
10-11 Future Conversion of a Base De-
sign Scheme (Angle Parking) to Parking
for Small Cars Only (90 degrees)
344' ` overall dimension
upbound circuit
downward circuit
3.,bat.,au ��.,: �}'yi!ti.�•f.T:' :y�1-'�:�.��.✓��:�� �p;.'r'''` :•:�.•:,. ::' zry:}i-w
.A. :.,.1:.. .t}.f�.�;y.;..:t•.'y,f h.N,�..,y_Y,'rr. Y....f,.,ii �{•" �lu.�:tiYir�.,V y��!S•.i �� •..4,�...�� ".
.�;... _ ..yam:".:.:: � .. �r�•'�'
- :fir:1' +� ';- .Y A'. }} •�:iti..,'iJ ',.f°�,�.�5yw;^ '.�.yC;::.-�:' 'Y�1„'�,�fi
Plan of Base Design Scheme Partial Plan of
(no scale) Parking Module
(no scale)
Design Criteria:
stall size 8'6"
angle of parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700 700
cars per floor 136
area per floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,592 4>b�
efficiency ratio . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298.47
stall size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,0„
angle of parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700 3
cars per floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
3
area per floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.592
efficiency ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317.12 a
18' 20' 18,
56' clear I
F- 3
y - 10
10-12 Conversion of a Base Design
Scheme to Parking for Small Cars Only.
(90 degrees)
344' overall dimension
y�era 1 yy •.7.i t : w7.
..
�'4�` t7 "4�i_.M1•_5•_ �...�5 C h � i`• .} '?.
.'y,4•y 'n it`�1 g.�p.{.,,afx f Ail� Yy ;?. '.'$ 4] �'y f�r;u`, M1a•'y
74,
l.iaAA, .• r r?,;v
' .+n.. kti F 'f'4v F • """# k r`f'F h�,.,A 9 r� "k'c'�"_ ��,E':' i.... --TA, .dx:' �A i.Ia � �;,. '�k� �}�'�.. ,•Fr•` piia•-.2�. 'ta4.:
. w
`� ".k' �.:... �....Tti..4%1.. r?i�,-"'... }r:`:—.•i't`:z3}'.f�:.. __ _ _.3� 'i;F:..'#�..;-.
Plan of Base Design Scheme Partial Plan of
Converted to Small Cars Parking Module
(no scale) (no scale)
Design Criteria:
stall size . . . . . 7'6"
angle of parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90'
cars per floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
area per floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.592 s
efficiency ratio . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247.51
s
Net gain of(28) cars over base w/8'6" 3
stalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.59% —
Net gain of(36) ears over base w/9'0"
stalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.4717
EI
16' 24' 16'
56' clear
72 F-3 —�
Long and Short Spans.
'The majority of self-service garages built to-
dav are Ion—span construction with no columns
in the parking- area. This trend developed be-
cause of the quick obsolescence of short-span
construction with columns between the cars, anti
because of the change in automobile dimen- G
ns. The long-span design generally costs 15
percent more than an equivalent shitrt-span de-
sign. but because of the larger capacity. the cost *,
per car space is only approximately 10 percent
more. The advantages of a lone-span design in-
elude:
® Column-free floor areas.which simplifies main-
tenance and improves overhead lighting.
®-Less damage to automobiles. —$
An improved psychological effect on patrons _
who feel they have more freedom of movement
in a wider parking area.
VW
o Greater flexibility to restripe stalls to.accom-
modate the changing automobile size. 10-13 Many developers and owners prefer that
their parking structures be directly
s Fewer car spaces lost due to careless parkers in connected to the buildings they serve by
a short-span, three-car bay: in an equivalent means of a bridge or tunnel.
Iona-span design, other drivers eventually ma-
neuver in and take up the slack.
Spans vary depending on module design and Bridges should be as open as possible with
width, but they basically range from about 50 feet glass walls for visibility. For easy flow of pedestri-
to 64 feet and generally require a floor-to-floor an movement, they should have a minimum
height from 9 feet 6 inches to 11 feet 6 inches. A width of 10 feet, depending on length and use.
minimum of three car bays should be used in a Most currently designed enclosed bridges are air-
short-span design, and the columns should be set conditioned, carpeted, and contain indirect
in from the aisle far enough to allow free and lighting. The carpeting serves two functions—to
easy maneuvers into the parking stall. A column clean shoes before entering the store and to elim-
between cars takes approximately 9 inches to 1 inate the hollow sound pedestrians make when
foot of usable maneuvering space from the adja- crossing the bridge.
cent stall. Interior columns tend to.slow driver In major downtown or congested areas, tunnel
movement into and out of the parking stall. design can be complicated by interference with
Short-span design is most often used.in multipur- underground utilities. this can result in increased
pose parking structures where the air rights are costs due to the relocation of these utilities. If
devoted to other uses, such as an office building, possible, the tunnel connections between the
hotel, motel, or apartments. Such facilities tend parking facility and the generator should be ex-
to use smaller or square columns.between bays. posed-on one or both sides by berming or sloping
thus limiting parking configurations in the strut- up to match the existing ground conditions. Al-
ture below. though such a solution might not be possible in
congested areas, it might be feasible in a Bevel-
Bridges and Tunnels opment with enough available acreage to accom-
Nlany owners and developers are increasingly modate this design feature. With the use of glass
requiring that their parking facilities be con- construction in the exposed areas, natural light
netted directly to the buildings they serve by and ventilation are allowed to enter, thus creating
bridges or tunnels, preferably by bridges. an open feeling for the pedestrian as well as
minimizing security.problems. A television sur-
veillance system could also be incorporated at
strategic points within the tunnel for added secu-
rity.
streets, with sufficient reservoir space as well. A
traffic study of streets in the site vicinity should
be conducted to determine the best possible ac-
cess points. These should be located approx- -
> �- ,b m imately 75 to 100 feet from any corner
•; �` intersection and are usually specified in local
codes.
It is generally more convenient to enter the
,- facility from a one-way street or with a right turn
from a two-way street. Left turns into a garage
from a major two-way street during peak periods
can be difficult if not impossible because of the
high volume of traffic approaching from the op-
. `' "` � posite direction.
Single-entrance lanes from the street should be
from 13 feet to 16 feet wide, tapering down to
approximately 10 feet at the approach to the con-
' . LL trol equipment. Double-entrance lanes should
n xz be a minimum of 24 feet wide. Ramps leading di-
rectly from entrances should not begin their
slope for at least two car lengths beyond the con-
trolled entrance area. Entrance lanes should
contain adequate reservoir space to handle a free
flow of traffic from the street. On high traffic
A "i;� ,... streets, it is preferable to locate the ticket-issuing
K or card-reading equipment at least three to four
car lengths within the building to provide reser-
voir space. If access points are combined with
exit areas. it is a good design practice to arrange
? r ahem so that vertical transit—by elevators and
stairs—can be observed by the facility attendant.
Since the control equipment—ticket-issuing
machines, card readers, and gates—are automat-
is and subject to malfunctions, they should be
t ,
visible or monitored by the attendant on duty.
