1987 Regional Center Parking Study - City of Indianapolis, Indiana
Click HERE for graphic.
Click HERE for graphic.
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-1
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SCOPE OF STUDY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
STUDY AREA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PREVIOUS REPORTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PARKING IN THE MILE-SQUARE 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
PARKING SUPPLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
PARKING UTILIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
PARKING DEMAND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Land Use Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Parking Demand Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
PARKING ADEQUACY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
PARKING CONDITIONS, AUGUST 1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
MILE-SQUARE FUTURE PARKING CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
FUTURE LAND USE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
PROJECTED PARKING SUPPLY, 1992. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
PROJECTED PARKING DEMAND, 1992. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
PROJECTED PARKING ADEQUACY, 1992. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
SUB-AREA ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
MILE-SQUARE FRINGE AREA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
MERIDIAN STREET CORRIDOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
Parking Supply and Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
Land Use and Parking Demand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Parking Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
HISTORIC DISTRICTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Lockerbie Square . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Chatham-Arch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Parking Utilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
IUPUI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
WHITE RIVER PARK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
HOOSIER DOME/CONVENTION CENTER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND CONTROLS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
CITY ORDINANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Central Business District Zoning Ordinance . . . . . . .34
Commercial Zoning Ordinance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
License and Business Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . .37
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
PARKING FOR THE HANDICAPPED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
Indianapolis Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE CHANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
PARKING POLICY ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
PRICING TACTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
ENFORCEMENT AND ADJUDICATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
MARKETING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
ON-STREET SUPPLY TACTICS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
OFF-STREET SUPPLY TACTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
BENEFITS OF PARKING MANAGEMENT TACTICS. . . . . . . . . . . .48
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1: Mile-Square Parking Supply, 1987. . . . . . . . .ES-1
Figure 2: Parking Occupancy By Zone . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-3
Figure 3: Parking Adequacy, January 1987. . . . . . . . . .ES-5
Figure 4: Projected Parking Adequacy, 1992. . . . . . . . .ES-7
Figure 5: Mile-Square Parking Supply vs. Demand . . . . . .ES-7
Figure 6: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Supply . . . . .ES-8
Figure II-1: Parking Supply, January 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure II-2: Parking Occupancy, January 1987 . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure II-3: On-Street Hourly Occupancy, January 1987. . . . . . 8
Figure II-4: Average On-Street Occupancy, January 1987 . . . . . 8
Figure II-5: Average Length of Stay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Figure II-6 On-Street Parking Turnover Rate . . . . . . . . . .10
Figure II-7 Employee and Customer Driving Percentage. . . . . .11
Figure II-8: Employee Density Per 1000 Square Feet of Gross
Floor Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Figure II-9: Distance Walked After Parking . . . . . . . . . . .11
Figure II-10: Maximum Distance Would Walk After Parking . . . . .11
Figure II-11: Parking Demand by Land Use Type and Zone, 1987. . .13
Figure II-12: 1987 Parking Adequacy With Perimeter Parking. . . .15
Figure III-1: Future Parking Supply, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Figure III-2: Future Parking Demand By Land Use Type. . . . . . .20
Figure III-3: Future Parking Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Figure III-4: Mile-Square Parking Supply vs. Demand . . . . . . .22
Figure IV-1: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Supply . . . . . .25
Figure IV-2: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Occupancy,
June 1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Figure IV-3: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Demand By
Land Use Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
Figure IV-4: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Adequacy . . . . .26
Figure IV-5: Historic Neighborhoods On-Street Parking
Occupancy, June 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page iv
LIST OF MAPS
Page
Map 1: Indianapolis Regional Center. . . . . . . . . . .ES-2
Map I-1: Indianapolis Regional Center. . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Map II-1: Parking Supply, 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Map II-2: Observed Parking Occupancy. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Map II-3: Parking Duration And Turnover Sample. . . . . . . . 9
