report - Oakville

Transcription

report - Oakville

OAKVl LLE
JUL 1 1 2006
I
REPORT
Counci! Meeting
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
MEETING DATE:
JULY11,2006
FROM:
Planning Services Department and
Engineering and Construction Department
DATE:
June 22,2006
SUBJECT:
Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study Supplemental
LOCATION: Town Wide
WARD:
All
-
Page 1 of 18
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the recommendations set out in the Planning Services Department Report LRP
012/06 dated April 25, 2005 with respect to the Town of Oakville Commercial
Parking Study be approved as amended as follows (amendments are in italics):
1. That the Town of Oakville Parking Study, Final Report, March 2006 be received;
2. That the following revisions to parking operations and policies in the Old Oakville
Downtown area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by 16 Mile Creek on the west, Allan Street on
the east, Randall Street and Rebecca Street on the north, and Robinson
Street on the south, maintain the existing parking exemptions in the Zoning
By-Law for non-residential uses in the C3R lands;
b) on lands zoned C3R located north of Randall Street, and bounded by Allan
Street to the east and Navy Street to the west initiate amendments to the
Zoning By-law to reduce parking standards for non-residential uses to a rate
of one parking space per 32.6 m2,with no exemptions;
c) Staff implement options to more effectively use the Parking Garage through
either (i) general customer and visitor use, or (ii) more monthly parking
opportunities, or a combination of (i) and (ii);
d) Staff implement a program to improve compliance of the two hour maximum
stay parking within the general vicinity of Water Street, north of Lakeshore
Road and Robinson Street, between Dunn Street and Allan Street, through
enhanced enforcement;
Town of Oakville
P.O. Box 31 0, 1225 Trafalgar Road
Oakville, Ontario L6J 5A6
Tel. 905-845-6601
www.oakville.cs:\word\long rangeE006 long rangeE006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
I
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning Service Department; Engineering and Construction Department
June 22,2006
Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study - Supplemental
Page 2 of 18
e) maintain the current exemptions of the two hour time limit for on-street
parking spaces south of Robinson Street;
f) monitor the issue of the loading/unloading spaces in the centre turn lane
along each block of Lakeshore Road East to determine if other options would
be feasible; and
g) continue the current strategy to specify and pursue properties for potential
acquisition and construction of new parking facilities.
3. That the following revisions to the parking operations and policies in the Kerr
Street Village area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by Maurice Drive on the west, Forsythe Street
on the east, Speers Road on the north and Burnet Street on the south, initiate
amendments to the Zoning By-law to reduce parking standards for nonresidential uses in the C3R lands to a rate of 1 parking space per 32.6 m2,
with no exemptions; and
b) deleted.
4. That the following revisions to the parking operations and policies in the
Downtown Bronte area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by Bronte Creek on the west, East Street on
the east, Sovereign Street on the north, and Ontario Street on the south,
delay initiation of amendments to the Zoning By-law to reduce parking
standards for non-residential uses in the C3R lands to a rate of I parking
space per 32.6 m2, with no exemptions, until finalization of the Bronte Village
Revitalization Study;
b) in conjunction with a major redevelopment planning application and/or the
Bronte Revitalization Study, identify potential properties that may provide
additional public parking spaces, and report back in the future; and
c) the implementation of the on-street paid parking trial be delayed until
finalization of the Bronte Village Revitalization Study.
5. That Staff be directed to initiate an amendment to the Zoning By-Law to include
a parking standard (commercial portion) of 1 space for every 32.6 m2of
commercial floor space per live-work unit;
6. Due to the increased cost to acquire and create additional parking spaces that
Staff, in conjunction with the BIAS, report back on options for increased parking
revenues through either parking rates or parking fines to ensure funds are
available to acquire and/or create additional parking spaces when needed;
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study - supplemental.doc
>
1
i
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning Service Department;
Engineering
and
Construction Department
June 22,2006
Town of Oakville Commercial ParkingStudy - Supplemental
Page 3 of 18
7. That parking utilization studies and updates to the parking demand studies be
undertaken on a regular basis.
BACKGROUND:
At the May 8,2006 Planning & Development Council Meeting, Council referred the
Planning Services Department Report LRP 012/06, Town of Oakville Commercial
Parking Study, dated April 25, 2006 back to Staff for further review in theform of
additional stakeholder consultation.
A stakeholder meeting was hosted on May 26, 2006 by Staff from the Planning
Services Department and the Engineering and Construction Department. The
agenda for the meeting was set based on written submissions from all three Oakville
Business Improvement Associations, the Stakeholders. Members of Council and
representatives from the three BIAS participated in the meeting.
Additionally, Staff met with a representative of the development industry to discuss
the proposed standards for live-work developments.
The purpose of this Supplemental Report LRP 015/06 is to present updated
recommendations concerning commercial parking in the Town of Oakville based on
these additional stakeholder consultations.
The Comments/Options section of this report presents the rationale for amending or
maintaining the previous recommendations. Appendix A presents an account of the
issues raised through the additional stakeholder consultations. Appendix B presents
the discussion notes from the stakeholder meeting held May 26. Appendix C
presents parking clarification for two developments in Downtown Bronte. Appendix
D presents the Planning Services Department Report LRP 012/06 dated April 25,
2005.
COMMENT/OPTIONS:
Amended Recommendations
Recommendation 1 was amended to reflect a correction to the title and date for the
Consultants study report being received.
Recommendation 4 a) and 4 c) are deferred to allow the opportunity to assess
implications that may arise from the Bronte Village Revitalization Study.
I a7
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
From:
June
Date:
Subject:
Planning Service Department;
22,2006
Page 4 of 18
The intent of the Commercial Parking Study and the prior Staff Report was to
harmonize parking policies and operations across the three key downtown business
districts. Deferring these recommendations means that variable regulations will
persist across the Town. As a result, the existing commercial parking standards
found in Bronte, which are higher than those proposed, have then potential to
constrain re-development in the area as compared to other areas in Town. As well,
future Town parking investment options will be limited in Bronte by virtue of the fact
that parking revenue streams continue to be limited.
Recommendation 3 b) was deleted because of the deferral of 4 c). There is
insufficient parking enforcement work on Kerr Street to justify an additional Parking
Control Officer. Until the need for greater service levels grows in either Bronte or
other parts of Town, Kerr Street will not receive the increased parking enforcement
recommended to improve compliance of the maximum parking duration.
Live-Work Parkinq Standards
A meeting was held with a local developer specializing in live-work construction.
The topic of the meeting was the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-law for a
live-work parking standard (commercial portion) of 1 space for every 32.6m2 of
commercial floor space. Previously, an interim live-work parking standard of 1
space for every 40m2 of commercial floor space was applied to live-work
developments.
As outlined in the previous staff report LRP 012/06, the rationale for this proposed
standard was partly based on observations by Stakeholders and Staff agreement
that these buildings were not operating as live-work units but rather that residential
tenants and commercial tenant were actually separate occupiers. As a result, the
functional operation of these buildings was causing site-specific parking demands
not addressed by the parking requirements of the development.
During the consultation with the developer, the issues discussed included how this
proposed standard of 1:32.6m2 (over the previous 1:40m2) had the potential to affect
development economics and overall live-work development viability. The interaction
of the proposed parking standard with downtown lotting patterns, smaller infill sites,
and newer interior accessibility requirements under the Ontario Building Code for
restrooms in commercial spaces was also discussed. Ownership and tenant
information for several developments was presented in support of the notion that
these building were operating as live-work units.
Despite the additional information, Staff is not recommending revisions to the
original Staff recommendation. The rationale for this, in addition to those mentioned
includes the need for a legitimate regulation in the Zoning By-law and additional
I2 .
s:\word\long rangeV2006 long rangeV2006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study - supplemental.doc
\
.
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning Service Department: Engineering and Construction Department
June 22,2006
Town of Oakville Commercial ParkingStudy - Supplemental
Page 5 of 18
information that these developments continue to function more as commercial sites
than as pure live-work developments. Finally, while the 1 space to 32.6 m2
commercial floor area might be seen as an increase over the interim 1 space to 40
m2, it is actually a moderate standard compared to the 1 space to 28 m2 applied to
most other commercial development through other sections on the Zoning By-law.
Therefore, while it is important to sustain innovative forms of mixed-use
development like live-work units, it is essential that other facets of key downtown
areas continue to function properly as in the case of commercial parking supply.
The proposed live-work standard of 1 parking space for every 32.6m2 of commercial
floor space is viewed as a regulation that supports downtown parking functions.
CONSIDERATIONS:
PUBLIC
A stakeholder committee with membership from all three key study areas
was established to help address specific local conditions through this study.
Sub-group meetings also occurred through the course of the study.
FINANCIAL
Staff to report on financial implications of additional commercial parking
operations and policy programs.
IMPACTONOTHERDEPARTMENTS~CUSERS
None known at this time.
CORPORATE AND/OR DEPARTMENT STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
This report, through encouragement and support of commercial
development, addresses the Corporate Strategic Priorities of Local
Economic Vitality and Principled Land Use Planning.
APPENDICES:
Appendix A: Chart of Issues Raised through Stakeholder Consultations
Appendix B: Discussion Notes from Stakeholder Meeting May 26,2006 - 1 pm,
Committee Room 1 and 2
Appendix C: Parking Clarification for Downtown Bronte
Appendix D: Planning Services Department Report, LRP 012/06, Town of Oakville
Commercial Parking Study, April 25, 2005
s:\word\long rangePo06 long rangeE006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
t
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Page 6 of 18
Submitted by:
--
Kirk Biggar, H.SE.Pl.
Hani&llison,
CMA
B.Sc.,
Planner, Long Range Planning
Manager of Parking/Halton Court Services
Director of Planning Services
Director of Enginbring and Construction
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006
staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
From:
Planning
Service
Department:
Engineering
and
Construction
Department
22,2006
June
Date:
Subject:
Town of OakvilleCommercialParkingStudy - Supplemental
Page 7 of 18
Appendix A
Chart of Issues Raised through Stakeholder Consultations
s:\word\long rangel2006 long rangeE006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parkingstudy - supplemental.doc
,
.
From:
Planning
Service
Department;
Engineering
and
Construction
Department
June
Date:
22,2006
Subject:
Page 8 of 18
The chart below presents an account of written Stakeholder comments received in
advance as well as discussion points raised during the additional stakeholder
meeting held May 26, 2006. Editorial clarification when required appears in (italics).
-
Stakeholder Downtown OakvilleBIA
Issue
I.The reduction of space required per
square meter on lands north of Randall
puts added strain on the already full
capacity of parking in downtown core.
Staff Response
- Staff recommends that parking utilization
studies and updates to the parking demand
study be undertaken on a regular basis to
ensure parking situations in the
commercial district are monitored.
- Staff will be proceeding with the parking
utilization study in October 2006.
- Parking utilization near the lands north of
Randall St. will be assessed prior to
initiating any amendments to theZoning
Bv-law.
- Staff is reviewing opportunities for adding
new parking spaces in the Downtown area.
- Areas under review are Church St,
immediately to relocate the 30 lot
Randall St., and Water St; Staff will update
spaces lost.
Council as new spaces are initiated.
3. The parking garage needs to (be) made - As outlined in LRP 012/06, Staff is
considering options for increased parking
more consumer friendly . . .
rates, fees, fines, and/or hours of
MUST be opened Sunday ...
(with) no need to charge for use of the
operation.
- Staff recommended in LRP 012/06 that in
garage (on Sunday).
conjunction with the BIAS, a report on
these options is brought back.
- The operations of the Church Street
Parkade will form part of that Staff Report.
- Parking Operations are in thefinal stages
of activating new security cameras on all
levels of the Church Street Parkade.
- Staff will review the issue of lighting.
- Staff will review signage in Downtown
5. (Parkade) - Better directional signage
Oakville and the Church Street Parkade for
guiding the public to the garage
(and) - Signage in garage needs to be
options and opportunities for improvement.
changed to make it easier ... to
understand the garage procedures.
(and) - Better signage in general
throughout downtown to guide
customers to surface parking lots.
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study - supplementaLdoc
4
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Town of Oakville Commercial Parking
..
- Study - Supplemental
6. (Parkade)- A marketing campaign
advertising the garage would be
beneficial.
Page 9 of 18
- As in LRP 012/06, Staff will examine
increasing the use of the Church St
Parkade through (i) general use or (ii)
monthly parking, or acombination of (i)
and (ii).
- Improved signage, advertising and
marketing may be methods used to
increase customer and visitor use.
7. Employee parking needs lo be
- Staff recommends considering options to
addressed (and) long term parking for
increase the utilization of the Church St
Parkade, including monthly passes.
employees away from prime customer
spaces.
- As well, Staff is reviewing opportunities
for adding new parking spaces in the areas
of Church St., Randall St., and Water St.
for both long term and transient parking.
8. The statement of “Fairness” is
- The issues and scope of “fairness” are
repeatedly used throughout the study
discussed in the consultant’s report, s. 5.2.
and the (BIA) Board would like the
- Fairness refers to real or perceived
consultants to define their interpretation inequalities among business districts or
of “Fairness.”
land uses and howthese can be
addressed through regulatory reform.
9. The transit system needs to be
- Improvements to Oakville Transit will be
improved and incentives given to riders. addressed through the transit strategy
emerging under the Transportation Master
Plan. a comDonent of BlueDrint Oakville.
10.The (BIA) would like to recommend
- Staff recommends thatparking utilization
studies and updates to the parking demand
continuous studies take place . . .
study be undertaken on a regular basis.
- As part of the 2006 Capital Budget,
funding is approved for a parking utilization
study of existing commercial operations.
- Staff will be proceeding with the parking
utilization study in October 2006 .
11.An action plan (to) acquire the post
-The Town’s current approved strategy
office location on Church Street.
identifies the Post Office site at Randall St
and George St as a property to be pursued
for future parkingfacility development.
-The Town has made it known to both the
Federal Government and the Canada Post
Corporation of our interest in acquiring this
property.
s:\word\long rangeY2006 long rangeE006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Page 10 of 18
-
Stakeholder Kerr Street BIA
Comment
12.Since the parking study was done
during the water main construction the
overall results of the study are no doubt
flawed . . . hard to believe that the Kerr
Village was not impacted by road
closures and construction delays.
13.The addition of more enforcement
officers is also recommended (in the
parking study report)... this should not
be a priority for Kerr Street.
Staff Response
- The parking study period June 16-19,
2004 overlapped with watermain
construction on Kerr Street for the road
section from Stewart St. to Speers Rd.
- While construction activities may have
affected commercial visitor traffic on Kerr
Street, the fact that parking utilization rates
are well below capacity ( ~ 4 0 %
utilization)
mitigates the concern that data collection
and subsequent supply/demand analysis
might have been affected.
- The watermain construction activities
would not have influenced parking
inventory data collected in the study.
- The study found that in some areas of
Kerr Street, vehicles were parking for
exceedingly long durations and that greater
enforcement was recommended.
- Staff therefore recommended that a
program to improve compliance of the
maximum parking duration be
implemented.
- However, for now additional enforcement
will only come with the addition of new
Town parking responsibilities in either
Bronte or other parts of the Town.
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\015-06commercial parking study- supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
-
14.The Town has budgeted for a traffic
study later this year; the results of that
and this report should be compared
once the other study is complete
(and) can Traffic Zone 1 be split
Speers/Stewart and StewaWHerald?
Page 11 of 18
- The results of
the Commercial Parking
Study can and will inform aspects of the
Kerr Street Traffic Study.
- Although the scope of the latter study is
broader than parking issues alone, parking
may be explored further in this new forum.
- Since Kerr Street is a part of the Town’s
commercial parking operations, future
parking utilization studies will cover this
territory in support of commercial parking
policies and programs.
-Staff will be proceeding with a parking
utilization survey in October 2006, and
Traffic Zone 1 in the Kerr St district will be
divided into 3 zones for this survey.
- Staff is examining the possibility of
extending an offer of monthly passes to
other local employers following the exit of
the Oakville Parent Child Centre from the
Kerr Street area.
v
15. On the issue of monthly passes for Lot
12.
-
Stakeholder Bronte Village BIA
Comment
16. Interim introduction for on-street
parking on trial basis ...
(and) money from meters goes into
general parking fund at the Town ...
(and) most urgent parking problem is in
on-street paid parking trial)
Staff Response
- The study report suggests the
introduction of paid parking as a means of
better managing the prime parking for
customers in Bronte.
- The introduction of paid parking in Bronte
would require additional staff, equipment,
and related resources.
- Any revenues received would be used to
pay for the resources to operate the paid
parking in Bronte.
- The Town currently accounts for
revenues received from lots and meters by
location, and would continue to do so if
more paid parking was introduced.
- The results and experience of the trial
period would determine if the program
becomes permanent.
s:\word\long rangel2006 long rangeD006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Page 12 of 18
I Stakeholder - Councillor Robinson
Comment
18. What is the status of parking at 100
in this area?
20. Is there public parking in the Inner
Harbour?
Staff Response
- Appendix C gives afull explanation of the
parking provisions on this site as wellfor
the adjacent site known as2464
Lakeshore Rd. West.
- Essentially, there are provisions for
commercial parking in both surface and
underground locations on these sites.
- The use of this parking is free for
customers of businesses located within the
developments although signageto this
effect is Door.
-While public signage cannot be used for a
private resource, it is the opinion
of Staff
that working with the local merchants and
building owners could produce better
sianaae conditions in Downtown Bronte.
- Staff communicated with the Harbour
Master who indicated that the Inner
Harbour Parking supply is at capacity with
harbour and boating patrons.
- During the active boating season the
parking is used by boaters, in particular as
an overflow for the Public Launchon the
west side.
- For the period November-April, the
parking area is convertedto dry dock boat
storage and motor vehicle parking would
not be possible.
-
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study
supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning Service Department: Engineering and Construction Department
June 22,2006
Town of Oakville CommercialParkingStudy - Supplemental
Page 13 of 18
Appendix B
Discussion Notes from StakeholderMeeting
May 26,2006 - 1 pm, Committee Room1 and 2
s:\word\long range\2006 long rangeD006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study
- supplemental.doc
From:
Planning
Service
Department;
Engineering
and
Construction
Department
June
Date:
22,2006
Subject:
Page 14 of 18
These notes summarize the discussion from the Stakeholder Meeting hosted May
26, 2006 by Staff from the Planning Services Department and the Engineering and
Construction Department. Editorial clarification when required appears in ( i f a h ) .
Attendees:
Planning:
Engineering:
Consultant:
Stakeholders:
Councillors:
A. Ramsay; T. Collingwood; K. Biggar
D. Bloomer; D. Wong; H. Ellison.
G. Kozorys-Smith.
J. Hatton - Downtown Oakville BIA;
L. Behrens - Bronte Village BIA;
R. Messer - Kerr Street BIA.
F. Oliver; C. Duddeck;
R. Robinson; M. Lansdown.
Notes:
Discussion at the meeting opened with a re-iteration of Downtown Oakville's
concerns with parking report recommendations, with reference to North of Randall.
Comment: employees need better parking accommodations to move them from
prime customer spaces.
Question: Can employee parking be monitored?
Response: this is very difficult
Comment: history and background to the issues and how initiatives like monthly
parking and the Water Street lot have alleviated these problems to some extent.
Question: what is the waiting time for a monthly pass?
Response: approximately one year.
Comment: employee parking is a long-term problem; they need to be moved away
from prime spaces.
Discussion on the interaction between a reduced standard to encourage
development and re-development, urban form and site/building/parking design and
the loss of parking impacting clients access to local business.
Comment: this type of pressure back and forth helps build the business case for
commercial parking structure development.
Comment: concern expressed that Town-wide parking revenues will simply be
directed to Downtown Oakville where parking issues are more apparent.
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study - supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Page 15 of 18
Response: explanation of parking revenue streams and how they are re-directed to
areas where collected. Currently the only parking revenues generated come from
Downtown Oakville and Kerr Street. This current study and report are just trying to
get Bronte into the “commercial parking game” by contributing funds.
Comment: parking and parking issues related to Quality of Life expectations within
Strategic Directions. Hopefully future parking solutions will not be limited by the
relatively small amount of funds available from parking revenues. Proper solutions
to deliver the quality of life, reasonable access to shops and services will require
going to the taxpayer. We need to take a broader, 15-20 year view of problems.
Question: when is the next parkade going to be built?
Response: not scheduled for the next 10-year period.
Question: can the parking data be re-classified according to types of private access
(for shopkeepers, customers of shops, privately owned/publicly used)?
Response: can’t go backand break it down in this manner.
Discussion: on site-specific parking issues of availability and signage in Bronte
Village. (This report clarifies further in AppendixA, comment 18).
Comment: suggestion as to how trolleys might travel.between BIAS topromote relief
from cars; look at alternatives to purchasing lands for parking; concern expressed
over watermain construction; how about monthly passes? can Traffic Zone 1 be
split Speers/Stewart & Stewart/Herald? (This report clarifies further in Appendix
A,
comment 12, 14, & 15)
Discussion of cash-in-lieu and changing uses within same building and how this
bumps up against the requirement of on-site parking.
Discussion of equitability b/w downtowns and suburban plazas and malls, quality of
life/parking/re-development.
Comment: there is no such thing as free parking. Typically, the cost of “free
parking” becomes a partof tenant’s lease, which is passed on to consumer prices.
Discussion on walksheds, equity/homogeneity/uniformity between Downtowns, built
form - live-work units.
Question: what has been gained out of this meeting?
Response: work together as staff, summarize discussion, changes,action items and
supplemental report will be brought back.
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangel2006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study - supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
-
Page 16 of 18
Appendix C
Parking Clarification for Downtown Bronte
s:\word\long rangeV2006 long rangeE006staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parking study- supplemental.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
June 22,2006
Page 17 of 18
These notes clarify parking specifics for two subject properties in Downtown Bronte:
100 Bronte Road and 2462 Lakeshore Road West.
100 Bronte Road
A mixed residential commercial use 4-storey condominium building occupies this
site. The building comprises 66 residential units and 1,196 m2 of retaiVcommercial
and office/commercial space.
Planning approvals for this property included the provision of 175 parking spaces on
three levels in an enclosed/underground parking structure. The parking allocations
are as follows: 132 spaces residential (1.75 residential spacedunit + 0.25 residential
visitor spaceshit) and 43 commercial spaces (1 space/28 m2 commercial space).
The commercial spaces are distributed as follows: 31 spaces on Level 1 and 12
spaces on Level 2. Use of the commercial parking space is “open to members of
the public while using the premises.’’ The parking structure access is from the west
side of Bronte Rd.
2464 Lakeshore Road West
This condominium is a mixed residential commercial use 4-storey building that
comprises 45 residential units and 279 m2 of commercial space.
The required parking allocations were varied through the planning process and final
approvals were for 103 spaces. Ultimately, the completed building provided 101
spaces with cash in lieu paid on the shortfall of two spaces.
Of the 101 spaces, 90 are residential and 11 are commercial. Six of these
commercial spaces are provided at grade in the surface parking lot and five are
found in Level 1 in the underground structure. The property known as “102 Bronte
Road” is the surface parking area and forms part of the larger site of the
condominium. The balance of parking spaces (residential) is also underground.
Access to the surface lot and the underground are from the west side of Bronte
Road just south of the intersection at Lakeshore Road. Use of the commercial
space would be similar to that of the first subject property, 100 Bronte Road.
supplemental.doc
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\015-06 commercial parking study
From:
Planning
Service
Department:
Engineering
and
Construction
Department
June
Date:
22,2006
Subject:
Page 18 of 18
Appendix D
Planning Services Department Report, LRP 012106
Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study
April 25, 2005
s:\word\long rangeP006 long rangeP006 staff reports\Ol5-06 commercial parkingstudy - supplemental.doc
OAKVl LLE
REPORT
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
MEETING
DATE: MAY8,2006
From:
Planning Services Department
File #: 42.10.17
Date:
April 25, 2006
LRP: 012/06
Subject:
Town of OakvilleCommercial Parking Study
Location:
Town Wide
Ward:
All
19
of
Page:
1
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That the Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study, Final Report, dated
April, 2006 be received;
2. That the following revisions to parking operations and policies in the Old
Oakville Downtown area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by 16 Mile Creek on the west, Allan Street
on the east, Randall Street and Rebecca Streeton the north, and
Robinson Street on the south, maintainthe existing parking exemptions in
the Zoning By-Law for non-residential uses in the C3R lands;
b) on lands zoned C3R located north of Randall Street, and bounded by
Allan Street to theeast and Navy Streetto the west, initiate amendments
to the Zoning By-law to reduce parking standardsfor non-residential uses
to a rate of one parking space per 32.6 m2, withno exemptions;
c) Staff implement options to more effectively use the Parking Garage
through either (i) general customer andvisitor use, or (ii) more monthly
parking opportunities, or a combination of (i) and (ii);
d) Staff implement a program to improve compliance of the two hour
maximum stay parking within the general vicinity of Water Street, north of
Lakeshore Road and Robinson Street, between Dunn Street and Allan
Street, through enhanced enforcement;
e) maintain the current exemptions of the two hour time limit for on-street
parking spaces south of Robinson Street;
f) monitor the issue of the loading/unloading spaces in the centre turn lane
along each block of Lakeshore Road East to determine if other options
Town of Oakville would be feasible; and
P.O. Box 310, 1225 Trafalgar Road
Oakville, Ontario L6J SA6
Tel. 905-845-6601
www.oakville.ca
From:
Planning
Services
Department
Date:
April 25, 2006
Subject:Townof
Oakville Commercial Parking Study
g) continue the current strategy to specify and pursue properties for potential
acquisition and construction of new parking facilities.
3. That the following revisions to the parking operations and policies in the Kerr
Street Village area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by Maurice Drive on the west, Forsythe
Street on theeast, Speers Road on thenorth and Burnet Street on the
south, initiate amendments to the Zoning By-law to reduce parking
standards for non-residential uses in the C3Rlands to a rate of one
parking space per 32.6 m2, with no exemptions;and
b) in conjunction with the proposed Bronte District paid parking program,
implement a program to improve compliance of the maximum parking
durations to increase available parking for transient customers through
enhanced enforcement.
4. That the following revisions to the parking operations and policies in the
Downtown Bronte area be implemented:
a) in the area generally bounded by Bronte Creek on the west, East Street
on the east, Sovereign Street on thenorth, and Ontario Street on the
south, initiate amendments to the Zoning By-lawto reduce parking
standards for non-residential uses in the C3R lands to a rate of one
parking space per 32.6 m2, withno exemptions;
b) in conjunction with a major redevelopment planning application andlor the
Bronte Revitalization Study, identify potential properties that may provide
additional public parking spaces, and report back in thefuture; and
c) as an interim step, on-street paid parking be introduced on a trial basis.
5. That Staff be directed to initiate an amendment to the Zoning By-Law to
include a parking standard (commercial portion) of 1 space for every 32.6 m2
of commercialfloor space per live-work unit;