;.: .�. The number of required exit lanes is deter-
- "__- mined by the facility's capacity. with one lane for
each 200 to'250 cars. The exit points should
Oklahoma City is a separate express ramp
10-14 key" feature of this.parking structure in generally be located at an acceptable distance
for levels six through nine. The_ramp eases from traffic intersections and are usually spec-
morning rush hours by allowing motorists to ified by local codes. As with entering from a one-
enter the upper levels while others enter at
ground,level. Similarly, in'the evening, way street. it is generally more convenient to
motorists can leave from the upper levels exit onto a one-way street. A left turn from the
without waiting for traffic-to exit from the exit lane onto a two-way street must cress onc•om-
lower levels. ing traffic. possibly causing delay at the exit
area. Exits usually require a minimum of 14 feet
ce for the lane, island, and cashier
6 inches of spa
Ingress. and Egress booth altogether. A cashier can handle approx-
"The number of entranc•es.to.the facility varies imately 180 to.225 cars per hour per lane if a sim-
with the capacity of the parking structure or lot. ple rate structure is used. A complex rate
One inbound lane would be required for a garage structure can reduce this capacity and is becom-
with a capacity of 300 to 500 cars. For larger ga- ing more prevalent. The number of required
rages holding:500 or more cars. additional en-
trance lanes should allow access can different �✓
;4 - �3►
�•a�hiers is determined by using a 40- or 50-min- Site conditions must be close to ideal for me-
u chanical systems because of the higher c�mstruc-
te exit time for discharging the garage's entire
capWcity. 'the, exit area in front of the cashier tion cost per car space. Normally, a larger-than-
booths should provide enough reservoir space or average ground floor area is required as reservoir
backup from booths. space for entering vehicles due to limitations in
if possible, the exit area should have.no visual the rate at which vehicles can be stored. Skilled
Obstructions and.vision should be unimpeded as personnel are needed to operate and maintain the
the driver exits. One of the major problems of system, which leads to increased.operating and
exit flow is caused by pedestrians crossing the maintenance expenses. An up-to-date preventive
sidewalk. One or two car lengths should be al- maintenance program is necessary to minimize
lowed after a car has passed the exit control gate: malfunctions; but even with such a program,
this shortens exit time by preventing cars from breakdowns occur and dissatisfied patrons are
stacking up and thus hampering the cashier's unable to retrieve their cars until repairs are
transaction with the next patron. made. These factors contribute to a rate struc-
ture which is generally higher than that of a self-
Mechanical Systems service garage.
Because there are many types of mechanical In mechanical garages, two types of elevating
garages in operation throughout the world, it is systems are used. The traveling elevator moves
valuable to highlight a few of the more common both horizontally and vertically to reach the park-
mechanical systems in use. Most mechanical sys- ing spaces. while the fixed elevator only moves
tems are operated by attendants; however, some vertically. With either elevator, the operation can
of the newer systems developed are fully auto-
be fully or partly automatic.
matic.
Ilk
i
/ � J
P u ' =
1T
ro ar r 'xrJ
- �
10-15 Ramps need not be unattractive.
V.3 . 3� I�
Parking Control ,Equipment mobile detectors; fee computers; cashier-atten-
Narking control equipment is used as an aid to dant booths or stations; intercoms; closed circuit
control traffic, issue tickets, identify and allow TV; and.space counting devices.I
the entry of authorized contract customers, ac- In the future, equipment design will continue
cept payment of parking charges, count available to improve and become more reliable, possess
spaces, and compute the parking charges due. additional capabilities, and contribute to better
The major components of a parking control parking facilities.
system are: ticket issue machines; parking gates; 'Refer to Chapter 16 for a discussion of revenue procedures
tokens, keys, coins, and credit card entry-exit and equipment.
devices; off-street meters including the ticket
meter machines and the slot meter boxes; auto-
. ..i'
76
Aim
tf shall b7ac,,,,7
way. confine emitted -light to the parking area, and the light
shall be required as source shall not be visible from outside of said area.
srtment. All driveway where important architectural considerations indicate the
is sub3ect to the ap- desirability of fixtures which expose the light source to
ortation engineer. view from beyond the parking area, the fixtures and lighting
layout shall be specifically approved by the . authority
races, indicated previously. Maximum average illumination at
rag minimum widths plus ground level shall be 3.0 foot candles and, except for park
ance on each side to a parking lots, shall not exceed 1.0 foot candles in an R
-t in height. District. No light source within a parking structure in an
R or R-PK District shall be visible from a public right-
of-way adjoining an R District.
17.68. 176 Parkinq lot landscaping.
:wo-way Parking lots shall have perimeter planting areas as
)ne-way prescribed by the following schedule and, in addition, shall
have 5 percent of the area within the perimeter planting
strips devoted to planting areas distributed throughout the
parking lot.
Ajoining an Ajoining
ne-way Parking Lot Ajoining R Use, R OS, PS, CD,
wo-way Dimension Street District or PD, CO, CL,
Adjoining Property Residential IG Districts
Property Line Line (ft.) PD (ft.) (ft.)
sing a property line of Less than 40 feet 2 3.5 2
d between a height
-eet from the property 40 to 150 feet 5 3.5 2
rom the edge of the More than 150 feet 10 3.5 3.5
P line intersect=
w..�.ever is less. Planting areas shall be planted, irrigated and main-
tained as prescribed in Section 17.64.210, and shall include
.1s and fences. at least one tree per 6 parking spaces distributed through-
s serving a nonresi- out the parking lot.
adjoining R District
a solid concrete or 17.68.180 Parkin - structure yards and landscaping.
that the height of a A par ing structure in a C or I District having at-
an R District shall grade parking adjoining a street shall have a 5-foot plant-
ing area adjoining the street property line. Upper parking
for 5 or more cars levels may be built over the area required for landscaping,
creened from an ad- provided that such recessed area shall have a minimum
ind floor residential vertical clearance of 9 feet.
height, except that
-ng a required front 17.68.190 Additional design standards for parking lots and
structures.
Parking lots shall have paving, drainage, wheel stops,
lighting, space marking, directional signs, ramp grades,
11 be in scale with litter collection containers and queuing space for drive-in
::ot, facilities or ticket dispensing booths or machines as
except in city
specifically approved prescribed by guidelines prepared by the public works
',ated authority. In department.
'gall be designed to Parking structure design standards: The following
227
F- 3 -
3� r
t
f
i
EW
` ! ,�I+:. • .N. \J. 1' f,�J �yV F �;a�j 5�'ViN�.•:r 1.oy+ l+l� �.1.V^.,W��';y s,.•:
�.^•^ tc.� u r; + •� T+ 9 ,i. ,yip., �' TB•�'"• t ^ .. � sJ1,9' •• 7 r/
cc y• •� tM1 �l µ
?AS A1>f A - covv$'d
criteria shall be used in reviewing use permits for the D. For ramps 65 f
construction of parking structures: exceed 16 perce
A. The compatability of exterior surface materials and the ramp not ex:
textures to the main structure. E. The slope of
B. The location of parking structure ingress and egress so percent, excludi
as to least impact residential streets or heavily
congested street intersections.
C. Facade length and height shall be limited so as to not
create large wall expanses without the benefit of
architectural relief and landscaping.
D. The setbacks shall be consistent with the requirement
for the underlying zone except that additional yards or
buffering may be• required as .is deemed necessary to
avoid detriment to adjacent property or_ to the general
welfare.
1 200 Location and desi n of off-street loading so es.