Map II-4: Parking Adequacy, 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Map III-1: Future Parking Supply, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . .19
Map III-2: Future Parking Adequacy, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . .21
Map IV-1: Mile-Square Fringe Area Parking . . . . . . . . . .24
Map IV-2: Meridian Street Corridor Parking Adequacy . . . . .27
Map IV-3: Historic Neighborhood District. . . . . . . . . . .29
Map V-1: Central Business District Zones In The
Mile-Square . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
Map VI-1: Monthly and Reserved Parking Rates. . . . . . . . .43
Map VI-2: Average Daily Parking Rates . . . . . . . . . . . .44
Map VI-3: Average Hourly Parking Rates. . . . . . . . . . . .45
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE 1: Parking Adequacy, 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . .ES-5
TABLE 2: Future Parking Adequacy, 1992 . . . . . . . . . .ES-6
TABLE II-1: Parking Adequacy, 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
TABLE III-1: Future Parking Conditions, 1992 . . . . . . . . . .20
TABLE V-1: Recommended Parking Dimensions. . . . . . . . . . .36
TABLE VI-1: Potential Impacts Of Parking Management Tactics . .49
TABLE VI-2: Public Sector Parking Development Alternatives. . .50
TABLE VI-3: Private Sector Parking Development Alternatives . .52
TABLE VI-4: Comparison Of Alternatives. . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page v
APPENDIX
Page
Table A-1: Parking Supply, January, 1987 . . . . . . . . . . A-1
Table A-2a: Off-Street Occupancy, December, 1986. . . . . . . A-4
Table A-2b: Off-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
North Quadrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-5
Table A-2c: Off-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
South Quadrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6
Table A-2d: Off-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
State Capitol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-7
Table A-3a: On-Street Occupancy, December, 1986 . . . . . . . A-8
Table A-3b: On-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
North Quadrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-9
Table A-3c: On-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
South Quadrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-10
Table A-3d: On-Street Spot Occupancy, January, 1987 -
State Capitol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-11
Table A-4a: On-Street Hourly Occupancy, January, 1987 -
Areas A and B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-12
Table A-4b: On-Street Hourly Occupancy, January, 1987 -
Areas C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-13
Table A-4c: On-Street Hourly Occupancy, January, 1987 -
Areas E and F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-14
Table A-4d: On-Street Hourly Occupancy, January, 1987 -
Areas G and H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-15
Table A-5a: On-Street Duration and Turnover Summary -
Areas A and B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-16
Table A-5b: On-Street Duration and Turnover Summary -
Areas C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-17
Table A-5c: On-Street Duration and Turnover Summary -
Areas E and F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-18
Table A-5d: On-Street Duration and Turnover Summary -
Areas G and H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-19
Table A-6: Customer and Employee Interview Summary . . . . .A-20
Table A-7: Primary Demand Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-22
Table A-8: Estimated Parking Demand, 1987. . . . . . . . . .A-23
Table A-9: Estimated Parking Adequacy, 1987. . . . . . . . .A-26
Table A-10: Future Parking Supply, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . .A-29
Table A-11: Future Parking Demand, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . .A-32
Table A-12: Future Parking Adequacy, 1992 . . . . . . . . . .A-35
Table A-13: Meridian Corridor Parking Supply and
Utilization, 1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-38
Table A-14: Meridian Corridor Parking Demand. . . . . . . . .A-39
Table A-15: Meridian Corridor Parking Adequacy. . . . . . . .A-40
Table A-16: Historic Neighborhoods Parking Supply and
Utilization, 1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-41
Map A-1: Regional Center Block Numbering System. . . . . .A-42
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The downtown areas of most midwestern cities have faced a multitude
of problems in the last 25 years that have caused an erosion or
reversal of the traditional role of the downtown as a center of
activity in the community. Outlying developments, particularly
those with retail, are providing competition. Traffic congestion
and lack of parking are often perceived as reasons to avoid the
downtown.
The downtown area of Indianapolis, Indiana, known as the Regional
Center, has experienced a loss of much of its retail base. A
strong commitment by both local and state leaders has, however,
kept the office sector strong. Moreover, there has been a
reemergence of the Regional Center as a viable residential and
entertainment area. This, in turn, has encouraged a return of
retail activity and the most densely developed section of the
Regional Center--known as the Mile-Square--is once again thriving.
In light of the continued growth and revitalization of the
Indianapolis Regional Center, the City has recognized the need for
an update of the City's parking policies.
WALKER Parking Consultants has been commissioned by the City of
Indianapolis to develop a Regional Center Parking Plan. In order
to develop a truly implementable plan, a comprehensive study of the
parking supply, demand, and adequacy in the entire Mile-Square area
has been conducted. Projections for the future parking needs of
the Mile-Square through 1992 have also been made in accordance with
an agreement dated December 12, 1986. 'Sub-areas' of the Regional
Center which lie outside the Mile-Square have been studied to
determine the interrelationship with Mile-Square parking needs and
concerns and/or any parking problems that require municipal action.