6. Due to the increased cost to acquire and create additional parking spaces
that Staff, in conjunction with the BIA’s, report back on options for increased
parking revenues through either parking rates or parking fines to ensure
funds are available to acquire and/or create additional parking spaces when
needed;
7. That parking utilization studies and updates to the parking demand studies be
undertaken on a regular basis.
From:
Planning
Services
Department
Date:
April 25, 2006
Subject: Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study
Page 3 of 19
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In May 2004 the Town initiated the Commercial Parking Study. Marshall Macklin
Monaghan Limited was retained to assess current parking utilization and develop
new parking standards that recognized the observed demand for all commercial
uses in the Town. The study focuses on the following areas:
..
.
Downtown Oakville
The Kerr Street Business District
Downtown Bronte
The study focused on parking issues and the adequacy of current parking standards
within the three areas, as well as reviewed the suitability of parking standards for all
commercial uses Town-wide.
The Town’s parking requirements vary for commercial and mixed-use development
suggesting that a comprehensive review of current standards for these uses might
address parking issues associated with development applications that the Town is
now dealing with. Specifically, the study focuses on the C3R zoning category, and
the parking standards, as well as parking exemptions that have been appliedto
Downtown Oakville, the Kerr Street Business District and Downtown Bronte.
A stakeholders committee was established with members from the three focus
areas. Meetings were held throughout the study with the stakeholder sub-groups.
Cdmments from the stakeholder meetings are included in the body of the report.
Staff agree with the consultant’s final report, in principle, with minor changes to
some of the parking standard recommendations and directions for operational and
policy direction.
BACKGROUND:
The Commercial Parking Study began in May of 2004. Marshall Macklin Monaghan
Limited was retained to undertake this study on behalf of theTown of Oakville. A
copy of the final report is included as Appendix A.
The purpose of thestudy was to assess current parking utilization and develop
appropriate parking standards for all commercial uses in theTown and mixed-use
development in the following areas:
From:
Date:
Subject:
April 25,2006
Page 4 of 19
..
Downtown Oakville
The Kerr Street Business District
Downtown Bronte
The study has two main objectives.
The first is a focus on the parking issues and the adequacy of current parking
standards for the commercial uses and mixeduse development in the C3R zones
within the three older areas of Oakville. The study area maps are included as
Appendix 9.
The second objective of thestudy is to review at the Town-wide scale,the suitability
of parking standards for all types of commercial uses.
The Town’s parking requirements have evolved incrementally over the years. Some
variation in parking requirements for given usesexists across the Town. A
comprehensive review of the current parkingstandards for commercial and mixeduse development was needed to better address the parking issues associated with
the type of development the Town is now dealing with.
The study focuses on the C3R zoning category. The C3R zone is a mixed-use zone
permitting residential uses in combination with commercialuses provided the
residential uses are located above the commercial uses. The Town has adopted a
policy for granting parking exemption requests, only in areas zoned C3R,under
Section 40 of the Planning Act in return for annual paymentsin lieu of the required
parking through a licensing agreement.
The parking standards for permitted commercialuses vary betweenthe three areas,
despite their common C3R zoning. For example,within the core part of historic
Downtown Oakville, commercial uses are exempt
from providing parking.Within a
portion of the Kerr Street Business District alongLakeshore Road, only restaurant
uses are exempt from the parking requirement.
In contrast, Downtown Bronte enjoys no relaxation from parking requirements for
any commercial use. For restaurants in Downtown Brontethe parking standard is
higher than for restaurants in the C1 and C2 zones elsewhere in the Town.
It is suggested that this variability in parking requirementsfor similar uses may
affect the relative economic vitality of the three major shopping areaslocated in
Oakville south of the QEW. The Kerr StreetBusiness District and Downtown Bronte
lag behind Downtown Oakville in new investment and development activity.
From:
Date:
Subjec:t:
April 25,2006
Page 5 of 19
Staff felt that it was necessary to review the Town's parking standards for
commercial and mixed use development across Oakville in order to develop
appropriate standards that foster and support desirable development.
A large stakeholders committee was established comprised of members from the
three focus areas. Meetings were held throughout the study with the stakeholder
sub-groups to gather input, discuss the parking inventory and survey results, as well
as have input into the preparation of the final recommendations.
COMMENTSIOPTIONS:
The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of findings and recommendations
from the consultant's study as well as bring forward Staffs recommendations for
implementing revisions to parking operations and policies.
Commercial Parking Study Report
The Commercial Parking Study report, prepared by Marshall Macklin Monaghan
Limited, presents the findings of the parking inventory and assessmentsfor the
parking supply and demand in Downtown Oakville, the Kerr Street Business District
and Downtown Bronte, as well as assess the adequacy of the current parking
standards. The consultant's report identifies the differences in parking requirements
for these three areas and the issues of inequality, inconsistency, and confusion in
interpreting the parking standards from one area to another.
Recommendations regarding specific current parking policies, such a,s cash-in-lieu
and enforcement are also addressed within the report.
Downtown Oakville
Downtown Oakville currently has 2,291 spaces available for public parking,
including:
652 spaces in privately owned/operated commercial surface parking lots
486 spaces in municipal surface lots
' 458 on-street metered parking spaces
' 180 on-street nonmetered parking spaces
' 515 spaces in parking garages
approximately 62 percent of the non-residential parking supply is municipally
operated
.
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25,2006
Page 6 of 19
Zoning By-law currently permitshequires:
Commercial areas are exempt from the provisions of parking within a defined
area of Downtown Oakville;
Other C3R lands outside of the exemption area are required to generally provide
1 space for every 28 m2of leasable area (with some exceptions).
Parking Exceptions
Groups such as the Oakville Historical Society, St. Jude’s Church workers and
volunteers and the Lawn Bowling Club have been provided permits which allow
members an exception to thetwo hour parking limit.
Parking Demand
The actual parking demand rate was calculatedto be 2.845 spaces per 1,000
square feet of occupied gross floor area, or 1 space per 32.6 m2of gross floor area.
The projected annual growth in parking demand (or utilization) was calculated at 0.5
percent in Downtown Oakville.
Stakeholder Comments
The Downtown Oakville Stakeholders Committee brought up theissues of a lack of
employee parking spaces, downtown merchants occupying prime spaces, the
possibility of free parking on Saturdays, second storeyresidential uses and the need
to increase parking enforcement. Stakeholders were very concerned that parking
difficulty and lack of convenience was not evident in the study results. Requests
include dedicated spaces and two hour exemptions from specific groups, a new
parking garage facility, and more visible parking restriction signs.
Key Findings:
There is currently more than enough parking in the Downtown as a whole (peak
utilization of only 67 percent)
The demand is 85 percent of capacity in Zone 1 during the peak on a Saturday.
The weekday peak is only 67 percent in Zone?
The demand for parkin is in the order of 2.845 spaces per 1,000 square feet or
3.07 spaces per 100 m
Additional commercial development can be accommodated in the Downtown
9
Recommendations:
Five Options have been developed and assessed for Downtown Oakville. The
consultant recommends that thefollowing two options be considered:
From:
Date:
April
Subject:
25, 2006
Town of OakvilleCommercialParking Study
Page 7 of 19
Option 4
Maintain the existing exemptionfor the lands which are currently exempt
Reduce the requirementsfor the C3R lands northof Randall to reflect the
observed parking rate for Downtown Oakville (one space per 32.6m2)
Or
Option 5
Maintain the existing exemption for the lands, which are currently exempt
Exempt the C3R lands to the north of Randall Street
9
9
In addition, the following operational recommendations were put forward:
More effective use needs to be made of the parking garagefor general customer
and visitor use, including improved signage, advertising and incentives;
Enforcement efforts should focus on Zones 1 and 5 to ensure the two hour
maximum stay;
The designation of specific on-street spaces for specific user groups
is not
recommended in that this is not an effective use
of the public supplyof parking
and could set a precedent.
Herr Street Business District
Kerr Street Business District currently has 1,460 spaces available for public parking,
including:
' 1,203 spaces in privately owned/operated commercial surface parking lots
' 48 spaces in one municipal lot
142 on-street metered parking spaces
37 on-street non-metered parking spaces
Zoning By-law currentlypermitdrequires:
C1 and C2 lands are required to generally provide 1 spacefor every 22 m2of
ground floor leasable area and1 space for every28 m2 of leasable area above
or below ground;
C3 lands are required to generally provide 1 space for every 28 m2of leasable
floor area, notwithstanding some excluded uses;
= C3R lands have varying standards.
.
Parking Exceptions
Complete exceptionsfor restaurants in the southern part of the District, but not
for other areas;
Exceptions for small restaurants in another partof the District.
.
From:
Date:
Subjec:t:
April 25,2006
Town of OakvilleCommercialParking Study
Page 8 of 19
Parking Demand
The actual parking demand rate was calculated to be 1.32 spaces per1,000 square
feet of occupied gross floor area, or 1 space per 70.4 m2of gross floor area. The
projected annual growth in parking demand (or utilization) was calculated at 0.5
percent in Kerr Street Business District.
Stakeholders Comments
The Kerr Street Business District Stakeholders Committee brought upthe issues of
inequality in parking requirements, that new or expanding restaurants were not
required to provide parking but may be increasing parking demand, and payment inlieu policies and implications.
Key Findings:
There is currently more than enough parking in the Kerr Street Business District
on an overall basis (peak utilization of only 39 percent)
= The highest peak demand is 74 percent in Zone 3.
= Additional commercial development can be accommodated, although protecting
land for a future parking facility in Zone 3 should be considered.
Recommendations:
Five Options have been developed and assessed for the Kerr Street Business
District. The consultant recommends thatthe following three options be considered:
Option 3(a)
Require parking for all non-residential uses in the District at a substantially
reduced standard in accordance with the measured demand (one space per70
m2),with no exemptions.
Option 3(b)
Require parking for all non-residential uses in the District at a consistent
standard of one space per 28 m2, with no exemptions.
Or
Option 4
= Exempt all non-residential uses in the District from the provision of parking.
Downtown Bronte
Downtown Bronte currently has 1,616 spaces available for public parking, including:
1,482 spaces in privately ownedloperated commercial surface parking lots
m
88 on-street non-metered parking spaces
46 spaces in parking garages
No off-street municipal lots
From:
Date:
Subject:
April 25,2006
Page 9 of 19
Zoning By-law currently permits/requires:
’ C1 and C2 lands are required to generally provide 1 space for every 22 m2 of
ground floor leasable area and 1 space per 28 m2 of leasable area above or
below ground;
’ C3 lands are required to generally provide 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasable
floor area, notwithstanding some excluded uses;
C3R lands have varying standards.
Parking Exceptions
There are no exemptions in Downtown Bronte.
Parking Demand
The actual parking demand rate was calculated to be 2.58 spaces per 1,000 square
feet of occupied gross floor area, or 1 space per 36.0 m2of gross floor area. The
projected annual growth in parking demand (or utilization) was calculated at 0.5
percent in Downtown Bronte.
Stakeholders Comments
The Downtown Bronte Stakeholders Committee brought up the issuesof a lack of
disabled parking in thearea for seniors, employees/owners utilizingprime parking
spaces, and increasing development pressure and intensification beingfelt in
Bronte. Main concerns were raised regarding the possibility of introducing on-street
paid parking to Downtown Bronte and the current parking provisionsof the new livework units. Requests were made for private parking lots to identify, through better
signage, any public parking spaces that are available, and more equality in parking
requirements within Downtown Bronte.
Key Findings:
There is currently more than enough parking in the Downtown Bronte (peak
utilization of only 45 percent)
The highest parking utilization is achieved in the on-street parking spaces
Growth in parking demand as forecasted, can continue to be accommodated
within the available parking supply
Parking along the Bronte and Lakeshore corridors are effectively operating close
to, or at capacity
If parking utilization rises consistently amongst the various parking types, it is
expected that the on-street parking system will “fill” first, and then the excess
supply in the private lots
=
.
.
From:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25,2006
Date:
Subject:Town
of Oakville Commercial Parking Study
Page 10 of 19
Recommendations:
Five Options have been developed and assessed for Downtown Bronte.The
consultant recommends thatthe following two options be considered:
Option 2
Reduce and simplify the parking standards to reflect the observed peak parking
demand (one space per36 m2 of floor area) to be applied equallyto all
commercial uses
Or
Option 5
Exempt all commercial uses
Town to address parking needs
Introduce fees for parking
.
.
Staff Comment
Marshall Macklin Monaghan Limited was retained to undertake a commercial
parking review for the Town of Oakville,with a key focus on theC3R zones within
Downtown Oakville, Kerr StreetBusiness District and Downtown Bronte. The Town
of Oakville Commercial Parking Study is the end productof the consultant’s scope
of work.
The Commercial Parking Studyincludes findings and recommendationsfor all three
areas and includes recommendationswith regards to specific current parking
policies, such as cash-in-lieu and enforcement.
Planning Services and Engineering and Construction Staff have reviewed the final
report recommendationsas well as attended all stakeholder meetings and agree,in
principle, with the Commercial Parking Study except for the following cases:
Downtown Oakville
Zoning Provisions
The study found that there was
currently more than enough parking in Downtown
Oakville as a whole. In accordance with the observed parking rate the study
recommends two different options to be considered. Staff support maintaining, in
the Zoning By-Law,the existing parking exemptions in the area generally bounded
by 16 Mile Creek on the west, Allan Street on the east, Randall Street and Rebecca
Street on the north, and RobinsonStreet on the south.
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25, 2006
Town of OakvilleCommercialParkingStudy
Page 11 of 19
In addition, Staff recommend a reduced and simplified standard on
the lands zoned
C3R located northof Randall Street, and bounded by Allan Street
to the east and
Navy Streetto the west, that is consistent withthat proposed for Kerr Street
Business District and Downtown Bronte.A rate of one space per32.6 m2, with no
exemptions is recommended.
Parking Garage
The Town operates a285 space municipal parking garage at300 Church Street.
As recommended through previous parking studies, the garage
is primarily used by
long term parkers. Thefirst level of the garage however has been designated for
transient parking(2 hours or less).
The parking study foundthat the garage is under utilized. Although there are250
permits issuedfor monthly parking, notall permit holders park their vehicles on a
daily basis or at the same
times, therefore parking spaces arenot all occupied.
Staff are therefore recommending that options be considered
to increase the
utilization of the garage
through either (i) general customer and visitor use,
or (ii)
more monthly parking opportunities, ora combination of (i) and (ii);
Improve Compliance
The study found that somelong term parkers, generally employees, are likely
parking on-street withinthe areas noted as Zones 1 and 5. Within those zones
there are both long-term and short term duration spaces available.To ensure that
the long term parkers are not occupying short term parking spaces for customers,
staff are recommendingthat a program be implemented to improve compliance of
the two hour maximum stay parking within the general vicinity
of Water Street, north
of Lakeshore Road andRobinson Street, between Dunn Street and Allan Street,
through enhanced enforcement.
Current Exemptions
The Town provides alimited number of parking exemptionsto the following
organizations: The Oakville Historical Society, St. Jude’s Church workers and
volunteers and the Lawn Bowling Club. The study found that
the impact of these
limited exemptions areminimal since the permit holders can park anywhere within
the two hour zones southof Robinson Street. The study further suggests that
designating specific on-street spaces for specific users groups
is not recommended
as an effective useof the public parking and could set a precedent. Staff
is
therefore recommendingthat no change to the current exemptionsof the two hour
time limit foron street parking spaces south
of Robinson Street.
Loading/Unloading in Centre Turn Lane
The study has identified theissue of commercial vehicles parkingin the centre lane
of Lakeshore Road East. As many of the businesses on Lakeshore Road East do
From:
Planning
Services
Department
Date:
April 25,2006
Subject: Town of OakvilleCommercialParkingStudy
Page 12 of 79
not have rear property access, they receive deliveriesthrough their Lakeshore Road
entrance. Commercial vehicles are often too large to fit within a standard meter
space found on Lakeshore Road, resulting in commercial vehicles parking in the
centre lane to make deliveries.
Although the Town has accepted this practice, it is limited to commercial vehicles
only as they are not able to fit within a standard on street parking space. Passenger
vehicles parked in the centre of Lakeshore are prohibited and enforced.
Options for eliminating commercial vehicles from parkingon the centre lane include
designating specific spaces for commercial vehicle loading/unloading within each
block of Lakeshore Road and/or requiring businesses to accept deliveries outsideof
regular business hours. These options would result in a loss of prime parking for
customers, would have negative impact on the business operations,and may not
fully eliminate the need for commercial vehicles to park inthe centre of Lakeshore
Road. Staff is therefore recommending that the issue of the loading/unloading
spaces in the centre turn lane along each block of LakeshoreRoad East be
monitored to determine if other options would be feasible.
Future Parking Facilities
The Study foundthat there was enough parking for the Downtown as a whole, with
an overall peak utilization of 67 percent. Although no additional parking is currently
required, the study suggests that it would be prudentto protect for future facilities
since the Town has no controlover the number of private parking spaces available
in Downtown Oakville.
The Town's current strategy identifies the following properties to be pursued for
future parking facilities:
Post Office site at Randall and George
Department of National Defense Property at Thomas and Robinson
ClBC lot at Church and George
Staff is therefore recommending that the current strategyto specify and pursue
properties for future acquisition and construction of newparking facilities be
continued.
Kerr Street Business District
Zoning Provisions
The study found that there was currently more than enough parking in the District.
In accordance withthe measured demand the study recommends a couple
of
different standards to reflect the current conditions of the area. Staff recommend a
From:
Planning
Services
Department
Date:
April 25,2006
Subject:Town
of OakvilleCommercialParking Study
Page 13 of 19
reduced and simplified standard that
is consistent with that proposed for Downtown
Oakville and Downtown Bronte.
32.6 m2,
Staff recommend that the parking standard
be reduced to one space per
with no exemptions. This new standardwould be consistent with the proposed
standards recommended for Downtown Oakville and Downtown Bronte.
Improved Compliance
The study found that there was ample parking on an overall basis in the Kerr Street
Business District. The study also found
that in some areas vehicles were parking for
exceedingly long durations and that greater enforcement was recommended. Staff
is therefore recommending that a program
to improve complianceof the maximum
parking duration be implemented.
Parking inthe Kerr Street Business District
is primarily enforced by officers deployed
to the Town's Commercial Parking Operations. There are currently three Parking
Control Officers workingin the commercial parking operations. These officers patrol
and enforce parking regulationsin Downtown Oakville and Kerr Street District, are
involved in revenue collection as well as carrying
out equipment maintenance.
In order to provide greater enforcement of
the time restrictionsin the Kerr Street
Business District, additional staff resources wouldbe required. As part of the
recommendation for the introduction of paid parking
in Bronte (discussed elsewhere
in this report) additional staff resources would also be required. Staff is
recommending that these additional resources
be considered togetherto provide for
efficiencies and economies of scale.
Downtown Bronte
Zoning Provisions
The study found that there was currently more than enough parking
in Downtown
Bronte. In accordance with the observed peak demand the study recommends
a
reduced standardof one space per36 m2to be applied equallyto all commercial
uses. However, Staff feels that parking standards across the C3R lands
in all three
study areas should be consistent.
Staff recommendthat the parking standard be reduced to one space32.6
per m2,
with no exemptions. This new standard wouldbe consistent with the proposed
standards recommendedfor Downtown Oakville and the Kerr Street Business
District.
' " I
k55
From:
Planning
Services
Department
Date:
April 25,2006
Subject:Town
The study found that there was ample parkingon an overall basis in the Bronte
Village, with a few locations where the demand for parking was equalto or
exceeded the supply. The study suggests the introductionof paid parking as a
means of better managing the parking in these areas, specifically, ensuring turnover
of prime parking spaces for customers.
The introduction of paid parking in Bronte would require additional staff, equipment
and related resources. Any revenues received would be used to pay for the
resources to operate the paid parking in Bronte. As stated elsewhere in this report,
additional resources are required to improve compliancewith the time restrictions for
vehicles parked in the Kerr Street Business District. Staff is recommending that
these additional resources be considered togetherto provide for efficiencies and
economies of scale.
The study further suggests that consideration should be given to protecting for
additional public parking in Bronte. No specific properties are currently identified.
As the Town is undertaking the Bronte Revitalization Study, as well as processing
any redevelopment applications in Bronte, staff is recommending that public parking
opportunities be identified through these processes.
Other Parking Operation and Policies
Live-work Developments
Staff recommend that an amendment to theZoning By-Law be initiated to include a
parking standard of one space for every 32.6m2 commercial floor space per livework unit. This standard would apply to the commercial portion of the live-work unit.
Additional parking would be required for the residential portion on the unit at the
current rate of two spaces for every residential unit.
Currently, the commercial portion of live-work units provide parking at a reduced
rate of one space for every 40 m2floor area. The rationale for this rate was twofold:
(i) the owner of the live-work unit would occupy the residential unit and also be the
proprietor of the commercial unit; and (ii)availability of on-street parking adjacentto
the unit can address part of the commercial parking demand. Duringthe stakeholder
meetings concerns were raised with the parking supply for live-work units. The
stakeholders noted that residents living above the commercial units were typically
not working in the commercial units and therefore the parking requirements werenot
working, and the demand for parking spaces was not being addressed. Staff agree
with these observations and are recommending that live-work units be subjectto the
same rate as other commercial uses in the C3R areas.
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25,2006
Paae 15 of 19
The Town of Oakville currently provides commercial parking in Downtown Oakville
as well as the Kerr Street Business District. The cost of these operations is funded
through parking rates, fees and fines. Any surplus revenues from parking
operations are transferred into a Parking Reserve Fund. The Reserve Fund is used
to fund repairs and maintenance of parking facilities and equipment and to fund the
acquisition and creation of additional parking spaces.
The study undertook a review of theTown’s parking rates, fees and fines and
provided a comparison with other municipalities. The study suggested that
consideration should be given to raising certain rates and fines in order to recoup
operating and capital costs, to contribute to the reserve for funding future parking
facilities and to ensure the fine is a deterrent. Furthermore, staff has been advised
of recent increases in the real estate values in Downtown Oakville. To ensure the
Town has sufficient funds to acquire and create new parking facilities in Oakville
when needed, staff will be reviewing options for increasing revenues. In
communication with the stakeholders, staff will be considering increases to rates,
fees, fines and/or hours of operation. Staff is therefore recommending that a report
be brought forward to outline options for additional parking revenue opportunities.
Parking Utilization Studies
To ensure parking situations in the commercial district are monitored and to respond
to changes in thecommercial districts, staff is recommending that parking utilization
studies and updates to the parking demand study be undertaken on a regular basis.
As part of the 2006 Capital Budget, funding has been approved for a parking
ufilization study for our existing commercial parking operations. Staff will be
proceeding with the study in 2006.
Next Steps
The following steps will be required to ensure that the recommendations ofthe study
are amended/incorporated within the Town’s Zoning By-Law and parking operations
and policies.
I.Initiate amendments to the Zoning By-Law to revise parking standards for
non-residential uses in the C3R lands for Downtown Oakville, Kerr Street
Business District, and Downtown Bronte.
2. initiate amendments to the Zoning By-Law to revise parking standards for
live-work uses.
3. Implement additional parking operations and policy programs identified by
Staff.
4. Undertake parking utilization studies and updates to the parking demand
studies.
From:
Planning
Services Department
Date:
April 25,2006
Subject: Town
Page 16 of 19
CONSIDERATIONS:
PUBLIC
With regards to the specific nature of the study, a large stakeholders
committee that comprised members from all three key study areas was
established. Meetings with the sub-groups were held over the course of the
study period.
FINANCIAL
Staff to report back on financial implications of additional parking operations
and policy programs.
lMPACTONOTHERDEPARTMENTS&USERS
None known at this time.
CORPORATE AND/OR DEPARTMENT GOALS& OBJECTIVES
Assessing parking standards and polices with the goal of encouraging
commercial development is in keeping with the Corporate Strategic Priorities
regarding Local Economic Vitality and Principled Land Use Planning.
CONCLUSION:
The purpose of conducting the Commercial Parking Study was to assess current
parking utilization and to develop appropriate parking standards for all commercial
uses in the Town and mixed use development areas within the C3R zones.
The need to assess parking utilization and standards within the study areas
stemmed from complaints that parking utilization was not optimal andthat there was
an inequality in parking standards within the C3R zones.
The study recommends newparking standards that suit commercial development
and support the Town’splanning and development objectives, effectively respondto
the issues present in the Town’s mixed-useareas, and are financially viable.
Staff supportthe consultant’s recommendations, with minor revisions.
-'
From:
Planning
Services
Department
25, 2006
Date:
April
Subject:Town
Page 17 of 19
Submitted by:
Hand Ellison
Manager of ParkingHalton Court Services
Authorized by:
Director of Planning
Services
Director
of Engineering
and
Construction
Appendix A: Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study Report
Appendix B: Study Area Maps
S:\word\Long Range 200flStaff Reports\012-06 Commercial Parking
Study.doc
From:
Date:
Subject:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25,2006
Page 18 of 19
Appendix A
Town of Oakville Commercial Parking Study Report
TOWN OF OAKVILLE
PARKING STUDY
FINAL REPORT
Prepared For:
The Town of Oakville
March, 2006
16-04060-01-TO1
Town of Oakville Parking Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Currently differences exist as to howthethreecommercial core areas of Oakville located
to the south of the Queen Elizabeth Way are treated with respect to parking. These
commercial areas are:
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
Downtown Oakville
The Ken Business District
Downtown Bronte
Downtown Oakville is generally defined by Sixteen Mile Creek on the west, Allan Street
on the east, Randall Street and Rebecca Street on the north and Robinson Street on the
south. For purposes of this study the study area wasextended southward to King Street.
Downtown Oakville has in the order of 2,291 parking spaces available for public parking.
This includes 285 spaces inamunicipallyoperated
parking garage,486spacesin
municipal surface parking lots, as well as 458 metered and 180 non-metered on-street
parking spaces. Thus just over 60 percent of the available public parking in Downtown
Oakville is municipally provided.Thebalanceofthe
public parking is privately
operated.
Parking utilization surveys undertakenover a fourdayperiodfound
an overallpeak
utilization of only 67 percent, occurring on a weekday. When related to the occupied
non-residential floor area this equals to 2.845 spaces per 1,000 ft2,or 3.07 spaces per 100
m2, or 1space per 32.6 m2 of occupied floor area.
For purposes of the parking study the Ken: Street Study area is generally defined as being
bounded by Maurice Drive on the west, Forsyth Street on the east, Speers Road on the
north andBurnet Street on the south.
0
0
0
0
There are approximately 1,460
public
parking
spaces available in this study
area.
Oakville operates only one municipalparkinglotin
this area, withthemunicipally
provided parking accounting for less than 18 percent of the overall public parking.
Parkingutilization surveys undertakenoverthree days indicatedapeakparkingdemand
of only 39 percent.Relating
thepeak observeddemand to theoccupiedfloorarea
equates to a peak parking demand of 1.32 spaces per 1,000 f?, or 1.43 spaces per 100
m2,or 1 space per 70.4 m2.
Downtown Bronte is generally boundedbyBronteCreekon the west,East Street onthe
east, Sovereign Street on the north andOntario Street on thesouth.
There are approximately 1,616parkingspaces available forcommercialor public parking
in Downtown Bronte.These include 88 on-street non-metered parking spaces.The Town
does not operate any off-street public parkinglots in Downtown Bronte.