A ading area shall not be located in a require yard.
Required s aces shall not be within a building, and hall be
on the site f the use served or on an adjoining ite. All
loading space shall have adequate ingress a egress as
approved by the ublic works department, and shall, be
designed so trucks all not back in fr or out onto a
public street nor pa , in a street •ght-of-way. Every
loading space shall be d . igned and intained so that the
maneuvering, loading or u oadin of vehicles does not
interfere with the orderly m ent of traffic and pede-
strians on any street.
An exception to the pr ibiti against the backing of
vehicles in from or out o a public treet may be obtained
from the public works epartment if t dimensions of the
property are such at adequate, turnarou area cannot be
provided and the oading area is accessi a to a minor
street of low affic volume, the entrance t which is at
least 100 f t from an intersection and the d of the
loading sp a nearest the street is located at leas 40 feet
form th curb on the opposite side of the street.
cept in CG or IG Districts, .a loading area vis' le
fr a street shall be screened on 3 sides by a fence, wa
hedge at least 6 feet in height.
17, am
A. All pa lans involving ramps-shall amanied
by profile showing the ramp, ramp transitions and
overhead and adjacent wall clearances.
B. The length of a ramp is defined as that portion of the
ramp from the beginning of the transition at one end of
the ramp to the end of the transition at the opposite
end of the ramp.
C. For ramps longer than 65 feet, the ramp grade shall not
exceed 12 percent, with the first and last 8 feet of
the ramp not exceeding 6 percent.
228
tN• /r
3. 35
V
aermits for the D. For ramps 65 feet or less, the ramp grade shall not
exceed 16 percent, with the first and last 10 feet of
e Materials and the ramp not exceeding 8 percent.
E. The slope of all parking areas shall not exceed .5
_-,ss and egress so percent, excluding ramps.
ee.t s or heavily
_ted so as to not
the benefit of
i the requirement
diti.onal yards or
med necessary to
-)r to the general
t Loading spaces.
a required yard.
ing, and shall be
Dining site. All
is and egress as
and shall be
m or out onto a
:t-of-way. Every
,fined so that the
hi -s does not
r• and pede-
st the backing of
t_ may be obtained
'.imensions of the
i area cannot be
able to a minor
to which is at
the end of the
at least 40 feet
greet.
ing area visible
by a fence, wall
Ll be accompanied
transitions and
it portion of the
ion at one end of
at the opposite
p gr,ide shall not
last 8 feet of
229
_3,3b
r.
Y
i V.E.4W.4 IItVYNE CODE
B. ..Design of Landscaping. Parking lot landscaping shall be located so as to discourage
pedestrians from having to cross any landscaped areas to reach building entrances
from parked cars. This can be achieved through proper orientation of the landscaped
fingers and islands.
C. Screening. Open parking areas shall be screened from view from adjacent properties
and streets using walls, berms and/or evergreen landscaping. This screening shall
have an eventual minimum height of three and one-half(3%)feet.
V.E404.5. Location of Parking Spaces.
The purpose of the requirements in this section is to ensure that parking facilities are
situated so that they can conveniently access the uses they are intended to serve.
A. All parking spaces required by this ordinance shall be located on the same site they
are intended to serve, except as authorized by administrative relief (see section
V.E-406).
B. All automobile spaces required for residential uses shall be located, at a maximum,
the following distances from the units they are serving:
-Resident parking 200 feet
-Visk"parking 250 feet
Distances shall be measuieed from a dwelling unit's entry to the parking space(s)
Serving that unit.For developments where a stairway or elevator provides access to
dwelling:un t(&), that.stairway or elevator shall be considered to be the entrance to
the,dwelling unit(s)for the purpose of computing distances.
Due to design considerations,it may not be possible to meet the maximum distances
identified. Variation from these distances may be requested through administrative
relief(see section V.E406).
C. All carpool parking spaces required shall be located as close as is practical to the
entrance(s)of the use they are intended to serve.The purpose of this is to encourage
carpooling by providing carpool users with the most convenient parking spaces.
D. All handicapped spaces shall be located as close as is practical to the entrance(s)to
the use they are intended to serve, and oriented so that a user of the handicapped
apace does not have to go past the rear of automotive parking spaces in order to reach
the building's main entrance.
E. All bicycle spaces shall be located as close as is practical to the entrance(s)to the use
they are intended to serve, but situated so that they do not obstruct the flow of
pedestrians using the building entrance(s)or using sidewalks.
V.E404. Parking Structures.
Parking structures require unique design considerations due to the fact that they can
significantly contribute to the building bulk on a site.The following requirements apply
only to parking located within above-grade parking structures:
A. Landscaping.
1. The exterior elevations of parking structures shall be designed to minimize the
use of blank concrete facades. This can be accomplished through the use of
textured concrete, planters or trellises, or other architectural treatments. The
approval body for the proposed use shall determine if a proposed development
meets the intent of this requirement.
SuM No.29 ,3
4578 F.. 3
ZONING 4 V.E404.9 ,
2. The perimeter of the parking structure.shall be landscaped at ground level with
a minimum of one(1)tree(15-gallon)for every twenty(20)feet in addition to any
required streetscape or boundary landscaping.
3. No, parking lot landscaping shall be required for parking spaces located in
parking structures.
V,E�404.7. Drive-Thru 1�'acilities.
Drive-thru facilities require special consideration as their design can significantly im-
pact the vehicular circulation on a site. Pedestrian access shall not cross the drive-thru
lane, whenever feasible. The following requirements apply to any use with drive-thru
facilities:
A. Each drive-thru lane shall be separated from the circulation routes necessary for
ingress or egress from the property,or access to any parking space.
B. Each drive-thru lane shall be striped, marked or otherwise distinctly delineated
C. The vehicle stacking capacity of the drive-thru facility and the design and location of
the ordering and pickup facilities will be determined by the approval body for the
proposed use based on appropriate traffic engineering and planning data.The appli-
cant shall submit to the city a traffic study addressing the following issues:
1. Nature of the product_or service being offered.
2. Method by which the order is processed.
3. Time required to serve a typical customer.
4. Arrival rate of customers.
5. Peak demand hour.
6. Anticipated vehicular stacking required.
V.E-404.8. Gates.
Gates which limit or control access to parking require special consideration as their
design can significantly impact the parking demand and usage and the vehicular circula-
tion on a site.Gates shall require a conditional use permit from the zoning administrator.
In instances where gates are being requested for a project that is subject to the review
and approval of the planning commission, such request for gates shall be heard by the
planning commission. The applicant shall submit.to the city a study addressing the
following issues:
1. Type and operation of the gate.
2. Adequacy of vehicle stacking area at gate.
3. Effect of gate on parking usage and distribution on site.
4. Effect of gate on parking for surrounding or adjacent areas.
V.E404.9. Time Restricted Customer Parking.
Commercial centers may request time-restricted customer parking. Such requests shall
be utilized only for high customer turnover businesses for the purpose of discouraging
long-term parking at selective locations. Requests for time-restricted parking shall be
submitted to the community development department.The appropriate approval author-
ity,as specified below,shall have the discretion to grant or deny the request on the basis
of the factors set forth in section V.E404.9,C below.