Parking policies have been reviewed and changes that would further
the goals of reducing traffic and congestion and/or encouraging
healthy economic growth have been recommended.
The study area encompasses the area known as the Indianapolis
Regional Center, with the major focus on the Mile-Square area as
illustrated in Map 1. For analysis purposes, the Mile-Square area
has been divided into four quadrants and a State Capitol Zone.
The remaining sections pertain to areas outside the Mile-Square:
the Meridian Street Corridor to the north, the Historic
Neighborhoods to the northeast, IUPUI and White River Park to the
west, and the Hoosier Dome area to the south.
PARKING IN THE MILE-SQUARE, 1987
Parking Supply
An inventory of all on-street and off-street parking in the Mile-
Square was conducted during the month of January, 1987 by WALKER
and city personnel to determine the existing parking supply. The
series of articles "Who Owns the Block" published in the
Indianapolis Business Journal and various downtown maps denoting
parking were used to help verify the field counts. A total parking
supply was established at 35,945 spaces distributed as shown in
Figure 1.
Click HERE for graphic.
-Street parking accounts for 92% of the total supply.
Commercial garages and lots make up about 60% of the off-street
spaces. Private spaces reserved for the parkers of a specific
building or complex make up the remainder of the off-street supply.
About two-thirds of the on-street spaces (which comprise 8%5 of the
total supply) are metered; the remainder are reserved for specific
users such as the police.
Walker Parking Consultants
Click HERE for graphic.
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-3
It is important that the parking supply include a sufficient
"cushion" in excess of the necessary spaces to allow for the
dynamics of vehicles moving in and out of parking stalls and to
reduce the time to search for the last few available spaces. This
cushion also allows for vacancies created by restricting lots to
certain users, misparked vehicles, snow cover, and minor con-
struction. Thus, a supply of parking operates at peak efficiency
when occupancy is 85% to 90%. When occupancy exceeds this level,
there may be delays and frustration in finding a space. The
parking supply may be perceived as inadequate even though there are
spaces available in the system.
As a result, the "effective" parking supply is used for analysis of
the adequacy of the parking system, rather than the total supply or
inventory of spaces. In Indianapolis, downtown employees are the
major parking users. Most of these employees do not search for a
parking space; they park in relatively the same location every day.
They know where to find an available space at a rate they are
willing to pay. Transient parking demand is minimal compared with
the employee need in the area. At the same time, occupancy counts
found that many of the private lots are being underutilized.
Therefore, the "effective" parking supply is assumed to be 75% of
the private surface lot spaces and 95% of all commercial surface
lots and on-street spaces. A factor of 90% has been applied to
private parking structures since the majority of these are for
employees only, and to transient spaces in commercial structures.
Monthly and reserved parking spaces in commercial parking
structures have been considered 100% "effective', due to high
occupancies, as have any state employee lots. These factors
include adjustments for the fact that some parking facilities are
attended or have valet parking and often operate above capacity
(for example, 320 vehicles in 240 marked spaces). Therefore, the
current "effective" parking supply is established at 32,760 parking
spaces. The overall effective supply factor is 91%of the total
supply.
Parking Utilization
Extensive data was collected in order to document the actual
current parking needs of the Mile-Square. Hourly parking
accumulation counts and license plate surveys were conducted in
selected areas to determine parking occupancy, duration, and
turnover levels. The occupancy of all spaces was recorded during
the inventory process. Furthermore, in order to determine the
ability of the supply to meet peak retail needs, occupancy counts
were taken the week before Christmas 1986 in a selected area.
Figure 2 summarizes on-street and off-street occupancy counts which
were taken during December, 1986 and January 1987.
Click HERE for graphic.
A turnover and duration study of short-term parking was conducted
in selected areas. All parking was best utilized between 12:00
noon and 1:00 p.m.
The parking duration, representing the average length of stay per
vehicle, ranged from 0.82 hours in the Northeast Quadrant to 1.91
hours in the area near Union Station. Overall the two-hour time
limit for on-street spaces appears to be sufficient. However, ap-
proximately 15% of the vehicles observed stayed over 2 hours. Some
stayed more than seven hours; this usually indicates that an area
employee is using the space.