Town of Oakville ParkingStudy
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
..
11
Parking utilization surveys over three days indicated an abundance of parking available in
Downtown Bronte asa whole, being only 45 percent. However, there are two smallareas
where the peak parking demand is close to or at the practical capacity of these spaces on
weekdays.
Relatingtheobserved parking demand to theoccupiedfloorareaequates to a demand of
2.58 spaces per 1,000 f e of occupied floor area, or 2.78 spaces per 100 m2, or 1 space per
36.0 m2.
0
0
0
.
Currently Downtown Oakville is exemptfromtheprovisionofparking,withthe
exception of residentialuses. These provisions apply to the lands bounded byNavy
Street on the west, Randall Street on the north, Allan Street on the east and Robinson
Street on the south. Other Downtown lands in the C3R zone outside of the exempt zone
are generally required toprovide one parking space for every 28 m2 of leasable floor area,
with someexceptions.Bycomparison,within
the Kerr Street BusinessDistrictboth
residential and non-residential uses in the C3R zone are required to provide parking, in
accordance with the By-lawrequirements.However,
here too some veryspecific
exemptions exist. Unlike Downtown Oakville and the KerrStreet Business District, there
are no parking exemptions whatsoever in Downtown Bronte,for either residential or nonresidential uses.
The differences between and within these three commercial nodes raise issues such as:
-
-
Fairnessbetween areas
Fairness between uses in the same area
The cost and funding of parking
The impacts on adjacent residential neighbours
Competitiveness with suburban shopping centres
The accommodation of parking for historical buildings.
In addition to the above noted issues, other factors and considerations arealsoof
relevance. They include:
-
-
The built-inmarket
The popularity/draw of each of these areas
Sharedparking opportunities
Transit availability
Market
factors
Ease in interpreting and administering the parking section of the Zoning By-law is also an
important consideration in view of the current complexity.
0
A range of strategic options were identified and assessed for each of the three commercial
areas.
They
tended
to range
between
no exemptiondexisting standards, to no
exemptionsheduced standards, to complete exemptions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
iii
Eachoptionforeachof
considerations:
-
-
the three areas wasthenassessed
on thebasisoffive
Equality
Potential impacts on municipal parking requirements
Supportforredevelopment
Opportunitiesto minimize overallDowntownparkingrequirementsthroughshared
use
Complexity in interpretation andadministration.
For DowntownOakville the recommendation is tomaintainthe existing exemptions,and
to extend the exemptions to the C3R lands to the north of RandallStreet.However,
should the Town be concerned that this would trigger the need for the Town to now
construct additional public parking in this area, an equally acceptable option would beto
maintain the current exemptions, and to reduce the parking requirements for the C3R
lands north of Randall Street to one space per 32.6 m2 for non-residential areas, which
would represent a reduction over the current requirements. This could also be used as a
stepping stone toward a future exemption.
For Downtown Oakville isit
also recommended
that
consideration
be
given
to
eliminating “free parking” on a Saturday, in that the high utilizationin the area generally
bounded byWater Street, Navy Street, RebeccaStreetandLakeshoreRoad
is only
experienced on a Saturday when ‘‘free parking” is available. This area should thenbe
monitored. There may also be opportunities to further maximize parking in thisarea
through striping and management practices. More effective usealso needs to be made of
the Town’s parkinggarage, and the various boundaries, which
define the Downtown need
to be rationalized to providefor clarity and consistency.
Finally, in Downtown Oakville it is recommendedthat parking demandstudies be
undertaken regularly, for example every five years similar to By-law reviews and that the
current strategy to specify and protect properties for the construction of new parking in
the future, be continued. One site that has been considered in the past for acquisition by
the Town is the Post Office site located in the south-west comer of Randall Street and
George Street, in view of itssize and location for either a parking lot or parking structure.
There is also a currently adopted resolution related to the acquisition of the CIBC lot at
Church Street at George Street andthe DND property at Thomas Street atRobinson
Street aspotentialmunicipalparkingfacility
sites. This is prudent inviewofthe
potential loss of some of the private parking inventory due to redevelopment, or loss of
municipal parking or leased sites.
For the Kerr Street Business District no additional parking is required at themoment,or
for the foreseeable future.
For theKerrStreet Business District t h r e e options are recommended for consideration.
They represent complete parking exemptions for non-residential
uses, or reduction in the
parking standards. In the case of reductions, the new standard (either 1 space per 28 m2
or 1 space per 70 m2) would apply to all non-residential uses, thus treating all of these
uses equally.
U(ECUTIVE SUMMARY
iv
0
0
0
0
0
ForDowntownBronte
two optionsarerecommended:
The firstwouldsee
a reduction
and simplification in the parking standards to reflect
the observed parking demand rate of
one space per 36 m2 of floor area for all commercial uses. Another option would be to
exemptallcommercialusesfromtheprovisionofparking,withtheTownthen
addressing the needs through the introduction of public parking lots or garages which
would be funded in wholeor in partthrough the introduction offeesforparking.
However funds are not available to construct new parking, since revenues from parking
are not specifically set aside for parking facilities, but
rather are allocatedaspartof
general revenues. Although Downtown Bronte has more than enough parking to address
the commercial needs of this area as a whole, because there are shortages of parking at
times along the Bronte Road comdor, it would be desirable to protect a site for public
parking along this comdor. As aninterim step consideration should begiventothe
introduction of some on-streetpaidparking
on a trial basis over a summer,asan
opportunity to better manage the on-street parkingsupply.
It is recommended that Oakville
retain
its
current
parking standards
for
C1 (local
shopping centre) uses, unless Oakville is finding that restaurant uses are occupying a
disproportionate amount of the total floor area in
local shopping centres, with the parking
demand spilling over onto theadjacentstreets,
or onto other sites. Similarly,for
community shopping centres, if Oakville is not experiencing parking problems, then the
existing standards shouldapply.However,ifparking
shortages arebeingroutinely
experienced, then consideration should be given to adopting the Urban Land Institute
(UL.1) industry standards.
It is recommended that Oakvilleretainitspayment-in-lieupolicy
in thatitisviewed as
providing a reasonable alternative for those sites which cannot address additional parking
requirements on-site, andwheresucharrangements
are in keeping with Official Plan
goals.
Althoughnot a mandateof this study, the spillover of recreational parkingdemandsinto
residential neighbourhoods was noted as an issue in Downtown Bronte. Ideally, it would
be desirable to locate a new parking facility in Downtown Bronte so as to address both
commercial and recreational needs on a shared use basis. For special events that only
occur occasionally throughout the year,
consideration
should
be
given
to
the
implementation of remote parking venues, connected by shuttle buses. This would not
only address the parking needs, but would also
help to minimize the traffic impactson the
localized area.
For live-work units it is recommended that for the resident component the normal By-law
standards wouldapply,withtandemparkingpermitted(e.g.
two spacesperunit).
However for the non-residential componentthe requirements shouldbe half of what they
would otherwise be,recognizing that theresident is also an employee. This would
address both non-residential and residential visitorparking demands recognizing that the
two are complementary. Tandem parking should notbe permitted for this componentof
the parking supply. The applicant should also be encouraged to create newon-street
parking spaces where none currently exist, provided that this does not jeopardise other
functions of the street. Part of the non-residential parking demand can then
be addressed
on-street. However this would need to be evaluated on a site specific basis.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................
(i)
1.0
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... I.................................1
2.0
DOWNTOWN OAKVILLE - CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................
2
2.1
STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................... 2
2.2
INFORMATIONCOLLECTION
...................................................................................
2
2.2.1 Perspectives of the Business Improvement Association,
Town Representatives and Stakeholders
2
2.2.2
3
............................................................
Review of Previous ReportsICorrespondence ....................................................
.........................................................................................
LIMITEXEMPTIONS .................................................................................
2.2.3 Parking Requirements
4
2.3
PARKING TIME
2.4
LOADING ZONES.......................................................................................................................
2.5
REVENUES .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.6
ENFORCEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 5
2.7
PARKING SURVEYS..................................................................................................................
6
2.7.1 General Description of the Study Area
............................................................................
7
2.7.2 Zone Analysis .....................................................................................................................
7
2.7.6 Total Area.........................................................................................................................
12
4
5
2.8
DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT..................................................................................................
13
2.9
CURRENT PARKING PROVISION.......................................................................................
2.10 FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKING
......................................................................................
2.11 COMPARISON OF FINDINGS................................................................................................
2.12 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
15
15
19
............................................................................................
20
3.0
KERR STREET BUSINESS DISTRICT .
CURRENT CONDITIONS
................
22
3.1
STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................................
22
3.2
DATA GATHERING .................................................................................................................
22
..............................................
22
3.2.1 Perspectives of Stakeholder and Town Representatives
.........................................................................................................................
Customer Surveys..............................................................................................
3.2.2 Interviews
3.2.2.1
22
23
............ ..............................
Review of Previous Reports/Correspondence ...............................................................
3.2.2.2 Business Owner/Manager Survey Results
3.2.3
24
25
....................................................................................................
25
3.3
PARKING EXEMPTIONS ........................................................................................................
26
3.4
REVENUES ................................................................................................................................
27
3.6
PARKING SURVEYS................................................................................................................
27
3.6.1 General Description .........................................................................................................
27
3.6.2 Segment Analysis .............................................................................................................
28
...................................................................
ASSESSMENT: OPERATIONS ..............................................................
................................
3.7.1 Existing Parking Operations .........................................................
................................
3.6.2.1 Total Kerr StreetBusiness District
3.7
31
31
31
3.7.1.1 Parking Utilization ............................................................................................
31
3.7.1.2 Parking Duration ...............................................................................................
32
3.7.1.3 Summary ............................................................................................................
33
3.8
DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT ...................................................................................................
33
3.9
CURRENT PARKING PROVISION .......................................................................................
34
3.10 FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKING
......................................................................................
35
3.11 FINDINGS RELATIVE TO 2004 KERR VILLAGE REVITALIZATION STUDY ..........37
3.12 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................
.........................................................
38
4.0
DOWNTOWN BRONTE .
CURRENT CONDITIONS
39
4.1
STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................................
39
4.2
INFORMATION COLLECTION .............................................................................................
39
.............
39
4.2.1 Perspectives of the Stakeholder Groups and Town Representatives
4.2.2 Interviews .........................................................................................................................
...............................................................................
Business Survey Findings ..................................................................................
39
4.2.2.1 Customer Survey Findings
40
4.2.2.2
41
4.2.3 Review of Previous ReportsICorrespondence ...............................................................
....................................................................................................
4.3
PARKING EXEMPTIONS .......................................................................
4.4
REVENUES ................................................................................................................................
Msrrhall
...........
Y...
Meoklln
Monaghrn
.....
m
,"
..
.
................................
;
7b7
41
42
43
43
.
4.5
ENFORCEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 43
4.6
PARKING SURVEYS................................................................................................................
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.1 0
44
4.6.1
General Description .........................................................................................................
44
4.6.2
Segment Analysis .............................................................................................................
44
4.6.3
Total Area .........................................................................................................................
47
ASSESSMENT: OPERATIONS AND POLICIES
.................................................................
47
4.7.1
Existing Parking Operations ..........................................................................................
47
4.7.2
Parking Utilization ..........................................................................................................
48
4.7.3
Parking Duration .............................................................................................................
49
4.7.4
Conclusions Related to the Existing Demand for Parking
...........................................
50
.........................................
50
DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT .........................................................
.....................................................................................
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKING ......................................................................................
CURRENT PARKING PROVISIONS
4.11 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
............................................................................................
.........................................................
52
52
54
5.0
DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS
5.1
CURRENT PROVISIONS ......................................................................................................... 55
5.1.1 Downtown Oakville .........................................................................................................
5.2
5.3
..........................................................................................
5.1.2
5.1.3
Downtown Bronte ............................................................................................................
ISSUES ........................................................................................................................................
55
55
55
56
56
5.2.1
Fairness Between Areas ..................................................................................................
5.2.2
Fairness Between Uses in the Same Area
......................................................................
56
5.2.3
CostFunding of Parking .................................................................................................
57
5.2.4
Impacts on Adjacent Residential Neighbours
56
5.2.5
...............................................................
Competitiveness with.Suburban Shopping Centres.....................................................
57
5.2.6
Historical Buildings .........................................................................................................
58
57
OTHER FACTORS AND CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO DEMAND OR SURPLY OF
PARKING ...................................................................................................................................
58
5.3.1
Built-in Market ................................................................................................................
5.3.2
PopularitylDraw
..............................................................................................................
58
58
5.3.4
....................................................................................... 59
..
Transit Availablhty .................................................................................................
:........59
5.3.5
Market Factors ................................................................................................................
5.3.3
Shared Parking Opportunities
...
lm!E+;.m
..... ............
....-.......*1
C
/@
60
5.4
5.5
............60
CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO INTERPRETATION/ADMINISTRATION
5.4.1 Interpretation ...................................................................................................................
60
5.4.2 Administration .................................................................................................................
60
.............................................
60
STRATEGIC OPTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS
5.5.1 Downtown OakvilIe ......................................................................................................... 60
5.5.2 Kerr Street Business District ..........................................................................................
64
5.5.3 Downtown Bronte ............................................................................................................
69
PARKING RELATED TO SHOPPING PLAZAS OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN
OAKVILLE, DOWNTOWN BRONTE AND THE KERR STREET €$USINESS
DISTRICT ...................................................................................................................................
73
6.1
CURRENT PROVISIONS.........................................................................................................
73
6.2
COMPARISON WITH STANDARDS FOR OTHER JURISDICTIONS
............................
Town of Markham .......................................................................... ;1................................
73
73
6.0
6.2.1
6.2.2 Niagara-on-the-Lake .......................................................................................................
74
6.2.3 Burlington ........................................................................................................................
74
6.2.4 City of Mississauga ...........................................................................................................
74
6.2.5 City of Kitchener .............................................................................................................
74
6.2.6 City of Hamilton ..............................................................................................................
74
6.3
INDUSTRY STANDARDS ........................................................................................................
74
6.4
ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................
75
7.0
PAYMENT-IN-LIEU OF PARUNG .......................................................................................
77
7.1
PURPOSE....................................................................................................................................
77
7.2
CONSIDERATIONS..................................................................................................................
77
7.3
CURRENT OAKVILLE PAYMENT-IN-LIEU PROVISIONS ............................................
77
7.4
EXPERIENCES OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES .................................................................78
7.5
FEES/APPLICATIONS.............................................................................................................
78
7.6
ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................
79
8.0
PARKING RATES AND FINES ...............................................................................................
81
8.1
PARKING RATES
8.2
TIME PERIODS.........................................................................................................................
82
8.3
FINES ..........................................................................................................................................
82
.....................................................................................................................
M-tnhrll
MaoMin
..........-.-.
.
Monrghan
E
.-.‘-...
. -
m-
.
81
...........................................................................
9.0
OTHER PARKING RELATED MATTERS
9.1
RECREATIONAL AND SPEClAL EVENT PARKING DEMAND
ACCOMMODATION ................................................................................................................
84
9.2
LIVE- WORK UNITS.. ..............................................................................................................
84
9.3
ON-STREET PARKING OPTIONS
........................................................................................
84
86
Page I of 88
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Currently the three commercial core areas of Oakville located to the south of the Queen Elizabeth
Way have different parkingrequirements,
or lack thereofin
terms of exemptions.These
commercial core areas are:
0
0
Downtown Oakville
The Kerr Business District
Downtown Bronte
These differences in how the three areas are treated with respect to. parking result in issues of
inequality, inconsistency, and confusion and can affect the economic vitality of these areas. For
example, in Downtown Oakville commercial uses are exempt from the provision of parking. The
Town operates various public parking facilities including a parking .garage and several surface
parking lots, as well as on-street spaces. In the Kerr Business District some restaurant uses are
exempt under specific circumstances. The Town only operates one pargng lot, as well as on-street
spaces. In Downtown Bronte no uses are exempt from the provision of parking and there is no offstreet parking provided by the Town.
This study was undertaken to inventory and assess the parking supply and demand in Downtown
Oakville, the Kerr Business District and Downtown Bronte, and to ‘assess the adequacy of the
current parking standards. The study was to also address some specific matters including the cashin-lieu parking policy.
Marshall Macklin Monaghan Limited was retained to undertake thisstudy on behalf of the Town of
Oakville. The study has been completed,with the findings outlined herein.
Page 2 of 88
2.0
DOWNTOWN OAKVILLE - CURRENT CONDITIONS
2.1
STUDY AREA
For the purpose of this assessment, the study area is generally defined by Water Street on the east,
Allan Street on the west, RandallStreet and Rebecca Street on the north, and Robinson Street on the
south in accordance with the Town's Terms of Reference forthis study. In additionMarshall
Macklin Monaghan Ltd., (M") extended the study area southwards to King Street to address
some local neighbourhood parking concerns.
An inventory of the parking supply in the study area indicates that there are 2,291 spaces available
for public parking. These include 652 spaces in privately owned/operatedcommercialsurface
parking lots, 486 spaces in municipal surface lots, 458 on-street metered parking spaces, 180 onstreet non-meteredparking spaces, and 5 15 spaces in parking garages.
There are two parking garages in the area. One is municipally operated with 285 spaces and is
located on the south side of Church Street between Trafalgar Road and Reynolds Street. The second
parking garage is privately operated and is located on the north side of Robinson Street behveen
George Street and DunnStreet, and has230 parking spaces.
The study area was divided into seven zones for ease of analysis and these are illustrated in Figure
1. Section 1, thecollection
of information and data involved variousactivitiesincluding
a
stakeholder meeting, review of available documentation, as well as parkingsurveysand
observations andare described below.
2.2
INFORMATION COLLECTION
2.2.1
Perspectives of the Business Improvement Association, Town Representatives
and Stakeholders
An initial meeting was held in September 2004,
with various stakeholders in the subject
area. The purpose of this meeting wasto allow these representatives an opportunity to voice
theircomments and concerns regarding the parking situationinDowntownOakville.
Outlined herein is a summary of the key stakeholder comments or concerns raised at the
meeting:
0
0
0
0
0
A lack of employeeparking spaces in theDowntownareaasemployeesappearto
use on-street parkingalong side streets along Lake Shore BoulevardWest(e.g.
William Street, King Street,Navy Street, etc.).
Localized issueshequests, such as by PROBUS Club for an exemption from a 2 hour
parking limit (to 3 hours) in order to accommodate their meetings. Also, Oakville
Historical Society requestfor dedicated parking spaces for theirstaffholunteers.
A concern that the parking surveys did not extend far enough south.
Parking overflowatOakville Trafalgar Hospital, inparticularthelack
of parking
spaces for patients. (Note: the Hospitalis located outside the study area).
Downtown
merchants
occupying
prime spaces.
REBECCA
STREFT
254 SPACES
LAKESHORE
ROAD
I
1
5 Area 1 and Zonal Boundaries
1
Zone
FIGURE 1
Downtown Oakville
Parking Inventory
Town of Oakville Parking S~udy
Page 3 of 88
e
Request by local BIA representativesforfreeparkingon
e
Concernthatsecondstoreyresidentialusesmaynegativelyimpacttheavailable
commercial parkingsupply.
e
Request for consideration of a new parking garage facility on Church Street between
George Street andDum Street.
0
e
Concernthatlaw
events.
Saturdays.
enforcement for parking is not adequate / lenientduringspecial
Request for more visible and clear parkingrestriction signs.
Input receivedat this meeting wasconsidered in this assessment.
2.2.2 Review of Previous Reports/Correspondence
Copies of relevant reports concerning parking in the Downtown Oakville area had been forwarded
to the consultant for information. These included:
e
e
0
e
e
0
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
Downtown OakvilleParking Study (1997)
Town of Oakville2002 Official Plan
Parking Study Map - showing C1, C2 and C3Rlands
Maps illustrating municipal metered parking locationswithin the Downtown
Oakville area
Excerpts of Zoning By-law1984-63 for parking
Inventory of municipal lots
Corporate Policy 09-01-05, Parking Exemption Requests under Section
40 of the
Planning Act
Town of Oakville Council Minutes, October 1,2001, Town of Oakville Community
Services Committee Minutes and June 11 Staff Report “Parking Issues for Special
Groups/Organization South of Robinson Street”
2004 revenue datafor municipal lots and on-street parking
2004 summary ofparkade transactions
2004 Lay-by StreetParking - A Policy Framework
Downtown Oakville Municipal Parking Lots - Land Acquisition Issues
Excerpts of the Planning Act (Part IV:Community Planning)
The 1997 Downtown Oakville Parking Study prepared by the BA Group & Domenic Sorbara was
reviewed and the previous survey results compared to the survey results in this study. The BA
Group study was initiated in 1996 to understand existing operating conditions, identify problem
areas and identify potential
solutions for parking considering the following objectives:
-
-
the provision of additionalcustomer spaces;
the goal of making more effective use of existing parking supply;
the desire to re-locate current employee parking from the residential areas
(south of Robinson), and;
the needtodiscourageand
re-locate current employees whopark on prime offstreet spaces on Saturdays.
Page 4 of 88
The study also developed forecasts for hture parking needs and recommended improvementsin the
Downtown Oakville area to accommodate the projected parking demands. Some of the suggested
improvements included geometric revisions to parking lots, improved signage formunicipal
facilities, aggressive enforcement of parking restrictions, improved,pricing structure,etc.
A
comparison of the BA Report study findings to the current studyfindings is outlined in Section 2.1 1.
As per the excerpts from the Town of OakvilleZoningBy-law1984-63,thefollowing
requirements for commercial areas in the Town areas follows:
C1 Zone
0
C1 - 1 space for every 22 m2 of ground floor leasable area
C1- 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasablearea above or,below ground
C2 Zone
C2 - 1 space for every 28 m2of leasable area above orbelow ground
C3 Zone
C3 - notwithstanding some excluded uses, 1 space for every 28 m2of leasable
floor area, one parking space shall be providedhaving direct accessfrom
a public street other than Lakeshore Road, Randall, Rebecca or Kerr
Street.
C3R Zone
This zone is applicable to thethree
older commercialareas of theTown
(Downtown Oakville, Kerr Street Business District and Downtown Bronte). The
C3R detailed requirements are not listed here since the parking standards for each
of these three business areas are varied. For example, commercial uses
are exempt
from providing parking within thecore part of historic Downtown Oakville.
2.3
PARKING TIME LIMIT EXEMPTIONS
TheTownhas reviewed and has accommodated,inmanycases,some
parking regulations.
specific exemptions to
Groups such as the Oakville Historical Society, St. Jude's Church workers and volunteers and the
Lawn Bowling Club, have been provided permits which allow members an exemption to the two
hour parking limit. For example, the Historical Society is exempted upto 4 hours.
I
Page 5 of 88
2.4
LOADING ZONES
During the inventories of parking in the Downtown area, the issue of providing loading spaces for
the commercial activities along the street was evident. During the day, many trucks use the centre
turn lane for loading and unloading activities. (Refer to Figure 2). In fact, one truck was observed
to unload at one location, move down the street, stop again in the centre turn lane and repeat the
by