A. Application Requirements The following information is required for submittal of
time restricted parking:
1. A completed application form.
'&.No.22 38
i("^_ 3 4579
P"
VEHICLE P, JNG AND LOADING REQUIREME ) 18.06.020-18.06.030
extraordinary circums ances applicable to the No. 135 entitled "Driveway Standard Detail"
site of the use to be se ved which would render and Standard Plan No. 402. entitled "Parking
strict conformance wit the provisions of .this Structure Standard Detail.
subsection unreasonabl said required off-street Handicapped Parking. Pro-
parking may be provide adjacent to, or within vision shall be made for handicapped parking as
close proximity to, sai site as provided here- otherwise required by. law and in compliance
inafter. All property sed for such off-site with Standard Plan No. 436 entitled "Handi-
parking shall be under Jo t ownership, or under capped Parking Standard Detail."
agreement approved as o form by the City .040 Tandem Parking. Tandem park-
Attorney. Said agreemen shall be recorded in ing for required off-street parking spaces shall be
the office of the county r corder and a recorded prohibited except as otherwise expressly
copy thereof filed with th Planning Department authorized herein. (Ord. 4383 § l (part);
prior to the issuance of ny building permits. December 28, 1982.)
Said agreement shall spe ify the number and
location of the off-site pa king spaces and shall
assure that said spaces s 11 be accessible and 18.06.030 REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT OF
available at all times for p rking in conjunction PARKING AREAS.
with the use for which sa parking spaces are All vehicle parking and outdoor
required. Termination of id agreement with- storage areas shall be fully paved and surfaced
out providing said required off-street parking in so as to eliminate dust and shall be further
an alternate manner other ise permitted here- improved as follows:
under shall constitute .a violation of this .010 Adjacent to Residential Zones.
subsection of the ,Code. (Ord. 4383 § 1 (part); A solid fence or wall six (6) feet in height shall
December 28, 1982.) be provided adjacent to any nonresidential
parking area that abuts any residentially zoned
lot. Within the front portion of such parking
18.06.020 LAYOUT AND DESIGN OF area, said fence or wall shall be reduced to
PARKING AREAS. thirty-six (36) inches in height to a depth equal
All references n this Chapter to to the required front yard depth of the adjoining
"Standard Plans" or "Erigineering Details" residential property with the exception of Area
shall refer to documents o i file in the Depart- E, "Line of Sight for Pedestrians," as shown on
ment of Public Works of.t e City of Anaheim Standard Plan No. 135 entitled "Driveway
including amendments to, such documents as Standard Detail." Bumper guards shall be
from time to time appro ed by resolution of installed and maintained to protect the fence or
the City Council. wall. Placement shall be a minimum of thirty
.010 Layout d Design. All off- (30) inches from the wall.
street parking areas sh• 1 be designed and .020 Adjacent to Street Frontages.
improved in compliance it
the provisions of In instances where fences or walls are not
Standard Plans No. 60 and 602 entitled required, a suitable concrete curb not less than
"Minimum Off-Street arking Dimensions"; six (6) inches in height shall be securely installed
provided, however, that here it can be shown and maintained adjacent to the boundary of any
that unusual site cond tions or topography parking area abutting a street in a manner such
require modification in the off-street parking that vehicles may not encroach or intrude into
area standards to permi reasonable develop-. the public right-of-way, required landscaped
ment of such property, si ch modifications may setback or pedestrian walkway as shown on
be approved by the Planning Director. Such Standard Plan No. 602 entitled "Minimum Off-
moditications shall be mited to matters of Street Parking Dimensions — Sheet 2."
layout and design of the arking area and in no .030 Lighting of Parking Areas
case shall result in a redu tion of the minimum Adjoining Residential Premises. Any lights
number of off-street parki g spaces required by provided to illuminate such parking areas shall
this Code be so arranged and directed as to reflect the light
020 Parking Structures. All parking away from adjoining residential premises and
facilities s'tT'Tfa a designed an improved in shall not exceed a height of twelve (12) feet.
compliance with the provisions of Standard Plan (Ord. 4383 § 1 (part); December 28, 1982.)
�J
478 (Anaheim 10-83)
39
VEHICLE PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS 18.06.040-18.06.050
18.06.040 PARKING SPACE AND ACCESS .032 Additional small car spaces in
DESIGN. lieu of required standard car spaces shall be
Except as otherwise provided herein, subject to the approval of the Planning Director
the following minimum standards shall apply: upon a finding that such modification would not
.010 Minimum Dimensions of be detrimental to the public welfare and interest
Vehicle Accessways. The minimum turning and based upon information contained in a
radit►s of any vehicle accessway shall be not less parking demand study prepared by an inde-
than twenty-five (25) feet except as provided pendent traffic engineer licensed by the State of
for angle parking in accordance with Standard California, or such other study as approved by
Plans No. 601 and 602 entitled "Minimum Off- the City Traffic Engineer, and provided to the
Street Parking Dimensions"; provided, further, City by the developer at such party's sole
that all covered or enclosed residential parking expense. In no case, other than covered resi-
spaces shall have a minimum clear horizontal dential spaces, shall the number of small car
access width of not less than nine (9) feet. spaces approved hereunder exceed thirty-five
.020 Minimum Dimensions-of Park- percent (35%) of the total number of required
ing Spaces. Except for parallel parking spaces parking spaces.
which in any zone shall have minimum dimen- .033 Designations. All small car
sions of at least eight (8) feet in width by spaces shall be clearly and distinctively marked
twenty-two (22) feet in length, the minimum as small car spaces by signs or other markings
dimensions of any parking spaces shall be as approved by the Planning Director as shown on
follows: Standard Plan No. 602 entitled, "Minimum Off-
Street Parking Dimensions _ Sheet 2." (Ord.
Zone Type of Space Standard Car Smau Car 4383 § 1 (part); December 28, 1982.)
covered 1 or not
Residential private garage 10'x 20' applicable
Residential open 81f2'x 19' 71/2' x 15' 18.06.050 MINIMUM NUMBER, TYPE AND
or DESIGN OF OFF-STREET
9' x 18'
Nonresidential covered 8'!i' x 19' 7'1W x 15' PARKING SPACES AND AREAS.
or open or The minimum number of off-street
9' x 18' parking spaces provided for any land use shall
1 not be less than the following numbers given for
Minimum dimensions of covered residential subject use(s); provided, however, that any use
spaces may be reduced to 8'/z' x 20' provided not listed below shall provide a minimum of
said space is not adjacent to any wall, column, nine tenths (0.9) of one space per each
pole or other structural element. The minimum employee on the largest work shift, plus such
span between structural elements shall be 28'/z' additional parking as is determined to be
and shall be subject to the approval of the reasonably necessary by the Planning Director
Building Department. to meet the parking demand for such use. Where
.025 Any required covered parking a combination of uses is proposed, the minimum
spaces shall be visually screened by solid number of spaces.provided shall be not less than
components amounting to not less than 50% the sum total of the requirements for each
of each wall. Such screening may consist of individual t
solid walls, wood lattice work, or other YPe of use to be established.