Parking turnover represents the average number of vehicles parked
per space throughout the observation period. Turnover is a measure
of utilization that must be used carefully. It reflects the
overall utilization of each space and is quickly affected by low
occupancy; a vacant space is obviously not "turning over".
Turnover rates of 3 to 5 are considered very good, while those
exceeding five are unusually high. The turnover rate observed
ranged from 1.39 times in the Northwest Quadrant to 6.99 times in
the Union Station area.
It has therefore been concluded that the meters with a two-hour
limit are generally serving their intended purpose of providing
short-term convenience parking in areas where retail/entertainment
activity is strong but that there is less need for and more
violation of meters in areas without substantial retail uses.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-4
Parking Demand
Parking demand is defined as the number of spaces which should be
provided for employees, shoppers, and business visitors that park
within the study area. A direct relationship between building use
and the parking demand it generates has been established in many
studies by various disciplines over the years. The parking demand
for the Mile-Square has been calculated by multiplying the square
feet of building space by a "demand ratio" which is the number of
spaces required per 1,000 square feet of generating land use such
as retail, office, etc. The ratios represent a busy day in a peak
month, rather than a true or once a year peak since it would be
unrealistic to expect every tenant and every use in the Mile-Square
to have peak activity on the same day. In order to reasonably
develop parking demand ratios to reflect local conditions, an
extensive analysis of employee and customer needs was conducted.
Surveys determined local employee driving ratios, the number of
employees per 1000 square feet, and captive market adjustments.
The latter factor accounts for patronage of businesses by employees
of other Mile-Square businesses, which do not add to the parking
demand. Parking demand was calculated for a peak daytime need
between noon and 1:00 p.m. December was chosen as the peak month
because of the higher level of retail activity (increased staff and
customer volumes) and decreased usage of alternate modes of
transportation (bus, walk, or bicycle).
Land use information was gathered and compiled for every building
in the Mile-Square. The Indianapolis Business Journal was a major
source for square footage information. Discussions with property
owners and businesses determined the type of use and the breakdown
of uses within a building in terms of the square footage occupied.
A total of 23,945,053 square feet of gross floor area was
identified. A 7.0% vacancy rate has been applied to all office
space where no vacancy information was available.
The existing parking demand for the Mile-Square is estimated to be
37,998 spaces. The average demand ratio for all land uses,
excluding vacant space, is 1.74 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet.
This ratio is reasonable compared to a range of average ratios of
1.3 to 3.0 per 1,000 square feet as calculated by WALKER in recent
years in a number of other midwestern cities.
The total demand equates to 106% occupancy of the existing parking
supply. During the occupancy studies in January of 1987, overall
occupancy was around 90%. However, January would likely represent
a lower demand condition than the assumed peak in December. Also,
no events were taking place at the Hoosier Dome/Convention Center
or at Market Square Arena at the time the data was collected, and
the total demand of 37,998 includes 1,140 spaces for these uses.
Parking Adequacy
Parking adequacy is defined as the ability of the parking supply to
accommodate the parking demand. This is measured by comparing the
total parking demand to the "effective" parking supply. The Mile-
Square area is estimated to have a current deficit of 5,237 spaces
as of January 1987. As seen in Table 1, some zones show large
parking deficits indicating localized parking shortages while
others have a surplus of spaces. It should be recognized that the
deficit (or surplus) is a comparison of the "effective" parking
supply and demand solely within that zone, without consideration of
the use of the spaces in or by neighboring zones. It is also
important to note that many of the surplus spaces are privately-
owned for individual business's employees and customers.
A certain percentage of the total parking demand is satisfied
outside of the study area. An analysis was therefore made of the
usage of spaces outside the Mile-Square by persons with
destinations within the Mile-Square as seen in Table 1.
A deficit of 1,988 parking spaces still exists as of January 1987
in the parking system when perimeter parking is included in the
analysis. It appears that this is a portion of
the"cushion"required to relieve the perception of a shortage of
parking in the system. That is, the parking system is currently
saturated. In order to provide a comfortable parking situation for
all users, this "cushion" must be provided in the system.