unloading procedure at another store. The same centre turning lane was observed to be used
couriers.
2.5
REVENUES
Table 1 outlinesTown-wide parking revenueinformationprovided by ParkingOperations.The
growth in revenues can be attributedto growth from lot usage, whilefines have declined markedly.
Table 1
Parking Revenue Sources, 1996 to 2004
Ave. Annual
Change
2.24%
1.19%
2.83%
8.58%
6.22%
10.19%
5.41%
* Fine Revenue allocation between Commercial District and town-wide for the Years 1996 to 2001 have bem estimated wine the averaee
Commercial Finc Revcnue (2002 to 2004) based on the staffing assignment of 3 Ofiiccrs for the Commercial District for the entire period.
** KerrLSRW & Lot 12 Revenues for the years 1996 to 2001 have been estimated based on historic levels of activity.
~
D
~
0
The growth in revenues shown above can be attributed to growth, especially from meters and lot
usage. Of note are revenues generated outside of the Downtown areas. These fine revenues have
risen, on average, 10.19 percent per annum. In effect, these revenues are subsidizing downtown
parking.
2.6
ENFORCEMENT
Enforcement was raisedas an issue at the stakeholder meeting
in that it is not adequate ortoo lenient
during special events, (see Section 2.2.1).
Town staff indicated that there are 11 Parking Control
Officers. Of these 11 officers, three are assigned as "Downtown Officers".
'i
i
:i
I
I
i
~
.
.
.
I
_
~
/A\
Marshall
Macklin
Monaghan
~'.'..".'.'il-.-.,r-li..Til.~.S.~.~..r.i.F..
J~UOMjobs\l6-M060.GKS\Repo~\s\Rnal
Report\Figures\Figure2 ~ T ~ Unloeding.cdr
ck
FIGURE 2
Truck Unloading on Lakeshore Road
in Downtown Oakville
Page 6 of 88
2.7
PARKING SURVEYS
Detailed parking surveys were undertaken in the commercial core arja of Downtown Oakville to
assess how the available parking supply is being used. In particular, the surveys indicate how the
demand for parking varies throughout the business day, how long vihicles are parked, and how
efficiently existing parking spaces are utilized.
Typically, the summer period provides a consistent high demand period both throughout the week
and on weekends. The surveys were thus undertaken duringthis period:on the following days:
Additional parking surveys were also undertaken subsequent to the September stakeholder meeting
to address local concerns regarding existing parking demand on King Street from Navy Street to
Allen Street. The supplementary surveys were conductedon the following days:
Friday, October I", 2004
Saturday, October2nd,2004
I 12:OO p.m. to 4:OO p.m.
I 12:OO p.m. to 4:OO p.m.
I
All parking surveys were undertaken under clear weather conditions exceptfor Thursday, June 17",
2004 which hadsome rain showers.
The surveys were undertaken onblockandblock-facebasis.
This allows theparkingdemand
related to any particular parking facility to be identified. The collected data was then grouped into
sub-zones for analysis purposes.
The methodology employed involved the recording of the license plates (i.e., the fust 3 digits or
letters), of every vehicle, legally or illegally parked within the study area every 30 minutes for the
survey days and time periods noted above. The data obtained was then used to determine the
following characteristics for each of the study sub-zones:
0
e
rn
e
0
The total number of vehicles parked over a given period of time
The number of vehicles parkedatanypointintime
The number of vehiclesusing a particularspaceoveragivenperiod
(turnover)
The extent to whichparkingspace is used(utilization)
The average length of stay of parkedvehicles (duration)'
of time
Parking utilizationand duration summary charts have been developed&d are included in this report
to demonstrate the use of parking spaces in the different segments of:the study area based on the
criteria describedabove.
I
Page 7 of 88
It should be noted that duringthe data collection process the survey staff were refused accessto the
following few locations:
RBC Bankbuildinglocatedon the south-westcomerof the intersectionofChurch
Street at Trafalgar Road. Prior to undertaking the parking surveys, Town staff had
contacted and confirmed withthe property management their cooperation to conduct
parking surveys on the site. Accordingly, surveys were completed for Thursday.
However, on Tuesday,the surveyors were instructed bythe property manager to stop
the surveysatapproximately
8:30 a.m.Therefore,MMMstaffinstructedfield
supervisors to stop surveying at this particular lot based on the office manager's
instructions.
0
2.7.1
The owner of a private property located on thesouth-west comer of the intersection
of Lakeshore Road East at
Trafalgar Road instructed the surveyorsto stop surveying
at approximately 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 22 2004 due to customer complaints
over having their license
plate numbers recorded. "Mcomplied with this request.
General Description of the Study Area
The parkingsurveyswereundertakenalongtheLakeshore
East commercialarea, from
Water Street in the west to Allan Street in the east and from Randall Street in the north to
King Street in the south. This segment of Lakeshore Rd is approximately one kilometre in
length, with commercial uses primarily located along Lakeshore Road.
Parking is providedin various forms throughout the study area.Most side streets have some
metered or non-metered on-street parking situated close to Lakeshore Road. Metered spaces
are provided in parking bays along muchof Lakeshore Road East. There are also a number
of municipaland privately operatedparking lots or structures, some of which are quite large,
reflecting the fairly urbanizednature of Downtown Oakville.
2.7.2 ZoneAnalysis
In order to facilitate the analysis of smaller areas withinDowntownOakville,thearea
surveyedwassubdividedintoseven
(7) zones,whichareillustrated
in Figure 1.The
seventh zone includes an area along King Street from Navy Street to Allen Street where
additionalparkingsurveyswereconductedsubsequent
to theSeptemberstakeholder
meeting. Each areais discussed inthe following section,with the emphasis on the following
issues:
0
What is the peak hour utilization by day and at what time of the day did it occur?
What is theweighted average parkingduration onweekdaysandonweekendsfor
different types of parking locations (private, municipal, on street metered, and onstreet non-metered)?
For reference, tables have been provided summarizing the data collected
on each of the
survey days, for each zone. Tables 2 and 3 summarize the utilization data and the average
duration by zone. These tables also includean inventory of the number of parking spaces in
each zone. Peak parking utilization for the municipally operated parking garage facility on
Page 8 of 88
Church Street and the privatelyoperated parking garage at Town Square on Robinson Street
are also shown separately inTable 2 as 4B and 6B, respectively.
Table 2
Peak Parking Utilization by Sub-zone: Downtown Oakville
Page 9 of 88
Table 3
Average Duration by Zone: Downtown Oakville
I
I
l
2
3
4
4B
5
4.34
I
6
6B
lI
2.17
2.25
1.89
1.80
4.37
2.34
1.82
I
I
3.06
I
I
2.48
2.18
1.31
1.25
2.05
1.28
1.19
3.76
1.74
I .70
0
1.45
2.01
4.20
I
I
I
'
:
:
3.58
I
1.76
1.45
1.63
3.95
1.92
1.79
5.20
I
I
Zone 1
Zone 1 provides 254 parking spaces, comprised of 85 on-street metered parking spaces, 109
privately operated parking spaces and 60 municipalspaces.
A peak hour weekday
utilization of 67 percent was observed on Thursday from 5:OO p.m. to 6:OO p.m. and 85
percent on Saturday from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. This suggests that during the weekday peak,
additional parking demand can still be accommodated. However on Saturday, 85 percent
utilization as observed, implies thatparking is effectively operatingclosetocapacity,
especially when circulating vehicles and the associated ease of locating a parking space are
taken into consideration.
Pape 10 o f 88
The weighted averageparking duration for different categoriesis outlined below:
9
0
0
Private parking (4.40hours on weekdays, 4.60 hours on weekends);
Municipal parking (1.82 hours on weekdays, 1.82 hours on weekends); and
On street metered parking (3.24 hours on weekdays, 2.34 hours on weekends)
The analysis indicates that the private parking in sub-zone 1 is utilised by both employees
and customers. Municipal parking seems to be used primarily by commercial customers.
The on-street metered spaces do not appear to achieve the same “turnover” on weekdays,
suggesting thatsome of those spaces are being used by employees.
Zone 2
A total of302 parking spaces wereavailable in this zone at thetime of thesurveys.
Included in this block are two municipal lots, which provide for 121 parking spaces in total.
This zone also includes 92 parking spaces on privately operated surface lots, as well as 89
on-street meteredparking spaces.
The peak observed utilization for Zone 2 ranged from 59 percent to 78 percent during the
weekday and weekend surveys indicating that sufficient parking is available in this area to
meet the existing demand.
The weighted averageparking duration for different parkingcategories is as follows:
0
Private parking (3.17 hours on weekdays, 3.78 hours on weekends);
Municipal parking (2.22 hours on weekdays, 2.75 hours on weekends); and
On street metered parking (1.59 hours on wcckdays, 1.52 hours on weekends)
The on-street metered parking spaces appear to be more effectively utilized in Zone 2 than
in Zone 1.
Zone 3
Zone 3 includes a total of 281 parking spaces, consisting of 73 on-street metered parking
spaces, 11 1 privatelyoperated parking spaces and 97 municipal spaces.
A peak hour weekday utilization of 78 percent was observed on Thursdayfrom 1:00 p.m. to
2:OO p.m.and 61 percent on Sundayfrom10:30 to 11:30 a.m., indicatingthatthere is
sufficient parkingavailable in this zone as awhole to meet current demands.
The weighted averageparking duration for different parking locations are as follows:
0
0
0
Privateparking (2.39 hours on weekdays,2.1 1 hours onweekends);
Municipalparking(2.41 hours on weekdays,1.92hours.onweekends);and
On street metered parking (1.42 hours on weekdays,1.09 hours on weekends)
Both private and municipalparking in this zone appears to be primarily used by short-term
parkers and the on-street
spaces exhibit a goodrate of turnover.
Page 11 of 8%
Zone 4
Zone 4 includes 564 parking spaces, of which 285 parking ;spaces are provided in the
municipally operated parking garage facility. The remaining279parkingspacesare
comprised of 167 private commercial spaces, 41 municipal spaces, 15 on-street non-metered
spaces, and 56 on- street metered 56 spaces.
The peak observed utilization of 69 percent occurred on Tuesday from 1O:OO to 11 :00 a.m.
This suggests that there is adequate parking in this area to meet the existing demand.
The weighted average parking duration for different parking categoriesis as follows:
Private parking (3.13 hours on weekdays,2.36hoursonweekends);
Municipal surface parking lots (2.71 hours onweekdays, 1.42 hours on weekends);
On street metered parking (1.18 hours on weekdays, 1.16hours on weekends);
On street non-metered parking (1.74hours on weekday, 1.96 hoursonweekends);
and
Parking garage facility (4.16 hours onweekdays, 3.76 hours on weekends)
The parking duration data suggests that the parking garage is primarily being used by longterm parkers (i.e. employees). Other municipally operated lots and on-streetspaces seem to
be used by short-term parkers and, as expected, have a good rate of turnover. The private
lots are used for a combination of employees and customer/visitor parking.
Zone 5
Zone 5 provides for 242 parking spaces, including is one municipal lot, which provides 42
parking spaces. This zone also includes 77 parking spaces on privately operated surface
lots, as well as 46 on-street and 77 on-street metered parking spaces.
The peak observed utilization of 77 percent occurred on Thursday from 1:OO to 2:OO p.m.
Again, this suggests that there is adequate parking on a zoned basis to meet the existing
demand.
The weighted average parking duration for different parking categoriesis asfollows:
0
e
Private parking (2.89 hoursonweekdays,1.69hours on weekends);
Municipal parking (4.21 hours on weekdays, 2.32 hoursonweekends);
On-streetmeteredparking (1.74 hours on wcckdays, 1.29 hours onweekends);and
On-street non-meteredparking (2.56 hours on weekdays,1.78hours on weekends)
The on-street non-metered spaces appear to be used bysomeemployeesonweekdays.
Similarly, municipal parking lots appear to be used primarilyby'employees.
Zone 6
Zone 6 includes a total of 452 parking spaces, of which 230 parking spacesare provided in a
privately operated parking garage, with the remaining 222 parking spaces comprised of 52
Page I2 of 88
other private commercial spaces, 41 municipal of-street spaces, 78 on-street non-metered
spaces, and 5 1 on-street metered spaces.
A peak hour weekday utilization of 78 percent was observed on Tuesday fiom 10:30 to
11:30 a.m. and 79 percent on Sunday from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m., indicating that there
is
sufficient parking available in this sub-zone currently, onan overall basis.
The weighted average parking duration for different parking locations
are as follows:
*
s
s
*
Private surface parking lots (3.48 hours on weekdays,3.19hours on weekends);
Municipal parking (2.08hours on weekdays, 2.02 hoursonweekends);
On street metered parking (1.51 hours on weekdays, 1.72 hours on weekends); and
Private operated parking garage (4.76 hours on weekdays, 4.72 hours on weekends)
The private garage appears to be used primarily by long-term parkers (i.e. employees), with
the Town's facilities and primarily by short-term parkers.
Zone 7
Zone 7 includes a
total of 196 parking spaces,withon-street,non-meteredparking(68
spaces),aswell as some private off-street parking locations (128 spaces). The off-street
parkinglocations include theOakvilleLawnBowlingClubandSt.Andrew'sCatholic
Church.
A peak hour weekday utilization of 54 percent was observed on Friday fiom 1:30 to 2:30
p.m. and 45 percent onSaturdayfrom
parking availablein this sub-zone.
2.7.6
3:OOto4:OO
p.m., indicating that there is ample
Total Area
The total inventoried parking capacity in the Downtown is 2,291 parking spaces. The peak
parking utilization for the entire survey area for the four individual survey
days was as
follows:
0
0
0
0
1,466 spaces occupied
Thursday, June 17:
Saturday, June 19:
1,328 spaces occupied
Sunday, June 20:
9 16 spaces occupied
Tuesday, June 22:
1,525 spaces occupied (adjusted
to 1,539 when inabilityto
survey one locationis taken into consideration)
In general, little variation in overall peak demand was observed between the two weekdays
and the Saturday, recognizing that access was denied to some parking facilities on some
days. On an overall basis the peak demand observed to be in the order of 1,539 spaces, as
compared to the parking supply of 2,290 spaces, or 67 percent overall parking utilization.
Page I 3 of 88
2.8
-
DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT
The Town of Oakville provided a commercial space inventory for both 1994 and 2004 for tlhe
Downtown Study Area bounded roughly by Randall Street, Allan Street, William Street and Water
Street. The 1994 inventory included the Gross Floor Area (GFA), and a classification by type of
commercial operation (e.g. “restaurant” use),for each commercial propertywithin those bounds.
The 2004 inventory updated the 1994 information and, as a result, accounted for expansions, ne:W
construction and demolition information for commercial properties. However, the inventory
allso
included gross floor area for commercial activities onother
floots (i.e.“second floor”, or
“basement”).
In order to establish a consistent measurement of change over the 1994 to 2004 time period, tlne
GFA related to the “other floors” wasnettedout of !he 2004 inventory. With two comparabde
inventories, it was found that the Downtown “street front” or “grade-level” commercial activityh as
expanded byjust 11.9 percent over the 10 year period, (as shownin Table 4).
Table 4
Downtown GFA (street front) Growth .
Square Feet
Table 5 below provides details regarding commercial activities by type, from the 1994 inventory, as
provided by the Town. In 1994, Department Store Type Merchandise’ (DSTM), activities account
for about one-third of all street front commercial activities at about ,133,000 ft2 GFA of a tot-a1
382,196 fc2 GFA. Accordingly, these DSTM activities account for 102 businesses, or about onethird ofthe total 297 businesses.
Table 5
1994 Downtown GFA
by Commercial Land Use
32
1,950 Automotive
DSTM
Food
Home
6,135
Improvement
47,866
Office
Local
11,186
Retail
Other
72,417 Service Other
51,818
Restaurant
Specialty Food
48,382
Vacant
]
133,103 I
01
I
1
102
0
‘ 6
‘ 9
9,339
47
39
10
382,196
297
.51
Page 14 of 88
Table 6 indicates that the importanceof DSTM activities has somewhat diminished over the 10 year
reporting period as this component of the commercial activity of the Downtown now accounts for
about one-quarterof the total GFA.
Because there are tenants on other floors that generate parking demand, the parking requirements of
those businesses on other floors cannot be ignored. As mentioned previously, the 1994 commercial
inventory did not include a census of those activities removed fromthe ground level. However, the
2004 inventory did include that information. For the purposes of estimating the current demand for
parking, the amount of gross floor area on other floors is included in the 2004 detail in Table 6 .
With the inclusion of the commercial activities on other floors, the total GFA is about 40 percent
larger (589,451 versus 427,689 ft2).The individual ratios of street frontversus the total GFA space
are indicatedin the right hand columnof the table.
It is evident then that the commercial activities on other floors for these Downtown addresses is
important in the context of a parking study as these businesses will contribute to the demand for
spaces - particularly employee parkingdemands. However, this demand is likely long-term parking
(i.e. “permit”,or“all-day”parking)
versus more short-termormeteredparkingforretailor
restaurant activities.
Table 6
2004 Downtown GFA
by Commercial LandUse
The vacancy rate is an important measure of health of a commercial area. Secondly, it is important
to consider in the context of a parking study since it may represent potential demand that could be
exerted upon a parking system if the commercial structure were to be entirely leased up. For 2004,
the vacancy rate in the Downtown area was 8.22 percent, (at the time of the inventory). This rate
includes the upper floor commercial activities. As for street front activities only, the rate is 7.47
percent. These are relatively normal and healthy vacancy rates for downtown commercial areas.
Sourcedfrom the applicable City’s web-site,Guelph’sdowntownvacancyrate(excludingthe
Page I S of 88
former Eaton Centre), is about 8.28 percent, St. Catharines downtownrate is about 10.1 percent and
the city-wide rate in Owen Sound is 12.6 percent’. Because these rates for Oakville’s downtown
area are considered “normal”, it is not likely that demand for parking
will increase in any substantial
way due to decreases in vacancy rates.
2.9
CURRENT PARKING PROVISION
The current parking provided per occupied floor area were developed by dividing thepeak observed
parking demand (1,539 spaces), by the occupied floor area (2004 commercial inventory from the
Town of Oakville), generating this demand.
The 2004 GFA figures are those discussed in theprevioustables and include thecommercial
activities on “other floor^'^, but are net of the vacancies. The calculation is detailed in Table 7
below.
Table 7
Downtown Peak Hour Parking Demand
.T&&
i
Occupied Parking
1,539
Spaces 1
2004 OccuDied GFA ft2 I 540.947
Peak Hour
Demand1000 ft2
Thus, the actual parking has been calculated to be 2.845 spaces per 1,000
3.07 spaces per 100 m2, or one space per 32.6 m2 of floor area.
2.10
ftz of occupied GFA,or
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKLNG
The Town of Oakville website reveals that the projected population for the entire municipality will
grow to approximately 241,000 by the year 2021 from the current total of about 145’,000. Table 8
presents thesefigures on a neighbourhood basis.
Page 16 of 88
Table 8
Projected Population Growth by Area
-
Bronte
-2001
.
2006
201
1
?Oj!G _.. j ’. ’ $&pg~~
.. . ;:.,
35,055
34,739
33,493
31,453
27,223
Source: Town of Oakville, Population Proiections to 2021, “Oakville Population Information Package”
Table 9 shows, on a relative basis, the growth for each of the Town’s neighbourhoods over the
coming5-yearincrementplanning
periods. On a percentagebasis,thelargestgrowthwillbe
experienced between the 2001-2006 and 201 1-2016 periods, with growth of 18.88 percent and 14.50
percent, respectively. However, for the most part, this growth will be in the communities located
north of the QEW. The Town’s population projection indicates that communities northof the QEW
will grow by about 18 percent in the 2001- 201 1 period and still grow at almost 23 percent over the
201 1-2016 period. Conversely, neighbourhoods south of the QEW are expected to grow by about
20 percent over the 2001 - 2006 period, by about 2.4 percent over the 2006 - 2016 period and by
about 4.2 percent over the 2016-2021 period.
Table 9
Midtown Core
EastLake
Clearview
n/a
-0.01%
0.00%
405.62%
0.38% -5.74%
1.85%
-5.19%
295.33% ’
0.70%
Growth on a community basis is important to understand in the context of predicting demand for
parking. The customer surveysundertakenin the Bronteand Ken areasindicate that about 70
percent and 61 percent, respectively,
of the customers/visitors originate south of the QEW. The
trade areas for commercial activities in these
areas can be considered.very “local”. If population
were to grow at a relatively slow pace, the demand for new short-term, customer parking would
similarly not be expected to growsignificantly.
Pane I7 o f 88
The growth in the non-residential GFA in the Downtown area over the past 10 years (1994-2004),
has averaged about 0.67 percent annually, (Table 4). PopulationintheBronte,Old
Oakville,
Eastlake and Clearview communities only grew marginally from 62,130 to 62,831 over the 19912001 period. However, the population projections indicate that neighbourhoods south of the QEW
are expected to grow 5.00 percent over the 2006 to 2016 period, or 0.50 percent annually. Clearly,
commercial activities grew at a greater rate than their primarytrade area populationandthe
implication here is that the commercial market grew dueto increased spending by customers.
As a conservative estimate and due to the expected slow down of population growth, the parking
demand projections assume a 0.67 percent annual growth rate in corrimercial GFA and, based on
past trends, a somewhat aggressive annual growth rate for parking demand (or utilization), of 0.50
percent annually. This growth is also considered to be somewhat aggressive in that new residential
for commercial parking since
development in the Downtownarea will not generate any new demand
the residents wouldbe within waking or cycling distance to the commercialservices.
Table 10 indicates, for each of the six downtown parking and commercial zones, the anticipated
peak utilization rate for each of the Town's population projection-based planning periods and the
associated GFA figure.
For the purpose of establishing demand, the parking garagesin Zones 4B and 6B (referto Figure l),
have been "assigned" to neighbouring zones as it is assumed they will serve an approximate 300
metre radius. The parking garage spaces represented by Zone.4B were assignedto Zones 4,5 and 6,
evenly. Similarly, the parking garage spaces in 6B were assigned evenly to Zones
2, 3, 5 and 6.
The same method was applied to the parking spaces inventoriedin Zone 7. The spaces found eastof
Dunn Street were assigned to Zone 5 and the westerly spaces assigned to Zone 6. The utilization
rates for Zones 2 through 6 are a simple average of the peak hour utilization rates for the particular
assigned zones. These utilization rates are simply presentedfor the purpose of determining when in
the hture new parking supply would be required.
Table 10
Projected GFA, Utilization and Peak Hour Demand, 2004-2021
360
360I
360 Spaces
I Parking
293
286 27 1279
ParkingDernand
270Peak
2004 GFA 106,497
103,000
99,618
96,347
95,705
95,068
75% 75%
Utilization
Weekday
81% 80% 78%
..
360
273
76%
360
360
Page I8 o f 88
79%
I
81%
I
82%
I
The demand calculations assume a slower growth rate in customer demand (utilization) than in the
commercial expansion, on a GFA basis. However, the utilization rateswill eventually reach a point
where the parking supply is considered “full”. It is generallyagreed that this is around the 85
percent utilization level and at this point, more parlung is required. Under this assumption, only
Zone 1, currently at over 85 percent utilization on the weekends would require new parking. The
balance of the zones would notrequire new parking facilities over the planning period.
Currently, the highest parking utilization is achieved in the municipal surface lots and on-street
parking spaces, with the private parking facilities the least utilized, as indicated in Table 11 below.
If parking utilization rises consistently amongst the various parlung
types, it would be expected that
the municipal parking system will“fill” first and then parkerswill be forced to use the excess supply
in the private lots.
Table 11
Downtown Peak Hour Parking Demand by Parking Type
Total Parking Spaces
Occupied Parking Spaces
Percent Occupied
L
186
139
47 1
346
868
381
475
75%
73%
55%
285
486
184
65%
78%
Page 19 of 88
2.11
COMPARISON OF FINDINGS
In 1997, the BA Group and Domenjc Sorbara produced a “Downtown Oakville Parking Study”.
This report found:
“Theoccupancy of the surveyedparkingspaces over theentire Study Area reached a peak
of 65percent of supply on the Thursday. The overallpeakhour was 13::45in the early
afternoon”
This finding is consistent with the findings of the current work. The overall peak in the current
survey occurred on Thursday June 22, at 1:00 p.m. As per the findings in the work above, there
were 1,539 of 2,291 spaces occupied fora peak demandrate of 67 percent.
The BA report determined the following targets based on their analysis:
0
0
0
the provision of a cushion of 70 customer spaces;
the goal of makingmore effective useof existing parkingsupply;
the desire to re-locate current employee parking from the residentialareas ( south of
Robinson); and
The need to discourage and re-locate current employeeswhopark
on primeoffstreet spaces on Saturdays.
On a Short Term basis, the BA report recommended that throughout the study area, approximately
70 additional spaces needed to be found to better serve existing customer demand. In the Medium
to Long Term, the same report suggest that west of Dunn Street there would be need for
230
additional spaces and that east of Dunn Street, 80 additional spaces would be required. Specific
timing was notindicated.
The current work suggests that some of the BA report propositions indeed still have merit. For
example,thegoalofmaking
more effective use of the existingparkingsupplydeserves
consideration, as wellas diverting customer and employee parking away from neighbourhood areas
by promoting and better marketing of (for example), the municipal parking garage. As noted, the
municipal parking garage was found to be only 65 percent occupied.
The provision of more parking spaces is, however, questionable, given the rates of growth revealed
by Town population projections and by recent non-residential GFA increases. It is expected that,
conservatively, GFA may only grow at about 0.67 percent annually and population (customers since
the primary trade area for the Downtown is south of the QEW), will only grow by about0.5 percent
annually. For the foreseeable future, no additional municipal parking is required. However since
the Town has no control over any increases or decreases in private parking space availability, for
example through the redevelopment of one or more private surface lots, it would be prudent to
protect land forpotential new public lots or garages.
Page 20 of 88
2.12
SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
The following summarizes the key findings arising fiom this revie$ of parking demands and
operations in Downtown Oakville:
0
b
b
0
b
0
0
Downtown Oakville currently has more than enough parlung for theDowntown as a
whole (e.g. peak utilization of only 67 percent).
However in Sub-zone 1 (area generally bounded by Water Street, Navy Street,
Rebecca Street and Lakeshore Road), during the peak on a Saturday the demand is
85 percent of the available supply. When vehicles in circulation and ease in locating
a parking space are taken into consideration this effectively means that the parking
in this zone is operating close to capacity. The explanation related to this higher
demand on a Saturday in this area as compared to a weekday is the availability of
fiee parking.
The Town’s parking garage is located on Church Street between Reynolds Street and
Trafalgar Road. Based on the parking duration it would appear to be primarily used
by long-term parkers (i.e. employees). This parking garage was found to only have
a peak utilization of 65 percent. More effective use needs to be made of this garage
for general customer and visitor use. Initiatives involving improved signage,
advertising andincentives should be considered.
Duration data does not bear out the concerns that employees are parking on-streetin
the area. The only sub-zones where some employees are likely parking on-street are
1 and to a lesser extent, sub-zone 5 (weekdays). Enforcement should focus on these,
to ensure the 2 hour maximum stay.
Generally theDowntown demand for parking is in the order of 2.845 spaces
per1,OOO ft2 or 3.06 spaces per 100 m2 (1 space per 32.65 m2). As noted, additional
commercial development can be accommodated Downtown, with the exception on
Zone 1, without requiring additional parking to be constructed.
The current practice of allowing limited exemptions to the 2 hour time limit for the
on-street spaces is appropriate and does not place a strain on parking. However, the
designation of specific on-street spaces for specific user groups is not recommended
in that this is not an effective use of the public supply of parking and could set a
precedence which could get out of hand.
The impact of limited exemptions are operationally considered minimalsince the
permit holders can park anywhere in the two hour parking zone, as opposed to
reserving specific parking spaces for a defmed period of time which may or maynot
be occupied, depending on attendance. On a revenue basis, there is no impact since
the Club members are not occupying paid spaces. The effect on parking of these
agreements is related to turn-over as these permit holders are occupying these spaces
for an extended period of time. However, parking Zones 5, 6 and 7 as described
have 660 parking spaces available in total. On a simple basis, the Historical Society
is provided with 10 permits, the Bowling Club with 30 permits, and St. Jude’s with
Page 21 of 88
15 permits. In total, this only accounts for 8 percent of all 660 spaces. The
members of these groupswouldnotbe
expected' to occupyall
55 spaces
simultaneously and the resulting impact is minimal. However, the reservation
of
specific spaces for these permit holders would not be cgnsidered appropriate as this
would preclude others from parking in these spaces and would considered to be
burdening the parking supply.
Consideration should begiven to thedesignation of a loading space along each
block facealong Lakeshore Road where suchspaces appear to be needed,in order to
rectify the current practice of unloading and making deliveries in the centre lane of
the street and where delivery persons cross traffic lanes to deliver or pick up their
goods. In the interests of public safety consideration::shouldbe given to loading
zonesineachcommercial
block, coupled with increasedenforcement of those
delivery operators which us the centre turn lane in tge Downtown Oakville area.
The impact of implementing this will include the loss of prime paid parking spaces
and the loss ofsome revenue.
Page 22 of 88
3.0
KERR STREET BUSINESS DISTRICT - CURRENT CONDITIONS
3.1
STUDY AREA
For the purpose of the assessment, the study area is generally bounded by Maurice Drive on the
west, Forsythe Street on the east, Speers Road on the north and Burnet Streeton the south.
An inventory of the parking supply in the area indicates that there are approximately 1,460 spaces
available for commercial or public parking.These include 1,203 spaces in privately ownedoperated
commercial parking lots, 48 spaces in the only municipal lot, 142 on-street metered parking spaces,
and 67 on-street non-metered parking spaces. For assessment purposes the study area was lvided
into sixzones. The inventory of public parking is illustrated in Figure 3.
3.2
DATA GATHERING
The collection of information and data involved various activities including: a stakeholder meeting,
employer and customer
surveys,
review
of available
documentation,
as
well
as parking
utiljzatiodduration surveys and observations. These are described below.
3.2.1
Perspectives of Stakeholder and Town Representatives