For purposes of interpretation of
architectural devices. this section, all rooms other than a living room,
.030 Small Car Stalls. All required dining room, bathroom, hall lobby, closet
parking spaces shall comply with the standard or pantry shall be considered as a bedroom.
car dimensions specified in Subparagraph .020 Further, in computing parking requirements,
above except as follows: fractional requirements shall be rounded off to
.031 A maximum of twenty-five the nearest whole number, fractions of one-half
percent (25%) of the total number of required (0.5) or more being counted as one full space.
off-street parking spaces other than covered .010 Residential Uses:
residential spaces may be provided in small .0I1 Single-Family Dwellings. A
car stalls of minimum dimensions as set forth in total of not less than four (4) off-street parking
x Subsection .020 above.
` q 1) 479 (Anaheim 10-83)
ON-SITE PARKING S+ALL'S
(REFERENCE FIGUWW1!
F
STANDARD CAR
Be tk Bso idth
Curb Stall Ona•Way Two-Way Bay Width Bay Width Overlap Overlap
.91 - Angie Length Length Aisle Aide (One-Way) (Two-Wev) (One-WOv) (Two-Way)
Y 30 17'4 17•-0" 12•-0" 20•-0" 46.0.. 54'.0-F -36610 19t4.5--.
1 1
40 13'-3" 18'-9" 12'-0" 20'-0" 49'-6" V'.6" 43'-0 1 i,
/ 45 12'4Y" 19'-6" 14'-0" 21'-0" 53'-0" 60'-0" 47'-0" 47'-0"
T 50 11'-0" 20'-0" 15'-0" 21'-0" 55.-0., 611•0" 49 7" 55'.7"
B 60 9'-10" 2(Y-9" 18'-0". 22'-0" 59-6" 63'-6" 55'2" 59'-2"
TI,
'-6" 19'-0" -0"25' 25%0" 63'-0" OI.T. NA �=NA
90 -0" 18'-0" 25'-0" 25'-0" 61'-0" 61'-0" NA
A B C 01 D2 E1 E2 F1 F2
A
C D C SMALL CAR
Bay Width Bay Width
Curb Stall One-Way Two.Way Bay Width Bay Width Overlap Overlap
E Angle Length Length Aide Aisle (0ne:Wa4) (Two-Way) (Ono-Way) ITwo-Way)
FIGURE"A" 30 16'4Y" 14'-6" 12'4Y" 20'-0" 41'-0" 49'-0" 34'-0" 42'-0"
40 12'$" 15'-9" 174r" 20'-0" 4 r v 51'-8" Xr s8 45-.6--
45 11'-3" 16'-3" 14'-0" 21'-0" 46'.6" 53'.6" 41'-0" 481-0"
ENO STALL STANDARDS 50 Ur-W' 16'-9" 15'4r" - 21'.0" 48'.6" 54'-6" 43'-0" 49'-0"
80 9'-3" 17'-3" 18'-0" 22'.0" 52'-0" 56'-0" 48'-0" 52-0"
(7W") (Small Carl STANDARD 90 '8•4r' 15'40" 25'-0" 25'-0" 55'-0 -0" 55' " NA NA
7
90 7'-6" 15'-0" 25'-0" 25'41" 55'-0" 55'-0" NA NA
A B C 01 02 E1 E2 F1 F2
4 •Recommended Small Car Minimum
FIGURE"S"
GENERAL NOTES
1) Parking layouts can combine standard and small car uses on the
12' STANDARD same aisle which will cause the bay widths to vary accordingly.
I10') (Small Carl 2) Small car provisions:
A. Spaces shall be conveniently located for general use and
unassigned.They shall be clustered and designed to
FIGURE"C" CUTOFF discourage standard cars.
DISTANCE TABLE B. Spaces shall be marked for small cars per City Standards.
(W) C. Design and location of small car spaces shall be subject to
Combined' (C) review and approval by the City Traffic Engineer.
lot
Cuo 3) Only g y may
Driveway y parkin bays with 90 stalls m deadend.The end stall
Width Distance treatment shall conform to the design detailed in Figure"B"
(feet) (feet) or"C."
40 18.40 4) Parallel parking stalls shall be 8'x22'with a 12'aisle.
41 17.25 5) On-site traffic aisle provisions:
A. Two-way traffic requires a minimum aisle width of 20 feet
P-C D 1 42 16.10
and one-way, 12 feet.See Figure"D"for required corner
IQ14.% cutoffs.
rI 13.30 B. Minimum 14'verticle clearance.
44 45 12.65 6) Garage/carport parking stalls:
46 11.50 A. Covered spaces shall be a minimum of 10'x20'.Some width
ii-D variations are pprmitted,in multiple parking situations.
47 10.35 B. Minimum door width is 9'for single and 16'for double.
48 9.20 7) Driveways shall be a 20'minimum where two-way traffic is
FIGURE "0„ 49 8.00 desired and/or refuse collection or fire vehicle access is
01+02-W 50 6.90 necessary.
Combined Driveway Width-W 51 5.75 8) For private street parking requirements see Standard
When W is not in table,use the 52 4.60 Detail No. 122.
following formula to compute 53 3.45
cutoff distance(C) 54 2.30
C-18.4(56-W) 55 1.15
16 56 0.00
FOR HANDICAPPED PARKING�9
SEE STANDARD PLAN NO. 43 6
CITY OF ANAHEIM MINIMUM OFF-STREET
®EPARTMENr Of PiJSUC WORDS PARKING DIMENSIONS
i
ENGIN U RING OIVtSION
aPp .lye -��° __ lk4-704 �. _R" : srA�voe1
J �AACT City Engineer a Q t p Planning Oireator r Q Q t® OETAIL M. 6 O
PARKING STALL DESIGN
STANDARD CAR SMALL CAR
2'OVERHANG WITH 6"CURBS
�— — OR BUMPER BLOCKS ems'
f9-0"1
15, 74
(15'1
1 18-0"1
19 (1 1)
(181) 1 7• SMALL'
l 16'1 CAR
SMALL CAR ONLY'
'Stencil Each Stall or Groups of Three Stalls
Both Use 12"Letters.
ALTERNATE"A"
STANDAROCAR SMALL CAR
t== f�
7.6" 7.6"
(9101 (9.011) (810"1 1'1 (81011) IVY,)
1 '
(1
19'
f18')
7 Z 2' SMALL CAR ONLY
ALTERNATE -S..
CLOSED STRUCTURE DESIGN
WALLS GENERAL NOTES
1) All stall striping shall be 4"lines using white or yellow
TV traffic bearing paint(for either "A"or"B"alternates).
2) Bumper guards or 6"curbs shall be installed and main-
tained in the following parking conditions:
t0' 8 6" .6.. A) Adjacent to a wall or fence at a minimum setback of
(910") (9-0 ) 2%6""
Note: 17 is B) Alon�walkways with a varying setback range of 2'
Required for at 90 to 1'at 300 parking.
Dead End Stall C) Adjacent to street frontages,only a 6"curb shall be
used to.maintain a 5'setback from public property
20'With Dow and sidewalk.
19' (18')Without 3) Small car dimensions do not apply to closed parking
Door Maintain structures(i.e.,residential garages/carports; tuck under
6"Clearance parking) unless they are a multi-car(more than 30 cars)
unassigned structure.
AL Column 2 '" 4. Tandem parking permitted in limited situations and is
$ems subject to review and approval of the City Traffic .
Engineer.The width and aisle clearances remain the
same but the total stall length increases to a 36'
minimum.No small car tandem spaces permitted.