It is concluded that as of January 1987 a need for additional spar-
es existed, particularly in the Northeast Quadrant, as illustrated
in Figure 3. The Southwest Quadrant also had a rather large deficit
which is primarily due to the retail area along Illinois Street and
Union Station. However, the Northwest Quadrant shows a surplus of
308 spaces and the State Capitol Zone had a surplus of 656 spaces
which is not available for any other users. The Southeast Quadrant
also shows a surplus of 147 spaces.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-5
Click HERE for graphic.
"Approximately 200 of the 458 commercial spaces in the Meridian
Corridor area north of the Mile-Square are available for Mile-
Square business.
Click HERE for graphic.
As of August 1987, approximately 3,400 more spaces have become
available for use. Approximately 88% of these spaces are for
commercial use. In light of this addition to the parking system
inventoried in January, an update of the parking conditions in the
Mile-Square is also shown in Table 1 for August.
With these new spaces it can be seen that there has been a marked
shift from an overall deficit of nearly 2,000 spaces to a surplus
of about 600 spaces. Parking conditions have substantially
improved in all areas except the State Capitol, where the surplus
has been reduced, and the Northeast Quadrant, where parking
conditions have not been affected.
Such fluctuations must naturally occur when large projects which
either add many spaces or create significant demand are brought on
stream. For example, the August supply includes the new parking
facility at the Pan Am Plaza but several of the projects it is
intended to serve are not yet complete.
MILE-SQUARE FUTURE PARKING CONDITIONS
In order to determine the future parking needs in the Mile-Square
it is necessary to consider the many proposed development projects
and their impact on the parking supply and demand. A number of
developments are already under construction; others appear likely
to occur in the next few years. Other projects are proposed for
development and construction in the long-term future but in some
cases in very limited detail. All known proposals have been
included in the projections in order that planning for the future
be able to accommodate an aggressive rate of growth.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-6
Click HERE for graphic.
"Approximately 200 of the 458 commercial spaces in the Meridian
Corridor area north of the Mile-Square are available for Mile-
Square business.
Projected Parking Supply, 1992
As projected, the various projects proposed will result in a total
future parking supply of 49,309 spaces. As before, this supply
must be adjusted to reflect the "cushion" needed for a parking area
to operated at optimum efficiency levels. Therefore, the projected
"effective" parking supply is 45,131 spaces, a net gain of 12,371
effective spaces by 1992.
Projected Parking Demand, 1992
All parking ratios, except one, used to calculate current parking
demand have been employed to calculate future demand. The retail
parking demand ratio for the Circle Centre Mall has been adjusted
for a much lower captive market, from 52% to 30%. A key factor to
the success of this project is to broaden the market area and
develop the mall as "destination" shopping in strong competition
with suburban malls. The resulting ration is 2.8 spaces per 1000
square feet of retail space.
Table 2 summarizes changes to parking demand by zone. The parking
demand is expected to increase to varying degrees in all quadrants
and zones. The Northeast Quadrant is expected to have an increase
in parking demand of 3,903 spaces (37%) by 1992, due primarily to
new office development and secondly, housing development. An
increase in parking demand of 2,629 spaces (34%) is projected for
the Northwest Quadrant by 1992 due primarily to new housing
development and some office and retail development. The State
Capitol Zone is expected to experience an increase in parking
demand of 2,399 spaces (68%) by 1992. The Circle Centre Mall will
have a greater impact than any other single development in the
Mile-Square. Parking demand in the Southwest Quadrant is projected
to increase by 5,318 spaces (82%) primarily due to this project.
In the Southeast Quadrant, the parking demand is projected to
increase by only 377 spaces (4%).
A total increase in parking demand of 14,627 is projected resulting
in a total parking demand within the Mile-Square of 52,624 spaces
(an overall increase of 39%) by 1992.
Projected Parking Adequacy, 1992
It must be recognized that projections for future parking demand
have been based on some committed projects and some optimistic but
likely developments for 1992. Further, the development of
commercial parking facilities independent of but in response to
other development is not represented. Therefore, the future
scenario tends to be a "worst case" scenario.
Overall, the parking deficit within the Mile-Square is projected to
increase to 7,493 spaces by 1992. This compares to deficits of
5,237 spaces in January of 1987
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-7
and 2,648 in August of 1987.