A meeting with representatives of the Kerr Street BusinessAssociation,WestHarbour
Residents Association, andTown of Oakville was held on August4,2004. Some issues that
were broughtup during the meeting included:
e
e
Parking
survey
findings
for area between
Stewart
and
Speers
may
have
been
impacted by road construction.
Newlargerrestaurantsor
expanded existingrestaurants may
be
attractingmore
patrons, thereby increasingparking demand.
Inequalityin parking requirements,withtheparkingrequirementsbeingincreased
for some land uses, whileother uses' requirements are relatively lcss onerous.
Various issues/questionsrelated to payment in-lieu policiesincluding:
Difficulty understanding the increased fees
Communication about the process is not well established
Implications for newbusinesses
How payment in-lieu funds are utilised.
Concerns that medical centres do not address their own parking demands.
3.2.2
Interviews
Representatives of "M interviewed 278 customers of 20 Ken- Street Business District
streetfrontbusinessandtheirassociatedowners
or managers.Thesesurveyswere
conducted starting on July 29, 2004, with the last survey completed on August 14. This
two-week survey period ensured that surveys were conducted during weekdays, weekends,
and a long weekend and during various business
hours.
..
.C,_:i-
Y.,j.;
Marshall
Mocklin
Monayhan
.. ., . .., ..,., .
,
,.
I
i
Area 2 and Zonal Boundaries
2
FIGURE 3
Parking Inventory
Zone
I
J:~004jobs\l6-04060.GKSMeporls\Final
Report\Figures\Flgure 3 -Area 2 Inventorycdr
-
I
'I95
I
Page 23 of 88
The surveyors used membership lists from the Kerr Business Association as guides to the
types of businesses that are found. The surveyors were instructed to attempt to conduct
interviewsthatincludedrepresentativebusinessesfromallcategories.Further,
the
surveyors were instructed to conduct the customer surveys i n ,a geographically consistent
manner that would ensure that businesses throughout the area would be represented. The
interviews were conducted by two people (Oakville residents), ensuring that the questions
were asked in a consistent manner. Further, the recording of the survey results was done
The interviewerswereprovidedwith
a short
consistently in ordertoavoiderror.
introductory letter that explained the nature of the survey and it noted a contact number at
the Town and at “ M . “M did not receive any queries regarding the survey. Finally,
approximately 2 hours were devoted to interviewing customers of stores where they were
able to completea business survey.
3.2.2.1 Customer Surveys
Some important findings from the customer survey include:
e
s
e
e
e
The average length of time it took to find parking was 0.48 minutes, with
the maximum amount of time reported at 2 minutes;
For those who drove, the number of passengers in the automobile
they were travelling in averaged 1.64 including the driver, with 5 being
the maximum reported;
The number of stores visited by those surveyed averaged 1.62, withthe
maximum recorded at 12.
The average amount of time in the area was calculated to be 60 minutes.
The longest period of time recorded was 5 hours.
The split among different modes is indicated in Table 12. The location of
parking is shown in Table 13. The origin of the trip is indicated in Table
14. The frequency of visits to the area is shown in Table 15.
Table 12
Mode of Travel
L
!
Page 24 of 88
Came directly from home
Came from work
202
72.66%
35
12.59%
A1
1A 7 C O L
Drove
Had no difficulty finding parking
Parked on-street or in a private lot
Stayed a relatively short time
Only visited a minimum number of establishments
3.2.2.2
Business OwnerManager SurveyResults
Business ownerdmanagers in the same locations where the customer surveys were
conducted where also interviewed. The results of the survey of the Kerr Street
Business District business ownerdmanagers are asfollows:
On average, the twenty businesses which were surveyed employ 4.8people during
the daytime;
On average, the twenty businesses employ 4.45persons during the evening;
On average, the twenty businesses provide 3.3 1 parking spaces for employees;
The total number of reported employees who drive and have no parking space was
14. However, 2 of the respondents indicated their employees who drive have no
parking;
L
,
;
I)
Page 25 of 88
8
e
e
8
3.2.3
The total number of customer parking spacesprovidedby the businessesinterviewed
is calculated to be395,withtheaveragenumber
ofl'spaces calculated at 19.75.
However, 200 of those spaces are located at a supermarl+et(Frank's Food Basics).
Twelve businessowners responded thatthey have enoughcustomerparking,while 8
responded that they do not;
The business owners were
asked
if there is enoud on-street
parking
and
12
responded that there is enough paking, while 8 responded negatively;
The business owners were asked if the amount of municipal lot parking is adequate
and 14 responded positively, while 5 responded negatiyly.
Review of Previous ReportsKorrespondence
Copies of relevant documentation, forwarded toMMM by the $own of Oakville staff, were
also reviewed. These reports, studies and policies included:
Exccrpts of Zoning By-law1984-63 for parking.
Town of Oakville 2002 Official Plan (1 CD);
Oakville Transit Service Schedule and Route Map;
Oakville Business Directory;
Hard Copy Parking StudyMap - showing C1, C2 a n 1il C3R lands;
List of Development Representatives, Residents' Associations, Councillors,
and
Business Associations;
Hard copy mapsof parking metered locations- Kerr Street;
Copy of the Corporate Policy No. 09-01-05;
Excerpts of the Planning Act(Part N:C a m u n i t y Planning);
Community Services Committee Reportfor September FO, 2003 and December9,
2003;
Census Data (population and dwellings) by dissemination area;
Inventory of municipal lots;
2004 revenue datafor municipal lots and on-street parking;
2004 Kerr Village Revitalization Study; and
20Q4.
Oakville Population Information Package, February
The 2004 Ken- W a g e RevitaZizationStudy prepared byiMBPDlnc. and theTown of
Oakville wasreviewedwithinthecontext
of the c k e n t parking.Thestudy
identifies comprehensive design initiatives to make Kim Street a more successful
mixed use and vibrant part of Oakville. The principle,theme of the study is urban
design, but also suggests a program of financial incentives for consideration by the
Town.
!
I
A more detailed discussionof the findings from the200A Kerr Village Revitalization
Study within the context of
the subject studyis out1ined:in Section3.1 1.
Parking Requirements
As per the excerpts fromtheTown of OakvilleZoningBy-law
requirements for commercial areas in the Townare as follows: :.
1984-63, thefollowing
Page 26 of 88
C1 Zone
0
C1- 1 space for every 22 m2 of ground floor leasable area
C1 - 1 space for every 28 mzof leasable area above or below ground
C2 Zone
0
0
C2 - 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasable area above or below ground
C3 Zone
0
C3 - notwithstanding some excluded uses, 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasable
floor area, one parking space shall be provided having direct access from
a publicstreet other thanLakeshoreRoad,Randall,Rebecca
or Kerr
Street.
C3R Zone
This zone is applicable to the three older commercialareasoftheTown
(Downtown Oakville, Kerr Street Business District and Downtown Bronte).
The C3R detailed requirements are not listed here since the parking standards
for each of these threebusiness areas are varied. For example, withina portion
of the Kerr Street Business District along Lakeshore Road, only restaurant
from theparking
requirement. These exemptions are
uses
are
exempt
discussed in moredetail below.
3.3
PARKING EXEMPTIONS
The Oukville Corporate Policy No. 09-01-05 is applicable to the Kerr Street Area. The exemptions
fiom the Oakville Corporate Policy No. 09-01-05 are as follows:
The request for agreement to exempt parking shall onlybe considered'wherethe site
is zonedC3Rand is part of the Community ImprovementAreasofDowntown
Oakville, KerrStreet, and Bronte Village where,in close proximity, the municipality
supplies parking for transientparking for multiple users in a communal manner.
0
The
Town
Oakville
of
will not
accept
applications
exemptions.
A listofrequirements
is provided that will belookedat
considering applications for exemptions.
The twoexemptionsthatwere
amended are as follows:
0
for residential
parking
bytheTown'sstaffin
extracted fiom Excerpts of Zoning By-law 1984-63, as
Forspaceshavingdirect
access to Kerr Street, LakeshoreRoad,RandallStreet,or
Rebecca Street the parking requirementsfor ZBLA 1984-63 Section 46-3-c) are not
Page 27 of 88
applicable. ZBLA 1984-63 Section 46-3-c) specifiesthst for every 28 m2 of leasable
floor area, one parking space shall be provided having1 direct access from a public
street other than the exemptions.
0
3.4
.
FortheareaboundedbyRebeccaStreet,MauriceDrive,thesoutherlylimit
of the
C3R zone south of Lakeshore Road and Forsythe Street parking is not required for
restaurants and ZBLA 1984-63 Section 46-3-d) (ii) is not applicable. ZBLA 1984-63
Section 46-3-d) (ii)specifies that for every 28 m2 of leasable floor area, one parking
space shall be provided having direct access from a public street other than the
exemptions.
REVENUES
AS outlined in Table I , fine revenues are helping to subsidize parking, 'including the one municipal
lot in the Ken Business District.
3.5
ENFORCEMENT
As noted, there are 1 1 ParkingControl Officers for the Town asa whole. Of these,threeare
assigned to the Downtown areas including Kerr Street and Lakeshore 'Roads West (from Forsythe
Street to Brock). Enforcement was not noted as an issue for the Ken Street area, based on the
Stakeholder Meeting held in September,
2004 in Downtown Oakville.
However some stays over the time limits were observed, particularly on the Saturday. Additional
enforcement would help to address this, but it is acknowledged that this would necessitate additional
staff resources.
3.6
PARKING SURVEYS
Detailed parking surveys were undertaken in the Ken- Street Business Districtin order to obtainan
understanding of the existing parking demands. The surveys were undertaken on Wednesday, June
16,2004 from 8:OO a.m. to 8:OO p.m., on Friday, June 18,2004 from 12:OO a.m. to 12:OO p.m., and
on Saturday, June 19 from 12:OO a.m. to 12:OO p.m. Surveys were undertaken under ideal weather
conditions for all the days surveyed.
The Parking surveys includedrecording the last three Letters of vehicle license plates parkedin the
area. They were undertaken in 30-minute increments. Thus data captured both parking utilization
and duration. The data collection for most part went without difficulties. There was one exception.
On Friday, June 18, 2004 the manager of Loblaws instructed the surveyors to stop surveying at
approximately 4:30 p.m. due to six customer complaints about having their licence plate numbers
recorded. The surveyors presentedthe letter from the Town of Oakville. The manager noted that the
surveyors could continue the next
day (Saturday), provided that there
were no other concerns raised.
"Mstaff suspended the survey on the Friday and then resumed it again on the Saturday.
3.6.1 General Description
The Ken Street BusinessDistrict has one municipal lot, someprivate lots, on-street metered
parking, and on-street non-meteredparking.
Page 28 of 88
The municipal lot in the area is located east of Kerr Street between Washington Avenue and
Florence Avenue.
The on-street metered parking spaces are located on Ken- Street from Stewart Street to
Lakeshore Road, on Florence Drive west of Kerr Street, and on Lakeshore Road from
Wilson Street to Forsythe Street.
The on-street non-metered parking spaces are located on John Street from Brock Street to
Wilson Street, on Lakeshore Roadjust west of Brant Street, and on Chisholm Street between
Rebecca Street and John Street.
3.6.2 Segment Analysis
The utilisation data was collected on a lot and block face basis. In order to facilitate the
analysis the study area was disaggregated into six zones. The six zones are shown in Figure
3. Each zone is discussed in the following section, with emphasis on the following issues:
a
a
What is the peak utilization by day and at what time of the day did it occur?
What is theweightedaverageparkingduration
on weekdays andonweekendsfor
and on-street
different types of parking categories (private, municipal, on-street metered,
non-metered)?
What is theoveralldemand for parking in thearea?
Table 16 summarizes utilization data for each zone and includes an inventory of the number
of spaces.
Table 16
Peak ParkingUtilization by Zone
Page 29 o f 88
34 %
4:OO p.m.
to
5:OO p.m.
I
Zone 1
Zone 1 includes one municipal lot, 8 private lots, as well as on-street metered parking, fora
total of 347 parkingspaces. A peak hour weekday utilizationof 35 percent was observedon
Wednesday from I1:OO a.m. to 12:OO p.m. and 30 percent on Saturday from 3:OO p.m. to
4:OO p.m., indicating that there is more than sufficient parking available in this zone as a
whole.
The weighted averageparking duration for different parkinglocations is outlined as follows:
e
e
e
Private parking lots (2.35 hoursonweekdays, 2.12 hours on Saturday);
Municipalparkinglot (2.60 hours on weekdays,5.31 hours on Saturday);and
On street metered parking (0.93hoursonweekdays, 0.99 hours on Saturday).
The on-streetparking is being usedbyshort-termparkers,
as intended. The municipal
parking lot is experiencing very long durationon weekends, suggesting that employeesmay
be parking here. The town does not enforce the municipal lot on Saturdays.
The average turnover was 1.48 on Wednesday, 1.66 on Friday,
and 1.29 on Saturday.
Zone 2
Zone .2 includes 1 1 private lots, as well as metered and non-metered on street parking, for a
total of 246 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilizationof 46 percent was observedon
Friday between 12:OO noon and 1:00 p.m., and 46 percent on Saturday from 5:OO to 6:OO
p.m. Again, ample parking was observed to be available to address the observed parking
demands. The latepeakparkingdemandon
a Saturday suggests that it is relatedto
restaurant parlung demands.
The weighted averageparking duration for different parking categories is outlined follows:
e
e
Private parking lots (2.68 hours onweekdays, 2.44 hours on weekends);
On street metered parking (0.79hours on weekdays, 0.76 hours on weekends); and
On streetnon-metered parking (3.08 hours on weekdays,3.60hours on Saturday).
It would appear that some employees are taking advantage
parking spaces, bothon weekdays and on Saturday.
of the non-metered on-street
The average turnover was1.75 on Wednesday andon Friday and 1.09 on Saturday.
Page 30 of 88
Zone 3
Zone 3 includes 5 private lots for a total of 204 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday
utilization of 74 percent was observed on Wednesday from 1O:OO a.m. to 11:00a.m. and 74
percent on Saturday from 2:OO p.m. to 3:OO p.m., indicating that there is sufficient parking
available in this zone, on an overall basis.
The weighted average parlung duration for the private parking lots were found to be 1.39
hours on weekdays, and 1.02 hours Saturday. This indicates little employee parking in these
lots.
The average turnover was 1.01 on Wednesday, 1.49 on Friday,and 1.16 on Saturday.
Zone 4
Zone 4 includes 7 private lots, as well on-street non-metered parking, for a total of 193
parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilization of 44 percent was observed on Friday
from 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. and 34 percent on Saturday from 5:00 to 6:OO p.m., indicating
that there is sufficient parking available in this zone.
The weighted average parking duration for different parking locations was as follows:
a
Private parlung lots (3.23 hoursonweekdays, 3.13 hours onweekends); and
On street non-metered parking (1.82 hours on weekdays,1.59hoursonweekends).
The average turnover was 1.58 on Wednesday,1.16 on Friday,cind 1.03 on Saturday.
Zone 5
Zone 5 includes 9 private lots, as well as on-street metered and non-metered parking spaces
for a total of 218 parking spaces. A peak hourweekdayutilization of 44 percentwas
observed on Friday from 2:OO p.m. to 3:OO p.m. and 40 percent on Saturday from3:OO p.m.
to 4:OO p.m. More than enough parking is available in this zone.
The weighted average parking duration was as follows:
a
Private parking lots (2.81 hours on weekdays,2.56 hours onweekends);and
On street metered parking (0.77 hours onweekdays, 0.56 hours on weekends).
The average turnover was 2.50 on Wednesday,2.41 on Friday,and 1.43 on Saturday.
Zone 6
Zone 6 essentially reflects the Loblaws parking. The parking area provides a total of 252
parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilization of 45 percent was observed on Friday
from1:30 p.m. to 2:30p.m. and 34percentonSaturdayfrom
4:OO p.m. to 5:OO p.m.,
indicating that there is more than sufficient parking availablein this zone.
The weighted average
weekends.
parlung durationwas 1.30 hoursonweekdaysand1.10hours
on
The average turnover was 2.52 on Wednesday, 1.53 on Friday, and2.37 on Saturday.
3.6.2.1 Total Kerr StreetBusiness District
The overall peak parking utilization for theentire Ken Street Business DistrictStudy
area for the three survey days wasas follows:
Wednesday,
June
16: 39%
Friday, June 18:
39%
Saturday, June3894
19:
an overallbasis,a
The total capacity is 1,460parkingspaces.Therefore,on
substantial amount of surplus parking exists. In general, there was no significant
difference in the average parking duration between weekdays and weekends.
ASSESSMENT: OPERATIONS
3.7.1
Existing ParkingOperations
The majority of the parking (83 percent)in the Kerr Street Business District is provided offstreet, in privately owned and operated lots associated with strip
plazas or smaller retail and
restaurant uses. There is one municipal lot, which provide 3 percent of the parking supply.
The remaining 14 percent of the parlung supply in the area are provided on-street, with 10
percent of the parking locations being metered and
4 percent non-metered.
3.7.1.1
Parking Utilization
An abundance of parking is available in the Kerr Street Business Districtas a whole.
As noted, the highest peak hour utilization was 39 percent for the.area as a whole.
However, there were several parking locations in the area where the demand was
equal to or exceeded the supply, as indicated in Table 17. Not surprising, these all
represent on-streetparkinglocations.
The on-streetmeteredparkinglocations
relative to the boundary road network are shown in Figures 4 and 5. The on-street
non-metered parking locations relative to the boundary road network are shown in
Figure 6.
-
Leaend
@
FIGURE 4
Surveyarea
Parking
and
Location
Zone
Number
On-street Metered
Parking Locations
in Sub-zone 1
1
Page 32 of 88
Table 17
Parking Locations where thePeak Hour
Demand is Equal to or Exceeds the Supply
2.1.13
OM
1
S side of Florence
Ave, E of KerrSt
I
N side of John St,E
of Ken St
9
'9;
6:
I
106 %
84%
1
87 %
100 %
1
* OM = On Street Metered Parking
* 0 = On Street Non Metered Parking
I.
There is parking available supply in close proximity: of these locations that can
accommodate the demand. For example, the weekday peak hour utilization at the
on-street metered parking location 2.1.13 was 106 percent or one vehicle in excess
of the actual supply, during a 30-minute interval from 5:30 p.m. to 6:OO p.m.on
Wednesday, June 16, 2004. During the same time pexjod there were 13 available
parkingspaces at parking locations2.1.11,2.1.12,2.1.15,and
2.1. I6 inclose
proximity. This is not an unusual situation.
I
3.7.1.2
Parking
Duration
Ingeneral, the weighted averageparkingduration for theoff-streetprivatelots
ranged from short (1.00 to 1.40 hours) in Zones 3 and 6, medium (2.10 to 2.90
hours) in Zones 1, 2 and 5, to longer (3.10 to 3.30 hours) in Zone 4. The municipal
parking location had a medium average duration (2.60 hours) during the weekday
and longer average duration (5.30 hours) on the Saturday. This would suggest that
the municipal lot is used primarily for employee
parking on a Saturday.
Parking durationof non-metered on-streetspaces tended to be longer than at metered
on-streetspaces.
At two locationsinparticular,
,:the parking
duration
was
exceedingly longon an averagebasis on the Saturday:
Page 33 of 88
Table 18
Parking Locations where the Average Duration
Exceeds 5.0 Hours
1
I* P
St
2.2.20
S side of John St,
O
2.2.12
I
= Private Parking
4 j;
w of Wilson St
S side of John St
0andStKerr
btw
I
I
I Brant
7.50 2.97
I
8
2.26
I
5.42
I
1
* 0 = On Streer Non Metered Parking
meters.
These spaces in all likelihoodarebeingoccupied
:by employees,orperhaps
residents, The time limit requires enforcement or coniideration for the installation
of parking
;i
I!
3.7.1.3
Summary
In summary, thefollowingconclusionscanbedrawnfromtheexistingparking
analysis:
1.
An abundance of parking supply is available in the Kerr Street Business
District as a whole. Even at some on-street parking locations where the
to surplus
demand occasionally exceedsthe supply, there was observed be
parking available in close proximity of these locations, albeit on private
lots.
2.
Some on-street spaces appear
be
to
occupied
for
exceedingly
long
durations. These are likelyemployees,and
on weekendsperhaps
residents. Greater enforcement is recornmenjied of the 2 hour time limit.
Consideration can perhaps also be given to the installation
of parking
atmeters these locations.
!
I
3.8 CONTEXT
DEVELOPMENT
~
The Town of Oakville provided a commercial space inventory forboth; 1994 and 2004 for the Ken
Street Business District bounded by Maurice Driveon the west, Forsy$e Street on the east, Speers
Road on the north and BurnetStreet on the south.
The1994inventoryincluded
the Gross FloorArea(GFA),and
classificationbytypeof
commercial operation(e.g. “restaurant” use),for each commercial property within those
bounds.
‘ a
I
The 2004 inventory updated the 1994 information and, as a result, accounted for expansions, new
two comparable
construction
and
demolition
information
for commercial
properties,.
With
inventories, it was foundthat the Downtown “street front” or “grade-level” commercial activity has
expanded by about 2.8% over the 10 year period, (as shown in Table 19).
Marrhrll
-
Maeklin
**.
......- .. “.Monaghan
.., .....X.l..
>
m
v -
,.
Page 34 of 88
Table 19
Kerr Street (street front) Growth
Square Feet
'! - j994 . ./ 3$@4 .
,.i&@&~~~~
487,659
501,325
2.80%
0.28%
.+%=e
I.
.
.-p/9
I
Table 20 below provides details regarding commercial activities by type, from the 1994 inventory,
as provided by the Town. In 1994, vacancies accounted for about 20.4 percent of all street front
commercial activities at 99,457 ftz GFA of a total 487,659 ft2 GFA. . Accordingly, these DSTM
activities account for 50 businesses, or about 21 percent of the total 234 businesses. Of the occupied
businesses, the Food category is the mostimportant, accounting for 19.12 percent ofthe total.
Table 2 1 indicates that vacancies, as a percentage of the total street front GFA in the study area have
improved to where (while they still account for the largest percent), they currcntly account for about
14.3 percent of the total GFA and 9.4 percent of the total bumber of storks.
Table 20
1994 Kerr Street GFA
by Commercial Land Use
Local Ofice
Other Retail
Other Service
Restaurant
Specialty
Food
Vacant
I
I
I
18,914
18,825
56,915
50,499 I
40,740 I
99,457 I
487,659 I
14
12'
46
32
21
so
234
The vacancy rate is an important measure of, firstly, health of a commercial area. Secondly, it is
important to consider in the context of a parking study since it may regresent potential demand that
could be exerted upon a parking system if the commercial structure were to be entirely leased up.
The 2004 vacancy rate for the Kerr Street
study area at 14.33 percent relatively high when compared
to Downtown Oakville's 7.47 percentfor street f?ont activities.
3.9
CURRENT PARKING PROVISION
The current parking rate per occupied floor area was estimated by dividing the peak observed
parking demand (spaces), by the occupied floor area (2004 commercial inventory from the Town of
Oakville), generating this demand.
!
Page 35 of 88
The 2004 GFA figures are those discussed in theprevioustablesahdincludethecommercial
activities on “other floors”, but are net ofthe vacancies. Table 21 indicates that the actual demand
to be calculated to be 1.32 spaces per 1,000 ft2 of occupied GFA, or 1.43 spaces per 100 m2, or 1
space per70.4 m2.
Table 2 1
Kerr Street Peak Hour Parking Demand
Demand1000 sq ft
occupied GFA
3.10
1.32
1
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKING
The forecast growthin population was discussed in Section 2.10.
‘
As previously noted, growth on a community basis is important to understand
in the context of
predxting demand for parking. The customer surveys undertaken
in the Kerr area indicate that
about 70 percent of the customerdvisitors originatesouthofthe
QEW. Thetradeareas
for
commercial activities in these areas can be considered very “local”. If population is to grow at a
relatively slow pace, the demand for new short-term, custo-mer
pargng would similarly notbe
expected to grow significantly.
The growth in the non-residential GFA in the Ken area over the past 10 years (1994-2004), has
averaged about0.28 percent annually, (Table 9.1). Population in the Bronte, Old Oakville, Eastlake
and Clearview communities only grew marginally from
62,130 to 62,83 1 over the 199 1-2001
periods. The population projections indicate that neighbourhoodssouth of the QEW are expected to
grow 5.00 percent overthe 2006 to 2016 period,or 0.50 percent annually.
The parking demand projections assume
a 0.28 percent annual growth rate in commercial GFA and,
based on past trends, andan annual growth rate for parking demand(or utilization), of 0.50 percent
annually.
Table 22 indicates, for each of the six Kerr Street zones,
the anticipated beak utilization rate for each
of the Town’s population projection-based planning periods and
the assiciated GFA figure.
Page 36 of 88
Projected GFA, Utilization and Peak Hour Demand, 2004-2021
Currently, the highest parking utilization is achievedinthemunicipalsurface
lot and on-street
parking spaces, with the private parking facilities the least utilized, as indicated in Table 23 below.
If parking utilizationrises consistently amongst the various parking types, it would be
expected that
the municipal parking system will “fill” first and then parkers will
be forced to use the excess supply
in the private lots.
Page 37 of 88
3.11
FINDINGS RELATIVE TO 2004 KERR VILLAGE REVITALIZATION STUDY
The 2004 Kerr Village Revitalization Study provides design concepts for five areas. Three of the
five areas are located within the project area boundaries of this study:
The Gateways
No significant commercial development is anticipated on the south side of Speers Road at this
gateway. The south gateway is divided into two physical areas being the intersections of Kerr at
Lakeshore and Kerr at Rebecca. Redevelopment is not proposed in the foreseeable future for this
portion of the gateway. However, consideration is made for an expanded surface parkinglot and a
multi-level parking structure in the north-west quadrant of the intersection of Rebecca Street and
Ken Street. The parking structure would accommodate approximately
300 vehicles.
Kerr Village Market and Outdoor Market
The Kerr Village Marketis proposed on the west sideof Kerr Street, bounded by Stewart Streeton
the north and Westside Drive on the south. The Kerr Village Market
parking demand is expected to
existing municipalsurfacelotbetween
be accommodatedby two surfaceparkinglots,the
Washington and Florence, east of Kerr Street, and potentially an expansion of the surface lot on the
west side of KerrStreet, south of Stewart Street.
Main Street Redevelopment Area - along Kerr Street
Most redevelopment or intensification potential has been identified along the west side of Ken
Street in this area. The redevelopment potential on the east side of Ken Street is viewed as being
for this area.
more limited. No recommendations pertaining to parking were provided
The following recommendations found in the Kerr Street Revitalization Study are relevant
context ofthe current study:
.
.
in the
The Town of Oakville should provide for development charge exemptions to help attract new
development to the Kerr Street Area;
The Main Street redevelopmentArea(Kerr,from CNR to Lakeshore)shouldeliminate the
parking requirement for commercial uses and reducethe parking requirement for residential
uses; and
The majority of the parking being supplied would be municipal in nature;
These recommendations would appear to suggest that the Town would be responsible for
providing virtually all the parking related to theKerr Street area, with no contribution from
those developments that would benefit
from this.
Page 38 of 88
3.12
Thefollowingsummarizesthe key findingsanddirections arising from this review of parking
demands and operations withinthe Kerr Street commercial area:
e
The Town of Oakville currently only operates one off-street municipal parking lot in
this area. However, both metered and non-metered on-street parking spaces arealso
available.
a
TheKerrStreetBusinessDistrictcurrentlyhasample,parking
(e.g. peak utilization of only39 percent).
0
on an overallbasis
Zone 3 currently has apeakdemand of about -74percent,thehighest of thevarious
zones parlung utilizations.
e
Whenvehicles in circulationandeaseinlocatingparkingspace
are takeninto
consideration, this effectively means that the parkingiq this zone is operating close
to a theoretical capacityof about 85 percent.
a
Duration data does not bear out the concerns that empl&ees are parking on-street in
the area. The only zones where some employees
may be parking on-streetare Zones
1 and 2 and to a lesser extent, perhaps Zone 5 . Enforckment should focus on these
is adcnowledged that additional
to ensure the 2 hour maximum stay, however it
enforcement will require additional enforcement resources.
a
Generally the Ken Street demand for parlung is in the order of 1.32 spaces per 1,000
,!if or 1 space per 70.42 m2. As noted, additional cominercial development can be
accommodated, without requiring additional parking6etoconstructed.
,
c
Page 39 of 88
4.0
DOWNTOWN BRONTE - CURRENTCONDITIONS
4.1
STUDY AREA
For the purpose of the assessment, the study area is generally bounded :by Bronte Road
on the west,
East Street on the east, Sovereign Street on the north and Ontario Street'on the south.
An inventory of the parking supply in the area indicates that there arelapproximately 1,616, spaces
available for commercial or public parking. These include 1,482 spaces in privatelyownedoperated
commercial parkinglots, 88 on-street non-metered parkingspaces, and 46 in parking garages.
The study area was divided into six zones for purposes of analysis. The inventory of public parking
is illustrated in Figure 7.
4.2
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
The collection of information and data involved various activities including: a stakeholder meeting,
employee and customer surveys, review of available documentation, as well as parking utilization
;
and duration surveys and observations. These are described below.
4.2.1
Perspectives of the Stakeholder Groups and Town Representatives
A meeting with representatives of the BronteVillage
BIA and Town of Oakville
representatives was held on August 5 , 2004. Some issues that'were brought up during the
meeting include that:
0
0
0
0
0
4.2.2
Bronte has doublethepercentage of seniors thanany other area in Town and there
was a concern that theremay not be adequate &sacled parking in the area for
seniors.
The Bronte BIA is opposed to any on-street parking met,ersin their Downtown Area.
Likein many other BIA's, employees/ownerstend to utilizeprime parking spaces
directly in front of their businesses.
Parking spill-over into residential areas occur only on accasion whenspecialevents
are held (usually associated
with the Waterfront).
Heavyin-fill and intensification is currentlyhappening or is anticipatedinthenear
hture.
Therearemany parking issues outsidethe scope of thestudyarea
(i.e. alongthe
Waterfront).
Interviews
Representatives of MMM interviewed 167 customers and the associated business owners
or
managersat 20 streetfront businesses. The surveys wereconductedstartingonJuly
29,
2004, withthe last survey completed on August 14. Thistwo-weekperiodensuredthat
surveys were conducted during weekdays, weekends, during a long weekend and during a
variety of business hours.
1
I
,P
~
b
s
ONTARIO
Downtown Bronte Parking Inventory
,
i
'
Page 40 of 88
The surveyors usedmembership lists from the Bronte Business Association as guides to the
types of businesses that are found. The surveyors were instkted to attempt to conduct
interviewsthat
included representative businessesfromallcategories.Further,
the
surveyors were instructed toconduct the surveys in a geograpGcally consistent mannerthat
would ensure that businesses throughout the areas would be included. The interviews were
conducted by two people (Oakville residents), ensuring that $e questions were asked in a
consistent manner. As well, the recording of the results was ai$o done consistently in order
to avoiderror.The
interviewers wereprovidedwith
a short introductoryletterthat
explained the nature of thesurvey and it noteda contact number atthe Town and at h 4 " .