FOR HANDICAPPED PARKING i4
SEE STANDARD PLAN NO. `i 6 1 1 =OPTIONAL DIMENSION SETS
C17Y OF ANAHEIIkA
M MINIMUM OFF-STREET
oermtTucmr or Pueuc wciq S3 PARKING DIMENSIONS
ew.SNSERING MSIOI►I p (�
UkOAR
02
n PACT CI ty Hfto n e a r 0 of a ��� Planning Di or 0 of O jaiTAII= N
1"� 1
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
To Mike Adams From Les Evans
Planning Director Acting Director of Public Works
Subject PARKING STRUCTURE DESIGN Date April 15, 1988
ORDINANCE
Our parking consultant has the following comments on our proposed ordinance:
I. Why do all parking spaces need to be 900. This restriction can cost a lot of money for
sites that are not the exact dimensions needed to accommodate 18 foot spaces with
26 foot aisles. Some flexibility should be allowed.
2. The note under (a) would be more flexible if it read: "No permanent obstructions
above the driving surface shall be allowed within a strip of P in width along either
side of a stall for the rear 14' of the length of the stall."
3. (b) would be more flexible if it read: "Ramps with parking on them will not exceed a
slope of 5% measured from horizontal. Ramps without parking shall not exceed a
slope of 15% measured from horizontal. Adjacent ramp slopes shall not exceed a
difference of 10%, without a transition section of 10' in length."
LGE:dw
cc: Paul Cook, City Administrator
Doug La Belle, Director of Community Development
1599g/4
3 � y3
REQUER FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Date A=ri l 4, 1988
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City AdministratorV
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Director, Community Developm
Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11 - TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS FOR
THE DESIGN OF PARKING STRUCTURES
Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes k] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that Code Amendment No . 87-11 be continued to the
May 2, 1988 City Council meeting to allow further study to establish
regulations for the design of parking structures .
DNL:MA:JA:kla
Plo 5/85
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 5
1 - ,
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 8 7-11
Parking Structure Regulations
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach Planning Commission
will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington
Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California,
on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider
the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Monday, April 4 , 1988, 7 : 00 PM
APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No . 87-11
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach
LOCATION: City Wide
REQUEST: To establish regulations for the design of parking
structures by amending Article 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinanc(
Cod(
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act .
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the
Department of Development Services, 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the
public . A copy of the staff report will be available to
interested parties at City Hall or the Main City Library
(7111 Talbert Avenue) ,
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. If there are any further questions please call
Jeff Ambramowitz, Assistant Planner at 536-5271.
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCILL
by: Alicia M. Wentworth
City Clerk
Dated: March 18, 1988
• a -
�'' NOTICE TO CLERK TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE DATE:
F ROM:
PLEASE SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING USING THE ATTACHED LEGAL NOTICE FOR THE
AP's are attached
AP' s will follow.
No AP'
Initiated by:
Planning Commission
Planning Department
Petition
* Appeal
Other
Adoption of Environmental Status (x)
YES NO
Refer to Planning Department - Extension #�5�® ,
for additional information.
* If appeal , please transmit exact wording to be required in the legal .
rf ..
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11
Parking Structure Regulations
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach Planning Commission
will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington
Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California,
on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider
the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to . the
application described below.
lctrobB
DATE/TIME: Taesd°ay, r 7 : 00 PM
APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No . 87-11
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach
LOCATION: City Wide
REQUEST: To establish regulations for the design of parking
structures .
ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the
Department of Development Services, 2000 Main Street,
Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the
public. A copy of the staff report will be available to
interested parties at City Hall or the Main City Library
(7111 Talbert Avenue) after October 16, 1987 .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above., If there are any further questions please call
, Ass Planner at 536-5271 .
tf A#mm44-0A1
Mike Adams
Huntington Beach Planning Commission
/o17r,rZA
Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including public
notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County,
California, Number A-6214, dated 29 September, 1961, and
A-24831. dated 11 June. 1963.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Orange Public Notice AOveAiling covered 0
by tnu Hndevn w sat in 7 point /
,atn 10 pica column widln
n
I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to or interested in the below
entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange
Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the
NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, PUBLIC NOTICE
County of Orange, State of California, and that a NOTICE OF PUBLIC NOTICE
PUBLIC HEARING inspection by the public. A
Notice of _ Public Hearing ll
CODE AMENDMENT 'bep available the to f interested report l
NO.87-11 iparties at City Hall or the
(Parking Structure Main City Library (7111
Regulations Talbert Avenue).
NOTICE IS HEREBY ' ALL INTERESTED PER-
of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete GIVEN that the Huntington :SONS are invited to attend
Beach City Council will hold said hearing and express
copy, was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, a public hearing in the Cou opinions or submit evidence
cil Chamber the Hunt-t- ifor
C
ngton Beach C or against the application
Civic Center, as outlined above. If there
Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, 2000 Main Street, Hunt-
ington Beach,California,on ,pare any further questions
Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna the date and at the time in- please call Jeff Abramowitz,
Assistant Planner at
one Beach
53
6-5271
Beach issues of said newspaper for consider the statements of .
1 HUNTINTINGTON BEACH
all persons who wish to be CITY COUNCIL, By: Alicia
consecutive weeks to wit the issue(s) of heard relative to the appli- M.Wentworth,City Clerk
cation described below. Dated:March 18, 1988
DATE/TIME: Monday, published Orange Coast
April 4, 1988,7:00 P.M. Daily Pilot March 24, 1988
APPLICATION NUMBER: Th567
Code Amendment No.87-11
March 24 198 8 APPLICANT:City of Hunt- I
ngton Beach r/
LOCATION:City Wide yo
REQUEST: To establish
198 regulations for the design of /
parking structures by IV`)
amending Article 960 of the t
Huntington Beach Ordi- o
198 nance Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS: Categorically ex-
empt from the California En-
vironmental vironmental Quality Act.
ON FILE: A copy of the
proposed request is file
with the City Clerk, City
y of
198 Huntington Beach, 2000
Main Stret, Huntington
Beach,California 92648,for
I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on March 25 , egg 8
at Costa Mesa, California.
Signature
J
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
REQUES f FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
May 2, 1988
Date
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Submitted by: Paul E. Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Community Developme
Subject: CONTINUANCE OF CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-11, ESTABLISHIN
REGULATIONS FOR THE DESIGN OF PARKING STRUCTURES
Consistent with Council Policy? X Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Staff recommends that Code Amendment No. 87-11, initially continued to the
May 2, 1988 City Council meeting, again be continued until June 20, to allow further
study to establish regulations for the design of parking structures.
PEC/DLB:lp
3704h
PIO 5/85
AJ ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 88-54
COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
To Honorable Mayor and From Paul E. Cook v
City Council Members City Administrator
Subject DOWNTOWN PARKING Date May 19, 1988
STRUCTURES FEASIBILITY
Attached are four exhibits showing how staff would propose to finance the land
acquisition and construction of parking structures in the downtown area. The projections
assume construction of the maximum size being considered for the structures north of the
pier (855 spaces), and the Walnut parking structure (1,000 spaces). The projections do not
change materially if fewer spaces are built in these structures since revenues and
expenses would decrease proportionately.