The January 1987 parking deficit in the Northeast Quadrant is
projected to increase from 2,621 spaces to 5,279 by 1992. The
Northwest Quadrant parking surplus is projected to change from a
surplus of 108 spaces to a deficit of 964 spaces by 1992. Although
over 5,000 spaces will be added to the parking supply in the
Southwest Quadrant, new developments will fill the spaces as soon
as they are built. the parking deficit in this quadrant is
estimated to increase from 2,552 spaces to 1,692 spaces by 1992.
The 102 space parking deficit in the Southeast Quadrant is expected
to change to a significant surplus of 789 spaces.
Figure 4 illustrates the projected adequacy of the 1992 parking
system when perimeter parking is included in the analysis. The
full capacity of the shuttle lot south of South Street has been
included for this analysis. A deficit of nearly 5,200 parking
spaces is projected, compared to a deficit of about 2,000 spaces in
January, 1987 and a surplus of about 600 spaces in August, 1987.
Again, it is concluded that a need for additional spaces will still
exist, particularly in the Northeast Quadrant.
Click HERE for graphic.
It appears that some attempt has been made to provide adequate
parking for future development projects, particularly for retail,
residential, and hotel uses. Parking is not being provided at an
adequate rate for office developments. Figure 5 shows that the
parking supply and the parking demand are expected to diverge at an
increasing rate over the next few years. However, the private
sector's response to the growing market is not reflected in this
picture.
It is likely that deficits such as those projected for 1992 would
cause market parking rates to rise, which in turn would encourage
the development of additional parking. Substantially higher rates,
however, may slow or halt economic development.
Click HERE for graphic.
SUB-AREA ANALYSIS
It was apparent throughout the study of the Mile-Square that many
parkers were parking outside the Mile-Square. Therefore, a more
complete understanding of the parking needs of the Mile-Square
required that the following sub-areas also be taken into
consideration: the Mile-Square Fringe Area, the Meridian Street
Corridor, the Historic Neighborhoods, Indian University-Purdue
University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), White River Park, and the
Hoosier Dome/Convention Center. These sub-areas were chosen to
represent the sections of the Regional Center that have the
greatest interaction with the Mile-Square and are shown in Map 1.
Mile-square Fringe Area
The fringe of the Mile-Square, as shown in Map 1, is defined as the
two-block wide perimeter of the Mile-Square. Based on the demand
analysis of the Meridian Street Corridor, approximately 200 of the
458 commercial spaces in that zone are available for use by
businesses within the Mile-Square. To the east of the Mile-Square,
Bank One provides a private employee lot with 181 spaces. Located
on the same block is a 68 space private lot used by the Department
of Education. To the south of the Mile-Square, a new surface lot
located at Senate Avenue provides 1,129 commer-
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-8
cial spaces; for an additional fee, shuttle service into the Mile-
Square is also provided. However, utilization of this lot has not
yet reached capacity.
An additional 1,726 spaces were identified as reserved for state
employees west of West Street; however, the State of Indiana has
indicated that plans have been made to relinquish all of its
perimeter parking upon completion of their new garages. These lots
will be used as parking for White River Park or used for other park
development.
The above referenced spaces were included in the analysis of the
perimeter parking impact on Mile-Square adequacy condition.
Meridian Street Corridor
The Meridian Street Corridor is a three block wide area running
from the north central boundary of the Mile-Square to 1-65 (see Map
1). Geographically, it is bounded by 12th Street Oust north of 1-
65), North and Pennsylvania Streets, and Capitol Avenue.
Parking Supply and Utilization
For descriptive purposes, the Corridor was subdivided into two
parts--north and south of 9th Street. This was done to reflect the
fact that much of the commercial parking south of 9th Street is
used by persons destined for the Mile-Square as well as the unusual
concentration of public facilities in the area.
A total parking supply of 3,839 spaces was identified. Off-street
parking accounts for 86.8% of the total parking supply. Private,
off-street parking intended for customers, employees, or business-
related visitors of a specific building or business accounts for
863% of the total off-street parking supply. The remaining 13.7%
is commercial parking, that is, available to the public for a fee.
The same factors used for the Mile-Square were applied to the
Meridian Street Corridor parking supply for an 'effective" supply
of 3,096 spaces.
Parking occupancy of all off- and on-street parking was recorded
once between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. during the inventory process.