MMM did not receive anyqueries regarding the survey.
4.2.2.1
Customer Survey Findings
Some importantfindings from the customer survey include:
0
0
0
They experienced no delay in finding parking;
For those who drove, the average vehicle occupancy inclusiveof the
driver was 1.64, with 5 being the maximum reported;
The number of stores visited by those surveyed averaged 2.93, with the
, .
maximum recorded at 25.
The average amount of time in the area was calculated tobe 62 minutes.
The longestperiod of time recorded was3 hours.
The split among different modes is shown in Table 24. The location of parking
i s shown inTable 25. The origin of the tripis shown in Table 26. The frequency
of visiting the area is shown in Table 27.
Table 24
Mode of Travel
I Travelled by auto
Walked15.6%
Took transit
Travelled by bicycle
Took other means of travel
83.2%
139
I
I
I
0%
0
2
0
I
1.2%
0%
Table 25
Location of Parking
Parked in a lot
Parked in a garage
Found street parking
Parked in a private lot
I
26
70
0
;
2
50.4%
0%
48.2% 67
1.4%
I
Page 41 of 88
Table 26
Origin of Trip
1 Came directly
home from
I
90
Table 27
Frequency of Visits to the Area
53.9%
:
5.
4.2.2.2
Business SurveyFindings
The businesses are the same locations where the customer surveys were conducted.
The results of the surveyof the Bronte business owners/managers areas follows:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.2.3
On average, the twentybusinessessurveyedemploy 2.45 people duringthe daeme;
On average,thetwentybusinessessurveyedemployonelpersonduringtheevening;
On average, the twenty businesses surveyed
provide
0.7 parking
spaces
for
employees;
The total numberofreported
employees who drove and have no parkingspace
provided was 14;
The
total
number
of
customer
parking
spaces
provided
by the 20 businesses
interviewed is calculated to be 34, with the average nuinber of spaces calculated at
2.6;
10 business ownersresponded that theyhaveenough parking for their customers,
while 10 responded negatively;
12 business owners respondedthatthereisenough
parking on-streetparking,while
8 responded negatively;
15 ofthebusinessownersrespondedthatthere
is enoughoff-streetparking,while 5
responded negatively.
Review of Previous ReportsICorrespondence
Copies of relevant documentation, forwarded to MMM by the Town of Oakville staff was
also reviewed. These included:
0
0
0
Town of Oakville 2002 Official Plan (1 CD);
OakvilleTransit Service Schedule and RouteMap;
Oakville
Business
Directory;
j.:
I?
Page 42 of 88
if
li
I
Hard Copy Parking Study Map- showing C1, C2and C3k lands;
Excerpts of the Planning Act(Part IV: Community Plamhg);
Excerpts of Zoning By-law 1984-63 forparking;
,
Parking Survey Summary Report dated October 23, 2401 prepared byBA Group
for DowntownBronte;
Census Data (population and dwellings) by disseminatioii area;
2001 revenue data for municipal
lots and on-street parking;
2004 Harbourview Plaza Parking Study;
2003 Parking Exemption Request under Section 40 of the Planning Act - Twisted
Fork Restaurant for 13 parking spaces;
Oakville Population Information Package, February
2004; and
The parkingsurvey results from this study were compared to the results from ParkingSurvey
Summcrries completed by the BA Group andto the survey results from the
2004 Harbourview Plaza
~-Parking-Srrtrdy p r e p - a r e - d - - - - b - y - W i ~Cm3~s lr~p ~3 ~h ~e ~
- c~o ~ - o F t h c m v e p e & - m
provided in Section8.1.1.
In the Parking Survey Summaries the surveys were conducted on Saturday July 21, 2001, Sunday
July 22,2001 and on Sunday August 12,2001. The overallconclusion of the surveys was that there
was enough on and off street parking in the area during the three days surveyed, which represent
average sUminer weekend conditions.
The Harbourview Plaza Parking S t u 4 was undertaken to determine whether sufficient parking
spaces are available on the site to accommodate the new tenant - Quizno’s Sub restaurant. The
Harbouview Plaza is located in thesouth-eastcomer
of LakeshoreRoad WestBronte Road
intersection.Thesurvey
for the 2004 Harbourview Plaza Parking Study wasconducted on
Thursday, April 15, 2004. The study indicated that parking demand generated from Quizno’s Sub
restaurant can be accommodated within the existing
site supply and surplus parking available.
The “2003 Parking Exemption Request under Section 40 of the Planning Act - Twisted Fork
Restaurant” indicates that the owner of Twisted Fork Restaurant applied to the Town of Oakville
for a parkingexemption to reduce the requirednumber of parking spaces by 13 spaces.The
restaurant is located within theexisting three storey mixed use building located at 67 Bronte Road.
The report recommended that the
applicant enter intoa license agreementwith the Town of Oakville
Services for 13 parking spaces until July
15,2007, at a license rate of $1 .OO per space per year.
Parking Requirements
4.2.4
Asper the excerptsfromtheTownofOakvilIeZoningBy-law1984-63,
following requirements for commercial areas
in the Town are as follows:
C1 Zone
0
C1 - 1 space for every 22 mzof ground floor leasable area
C1 - 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasable area above or below ground
C2 Zone
0
0
C2 - 1 space for every 28m2of leasable area above or below ground
the
Page 43 of 88
C3 Zone
C3 - notwithstanding some excludeduses, 1 space for every 28 m2 of leasable
floor area, one parking space shall be provided having direct access from a public
street other than Lakeshore Road, Randall, Rebecca or Kerr Street.
C3R Zone
This zone is applicable to thethree
older commercialareasoftheTown
(Downtown Oakville, Ken Street Business District aid DowntownBronte). The
C3R detailed requirements are not listedhere since the parking standards for each of
these three business areas are varied. For example,DowntownBronteenjoysno
relaxation from parking requirements for any commercialuse.Infact,for
restaurants the parking standard in Downtown Bronte is higher than for restaurants
in the C1 and C2 zones elsewhere in the Town.
;.
4.3
PARKING EXEMPTIONS
i
The Oakville Corporate Policy No. 09-01-05 is applicable to theDowntownBronteArea.
exemptions fiom the Oakville Corporate Policy No. 09-01-05 are as follows:
e
0
4.4
The
The requestforagreement to exemptparking shall on1y;beconsideredwherethe site
is zoned C3R and is part of the Community Improvement Areas of Downtown
Oakville, KerrStreet, and Bronte Village where, in close proximity, the municipality
supplies parking for transient parkingfor multiple users in a communa~manner.
The Town of Oakville will not
accept
applications for
residential
parking
exemptions.
A listofrequirements
is provided that will be looked at bythe .Town’s staff in
considering applications for exemptions.
REVENUES
With the exception of fines there are no other parking revenues generated in Downtown Bronte
since there is no paid parking in
this area.
4.5
ENFORCEMENT
There are 1 1 Parking Control Officers for the Town as a whole. Of these, three are assigned to the
Downtown areas including Kerr Street and Lakeshore Roads West (fromForsythe Street to Brock).
Enforcement was not noted as an issue for the Downtown Bronte area, based on the Stakeholder
Meeting heldin August, 2004.
Ifpaid parkingisintroduced
enforcement as well.
to DowntownBronte
this would triggertheneedforincreased
!i
i.'
Page 44 of 88
>,
~
I
I;
1.
I"
4.6
PARKING SURVEYS
Detailed parking surveys were undertakenin Downtown Bronte in ord& to obtain an understanding
of the existing parking demands. The surveys were undertaken on Wednesday, June 16, 2004 from
8:OO a.m. to 8:OO p.m., on Friday, June 18, 2004 fiom 12:OO a.m. to $2:00p.m., and on Saturday,
June 19 fiom 12:OO a.m. to 12:OO p.m. Surveys were undertaken under ideal weather conditions for
all the days surveyed.
,i
The parking surveysincludedrecording the lastthree letters of vehicle licenseplates in the
designated parking areas in 30-minute increments. Thus data captured both parking utilization and
duration. The data collection for most part went without difficulties.There were a few exceptions:
W
On Wednesday, June 16, 2004, the surveyors in the parking:,location adjacent to Sobeys
could not complete the surveyon time after four cycles i8:OO to 1O:OO a.m.). The
parkinglotwastoobig
and customers were constantly asking questions about the
survey. MMM staff made additional photocopies of the Tbwn of Oakville letters and
instructed the surveyors to provide letters to the people as@g questions, mention that
they are working on behalf of the Town of Oakville, and jxomptly continue with the
additional surveyor was
survey. The parking lot was also split into two parts and
added.
' k i n
The owner of Laundry Place at 2390 instructed the surveyois to stop surveying at their
lot at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Saturday, June 19,2004, aue to customer complaints.
The surveyor presented the letter from the Town of Oakville but was still asked to stop.
M" complied with the request.
..
,
I
4.6.1
General
Description
i
,.
Downtown Bronte consists of mostly privately owned and! operated parking lots, onstreet non-metered parking, and two parking garages. The on-street non-metered parking
are located on Marine drive from Bronte Road to Jones Skeet, on Jon& Street fiom
Lakeshore Road to Marine Drive, and on Bronte Road fiom Lakeshore Road to Ontario
Street. The two parking garages are located on the west side of Bronte south of
Lakeshore Road.
4.6.2
Segment Analysis
The data was collected on a lot and block face basis. In orderito facilitate the analysis, the
survey area was aggregatedinto six zones. The six zones are &ownin Figure 7.Each zone
is discussed in the following section,with emphasis on the follo+ng issues:
0
e
0
What is the peak utilization by day and at what time of the day did it occur?
What is theweighted average parlungduration on weekdaysand on weekendsfor
different types of parking categories (private, on-strekt non-metered, and parking
garages)?
What is theoveralldemand for parking in thearea?
;
Page 45 of 88
Zone I
Zone 1 includes 9 private lots, 4 on-street non-metered parking spaces, and two parking
garages for a total of 258 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilization of 57 percent
was observed on Wednesday from 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. and 45 percent on Saturday from
3:OO p.m. to 4:OO p.m., indicating that there is more than sufficient parking available in this
zone as a whole.
The weighted average parking duration for different parking locations are as follows:
Private parking lots (2.27 hours on weekdays, 2.68 hours on Saturday); and
On street non-metered parking (0.97 hours on weekdays, 1;.12 hours on Saturday).
I
Page 46 of88
The on-street parking is being usedbyshort-termparkers,
'is intended.The data also
indicates that the parking lots are being used primarily
by customers.
The average turnover was 2.95 on Wednesday,2.80 on Friday,qnd 2.26 on Saturday.
Zone 2
Zone 2 includes 5 private lots and 11 on-street non-meteredparking locations, for a total of
271 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilization of 62 percent was observed on Friday
between 12:30 p.m. and 1:30 p.m., and 47 percent on Saturday fiom 12:30 p.m. and 1:30
p.m., indicating that there is sufficient parking available in this zone as a whole.
The weighted average parking duration for differentparking locations are as follows:
Private parking lots (1.62 hours on weekdays, 1.57 hours on Saturday); and
0
On street non-metered parking (1.29 hours on weekdays, 1..36 hours on Saturday).
0
The on-street non-metered parking is being used by short-termgarkers, as intended.
The average turnover was 3.37 on Wednesday, 3.89 on Friday, and 1.22on Saturday.
Zone 3
Zone 3 includes 1 1 private lots for a total .of 172 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday
utilization of 35 percent was observed on Friday from 5:OO p.m; to 6:OO p.m. and 33 perccnt
on Saturday fiom 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m., indicatingthat there is'more than sufficient parking
available in this zone as a whole.
The weighted average parking duration for parking was 1.91 hours on weekdays, and 1.87
hours on Saturday. This indicates that few employeesare parking on these lots.
The average turnover was 2.14 on Wednesday, 1.76on Friday, and 1.32 on Saturday.
Zone 4
utilization of 39 percent was observed on Wednesday from 6:OO p.m. to 7:OO p.m. and 23
percent on Saturday from 12:30 to 1:30p.m., indicating thatthere is Sufficientparking
available in this zone as a whole.
The weighted average parking duration was 1.91 hours on weekdays, and 2.01 hours on
Saturday. This indicates that this parking is being primarily used by customers.
Zone 5
utilization of 33 percent was observed both on Friday from 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. and on
Saturday from 2:OO p.m. to 3:OO p.m., indicating that there is more than sufficient parking
available inthis zone as a whole.
The weighted average parking duration was 1.76 hours on weekdays, and 1.57 hours on
Saturday. Again,this indicates primarily customer parking.
Zone 6
Zone 6 represents one large private lot serving Sobeys and various other commercial uses,
with a total of 359 parking spaces. A peak hour weekday utilization of 52 percent was
observed on Friday from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and 48 percent on Saturday fi-om 1:00 p.m.
to 2:OO p.m., indicating that there is sufficient parking available inthis zone asa whole.
The weighted average parking duration was 1.I 6 hours on weekdays, and 1.15 hours on
Saturday. This indicates that few employees are parking on these lots.
The average turnoverwas 3.52 on Wednesday, 4.10 on Friday, and 3.59 on Saturday.
4.6.3
Total Area
The overall peak parking utilization for entire Area1 for the three survey days was
as follows:
0
0
Wednesday, June 16:
Friday, June 18:
Saturday,
38%
June 19:
44%
45%
The total capacityis 1,616 parking spaces. The peak utilizationat 45.05 percentamounts to
728 spaces. Therefore, on an overall basis, a substantial amount of surplus parking exists.
In general, the average duration of parking is slightly longer on Saturday relative to the
weekdays, andconsequently the average turnoveris higher on weekdays.
4.7
ASSESSMENT: OPERATIONS AND POLICIES
4.7.1
Existing Parking Operations
The majority of the parking (92 percent) in Downtown Bronte is provided off-street, in privately
ownedandoperated
lots associatedwithstripplazasorotherretailandrestaurantuses.The
remaining parking supply in the area includes 5 percent in on-street non-metered parking locations,
and 3 percent in parking garages.
Page 48 of 88
4.7.2
Parking Utilization
An abundance of parking is available in the Downtown Bronteas a whole. The highest peak
hour utilization was 45 percent for the area as a whole.However,
there wereseveral
parking locations in the area where the demand was equal to or exceeded the supply, as
shown in Table 29.
The parking areas where the demand was equal to or exceeded the supply were located in
two areas. These two sub-areas and the parking locations withinthe sub-areas are shown in
Figure 8.
Table 29
Parking locations where the PeakHour
Demand is Equal to m- Exceeds the Supply
1
1.3
I
P
I Lakeshore Rd, Bronte I
2
I
100 %
* 0 = On Street Non Metered Parking
* P = Private Lots
These represent either onstreet spaces, or smaller parking lots.
I
100 %
I
NOSl3N
133
NOS13N i.
- 1
- 1
!
- I
J
133tll#
S3NOr
Page 49 of 88
Utilization calculations were undertaken for these two sub-areas. The peak hour utilizations
for the two sub-areas areshown in Table 30.
Table 30
Sub-area Peak Hour Utilization Analysis
The results of the analysis show that the peak hour uti1izations:in sub-area 1 in Zone 1 and
sub-area 2 in zone 2 are relatively high during the weekdays,
ranging fiom 80 to 90 percent.
Typically utilizationin the range of 85 percent indicates thatparking is operating at, or close
to, capacity when easein locating a parking spaceand vehicles in circulation are considered.
The resultsof this sub-analysisarecomparableto
the results fromparkingsurveys
completed by the BA Group in 2001 for the weekend. Their:surveys were conducted on
Saturday July 21,2001, Sunday July 22,2001 and on Sunday August 12,2001. The peak
how,utilization in Area H which corresponds to sub-area 1 ofZone 1 in our report, was 54
percent. The peak hour utilization for on-street parking
on Bronte Road from Lakeshore
Road to Ontario Street was 52 percent. However, as noted by 'the current survey, the peak
utilization is achieved on weekdays, not weekends.
Wilmslow Properties Corp. prepared the Harbourview Plaza Parking Study in 2004. The
boundaries of Harbourview Plaza correspond to sub-area 1 of Zone 1 of this study. The
survey was conductedon Thursday, April 15,2004. The peak-hour weekday utilization was
69 percent. This demand was lower than that observed in the more current MMM surveys.
4.7.3
ParkingDuration
In general, the weighted average parking duration on off-street private lots was short (less
than 1.2 hours) in Zone 6 and ranged from 1.50 to 2.70 hours in the remaining zones. The
analysis indicates that the average turnover was high (more than 3.50) during both the
weekday and weekends in Zone 6 and during the weekdays in Zone 2. Furthermore, the
weightedaverageparkingdurationwasshort(lessthan
1.36 hours) for on-streetnonmetered parking locations.
The installation of meterscould potentially reduce the parking duration at on-street parking
locations.
Observations were made todetermine if any parking locations have extremely long average
parking duration of more than 5 hours. A parking duration of more than 5 hours potentially
indicates that parkinglocations are being used primarily by employees.
No parking locations
were observed to have average parking duration of more than 5 hours. Therefore we can
conclude that there are
no parking locations being used primarily by employees.
Page 50 of 88
4.7.4
Conclusions Related to the Existing Demand for Parking
In summary the following conclusions can be made
from the existing parking analysis:
1.
An abundanceofparking is available inDowntownBronteasawhole.However,
there are two small pockets where the peak parking demand is close to or at the
practical capacityon weekdays. On Saturday these same spaces arefar less well used.
2. There
4.8
are no parking locations being used primarily by employees.
DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT
TheTownofOakvilleprovided.acommercialspaceinventoryforboth1994and2004
for
the west, East Streeton the east, Sovereign Street on
Downtown Bronte bounded by Bronte Road on
the north and Ontario Street
on the south.
The 1994 inventoryincluded the Gross Floor Area(GFA),andaclassification
by typeof
commercial operation (e.g. “restaurant” use), for each commercial property within those bounds.
The 2004 inventory updated the 1994 information and,.as a result, accounted for expansions, new
construction
and
demolition
information
for
commercial
properties.
With
two comparable
inventories, it was found that the Downtown “street front” or “grade-level” commercial activity has
expandedbyabout22.6percentover
the 10 year period,(asshown ‘in Table 31). Commercial
activities locatedon “other floors” in the Bronte area are assumedto be minimal in this analysis.
Table 31
Bronte (street front) Growth
Square Feet
,z~’?@94,, -2004 ’. I % change
244,903 300,359 I 22.6%
I,,
<W”
,’
’
’
Annual change
.
2.26%
Table 32 below provides details regarding commercial activities by type, from the 1994 inventory,
as provided by the Town. In 1994, vacancies accounted for about 13.6 percent of all street front
commcrcial activities (32,247f? GFA of a total 244,903fi? GFA).
Table 33 indicates that vacancies,as a percentageof the total street frontGFA in the study area have
improved to where they currently only account for about
1.7 percent of the total GFA and 3.0
percent of the total numberof stores.
Page 51 of 88
Table 32
1994 Downtown Bronte GFA
by Commercial LandUse
30.
46,332
Land Use Type
Automotive
DSTM
Food
Home
Improvement
Local Office
Retail
Other
Service
Other
30.331
Restaurant
Specialty
Food
Vacant
42’:
I
I
I
I
I
~
.~
ft2
businessesil
2,718 I
2’
61,979 1
49:
30,007 I
1
5,009
2 1,SO8
3,318 I ’
5
1
5
9
:
I
I
I
1 1,454
32,247
9:
244,903
192,
However, neither inventory for the Bronte studyareaincluded gross floor areaforcommercial
activities on other floors (i.e. “second floor”, or “basement”). Observations of the area indicate the
predominate form to be one-storey commercial operations, with little if any activity on other floors.
is
Thevacancyrate is an important measure of thehealth of a commercial area.Secondly,it
important to consider in the context of a parking study since it may represent potential demand that
could be exerted upon a parking system if the commercial structure were to be entirely leased up.
The current 5.98 percentvacancy rate for the Bronfe studyarea is lowwhen compared to Downtown
Oakville’s 7.47 percent for street front activities. Because these rates for the Bronte Street area are
relatively low, adjustments do not need to be made to account for reduced vacancy rates in the
future.
Table 33
2004 Downtown Bronte GFA by Commercial Land Use
DSTM
--
Food Store
Home Improvement
Local Office
I
I
I
..
Ad
30,007
8,715
35,856
I
1
I
1
6
40
,!
I
Page 52 of 88
4.9
CUIZRENT PARKING
PROVISIONS
The currentparkingdemand rate per occupiedfloorareawasdeveloped
by dividingthepeak
observed parking demand (spaces),by the occupied floor area (2004 commercial inventory from the
Town of Oakville), generatingthis demand.
The 2004GFA figures are those outlined in the previous table,net of the vacancies. The calculation
is detailed in Table 34 below.
Table 34
Downtown Bronte Peak Hour Parking Demand
Occupied Parking
2004 Occupied.GFA
Peak Hour
Demand1000 sq ft
occupied GFA
I 282,375
I
2.58
Thus, the actual parking demand has been calculated to be 2.58 spaces
GFA, or 2.78 spaces per 100 m2,or 1 space per36.0 m2 of GFA.
4.10
I
per 1,000 I? of occupied
FUTURE DEMAND FOR PARKTNG
As previously noted, neighbourhoods south of the QEW are expected to grow by about 2.46
percent over the 2006-201 1 periods and by about 2.48 percent over the 201 1-2016 periods. The
Bronte neighbourhood is expected to grow by about 0.76 percent annually between 2006-and201 1.
However, the majority of customers for local retailers are identified as coming from south of the
QEW and the annualised growthrate for this area is forecast at 0.50 percent. The effect of the 0.76
percent growth rate of the very local customer base in Bronte would not have asignificant parking
impact as it wouldbe expected that many of those customers wouldwalk to the stores and services.
Consequently, demandfor parking is forecast at a conservative 0.50 percent
annual rate.
Table 35 indicates for each of the six Downtown Bronte zones, the anticipated peak utilization rate
for each of the Town's population projection-based planning periods
mil the associatedGFA figure.
L
Page 53 of 88
t
!I
;I
Table 35
Projected GFA, Utilization and Peak Hour Dernand,j2004-2021
I.
The analysis indicates that if uses were to intensify on these sites as forecast in Table 36, on an
overall basis there is more than enoughparking available.
Currently, the highest parking utilization is achieved in the on-street
parking spaces, with the private
parking facilities being less utilized, as indicated in Table 36 below. If parking utilization rises
consistently amongst the various parking types, it would be expected that the on
street parking
system will “fill” first, and then parkers will be forced to use the excess supply in the private lots.
Pane 54 of 88
Table 36
Downtown Bronte PeakHour Parking Demand by Parking Type
ITotal
Parking Spaces
Occupied Parlung Spaces
Percent Occupied
4.11
88
50
57%
1,465
651
46
19
41.%
I
44%
The following summarizes thekeyfindings.arising
operations in Downtown Bronte:
from thisreview
DowntownBrontecurrentlyhasampleparking
utilization of only45 percent).
on
of parkingdemandsand
. .
& overallbasis,(e.g.peak
Growth in parking demand as forecasted, can continueto be accommodated within
the available parking supply, onan overall basis.
However, two localized areas have been identified where the parking is effectively
operating close to or at capacity when vehiclesin circulation and ease in locating a
parking space, are taken into consideration.
The two parking garages in Downtown Bronte are locatedtheonwest side of Bronte
Road south of Lakeshore Road. The two parking garages combined were found to
only have a peak utilization of 41 percent. More effective use needs to be madeof
this garage for general customer and visitor use.
The two parking garages in Downtown Bronte are locatedon the west side of Bronte
Road south of Lakeshore Road. The two parking garages combined were found to
only have a peak utilization of 41 percent. More effective use needs to be made of
this garage for general customerand visitor use.
Consideration should be given to protecting for a municipal parking facility in this
generalizedareaalong
the Brontecorridorfor
the future.(Bronte
has no
municipalityoperatedoff-streetparkingcurrently).Thismayalsoassistwith
addressing some recreational parking demands
in this area.
Consideration should alsobe given to adding on-street parking meters.
I
,
Town of OakvilleParking Study
Page 55 of 88
5.0
DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS
5.1
Current Provisions
5.1.1
I
Downtown Oakville
Currently Downtown Oakville is exempt from the provision of parking, with the exception
of residential uses. These provisions apply to the lands bounded by Navy Street
on the west,
Randall Street on the north, Allan Street on the east andRobinson Street on thesouth. Other
Downtown lands in the C3R zone outside of the exempt zone are generally required to
provide one parking space for every 28 m2 of leasable floor area, with some exceptions. For
example, restaurants arerequired to provide one parking spacefor every 4.6 m2 of floor area
devoted to public use or every 9.3 m2 of floor area, whicheveris the lesser and one parking
space for every 4.6.m’ of patio area. Other uses-withspecific requirements include cinemas,
office buildingscontairiing medical offices whichoccupy more then 60 percent ofthe
leasable floorarea,clubs, and banks,amongstothers.For
ease of reference excerpts of
Zoning By-law 1984-63 dealing with parlung, are attached. As noted, the Downtown lands
indicated, are exemptfrom these provisions.
The municipality has been responsible for providing public parking, funded in part through
parking revenues from the users. Approximately 62 percent of.the non-residential parking
supply are municipallyoperated, with the balance suppliedby the private sector.
5.1.2
Within the Kerr Street Business District both residential and non-residential land uses in the
C3R zone are required to. provide parking, in accordance with the By-law requirements.
However, here too some exemptions exist: restaurant uses areexempt from the provisionof
parking in an area bounded by
Rebecca Street, Maurice Drive,the southerly limitof the C3R
Zone south of Lakeshore Road Westand Forsythe Street. This exemptionwas implemented
in 1999 in response to potential restaurateurs wishing to locate in this area, but who could
not invest the necessary monies to both set up their businesses, as well aS provide the
necessary parking.
By-law 1993-1 93also exempts restaurants or take-out eating establishmentsof less than 100
m2 in floor area from requiring parking. The lands to which this provision applies are C3R
lands situated between Stewart Street and Herald Avenue,and fronting onto Ken Street.
Within the commercial area there are some lands which are zoned C3, south of Lakeshore
Road abutting the residential uses. The basic parking requirement is one space for every 28
m2ofleasable floor area.However,specificusesoutlinedintheZoningBy-laware
excluded, and they have theirown requirements. There are also pockets of C6 zoning. The
units (e.g.south-east comer of
Kerr Street Business Districtalsoincludeslive-work
Lakeshore Road West Street at Kerr Street.) The residential units are required to provide
two parking spacesper unit. Site specific reductions have been approved for the commercial
components.
Page 56 of 88
5.1.3
Downtown Bronte
4,
Unlike Downtown Oakville and the Kerr StreetBusinessDistrictthere
are no parking
exemptions whatsoever in DowntownBronte.Parking
is :required to beprovided in
accordance withthe By-law standards for both residential and non-residentialuses.The
majority of the commercial lands are zoned C3R, however, the plaza north of Lakeshore
Road Westand west of Jones Street is zoned C2 and the north-east comer of Bronte Road at
Lakeshore Road West is zoned C6.
There have also been site specific modifications to the C3R regulations to permit livelwork
units. These are required to include two parking spaces per residential unit, as well as one
parking space perunit to address the commercialandvisitorparkingneeds.With
an
average floor space of about 40 m2per commercial unit, this icpates to approximately one
parlung space per 40 m2, as compared to the by-law requireme;! of one space per28 m2.
The only parking provided by the municipality is that which &:along the streets. There are
no municipal parking lots or garages in Downtown Bronte.
5.2
ISSUES
.
/ .
There are a number of issues with regard to the current By-law provi$ions with respect
to parking,
as well as parking in a ‘Downtown’ settingin general.
5.2.1
Fairness Between Areas
Perhaps thekey issue is withregard to fairness,real or perceived, between the three
Downtown areas. Currently, Downtown Oakville is perceived’as having an advantage over
the other two commercial areas in that all non-residential uses‘are exempt entirely from the
provision of parking, whereas in the Kerr Street Business DistAct restaurant uses are exempt
in the southern part of the District and small restaurants are ex6mptfrom parking in another
part of the District. In Bronte no uses are exempt. Consequently, suchdifferences result in
questions of fairness.
5.2.2
Fairness Between Uses in the Same Area
Another valid questionrelates to fairness between uses in theszime District. As noted, inthe
Kerr Business District restaurants are exempt in the southerly bart of the District, although
small restaurants (under 100 m’), are exempt within the Stewart Street to Herald Avenue
segment. Office and retail uses are also not exempt.
Within Downtown Oakville non-residential usesjust north of Randall Street are requiredto
provide parking, whereasthose south of Randall Streetare exempt.
Again, questions arise as to whether the Town treats its businesses in an equitable manner.
In July, 2000 a staff report was brought before Council related
to the inequality with respect
to the treatment of the C3R zoned properties north of Randall Street between Allan Street
and Navy Street. That study concluded that the owners north’ of Randall generally do not
have plans to add building floor area which would trigger the need for additional parking
and therefore no revisionsto the parking standards in theC3R zone north of Randall needed
Page 57 of 88
to beundertaken at that time. However, it shouldbe noted that :a number of these properties
already have site specific provisions.
In Downtown Oakville thereare no parkingfees in the eveking, oronSundays.
This
provides some advantages to restaurants, which tend to have their peak demands in the
evenings, whereas many other uses are closed in the evenings.
5.2.3
Costmunding of Parking
~
Related to the two issues
noted above is the matterof the cost arid fimding of parking. There
is no such thing as “free parking”. For example, when parking is provided in a shopping
centre, those costs are passed on by the owner to the lessees,who in turn pass the costs onto
the consumer as part of the purchase price for the goods sold, br the service rendered. The
costs related to parking not only .include the cost of the land and construction, but also .
maintenance costs related t o itemssuchas
lighting, sweeping and snowclearance.
Construction costs are significantly higher for above
or below grade parking than for surface
parking lots. Parking structures also require substantially higher rehabilitation costs in the
fbture.. Even on-street parlung has costs associated with it. For example, a street may need
to be oversized so as to allow on-street parking throughout the day, including during peak
periods. There are also maintenance costs with respect to the.pavement used for parking,
just as there are with respectto the travelled portionof the road$ay.
Currently,users are charged for parking in bothDowntownOakvilleandin’theKerr
Business District. The rates charged are relativelylow when compared to thecost of
providing the parlung, particularly in the case of parking structures. In Downtown Bronte
there are no municipally operated off-street parking lots, or structures, or on-street metered
spaces. The business community in Downtown Bronte is generally adverse to charging for
parking.
5;2.4
Impacts on Adjacent Residential Neighbours
A common -issue where a business area abutsresidential uses is the spillover ofnonThis does not occur inallcases.
It tends to
residentialparkingontoresidentialstreets.
depend on factors suchas:
0
0
0
the general availability of parking in the business area
theparkingratescharged