$18,000,000 is needed for land acquisition and estimated construction costs of the two
structures plus land acquisition only for a third parking site at Orange Avenue between
Fifth and Main Streets. $12,000,000 is available currently from the 1986 Certificates of
Participation (C.O.P.'s) debt issue. An additional $6,000,000 of C.O.P.'s is proposed to
finance the balance of the estimated costs. Construction of the two structures is
projected to begin in fiscal year 1988/89, with completion approximately 12 months after
construction begins.
The projections show that parking revenues will exceed total annual debt service and
maintenance costs within four years of the completion of these structures. This
"breakeven" point occurs sooner than would normally be expected on a parking structure
project, and is explained by the following two factors:
1) The 1986 $12,000,000 C.O.P. financing was an extremely
cost-effective debt issue. The annual debt service is over $300,000
less than what is expected in traditional debt issues.
2) Parking demand, in general, is expected to be high in the downtown
area due to elimination of existing spaces along PCH, and reduction
of traditional parking alternatives because of development that is
occurring.
You will note that the 30-year projections show very large annual parking revenue
surpluses within ten years, continuing to grow dramatically thereafter. These projections
can be confirmed by our actual experience in the past 20 years with parking at beach
parking lots. Construction of the existing parking lots was financed by a debt issue which
requires annual debt service of $170,000. In the initial years after construction, parking
revenue from these lots was less than the $170,000 debt service. Today, with the normal
parking fee increases that have occurred over the years, the annual parking revenue is
$1,300,000 and is one of the General Fund's significant revenue sources.
It is hoped that these projections show the feasibility of financing the parking structures
as proposed by staff. The projections show the need for the issuance of an additional
$6,000,000 of debt. The existing financing authority (Civic Improvement Corporation),
can utilize the same financing mechanism as used in 1986 to issue as much as $10,000,000
or more of additional C.O.P.'s. This financing mechanism would appear to be the most
logical and cost effective approach for additional debt issuance.
PEC/RJF:lp
Attachments
3789h
EXHIBIT I
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES
CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS - SUMMARY
ANNUAL CUMULATIVE
FISCAL REVENUE EXPENSE SURPLUS OR FUNDS
YEAR TOTAL TOTAL DEFICIT AVAILABLE
(NOTE 2) (NOTE 3)
1986/87 12,900,000 350,000 12,550,000 12,280,000
1987/88 900,000 1 ,620,000 -720,000 11 ,560,000
1988/89 600,000 9,520,000 -8,920,000 2,640,000
1989/90 7-,243,438 8,994,775 -1 ,751 ,338 888,663
1990/91 1 ,453,456 1 ,459,700 -6,244 882,419
1991192 1 ,453,019 1 ,470,088 -17,069 865,350
1991 /92 1 ,451 ,825 1 ,480,892 -29,067 836,283
1992/93 11669,500 1 ,492, 127 177,373 NOTE 1
1993/94 1 ,669,500 1 ,503,812 165,688
1994/95 1 ,947,750 1 ,515,965 431 ,785
1995196 1 ,947,750 1 ,528,603 419, 147
1996197 1 ,947,750 1 ,541 ,747 406,003
1997/98 2,226,000 1 ,555,417 670,583
1998/99 2,226,000 1 ,569,634 656,366
1999/00 2,782,500 1 ,584,419 1 , 198,081
2000/01 2,782,500 1 ,599,796 1 , 182,704
2001 /02 2,782,500 1 ,615,788 1 , 166,712
2002/03 3,339,000 1 ,632,420 1 ,706,580
2003/04 3,339,000 1 ,649,716 1 ,689,284
2004/05 3,895,500 1 ,667,705 2,227,795
2005/06 3,895,500 1 ,686,413 2,209,087
2006/07 3,895,500 1 ,705,870 2, 189,630
2007/08 4,452,000 1 ,726, 105 2,725,895
2008/09 4,452 ,000 1 ,747, 149 2,704,851
2009/10 5,565,000 1 ,769,035 3,795,965
2010111 5,565,000 1 ,791 ,796 3,773,204
2011/ 12 5,565,000 1 ,815,468 3,749,532
2012/1.3 6,678,000 1 ,840,067 4,837,913
2013/14 6,678,000 1 ,865,690 4,812,310
2014/ 15 7,791 ,000 1 ,892,318 5,898,682
2015/16 7,791 ,000 11920,010 5,870,990
2016/17 7,791 ,000 1 ,328,811 6,462, 189
2017/18 8,904,000 1 ,358,763 7,545,237
2018/ 19 8,904,000 1 ,389,914 7,514,086
2019/20 8,904,000 1 ,422 ,310 7,481 ,690
2020/21 10,017,000 1 ,456,003 8,560,997
NOTES:
1 . SURPLUS REVENUE IN YEARS 1992193 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS IS
ASSUMED TO BE UTILIZED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THIS PROJECT
2 . SEE EXHIBIT II FOR REVENUE DETAILS
3. SEE EXHIBIT III FOR EXPENDITURE DETAILS
.BIT 11
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES
CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS - REVENUES
FISCAL BOND INTEREST PARKING
YEAR PROCEEDS INCOME REVENUE TOTAL
1986/87 12,000,000 900,000 0 12,900,000
1987/88 900,000 0 900,000
1988/89 600,000 0 600,000
1989190 6,000,000 200,000 1 ,043,438 7,243,438
1990/91 62,206 1 ,391 ,250 1 ,453,456
1991 /92 61 ,769 1 ,391 ,250 1 ,453,019
1991 /92 60,575 1 ,391 ,250 1 ,451 ,825
1992/93 SEE NOTES 1 ,669,500 1 ,669,500
1993/94 1 ,669,500 1 ,669,500
1994/95 1 ,947,750 1 ,947,750
1995/96 1 ,947,750 1 ,947,750
1996/97 1 ,947,750 1 ,947,750
1997/98 2 ,226,000 2 ,226,000
1998/99 2,226,000 2,226,000
1999/00 2,782,500 2,782,500
2000/01 2,782,500 2,782,500
2001/02 2 ,782 ,500 2,782 ,500
2002103 3,339,000 3,339,000
2003/04 3,339,000 3,339,000
2004/05 3,895,500 3,895,500
2005/06 3,895,500 3,895,500
2006/07 3,895,500 3,895,500
2007/08 4,452,000 4,452 ,000
2008109 4,452 ,000 4,452,000
2009/ 10 5,565,000 5,565,000
2010/ 11 5,565.,000 5,565,000
2011/ 12 5,565,000 5,565,000
2012113 6,678,000 6,678,000
2013/14 6,678,000 6,678,000
2014/15 7,791 ,000 7,791 ,000
2015/16 7,791 ,000 7,791 ,000
2016/ 17 7,791 ,000 7,791 ,000
2017/18 8,904,000 8,904,000
2018119 8,904,000 8,904,000
2019/20 8,904,000 8,904,000
2020/21 10,017,000 10,017,000
NOTES:
1 . PARKING FEES ARE ASSUMED TO DOUBLE EVERY 10 YEARS
(FEES HAVE DOUBLED EVERY 6-7 YEARS SINCE 1968)
2 . INTEREST INCOME NOT INCLUDED AFTER 1991/92
(SEE EXHIBIT I - SUMMARY)
EXHIBIT III
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES
CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS - EXPENDITURES
. FISCAL LAND BUILDING ANNUAL DEBT
YEAR COSTS COSTS MAINT. SERVICE TOTAL
1986/87 350,000 350,000
1987/88 1 ,000,000 620,000 11620,000
1988/89 21000,000 61900,000 620,000 9,520,000
1989/90 1 ,000,000 6,900,000 194,775 900,000 8,994,775
1990/91 259,700 1 ,200,000 1 ,459,700
1991 /92 270,088 1 ,200,000 1 ,470,088
1991/92 280,892 1 ,200,000 1 ,480,892
1992/93 292, 127 1 ,200,000 1 ,492, 127
1993/94 303,812 1 ,200,000 1 ,503,812
1994/95 315,965 1 ,200,000 1 ,515,965
1995/96 328,603 1 ,200,000 1 ,528,603
1996/97 341 ,747 1 ,200,000 1 ,541 ,747
1997/98 355,417 1 ,200,000 1 ,555 ,417
1998199 369,634 1 ,200,000 1 ,569,634