It was found that south of 9th Street 70.1% of the private spaces
and 82.8% of the commercial spaces were occupied. In comparison,
Landmark Center's lots displayed an overall occupancy of 80.2%,
while the remaining private lots north of 9th Street had only 65.8%
observed occupancy.
Click HERE for graphic.
Land Use and Parking Demand
The parking ratios developed for the Mile-Square have been used to
determine parking demand. The principal land uses south of 9th
Street are: the American Legion, the Scottish Rite Cathedral, the
Marion County Public Library, and Indiana Business College.
The principal land uses north of 9th Street are office, storage,
and service. In addition, there are 553 residential units. By far
the major land occupant is the Landmark Center and its related
parking lots.
The parking demand for the entire Meridian Street Corridor is 2,483
spaces.
Therefore, the Meridian Street Corridor is estimated to have a
current surplus of 612 spaces.
Historic Districts
The Chatham-Arch and Lockerbie Square Historic Neighborhoods are
situated within the northeast corner of the Regional Center shown
in Map 1.
Lockerbie Square
The current mix of land uses in Lockerbie Square is indicative of a
residential area in an urbanized setting. Commercial land use is
largely confined to the periphery of the Lockerbie Square Historic
District, where its impact on the residential core is limited.
Particularly heavy commercialization, however, has occurred along
the 300 block of College Avenue, the 600 block of Michigan Street,
and the 400 block of East Street.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-9
The interior streets are limited to two-hour parking between 6 a.m.
and 6 p.m. which was imposed in response to neighborhood residents'
concerns of all-day parking by downtown commuters. The Lockerbie
Square People's Club has worked out an informal agreement with the
Department of Transportation and with the Indianapolis Police
Department giving the Club permission to distribute parking permits
at no cost to residents of Lockerbie Square. Anyone with such a
permit on his or her car may then park on street without regard to
the two-hour limit.
Neighborhood perceptions are that the residential permit system
adequately meets daytime needs. Residents indicated, however, that
they often have problems finding parking spaces in the evening--
when neither time restricted parking nor the residential permit
system are in effect.
Chatham-Arch
Unlike Lockerbie Square, the renovation or restoration of most of
the residential core of the Chatham-Arch Historic Area--bounded by
10th, St. Clair, and East Streets, and College Avenue--has yet to
start.
There are no posted restrictions on Broadway, 9th, and Arch
Streets, and Park Avenue. Some on-street parking is permitted
during off-peak traffic flow periods along the periphery of the
neighborhood.
Parking Utilization
Parking occupancy of the on-street spaces in the Historic Districts
was observed by WALKER personnel on Friday and Monday, June 19 and
22,1987.
Less than 20% of the on-street spaces in Chatham-Arch were
occupied, indicating that currently there is more than sufficient
parking. An examination of the residential core of Lockerbie
Square indicated that 52.0% of the on-street spaces were occupied.
Moreover, almost all of these vehicles displayed a residential
parking permit. Both of these observations are consistent with
resident's comments indicating that the residential permit system
is having the desired effect of restricting daytime parking to
Lockerbie Square residents.
The enforcement of this program should be continued in order to
maintain the image of these historic districts. It is, however,
recommended that the City work With the Lockerbie Square People's
Club in adopting a more formal residential parking policy, and that
the evening parking problems be addressed.
Indianapolis University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)
IUPUI is the third largest college campus in Indiana. The
immediate vicinity also contains several health-related
institutions.
Historically, IUPUI has provided for all of its own parking needs.
Localized shortages do occur, requiring longer walking distances
than may be desired by the parking patron. OveralL sufficient
spaces are provided on campus to accommodate the University's own
parking demand. This pattern is expected to continue into the
future, as the campus continues to develop.
White River Park
The area of the White River Park as shown generally on Map 1,
includes the new Indianapolis Zoo which is currently under
construction as well as existing Military Park at New York and West
Streets.
A preliminary parking feasibility study for the park was prepared
in early 1983. While the plans for various elements of the park
and their timing have changed dramatically in the intervening four
years, no formal revision of the parking analysis has been
undertaken.
The overall strategy for parking, however, is to provide within the
confines of the park enough parking spaces to satisfy the park's
own peak weekday parking needs in the peak season (Summer). Since
weekend daytime parking demand exceeds weekday demand, off-site
spaces will be required in peak seasons on weekends. The most
notable candidate to provide nearby, convenient, off-site weekend
parking is the 3,000 space State of Indiana garage currently under
construction immediately across West Street from the park. Infor-
mal discussions to this end have taken place between
representatives of the State and the White River Park Commission.