thewalkingdistanceinvolved
Appropriateparking restrictions (e.g. 2 or 3 hour limits during thedayonweekdays),
combined with enforcement can help alleviate theissues. However, these restrictions would
applyequally to visitors to theresidentialuses, or torecreqttionaluses,as
to spillover
parking from the commercial core, thus potentially impacting: more than just the targeted
group.
5.2.5
Competitivenesswith SuburbanShoppingCentres
j
i
Frequently thosebusinesseswhichare
situated in a ‘Downtown’notethattheyrequire
special parking considerations in order to compete favourablyi with vast expanses of “free
parking” in suburban shopping centres. These special parking $onsiderations can vary fiom
.
Page 58 of88
location to location and take different forms, as reflected in Oahille as well. For example
they can involve:
0
Partial orcompleteparkingexemptions
0
Reduced
parking
standards
0
Parking needs being addressed in part by the municipality
a
'Free' public parking (e.g. initial 2 hours free, free on particular days of th,
.,e week, or
times ofthe day).
As noted, oneway or another the costs of providing
the parking bust be fimded.
!
5.2.6
'
Historical Buildings
.
. .
Historic buildings constructed before the advent of the popularity of the automobile, often
occupy small sites where little of the parking demand can be accommodated on-site. The
parking demands whichare generated bythese,buildings are typically accommodatedin one
of two ways: through exemptions, with the municipality providing parking in commercial
lots or garages paid wholly or
in part by the users of the parking facilities, or through
payment-in-lieu, with the municipality using
the funds collected'toward the construction
of a
parking facility, but with no guarantee that
any parking will actuallybe built in proximity to
the building requiringthe parking. .
Historic buildings also limited
the number of sites that a municipality can potentially acquire
for parking purposes.
5.3
Other Factors and Considerations related to Demand or Supply of Parking
In addition to the issue of fairness and the other issues outlined in the previous sections, there are
also various other factors and considerations
that are of relevance when developing strategic parking
options for these three commercial areas.'These are discussed below:
5.3.1
Built-in Market
Medium and high density residential uses within walking distance of retail, restaurant and
service uses provide a built-in market for
those uses. Thus, with the exception of trips
which necessitate the use of an automobile (e.g. involving heavy or bulky purchases,
or
because of a disability) most of these trips can avoid the use of a car. Commercial parking is
therefore not required for these trips. With a built-in market the parking requirements are
lower than what they would otherwise need
to be,asinthecase
of a shopping centre
surrounded bylow density residential uses.
5.3.2
Popularity/Draw
Downtown Oakville not only attracts customers from an area south of the QEW, but also
from throughout Oakville, as well as beyond Oakville.It is viewed as being the Downtown
for the municipality, offering a range of shopping, dining and recreational experiences not
found elsewherein the municipality.
. .
Town of Oakville Parking Stu&
Page S9 of 88
E
:rl
Just as popular restaurants or other uses in
a suburban setting may require more parking than
less popular counterparts in the same setting, a vibrant Downtown requires more parking
than one which attracts fewer customers and visitors.
However, evenin the case of popular ‘Downtowns’ the parkingjrequirements can be reduced
through other considerations, as discussed below:
5.3.3
.
Shared Parking Opportunities
Successful‘Downtowns’typicallyinclude
a mixof retail,’: service,office,restaurant,
institutional, recrcational and other uses. Different uses have different peaking requirements
by time of day and day of the week. For example, offce uses tend to experience their peak
parking demands mid to late-morning and mid-afternoon, Monday through Friday.
They
typically generate little; if any, parking demand during the evening and
on weekends, (witha
few exceptions such as real estate offices). Churches tend to require little parking during the
week, butresult in substantialparkingdemands
.on Sundaymornings. . Again,thereare
.
exceptions during the week as well (e.g. funerals). Retail;-uses requiresomeparking
Monday to Friday, but theirpeak demands tend to occur on weekends.
Shared parking facilities such as those operated by the municipality, result in efficiencies
that reflect the fact that different uses exhibit their peak parking demands at different times.
Thus they make more effective use of the parking than if eachkse was required to provide
parking on its own site to address itsown specific needs.
Shared parking opportunitiescan also be achieved on private lots through the cooperation of
and
the owners. For example, by opening up access andparkingbetweenanoffice
restaurant/pub use, the office can take advantage of surplus r&taurant/pub parking during
the day Monday to Friday, and through
a reciprocal arrangementthe restaurantlpub can take
advantage of the surplus office parking in the evenings and on weekends. There are also
other inherent advantages to integrating surface parking lots (e.g. increased parking yield
through a more efficient layout, potential to reduce or eliminate
dead ended aisles, etc.).
.
5.3.4
.
Transit Availability
Transit services, whicharefocussedon
a Downtownnode, can provideanattractive
alternativetodriving.Generally,
the key benefits are toemployees,providedthatthe
well
at work end.
service is viewed as being convenient and frequent, both at the home as as
Employees tend to occupy a parking space throughout the day and to add to peak period
congestion on the road network. A parking space occupied byone employee canbe instead
used by two, three or more short term parkers throughout the day.
However for transit to be viewed as an attractive alternative for those who are not transit
captive, this requires a combinationof‘carrot and stick’rrieasures(i.e.incentivesand
disincentives). No matter how attractive the transit service is, &ere is little incentive for an
employee to use it where the employer provides “free parlcing”,;or where
the cost of parking
and gas is less than or equivalent tothe cost of a transit pass. ,
!
Page 60 of 88
5.3.5
MarketFactors
Notwithstandingparkingexemptions or minimalparking standards in the case of new
developments, some developers provide parking even if not required to do so, or provide
parking inexcess of the requirements specified inthe Zoning By-law. They may find#at in
order to lease the floor space, additional parking is required, b d that without guaranteed
parking, the project viabilityis in question.
5.4
ConsiderationsRelated to Interpretation/Adrninistration
5.4.1
Interpretation
At the momentthe parking section of the Town’sZoning By-law is complicated to interpret
for thosecontemplating an addition, new building,orsimply a change in use, Not only must
the applicants understand the zone in which they are situated,,but also the exclusions and
exemptions.
For example,in the case of a restaurantuse applicants must detkrmineif they are situated in
an area, which is exempt from parking requirements for rest+rants. If not exempt, they
would thenneed to understand if theyare defined as a ‘restauraM’or a ‘take-out restaurant’.
If they are defined as a ‘restaurant’ they would thenneed to intirpret and calculate the floor
area devotedto public use and the total floor area, as well as
patio area.
an?
The assistance of the staff at the Town is normally required in @e interpretation.
5.4.2
Administration
. *
As an example, a restaurantuse in the southern part of.the Kerr Street Business District does
not require any parking whatsoever. A simple change of use (e.g. fiom restaurant to retail,
service, or office use) would trigger new parking requirements each time the use changes.
This is an administrative issue not only for’the landowner, but also for the municipality. It
would befar simpler to have one generalized requirement,which would also allow the floor
space to change uses without triggering a review each time.
’,
5.5
StrategicOptionsand Assessment of Options
5.5.1
Downtown Oakville
As noted, DowntownOakville currently has morethan enough parking for the Downtown as
a whole, with the peak utilization being only 67 percent; although there are localized areas
where the parking is effectively operating at capacity at times.’ At the same time there are
parking facilities which appear to be underutilized, most notablythe Town’s parking garage
located on the south side of Church Street between ReynoldsStreet and Trafalgar Road.
Page 61 of 88
Currently, the municipality is responsible for the provision of parking to address the needs
of non-residential uses in Downtown Oakville. The current demand for parking has been
calculated to be 3.07 spaces per 100 m2, or one space per 32.6 m2 of floor area. Under the
C3R zone the general commercial requirement would be one space per 28 m2 of Ieasable
floor area, which is slightly higherthanthe
actual observeddemand, In addition the
requirements for other specific uses found in Downtown Oakville (e.g. restaurants, office
buildings with medical uses and banks), are substantially higher than the observed peak
demand of one space per 32.6 m’ of floor area. Two factors can be used to explain the
differences:
The current parking standards are based on specific uses addressing peak requirements
on their own sites, such that they do not reflect the opportunities to share parking,
whereby different uses experience their peak requirements at different times
of the
day,or different days of thewcek.
,
Downtown Oakville has a residential base within the Downtown area, such that these
people canfor the most part walkto the commercial areasrather than drive and require
parking at their destinations.
The above is a somewhatmootdiscussion,sinceasnoted,theareabounded
byNavy,
Randall, Allan and Robinson Streets, is exempt fi-om the provision of parking, with the
exception ofresidential uses.
Downtown Oakville includes a bit of an anomaly in that the C3R lands to the ’north of
Randall Street are n u exempt from the provision 0.f parking. In July, 2000 a Staff Report
had been prepared for the Mayor and Members of Council dealing with this issue. That
report noted that “staff are oftheopinionthattheparking
shortfall broughtfogvardto
Council for the site at 156 Reynolds Street is a special situation given the indication from
existing landowners that there are no plans to. add space to buildings in the commercial
area”. On this basis, staff suggested that “the ‘Ward Councillor andstaff meet,with the few
landowners who haveexpressedaninterestindiscussing
parking standardswiththe
Councillors and that no changes to the parking standards in the C3R zone north of Randall
Street be undertaken at this time”.
’
In theory, the C3R landsto the north of Randall Street could
be redeveloped ai much higher
densities than exist today, resulting in a substantial demand for parking which the Town
would be obliged to provide if the non-residential parking exemption wasto be extended to
in view of the stability
the north ofRandall Street. However in reality this is highly unlikely,
of someof the uses. It should also benotedthatexistingdevelopmentinDowntown
for the areas both north
Oakville reflectsonly about 12 percent of the development potential
and south of RandallStreet. Thus the parking exemptionto the south of Randall Street has
resulted in no material difference in the propensity to redevelop.
In view of issues of inequality north and south of Randall Street several options have been
considered andassessed herein:
I
Page 62 of 88
Option 1
Option 2
-
Require new development on the lands boundedby Navy, Randall,
Allan and Robinson Streets to provide parking in accordance with
the C3R parking standards, as required of the C3R lands to the
north of Randall Street.
-
Require new development on the.: lands bounded by Navy,
Randall, Allan and Robinson Streets to provide parking in
accordance with the observed demand (i.e. one parking space per
32.6 m2),regardless of non-residential use andapply this
same reduced standard to the C3R l g d s north of Randall Street.
Option 3
Maintain the existing -exemptionfor the lands which are currently
exempt, and the existing C3R requirements for the C3R lands
north of Randall Street.
Option 4
-
Maintain the existing exemption for fbe lands, which are currently
exempt.
Reduce the requirements for the C3R lands north of Randall to
reflect observed parking rate for Downtown Oakville (one space
per 32.6 m').
Option 5
Maintain the existing exemption for the lands, which are currently
exempt.
Also exempt the C3R lands to the no+ of Randall Street.
Table 37 below assesses these various options:
Table 37
Assessment of Downtown Oakville Parking Supply Options
Consideration
Equality
Potential Impacts
on Municipal
Parking
Requirements
Support for
Redevelopment
1
2
All treated
equally
Downtown
Minimal since
would need to be
addressed on
development
sites
Potential
obstacle to
redevelopment
All treated equally
Downtown
Minimal since
would need to be
addressed on
development sites
Potential obstacle
to redevelopment,
albeit less of an
obstacle than in
Option 1
Option
3
I
4
some relief
Continued
growth in
demand
associated with
exempt area
Yes, south of
Continued
growth demand
yociated with
exempt area
I:
I Yes, south of
5
All treated
equally
Downtown
Potential
increase in
demand, but
unlikely to be
substantial
Yes
Town of Oabille Parking Study
Page 63 of 88
Consideration
Opportunities to
Minimize Overall
Downtown
Parking
Requirements
Through Shared
Use
Complexity in
Interpretation and
Administration
r
1
Limited (to
different uses on
same site)
Some
Complexity
2
Limited (to
different uses on
the same site)
I Simple
I
I
Option
3
Yes for lands
4
.,I
Yes, for lands
A
of Randall 'south of Randall south
'but limited for
but limited for
lands north of
. l a n d s north of
.Randall
Randall (to
different uses on ,.
the samesite)
:'
.
I .:Relatively
I Some
CompIexity
'Simple
Simple
I
I
I
1
1
I
.'
Clearly Downtown Oakville is thriving today. It is difficult to.speculate as to the degree to
to thisvitalityandtheimpact
which. the
whichtheparkingexemptioncontributes
introductibn ofparking standards couldhave on -redevelopment, sinceanumberof
developers still choose toprovideparking
on their own; sites,notwithstanding the
. .
exemption.
Ideally; it wouldbe desirable to include the C3R landsto the north of Randall Street as part
for
several reasons:
of this exemption
%
0
0
0
.
.
Fairness
Poteatial impetus for redevelopment
Opportunities to minimize overall parking supply requirements 'through shared use
For these reasons Option 5 would be the preferred option. However, the potential exists,
albeit slight, that this could.require @e municipality to provide more parking in this area,
with the available revenue stream from parking making it diffi'cult to fund another parking
structure. To do so could for example, require substantialincriases in parking rates, to help
fundanewparking
structure. A concernhasbeenexpressedthatinclusionofthelands
north of Randall could result in increased parking demands op' residential streets. This is
highly unlikely given the location of these lands. For example, it is unlikely that someone
from this area who requires parking would look south of Robdson Street, east of Trafalgar
Road or westof Forsythe Street for parking.
An equally acceptable recommendation would be
to reduce theharking requirements for the
C3R lands north of Randall Street to one space per 32.6 m2'for non-residential uses, to
reflect the observed Downtown Oakville rate (or asimplificatibn thereof such as one space
per 28 m'). This wouldrepresent a reduction overthe current requirements,for example for
restaurant uses, and would allow non-residential uses to change without triggering a review
of the parking standards and a potential short-fall in parking, if the uses change to ones,
which today require more parking. This could also be used as a stepping stoneto consider a
complete exemption for the lands north of Randall Street in the future.
As noted, the area generally bounded by Water Street, Navy' Street, Rebecca Street and
utilization on aSaturday.
LakeshoreRoad is currentlyexperiencing 85 percent
Whenvehicles
in circulation andeasein
locating
spacearetakeninto
Pane 64 o f 88
~~
consideration, this effectively means that parkingin this zone is operating close to capacity.
These are lands, which are used for institutional and recreational uses, along with surface
parking. It should be noted that the Town does not charge for parking in this area on a
Saturday and that this may be contributing to this high utilization. If this “free parking” was
to be eliminated,it may result in aredistributionofparkingtoother
lots outside this
immediate zone. In view of the fact that this higher level of utilization was only observed
on Saturday and not during other days of the week and in view of the likely explanation
noted above, it is recommended that this area be monitored following the introduction of
paidparking on a Saturday. Theremayalso
be opportunitiestofurthermaximizethe
parking in this area (e.g. throughstriping and management practices).
More effective use also needs to be made.of the Town’s parking garage located
on the south
sjde of Church Street between Reynolds Street and Trafalgar Road for customer and visitor
parking. Periodic surveys should be undertaken to determine if additional monthly parkers
could still be accommodated withinthe spaces allocatedfor monthly parkers (i.e. overselling
of permits, recognizing that not all parkers use the garage every:day or throughout
the entire
day). Also, the short term spaces that are intended for visitorsmd customers can be better
utilized. Consideration should be given to improving the signage to this garage for this short
term parking. Also increased advertising and incentives should
be considered.
It is also recommended that the various boundaries defining the Downtownbe rationalized
(e.g. as definedby the Town, the BLA and by others) to provide forsome‘clarityand
.
.
consistency.
Finally, it is recornmended that parking demand studies be undertaken on a regular cycle
(e.g. every five years), similar to By-law reviews, and that the current strategy to protect
specific properties for the construction of new public parking .in the hture, be continued.
For example, the Post Office site should be protected.
5.5.2
The Ken Street Business Districtis an area, which isin transition. It is an inverted ‘T’ with
the north-south part of the District focussed on Kerr Street ind the east-west part focussed
as being
onLakeshoreRoadWest.UnlikeDowntownOakville,whichcanbeviewed
relativelycompact,the Ken StreetBusinessDistrict is elongated. As aresult, the one
municipally operated parking lot in this District can only serve a localized area and
is not
convenient for those who may wish to park
in the southern part of the District.
Currently those whoare proposing to redevelop or expand uses on sites that
are zoned C3R
are required to address the applicable by-law requirements with respect to parking. Unlike
Downtown Oakvilleno blanket parking exemption exists.
only.
Ratherthere are two exemption areas withrespecttoparkingforrestaurantuses
Under Zoning By-Law 1984-63 as amended, restaurant uses are not required
to provide
parking within an area boundedby Rebecca Streeton the north, Maurice Drive on the west,
Page 65 of 88
the southerly limitof the C3RzonesouthofLakeshore
Road West on the southand
Forsythe Street on the east. The staff report to the Mayor and Members of Council dated
November 1999, which recommended adoption of this exemption cited proposals for new
restaurants, which did not proceed because of
the zoning requirements, particularly with
regard toparkmg. The key goals relatedto the by-law amendment were:
“To draw a wider geographic customer base to the west CBD area, which, hopefully,
in the area;
will result in spin-off effects for all commercial and service uses
0
To encouragethecommercialpotentialforaportionoftheCentralBusinessDistrict
which is underutilized.”
Also under By-law 1993-193 small restaurants or take-out eating establishments
of less than
100 m2in floor area arc exempt from the parking requirements for a localized area of the
Ken: Street Business.District. This area is Situated,-betweea-StewartStreet in the north and
Herald Avenue on the ’south for the properties fioriting onto Kerr Street.
The November
1993 staff report in suppqrt of this amendment notedthat “restaurants encourage patronsto
frequent the area, but the current parking. provisionsire a disincentive tothe establishment
of these uses”.
..
In addition to the two by-law amendments as noted, in 1999 Co.mcil also initiated a policy
under Section 40 of the Planning Act. The June,. 1’999Staff Report to Council notes that this
policy is “to provide exemptions from parking requirements
for a portion ofthe Kerr Street
Business District on a limited basis subjectto the conditions outlined in Schedule ,A to this
are on the east side of Kerr Street
report.. ...”. Essentially, the lands in .question which
between Stewart Street on the north and the Normandy Place residential lots on the south,
this is forthe
can apply for apayment-in-lieuagreementwithCouncil,providedthat
commercial components only and provided that there is general parking availability in the
adjacent municipal parkinglot.
The parking utilization.surveys indicate that the Kerr Street Business District currently has
ample parking on an overall basis, with a peak utilization of only 39 percent. The highest
utilization at 74 percent was found in the Rebecca StreetMaurice Drive/Lakeshore,Road
West area. There are also other specific blocks where on-street metered or non-metered
spaces were found to be hlly occupied either during the week, or on the Saturday. This is
not an unusual situation in that on-streetspaces are viewed as being most attractive. On an
overall basis the current demand for parking in theKerr Street BusinessDistrict was foimd
to equate to 1.43 spaces per 100 m2,which is substantially lower than the demandper
equivalent floor area in Downtown Oakville. This very lowrate may simply be a reflection
of the reduced vitality of this area
as compared to Downtown Oakville.
The 2004 Kerr VillageRevitalizationStudynotedconsiderationofexpandedsurface
parking andapossiblemulti-levelparkingstructureat
the north-westquadrantof the
RebeccaKerr Streets intersection.
The
parking
structure
would
accommodate
Kerr VillageMarketareaintheStewartStreet
to
approximately 300 vehicles.Forthe
Westside Drive area new and expanded surface parking lots were envisaged as well. The
study also recommended the elimination of parking requirementsfor commercial uses and a
reduction in the parking requirements for residential uses, with the majorityof the parking
being supplied by the municipality.
Clearly, there are real and perceived issues of inequality:
Town of Oakville Parking Stub
Page 66 of 88
Inequalitybetween the Kerr Street BusinessDistrict where thoseredevelopingor
expanding their uses are being required to provide parking on their own sites (with
the exception of the specific restaurant exemptions) and Downtown Oakville where
parking is provided by theTown.
Inequality betweenparts of the District whererestaurantsareexemptaltogether fiom
providing parking and where only small restaurants are exempt, and parts where
restaurants are not exempt.
0
Inequalitiesbetweenrestaurantuses
in the District which areexemptandother
commercial uses in the District which are required to
provide parking.
..
'
.
As noted, in Downtown Oakville (notwithstanding the parking exemptions), 38 percent of public
parking is being supplied by-the private sector, with 62 percent representing theTown's component,
including the parking garage, 1ots;'arid on-street meteredand n6n-metered spaces.
The options'for the Kerr Street Business District include -the following::
Option 1
-
'
Maintak the status quo (existing parking standardsandexistingparking
exemptions).
Option 2
-
Require existing parkingstandards for all non-residentialusesinaccordance
with the by-law standards, with the exception of restaurants.
-
Exemptall restaurant uses in the District.
Option 3(a)
-
.
Require parking for all non-residential uses in the District at a substantially
reduced standard in accordance with the measured demand(1.43 spaces per 100
m2 orone space per 70 m2),with no exemptions.
Option 3(b)
-
Require parking forallnon-residential
uses in theDistrict at aconsistent
standard of 3.57 spaces per 100 m2 orone space per,28 m2, with no exemptions.
Option 4
-
Exempt all non-residential uses in the District from the provision of parking.
An assessment of these options is outlined in Table38 below:
,
Table 38
AS :ssment of Kerr Street Business District Parking Supply Options
Consideration
1
Retains
existing
inequalities
Equality
Poterifial Impacts Minimal
On Municipal
Parking
Requirements/ .
costs
Support for
Some (e.g.
Redevelopment
restaurants in
exempt areas)
Opportunitiesto
Minimize Overall
Parking
Requirements
Through Shared
Use
Complexity in
Interpretation and
Administration
Limited to
different uses
on same site
Complex both
for the
landowners to
understand
and the Town
to administer
Option
3(a)
Increases
Increased
equality
equality
between
between uses
within the
restaurant
uses, but still
District but
still inequality
retains
with
inequality for
other uses
Downtown
Oakville
Some potential Minimal
for increase
over the
existing
4
@creased
eduality
between uses
within the
District but
still inequality
Results in
equality with
Downtown
Oakville
kith
Dbwntown
Q@kville
Minimal
.'
Y
~otential~y
extensive
Support for
redevelopment
redevelopment of all types of
(i.e. all
non-residential
restaurants)
uses through
substantially
reduced
standards
Minimal
Limited to
different uses
on same site
Some support Strong support for
redevelopment
for
reklevelopment
Limited to
different uses
on same site
Modest (dueto
linear natureof
the District)
Somewhat less Simple
complex than
Option 1
Simple
Simple
Some support
for
i
The existing system of exemptions is difficult for landowners to understand. Although the
concept of providing exemptions for restaurants in some circuinstances and with paymentin-lieu available in other cases is well intentioned, inequalitieg.are the result. Maintaining
the status quo should not beconsidered to bea viable course of action.
Exempting restaurants from the provision of parking to date h& not resulted in any issues.
Under normal circumstances restaurants do in fact generate a: higher demand for parking
than those generated by other uses such as offices and retail uses occupying an equivalent
amount offloor area. The rationale given for the exemptiops has been to allow these
restaurants to move into the area, whereas if parking were t6 be required of them, they
would not be able to do so. The hope was also that the restaurant uses would attract retail
Page 68 of 88
and other uses to locate in the area. It is difficult to speculate if restaurants would attract
other uses to the area. It should be noted that in some other commercial areas of a similar
nature (e.g. Downtown Unionville) concerns have arisenthat restaurant uses are occupying
an exceeding large proportion of the total commercial floor space (i.e. conversions from
retail to restaurant uses). Care must
betakentoensurethat
restaurants donotcometo
occupy a disproportionate amount of the total floor space
by providing them an unfair
advantage over other potential uses. For this reason, Option2 would need to be considered
with caution.
Options3(a), 3(b) or 4 are recommendedforconsideration. Each has its ownpotential
drawbacks.Option 3(a) wouldtreat all non-residentialuses in the Districtequallyand
wouldprovidesubstantialrelief
as comparedtothecurrent
C3R requirements.The
requirements wouldbe much easier for landowners to understand
and for the municipality to
administer.Thedownsideisthatastheareamaturesand
attracts morecustomersand
visitors to the area this reduced parking standard would
be insufficient and the municipality
would need to step in to provide this additional parking. Option 3(b) would also be.easier
for the publictounderstandandfortheTown
to administer. It wouldalsoprovide for
equality within the District and would provide some reductions
in parking requirements (e.g.
for restaurant uses in parts of the District which are not exempt, for medical office uses,
etc.).
Although Option 4 would provide the sought after equality with Downtown Oakville, the
cost implications could be substantial for the Town. At this stage, this cannot be quantified
without understanding the magnitude, and location of
the potential development. Unlike
Downtown Oakville which is relatively compact allowing different users to make use of a
particular parking facility during different times of the day or days of the week, the Kerr
Street Business District is spread out. As a result, it would be more difficult to achieve the
same efficiencies in shared use in order to maximize the potential revenues so as to off-set
the capital and operatingcosts.However,thearea
south of Rebeccaprovides a more
compact form such that any new parking facility in
this area should be located so as to
maximize its market area and coincidently minimize walkingdistance. If Option 4 were to
be pursued, additionalsources of revenue (beyond the users) would
be required, becausethis
revenue currently only coversa small proportion of the totalcosts, based on today's parking
rates for the area. Parlung rates would also need to be increased substantially
to help to offset these costs. There wouldalso be general operational issuesfor the Town with respect to
additional enforcement and fee collection. These costs would
also need to be addressed.
As noted, no additionalparking is requiredinthe
Kerr Street BusinessDistrictatthe
moment, nor for the foreseeable future. Under Options 3(a) or 3@), additional uses would
be required to provide parking on their own sites, albeit at much lower rates than those
currently noted in the Zoning By-law, such that the demand for additional public parking
would be minimal. Option 3(b) can be viewed as a stepping stone for Option 3(a) in that it
wouldallowforparkingrequirementstobereassessed
in the future(e.g. in 5 years,
corresponding to a By-law review) to assess if the demands per occupied floor area have
increased asa result of increased vitality in the area. For example,it may be found that over
time as the Ken Street District matures and thrives,the parking demandsper occupied floor
area may increase to be more similar to those in Downtown Oakville, or Downtown Bronte.
However, if the parking rates in the Kerr Street District are found to be consistently lower
than those in the othertwo Downtown areas, thenfurther reductions in the requirements can
be considered in the future. This is a more prudent approach than reducing the standards
. .
Page 69 of88
its
and
substantially today as per Option 3(a) and then reinstating higher standards in the future if
the demands on a floor areabasis do increase over the existing ratios. Under Option 4, the
location and magnitude of the development would dictate thk need for additional public
parking
j.
I
Downtown Bronte
5.5.3
Both from a By-law and operational perspective with respect to parking, Downtown Bronte
is simpler thaneither Downtown Oakville, or the Ken Street Business District. Most of the
commercial lands are currently zoned C3R and there are no exemptions from the parking
provisionsspecified in the By-law. The Town does not @perateany parking lots or
structures, although on-street parking is available. The users 'are not charged for parking.
The desire of the BIA is to continue to not charge for parking.:
.
.
Issues identified by Downtown.Bronte stakeholders included the rate of new development,
the needforadditionalhandicappedparking,and
the impact:on the adjacent residential
community
caused
by
waterfront
and
special
events parkhg demands.
Since
new.
development is required to provide parking in accordance with 'the current By-law standards
and unlessa site specific amendment is sought, this shouldnotplaceaburden
on the
municipality to provide parking for these uses. (Where a variance to the requirements is
sought, theburdenis
on the applicant toprovethat
this willnotresultinaparking
shortfall.).
With respect to handicapped
parking, designating on-street spaces for the handicapped
is not
an appropriate approach in that opening a car door into oncoming traffic for a handicapped
driver can pose a more hazardous situation simply due to the time involved in entering and
leaving the vehicle. In the case of a handic'apped passenger, curbs pose an impediment. If
additional handicappedspaces are generally requiredin Downtdwn Bronte, then they should
be provided in off-street parking lots, or garages. For example, whenan application is being
reviewed under site plan approval, the applicant can be requested to provide additional
handicapped spacesin an appropriate location. Also, ifthe Town builds a public parking lot
in Downtown Brontethen spaces can be designated for handicapped parking.