1999/00 384,419 1 ,200,000 1 ,584,419
2000101 399,796 1 ,200,000 1 ,599,796
2001/02 415,788 1 ,200,000 1 ,615,788
2002/03 432,420 1 ,200,000 1 ,632,420
2003/04 449,716 1 ,200,000 1 ,649,716
2004/05 467,705 1 ,200,000 1 ,667,705
2005106 486,413 1 ,200,000 1 ,686 ,413
2006/07 505,870 1 ,200,000 1 ,705,870
2007/08 526, 105 1 ,200,000 1 ,726, 105
2008/09 547, 149 1 ,200,000 1 ,747, 149
2009/10 569,035 1 ,200,000 1 ,769,035
2010/ 11 591 ,796 1 ,200,000 1 ,791 ,796
2011 / 12 615,468 1 ,200,000 1 ,815,468
2012113 640,087 1 ,200,000 1 ,840,087
2013114 665,690 1 ,200,000 1 ,865 ,690
2014115 692,318 1 ,200,000 1 ,892,318
2015116 720,010 1 ,200,OQ0 1 ,920,010
2016/17 748,811 580,000 1 ,328,811
2017/18 778,763 580,000 1 ,358,763
2018/19 809,914 580,000 1 ,389,914
2019/20 842,310 580,000 1 ,422,310
2020/21 876,003 580,000 1 ,456,003
NOTES:
1 . MAINTENANCE COSTS ASSUMED TO INCREASE 4% PER YEAR.
2 . DEBT SERVICE IS ACTUAL THROUGH 1988/89; AND NEW
DEBT OF $6,000,000 IN 1989/90 ASSUMES 9% INTEREST.
Exhibit IV
w
Background Data - Financing Downtown Parking Structures
I. Cost Data - Assumptions
The Downtown Village concept in the Main - Pier redevelopment project area proposes
three city-owned parking facilities.
A. North of the Pier The north of the pier parking structure is in the preliminary
Parking Structure design phase and will consist of surface parking, one level of
subsurface parking and an option for a second level of
subsurface parking. The basic lot will include 735 spaces,
while the optional second level will add 120 spaces for a total
of 855. The estimated cost of the structure is $8,100 - 8,300
per space. The parking lot north of the pier presently provides
315 spaces. The Pacific Coast Highway widening project will
eliminate 300 on-street parking spaces which must be replaced
on a one for one basis. Total cost assumed for this report is
$7,100,000.
B. Downtown Parking Planning efforts for the downtown area of Huntington Beach
Structures have resulted in the identification of parking locations inland
of Pacific Coast Highway. Parking facilities, including a
parking structure in conjunction with retail development, are
proposed to be located on Fifth Street, south of Orange
Avenue("Orange" parking structure), and on Third Street, north
of Walnut Avenue ("Walnut" parking structure). The Walnut
structure is planned to provide 800-1,000 parking spaces and
the parking facilities south of Orange will provide from
200-1,000 spaces depending on project scope. It is conceivable
that a percentage of spaces in these facilities could be utilized
by beach goers. The inland location of the structures,
however, is not conducive to beach-goer usage and may
conflict with additional commerical parking demands. The
Walnut parking structure is presently under design. The cost
of a 1,000 space parking structure including land cost has been
estimated at about $8,700 per space. Total cost assumed for
this report is $8,700,000 for the Walnut structure; including
land, and $2,000,000 for land only for the Orange structure.
C. Cost of Debt The annual debt service on the $12,000,000 of debt
and Maintenance previously issued is $620,000 per year. Additional debt of
$6,000,000 is needed for these projects and is assumed to be
financed at 9% interest rate. The cost of operations and
maintenance of the parking structures was estimated by PBGI
& D at about $140 per space per year. The actual cost to the
city for a space in the proposed parking structures then, will
be about $940 annually based on utilizing long term debt for
the initial construction costs of the parking structures.
II. Revenue Assumptions
A. PBO & D Revenue The August, 1985 PBQ & D Downtown Parking, Transit and
Estimates Financing Study estimated that the city could generate
revenues of $833 per space per year from downtown parking
structures.
w
Financing Downtown Parking Structure
Page 2
B. Redondo Beach The City of Redondo Beach has a 1,150 space parking structure
Experience which serves it's pier village complex and generates annual
income of $1,174 for each space. The Redondo Beach Pier
conplex includes restaurants, shops and a small marina.
Redondo's 1987 monthly parking structure revenue was lowest
in November when they generate slightly less than $2 per day
per space, and highest in August with revenues of more than
$4 per day per space. The Redondo Beach Pier parking
structure is probably most similar in use to the city's proposed
Pierside Village parking structure, while the City's proposed
north of the pier parking structure is more oriented to the
beach user and the downtown parking structure more oriented
to the Main Street businesses and Phase I development.
C. City Parking Data developed by the city's Community Services Department
Revenues from indicates 2,050 spaces in beach parking lots number 1-4 located
Existing Facilities between the pier and Beach Boulevard. The parking lots are
filled to capacity approximately 25-30 times each year and
generate annual revenues of about $600 per space. All day
parking costs $4 and metered lots are 750 per hour (projected to
increase to $1 per hour).
Along Pacific Coast Highway between Beach and 9th Street,
the city charges 750 per hour and generates about $400 per
meter each year.
In the downtown business zone (5th Street and Main Street
between P.C.H. and Orange and Olive and Walnut between 5th
and 3rd), the city has 172 meters which charge 250 per hour and
annually generate $436 per space.
D. Expected Revenues At a basic charge of $4 per space for the use of the north of the
from the North pier parking structure, the city could probably generate
of the Pier Parking $600 per space per year for as many spaces as we could
Structure provide.
E. Expected Revenues The Walnut parking structure financing is more complex.
from the Walnut During the summer months, beach goers would probably be
Parking Structure happy to fill the structure to capacity, a $4 per space per day.
However, since this lot is intended to serve the retail area,
beach parking will probably have to be limited. The "limit"
could be set by charging an hourly fee to park in the structure
during the summer months. One dollar an hour would
discourage the beach goer from parking for more than four
hours, since it would be cheaper to park in a $4 all day lot.
However, we need to be careful not to limit beach parking to
the extent that the Main Street structure sits partially empty.
We should expect to generate a minimum of $600 per space per
year if we manage the structure properly. For shoppers,
restaurant and theater goers, a validation system will have to
be developed or people will go somewhere with free parking to
do their shopping and recreation.
16190