The matter of special event and recreational parking is beyond the scope of the subject
study.Parkingrequirements are typicallybased on day-to-dayrequirements,not on the
in
basis of those demands which may only occur several times per year, thus resulting
excess parking for themajority of the year.
As noted, Downtown Bronte is different than the other two commercial areas considered
herein since it does not provideany exemptions. From that perspective it can be viewedas
aninequality.Several
options were developed and assessedwithrespecttoparking
in
DowntownBronte in the future,includingthematter
of equality.Theseoptionsare
as
follows:
Option 1
Status quo (i.e. continue to require parking in accordance with standards
set out in the Zoning By-law).
Page 70 of 88
Option 2
Reduce and simplify the parking standards to reflect the observed peak
parking demand (2.78 spaces per100 m2or one space per 36 m2of floor
area) to be applied equally to all commercial irses.
Option 3
Exempt restaurant uses.
Require other commercial uses to provide parking in accordance with the
By-law standards.
Option 4
.
0
Exempt restaurant uses.
Require' other commercial uses to :provide paiking in accordance with a
reduced requirement of 2.78 spaces per 100 mzor one space per36 m2 of
floor area.
.
Option 5
Exempt all commercial uses.
Town to address parking needs.
Introduce fees for parking.
Under Options 1 through 5 the opportunity also exists to also introduce on-street paid parking, at
least on a trial basis.
The assessment of the options presented is detailed in Table 39.
Table 39
Assessment of Parking Supply Options Related to Downtown Bronte
Consideration
Equality
Potential
Impacts on
Municipal
Parking
Requirements1
costs
I
Option
3
Equality
between uses
in Bronte but
not between
Bronte and
Downtown
Oakville
Equality
between uses
in Bronte but
not between
Bronte and
Downtown
Oakville
Nil
Nil
Limited Support Slight
for
(somewhat
Redevelopment
reduced
standards)
Inequality
between uses
in Bronte as
well as
between
Bronte and
Downtown
Oakville
Likely
minimal
restaurant
uses)
4
Inequality
between uses
in Bronte and
between
Bronte and
Downtown
Oakville
Likely
minimal
5
Equality between
uses and with
Downtown
Oakville
Potentially
extensive
i
Town of Oakville Parking S~u+
Page 75 of 88
area (1 space per 40.4 m2) and 4.5 spaces per 1000 ft2 of occupied grcm leasable area (1 space per
28.1m2). For community shopping centres the parking demands were found to rangewidely
between 1.3 spaces per 1,000 ftz of occupied gross leasable area (1 space per 71.5 m2) to 6.3 spaces
per 1000 ft2 occupied gross leasable area (1 space per 14.7 m2), with !he average being 3.7 spaces
per 1000 fl? (1 space per 25.1 m2).
For shopping centres of less than 400,000 f? (37,160'm2) the study recommended a standard of 4.0
spacesper 1000 f t 2 ofgross leasable area (1 space per 23.2m2), issuming thattherestaurant,
entertainment and/or cinema uses occupy up to 10 percent of the floor*ea. For each percent above
10 percent to 20 percent, the parlung requirements increase by 0.03 spaces per 1000 f?. Over 20
percent restaurant, entertainment andor cinemas space, shared paiking provisions need to be
considered.
-
For shopping centres of between 400,000 f? (37,160 m2) and599,999.p (55,740 m2), a proportional
gliding scale would apply of between 4.0 spaces per 1000 ftz ( €space per 23.2 m2) and 4.5 spaces
per 1000 ft? (1 space per 20.6 m2). Again the same adjustments would need to be made with respect
to the proportion of the floorarea which is devoted to restaurant, entertainment and/or cinema space.
For shopping centres of 600,000 ft2 (55,740 m2) or greater, the basic parking requirement is 4.5
spaces per 1000 ft2 of gross leasable area (1 space per 20.6 m2), with ,no .adjustment for restaurant,
entertainment andor cinema space, until it represents more .than20 percent of the floor area.
6.4
Assessment.
.
Smaller shopping centres tend to generate a lower demand for parking on an equivalent floor area
basis than larger shopping centres, (although traffic generation tends to be higher). This is'because
the parkers stay for a shorter time,with the same parking space turning over a number of times over
the course of the day (e.g. visit to a convenience store, versus to a department store). Also, small
plazasor shopping ccntresdo not experience the same peaking in parking demands around
Christmas time, but rather they tend to have more consistent parking demands throughout th,e year.
Parking standards for municipalities such as Oakville and Markham are.reflection of this.
Oakville's standards forlocal shopping centres are a bithigherthantheUrbanLandInstitute
average rate findings for neighbourhood shopping centres, but fall within the range found in their
study for this size of shopping centre. Theyare also close to the Urbari LandInstitute recommended
standard for shopping centresunder 400,000 ft2 (37,160 m2)in size. If secondfloorusesare
included, they tend to be office rather than retail uses and have a lower demand for parlung on a
floor area basis than the retail uses. Lower level uses also tend to have a lower demand for parking
than those on the main level.
Unless Oakville is finding that restaurant uses are occupying a disproportionate amount of the total
floor area in local shopping centres, with the parking demand spilling over onto the adjacent streets
or onto other sites, then the recommendation wouldbe to retain the current parking requirements for
C1 (local shopping centre) uses.
If restaurant and related uses suchbars
as are found to occupy a disproportionate amount of the floor
space in local shopping centres, then Oakville should consider adopting theULIrecommended
standard of one space per 23.2 m2, with the adjustment for restaurants :uses above10 percent, being
an additional0.03 spaces per 1000 ftz for each percent above 10 percent.
Page 76 of 88
For community shopping centres Oakville's higher requirement of one space for every 18 m2 of
ground floor leasable area is again reasonable but somewhat higher than the average requirement
recommended in the Urban Land Institute study for the community shopping centre category. It
falls in line with Markham's standard of one space per 18.5 mz of gross leasable floor area, for
shopping centres of greater than 2500 m2. It is marginally lower than Burlington's requirements for
retail centres.
Since community shopping centres are larger than local shopping centres, there is less llkelihood
that a larger proportion of the floor space would be occupied by restaurants and entertainment uses/
cinemas, but this may not always be the case. Again, if the current parking requirements do not
appear to be causing any problems at the community shopping centre level, then their current
standards should bc retained. However, if a disproportionate amount of the floor area is being
devoted to these uses, then consideration should be given to adopting the Urban Land Institute
standards.
.
.
For the most part developers tend to meet orto exceed the parking standards specified in the Zoning
By-laws since they require adequate parking -to lease the floor space and to address the lease
commitments. However, problems may occur in small local centres or strip malls where parking
may be limited, combined with a disproportionate amount of floor spact devoted to restaurant uses.
Town of Oakviile Parking Study
Page 77 of88
I,
i:
I’
7.0
PAYMENT-IN-LIEU OF PARKING
!.
1:
7.1
Purpose
I
’,
ti,
f
Typically payment-in-lieu,or cash-in-lieu of parking is used to providirelief from the provisions of
the Zoning By-law, by allowing for cash payments in lieu of providing parking on the site whereit
is required. It has generally been meant for applications in Downto* settings where a building
occupies much, if notall, of a site and where a change in use, or minor.expansion, triggers the need
for additional parking which cannot be met unless the site is redevel6ped and parking is provided
below grade.
I
7.2
Considerations
.
-
.
%.
- .
For payment-in-lieu to be effective the following considerationsneed tgbe kept in mind:
0
.
.
A clearly writtenandunderstoodpolicythat is viewed as being fair.
The availability of public parking in the area, or a reasonable expectation that public
parking willbeprovidedin
the area. It is pointless‘to offerpayment-in-lieuof
parking in areas ofthemunicipalitywhere
the municipality does notprovide
parking, or intend to provide parking.
A fair payment-in-lieu charge,thatisneither onerous .for the applicant,norwhich
undervalues the cost ofproviding the parkingby the mhcipality.
.:
Where some, or all, users in an area are exempt from the provision osparking, clearly payment-in‘4.
lieu is not applicable.
!
Where payment-in-lieu charges are viewed as being excessive, some applicants seek relief through
minor variances before the Committee of Adjustment, rather than pay
$ e x costs.
Entirely newdevelopment is typically requiredto meet the By-lawrequirements on-site, albeit there
may be additional costs associated with for example, going another level below grade to achieve
this. In contrast, such options are typically not available in the casq of the reuse of an existing
building, or an addition to an existing building.
7.3
Current Oakville Payment-in-lieu Provisions
1
Currently payment-in-lieu is available for sites, which are, zoned C3R.under the Town’s policy on
“Parking Exemption Requirements under Section 40 of the Planning’.Act.” This would apply to
Downtown Oakville, the Ken- Street Business District and Downtown Bronte, although the Town
does not operate any off-street parking facilities in Downtown Bronte. 1:
Inconsidering applications for parking exemptions(i.e.payment-in-lieu),thefollowingaspccts
would be examined bystaff
0
The circumstances leading to the report for the exception!ke.g. the site restrictions that
would preclude meeting the parking standards onthe site].
I
Page 78 of 88
0
7.4
.
The availability of nearby parking. (As noted, both Downtown Oakville and the Ken
Business District have municipally operated parking facilities, whereas Downtown
Bronte does not).
Whether the project is in keeping with Official Plan goals such as:
o
Encouraging improvement and rehabilitation of older areas of the community in
a coordinated manner.
o
Protecting heritage buildings orfeatures.
o
Protecting designated EnvironmentalProtection Areas.
Experiences of Other Municipalities
Althoughmany municipalities do havepayment-in-lieuprovisions,theytend
to see limited
application. For exmple.even within the City of Toronto there are only about 12 requestsmually,
period. Insomecases the
withtheCity of Kitchener applying it onlyoncewithina10year
provisions may bein place, but have never been applied.
’
Most municipalities permit payment-in-lieu only in specific areas, for’example in their Downtown
cores only, or in other commercial roads as well where municipal parking is available. The City of
Mississauga is the exception with a City-wide policy in place. However even there are only four
payment-in-lieu accounts have been established in the B/A areas of PortCredit,,Clarkson,
StreetsvilleandCooksville.When
assessing whether to allowpayment-in-lieu of parking,
Mississaugaconsiders factors such aswhetherthe
site hasphysicalconstraintswhichwould
preclude addressing all of the requirements on site, whether surplus public parking is available in
site.
the area, and whether the proposal is not considered to be over development of the
Generally, payment-in-lieuis applied only to commercialand/or other employment based uses,(i.e.,
nonresidential uses), however some municipalities such as Calgary
apply it to all uses.
7.5
Fees/Applications
Some municipalities such as Kitchener and Calgary have established flat payment-in-lieu charges
(e.g.$20,000inDowntown
Kitchener or Calgary). Others however, such as Mississauga, have
detailedformulafor
calculating the payment-in-lieu fees. In Mississaugathepayment-in-lieu
charge is calculated as follows:
For change in land use, or the conversion of an existing building .or structure or part thereof,
12.5 percent of the estimated cost of parking spaces is charged where the gross floor area
equals or is less than 50 m2, equating to a payment the
in range of $883 to $1,255, depending
on the area.
0
0
For change in land use, or the conversion of an existing building or structure, or part thereof,
with gross floor area exceeding 50 m2 butequal or less than 200 m2,25percent of the
estimated cost of parking spaces, equating to a payment in the range of $1,766 to $2,510,
depending on the area.
For change in land use, or the conversion of an existing building or structure or part therefore,
to
with gross floor areaexceeding 200 m2 or new developments, redevelopments, or additions
existing buildings and structures, 25 percent of the estimatedcost of parking spaces, equating
to a payment inthe range of $3,532 to $5,020, depending
on the area.
.
,
Page 79 of 88
!;
In the former City of Hamilton separate formulae wereestablishedit’forsurface and multi-level
parking, with half of the cost borne by the applicant, and half by the municipality. In Niagara-onthe-Lake the fees were established at $13,397.00 as at January, 2003. .,
Generally, both the costs of constructing the parking as well as the land costs are considered inthe
calculations.
In most municipalities the payment-in-lieu is paid as a lump sum. Oakville is unique in that regard,
whereby the charge is applied on a monthly basis. This monthly license cost per space is based on
the yearly revenue of a municipal parkingspace in the surrounding area, which is then pro-ratedto a
monthly licensing rate. For example in the case of the “T-Bone Grille” in the Ken Street Business
District’a monthly rate of $131.95 was established torun for a 5 year period ending in August,2009,
with respect to a 16 space deficiency. However, Council may at its .discretion establish a lower
monthly parking charge. For example in the case of t6e “Twisted Fork Restaurant” application
dealing with a 13 space deficiency in Downtown Bronte a 4 year lease term was established at an
annual cost of only $1.00 per space. This nominal fee was establishedinrecognitionthatno
revenue is currently collected for parlanginDowntownBronte,
wGth noplans to implement
charging for parking during the period of this licensing agreement.
:
?.
In Oakville as in most other municipalities, the fees collected for payment
in-lieu are relatively
<,
small and contribute very little to the overall parking revenues.
7.6
Assessment
Oakville’s approach to payment-in-lieu of parking is for the most part aieasonable one in that:
e
e
It only applies to C3R lands in Downtown Oakville, the kerr Street Business District
and Downtown Bronte. (As noted, in most of Downtoqn Oakville commercial uses
are exempt, so payment-in-lieuisnotrequired.)
::
Itrequiresmunicipallyoperatedparking
to be available in that area.
It requires that the application be in keeping with goals outlined in the Official Plan.
e
It applies only to existingbuildingsandcircumstances,ratherthan’newbuilding
construction.
e
The requirements as
set
out
through
a licence agreement
which
establishes
monthly charge, are less onerous thanan upfront lumps b payment.
a
As municipal parking facilities are extended into other parts of Oakville over time, consideration
should be given to extending payment-in-lieu options to those areas as well, again under specific
circumstances.
Downtown Bronte is somewhat of ananomaly today, as demonstrated by the “Twisted Fork
Restaurant” application. This application was approved at a nominal :cost of $1.00 per space per
year, notwithstanding the fact that the Town does not operate any ,off-street public parking in
Downtown Bronte. When the application is up for renewal in July 2907,consideration should be
Page 80 of 88
given to requiring a monthly fee, which would help to off-set part of the cost of constructing some
off-street municipal in this area. A demand exists for additional parking in this vicinity.
Page 81 of 88
1
8.0
PARKING RATESAND FINES
8.1
Parking Rates
i
Currently the parking rates for the 14 municipal lots range from $OSd,.per hour to $1.00 per hour.
Monthly permits are available on four of these lots and range from $16.05 per hour to $58.85 per
hour. There are four lots with lower hourly rates ($0.50 per hour) andthese are located in areasthat
are not "prime locations" such as in the vicinity of Water Street and the one municipal lot in the
Kerr Street BusinessDistrict. The lots with higher parking ratesare located closer to prime
commercial area in Downtown Oakville, which is the area from NavyStreet to Allan Street.
For comparisonpurposes
parking rate information for downtow- was obtained for other
downtowns. These includc the City of St. Catharines, the City of Kitchener, the Cityof London, the
City of Burlington, the City of Hamilton, the City of Mississauga and.'the Townof Niagara-on-the
Lake. The municipal parking is free in the City of Mississauga. A 'comparison of the range of
parking rates is shown in Table 40.
Table 40
Comparison of Parking Rates
By no means is thc listing of rates for other municipalitiesexhaustive,but it does provide a
reasonable basis of comparison. The hourly rates are comparable, but perhaps on the low side in
Oakville. Consideration could be given to raising them marginally (eg. by$.25 per hour). The daily
rates are also within the same ranges as those for the other municipalities, however the minimum
monthly rates in Oakville are lower than those in each of the municipalities noted. Consideration
should be given to raising the monthly rates.
A delicate balanceexistsin establishing parking rates. At minimumtherateschargedneedto
recoup the operating costs and they should also recoup the capital costs. In some municipalities
they also allow for surpluses which are then dedicated in whole or in part to reservefunds for future
parking endeavors. Thus when a new parking facility must be constructed, funds within the reserve
f h d s can be drawn upon, ratherthan relying on the general tax base.
Equally important to the above noted considerations is the matter of parking rates being used as a
strategy to achieve other policy objectives. As long as the cost of monthly parking is less than the
cost of a monthly transit pass,it is difficult to convince those who havea choice as to mode, to take
Page 82 of 88
public transit rather than driving. Thus higher monthly parking rates can be used to help encourage
drivers to shift to public transit andforcarpooling.
8.2
Time Periods
The hours of operation of municipal parking lots in the Town of Oakville are generally Monday
through Saturday from 9:OO a.m. until 5:OO p.m. or 600 p.m. Three of the lots in the vicinity of
Water Street do not chargc for parking onSaturday. The only exception in termsof the time of day
operation is the Parkade on the south side of Church Street between Trafalgar Road and Reynolds
Street, which operates from 5:OO a.m. until 9:00 p.m.
The hours of operation for Oakville were compared tothose for the cities and towns listed in Table
40. Generally hours of operation are similar to those in the Town of Oikville. The typical hours of
operation for most lots are from Monday to Friday (or Saturday) from 8:OO or 9:OO a.m. to 5:OO or
6:OO.p.m. However, there are exceptions and some of them are listed below:
Library - Lot 4,85 Queen Street North, City of Kitchener wherethe hours of operation are from
8:OO a.m. to 9:OO p.m.
Green Street - Lot 12, 787 King Street West, Cityof Kitchener where the hours of operation are
from 4:OO p.m. to 12 midnight from September to June and fiom 8:OO a.m. to 12 midnight from
July to August.
Three parking garages in the City of Kitchener which have extended hours of operation, with
two of them operating24 hours a day.
. Most lots in the City of Burlington wherevehicles can park throughout the entire day, except for
overnight parking (2:OO a.m. to 9:OO a.m.).
Based on the above comparison, the Town of Oakville is in line with other municipalities in terms
of hours of operation. However the Town may wish to consider extending paid parkingto the lots
in the vicinity of Water Streetto include Saturdays, in orderto get higher turnoveron these lots.
The Town may also wish to. consider extending paid parking until 9 p.m. The benefits are the
potential for increased turnover, particularly in the areas
of highestdemand. This couldalso be used
to help h n d future parking endeavors if these fimds were to be set aside in a reserve fund. The
disadvantage is thatenforcementwouldneed
to be extendedintotheeveningsaswell,likely
necessitating additional enforcementofficers.
8.3
Fines
The Town of Oakville Parking By-Law
- Violations - Table 2 includes 59 parking violations, with
fines ranging from $8.00 to $300.00. A comparison of finesin Oakville ascomparedtoother
municipalities for some of the more common
violations is listed in Table 41.
Town ofoakville Parking Stu+
Page 83 of 88
Table 41
Comparison of Parking Fines
Parking Mehe
Parking
Within
1
Metre of Driveway
Parked
Vehicles
Obstructing Snow
Removal
Stopped
Near
a
Crosswalk
. Stopped
Near
a
Signalized
Intersection
Stopped 1 Parked
Near a Fire Hyh-ant
Parked in a
Designated
Handicapped
Parked in a
Designated
Fire
Route
Parked
Wrong
Way
on a Street
-.
$30
I
I
$20
$20
$30
$30
$30
$40
I
$18$20
$50 to
$75
$35 to
$50
I
I
$20
$40
$20
$300
$300
$300
$50
I
$300
$20
$20
where Prohibited
$300
$25
$40
$75
$25
$300to
$300to$300
$30
1 1 1 1 1
$80
$75
$20
$35 to
$50
$30
$20
$50
to
$40
$35 to
$75
$30
$25
$20 to
$35
$25
,
$35.
$20 to
$30
$20 to
$30
$75
to
$100
$20 to
$25
$15 to
$20
Note:
(1) The tines vary depending on how soon after the infractions they are paid
Based on the parkingfines information shown in Table 41 the parking fines in the Town of Oakville
would appear in general to be similar to the ones in the other towns and cities noted. The one
exception is the low finefor‘‘Parlung at an Expired Parking Metre” of $8.00 wherethefines
typically range from $12 to $20 in the other municipalities noted. The Town may wish to consider
increasing the fine for this typical parking violation.
Town of Oakville Parking Smdy
Page 84 of 88
9.0
OTHER PARKING RELATED MATTERS
9.1
Recreational and Special Event Parking DemandAccommodation
Although the identification and assessment of recreational and special event parking needs was not
within the mandate of this study, it washowevernotedas
an issue, specifically in the Bronte
Harbour area adjacent toDowntown Bronte. The recreational and specialevent parking was noted to
be more of an issue than thatrelated to the commercial uses in
of Downtown Bronte.
Parks such as those along the lakefront tend to bemostheavily used onweekendsduring the
summer, with the parking demands related to special events such as festivals or fire works being
especially high.
Clearly day-to-day parking.demands need to be met, usually through a combination of on-site and
on-street parking. Shared usearrangements, which can take advantage6f surplus parking elsewhere
in the area, are preferred, in that this is the most effective use of parking. For example, office uses
require parking during the day Monday to Friday, whereas recreational and. special event parking
needs are concentrated on weekends, and in the evenings. This has allowed major attractions such
as the Skydome (now theRogers Centre) to be built withvirtually no pkking on site. Opportunities
for office and recreational shared parking are limited at the moment iii Downtown Bronte, but do
exist in Downtown Oakville. In Downtown Bronte it would be deshable to site a new parking
facility which canserve predominantly business needs duringthe day, and recreational needs in the
evenings.
For special events which onlyoccur a handhl of times duringthe year,' it is not reasonable totry to
address these parking needs in the immediate area, just as it is not reasonable to meet the parking
..
demands at regional shopping centres at Christmas.
For these occasional events, arrangements can be made withother uses,in the area, which may have
'surplus parking available at that time, for example schoolsites, churches and shopping centres. Due
to the concentration of vehicles within a localized area, consideration should also begiven to
making arrangements with a large shopping centre, or with industrial uses with significant surplus
parking available outside of the area where the event is being held. Shuttle busses can then be
operated between the remote parking lots and the event site. This can help to minimize the traffic
impacts on the localized area,including or the residentsof this area.
9.2
LiveWork
Units
Live-work units are a relatively new form of development, allowing the resident or residentsof the
unittocarry on a business from their homelocation. This has two key transportationrelated
advantages:
0
0
Since residents bothliveandwork at the same location, they do notgeneratework
related trips between their place of residence and place of employment during the
roadway peak periods.
Theyoccupy the same parkingspace throughout theday,ratherthanrequiring
a
parking space at their place of residence andanother at @eir placeof employment.
Page 85 of 88
Live-work units have been approved and constructed in Oakville, in both the Kerr Business District
andinDowntown Bronte. Thesehavebeen required to provide two parking spaces for each
residential units. Under the current Zoning provisions theunitswouldhave
been required to
provide one parking space per 28 m2 of Leasable Floor area for the commercial uses. However,
reductions in the commercial parking requirements have been granted in these cases recognizing
that:
0
0
The residents already have two parking spaces on thesite
and would
not
be
generating a work related parking demand as they would if their place of
employment was situated elsewhere.
On-street parking adjacent to the unit can address part of the parking demand.
A
As noted, live-work units are a relatively new phenomenon. Like Oakville, other municipalities are
still trying to establish the most appropriate parking standards for these units. For example, the City
of Toronto is in the process of undertaking a comprehensive review of all parlung standards, as part
of the Zoning By-law consolidation and update. Parking standards related to live-work units will be
addressed in this new By-law. In the interim the City is applying the applicable residential parking
requirements for that area to the residential component of the live-work unit. For the employment
based component of the unit, the City is simply applying a slightly higher visitor parking
requirement than what it would normally apply..
, .
..
.
In Oakville’s circumstances the requirement to provide two parking spaces per residential unit is a
reasonable one, given that it conforms to the general provisions. Tandem parking is acceptable in
this circumstance.
It also makes imminent sense to reduce the parking requirements for the commercial component of
theproject since the primary “employees” (i.e. the residents themselves), already have parking
available on the site. There may or may not be other employees. If a second person in the
household has a vehicle and works elsewhere during the day,.then the potential exists for.an outside
employee working in the live-work unit to park in that space.
Visitor parking requirements would likely be more fi-equent than in the case of simply residential
visitors, but thc demands would tend to be complementary (e.g. visitors to the work component of
the unit occurring primarily during the day or weekdays, and to the residential compongmt of the unit
primarily in the evenings).
As noted, the overall parking demands related’to non-residential users were found to be:
0
1 space per 33 m2in Downtown Oakville
0
I space per 70 m2 in the Kerr Business District
0
1 space per 36 m2 in Downtown Bronte
On an overall basis this works out to be 1 space per 46 m2.However, this is influenced by the low
Kerr Business District rate. If only the Bronte and Downtown Oakville rates are averaged, this
works out to be 1 space per 34.5 m2.
Page 86 of 88
As indicated, partof parking demand is already addressedby the residential parking available
on the
site. The expectation is that this would address at least half of the non-residential parking demand.
Thus, it would be reasonable to require the balance (1 space per 69 m2) of the parking demand
associated with the non-residential floor area, to be provided on site. This is very close to the
1
spaceper 70 m2inthe
Kerr BusinessDistrict.Thisnon-residentialparkingcanaddressthe
residential visitor parking demands as well, since the two demands tend to be complementary. The
applicant should also be encouraged to create new on-street parking spaces, if none currently exist
along the block face,if on-street parking can be achievedwithout jeopardising the other functionsof
the street. On-street parking is viewed as being convenient. It also helds to achieveother objectives
suchastrafficcalming.
Consideration shouldbegiven to reducingtheon-sitenon-residential
parking requirements, if new on-street parking is being created, however this needs to be evaluated
individually on a site specific basis.
9.3
&-Street
OptionsParking
On-street parking is typically accommodated in
0
.
.
one of three ways:
j:
*
As part of a wider pavement width whereby 2.5 metres of the pavement next to the
curb is designated for on-streetparking throughout the'day.
Provisionofthe
curb side travel lane for parking d&ngnon-peakperiodswhen
those lanes are not required fortravel.
Parking in bays adjacent to the outside travel'lanes.
'.
,
The provision of a wider pavementwidth which includes permanent pavementfor parking may be a
suitablesolutionwheretheon-streetparking
demands are heavythroughouttheday,including
during the roadway a.m. and p.m. peak periods. Drainage and maintenance are relatively simple
since the water flows into the same catch basins and the parking area is swept and ploughed at the
same time as the rest of the roadway, provided there are not vehicles parked there. However, this
option can result in excessivelywide pavements, with no landscaping or street M t u r e to break up
these long rows of parking.
The reallocationof the curb lanes to on-street parking during non-peak periods is the most efficient
use of the roadway pavement width,provided that the adjacent businesses can makedo without this
parkingduring the roadway peak periods. This often ends up being a contentiousissuewith
adjacent businesses, where the municipality requires this pavement as a travel lane, whereas the
businesses view thisas a loss of the most convenient parking. In areas where the traffic flows tend
to be more uni-directional, one option has been
to still permit on-street'parking during peak periods,
along the one side of the street where the traffic is substantially lighterf: For example, if the traffic
is predominantly eastbound in the a.m. peak hour and predominantly -westbound in the p.m. peak
period, then on-street parking may be provided westboundin the a.m. peak period and eastboundin
the p.m. peak period. The sharing of the curb lane for on-street parking during non-peak periodsof
thedaycanalsocreateoperationalissueswhereby
even one vehicleparked in thecurblane
effectively createsa bottleneck, thus, forcing drivers to merge into the through lane.
Parking in bays which are specifically constructed for that purpose has advantages in that it results
in discreet pavement widenings, rather than a continuous widening. These bays can be separated
by
landscaping andor street fbmiture, so as to create an attractive streetscape.Therearehowever
additional costs as well as challenges, for example related to drainage, street sweeping and snow
,
.
Town of Oakvilie Parking Study
Page 87 of 88
clearance. By necessity, the parking yield is also less than if parking is simply permitted along the
entire length of the block. Also, the parking bay cannotbe readily used periodicallyas a travel lane
if need be, for example by emergency vehicles.
Which of the three options is selected is dependent upon the circumstances. Generally speaking,
the
latter two options are preferred tothe first optionsincethey makti moreeffectiveuse of the
pavement and do notcreate excessively wide pavements, which may encourage speeding. They can
also result in more attractive streetscapes, in the case of the parking in bays which is interspersed
with landscaping.
J:\2004jobs\l6-04060.GKS\Final
Report\March 2006\Town of Oakville Final Report - April 20,2006 (Clean) .doc
..
From:
Planning
Services
Department
April 25,2006
Date:
Subject: Town of OakvilleCommercialParkingStudy
Page 19 of 19
Appendix B
Study Area Maps
I
r-l
PL
Li
SQlONh3iI
m
N
r-
E
NNilQ
NNna
I.
tW
E
,T J
bi
SWYOHI
L
inIL
n
MVN
I
._L.Y.
.,.#.z,
...,
Marshall
Macklin
Monaghan
..:,,q%F...z.,n.*,
.....
U.l(?
2
Zone
J:\20Mjobs\l6-04060.GKS\Reporls\Fi~l
Repor(Ulgures\Figure3 -Ares 2 1nventory.cdr
m--
FIGURE 3
Parking Inventory
264

report - Oakville

Transcription

Similar documents

Scanned Document - Covenant Health

Ref: SB0160 Sun and Mountains Near the Sea, Busot Alicante

Ah-Nab-Awen Park - City of Grand Rapids

Directions to UCSD Extension K-12 Facility Located at: 6256

BRP Flyer - III_13-ENG.indd

2001 4118 Dawson Street, Burnaby

Flämingstrasse

AA Map - Mother`s Day 5K

Schottenstein Center

Unit 413, 121 Woodbridge Ave, Vaughan L4L