The new Indianapolis Zoo will have its own surface parking lot, and
also has an arrangement with the General Motors site south of the
zoo to handle overflow parking on weekends via a shuttle system.
Although the zoo is therefore theoretically self-sufficient, it
seems likely that some visitors will visit both the zoo and the
park, and thus park in the park's lots or garages.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-10
As additional plans for the park become firm, it would appear
advisable to analyze in detail the interrelated parking needs and
resources of the major land uses in the area, namely IUPUI, the
State of Indiana, White River Park, Indianapolis Zoo, and the
Hoosier Dome and Convention Center. With the exception of the
State, each of the others will generate parking demands with large
fluctuations on a seasonal or special event basis. A level of
confidence should be established that overlapping of these peak
needs will not cause failure of the parking system.
Hoosier Dome/Convention Center
The Dome/Convention Center area shown in Map 1 identifies the
immediate impact area of this complex. A parking analysis was
conducted for this complex by Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff
in 1980. Based on that analysis, but adjusting for current parking
at and to the south of the Hoosier Dome, a capacity weekend event
at the Dome would generate a demand for approximately 11,500 more
spaces in the Southwest Quadrant or at White River Park. As of
August 1987, therefore, event parkers would have to park four
blocks north and five blocks east of the Dome, employing all
commercial and on-street spaces to find enough parking. Needless
to say, other businesses will require parking concurrently which
would suggest the event parkers are parking even further away.
However, when new parking development expected by 1992 is taken
into consideration, this demand could be satisfied within two
blocks north and three blocks east of the Dome on a weekend. The
latter analysis assumes that on-street and commercial parking will
be used entirely by event parking, except for that directly
associated with hotels, Circle Centre Mall and Union Station.
For a major weekday or evening event 40% of the demand could be
satisfied within the Dome area forcing 60% or nearly 3,000 parkers
into the surrounding parking system. This can be easily
accommodated in the evening, if the starting time is late enough to
avoid overlap with office hours. However, during the day, the
southwest quadrant and in fact the Mile-Square will continue to
have a deficit in parking similar to the current magnitude through
1992; thus the additional parking of a major weekday event will
likely continue to overload the system.
Typical weekday events held at the Convention Center can be
accommodated in the 800 parking spaces provided at the Convention
Center with any remaining demand being satisfied in surrounding
commercial and on-street facilities.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND CONTROLS
The City/County Government can influence the market and moderate
the "downside" swings of the economic growth cycle for the Regional
Center without abandoning its reliance on the private sector to
meet parking needs. Before determining what programs and policies
should be adopted, it is important to understand what controls are
currently in place, and what modifications, if any, to those
controls are desirable in light of the information and insights
gained in the previous supply/demand analysis.
The analysis of three current ordinances--the Central Business
District Zoning Ordinance, the Commercial Zoning Ordinance, and the
Licensing and Business Regulations--recommended that a number of
improvements be made.
A complete set of design standards applicable to all parking
facilities in all zoning districts should be adopted. The
required dimensions should reflect the downsizing of vehicles.
Specific changes are also recommended for certain design re-
quirements now in the license ordinance that should be
transferred to the zoning ordinances.
A "shared use" clause that is more flexible and manageable
than a blanket 10% reduction should be adopted for common, or
shared, parking facilities.
Modifications to the definitions and determination of capacity
in the License Regulations are recommended, to reflect current
design practices.
The City Controller's office should be required to report
information from license application for off-street parking
facilities to the Division of Planning for incorporation into
the Parking Data Base. Likewise the DOT should be required to
report changes made to the on-street parking supply.
While the City has no control over state regulations, WALKER
has recommended that either the State regulations for
handicapped parking be updated or local ordinances be expanded
to reflect current American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) and The National Parking Association (NPA) Consultants
Council'S recom-
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-11
mended handicapped parking standards and be applied to all
parking facilities in the absence of locally derived data on
the actual demand for such spaces.
PARKING POLICY ALTERNATIVES
One key policy decision which requires further study is whether or
not the City should modify the requirements (or exemptions) for
providing parking in the Mile-Square. There is a variety of
parking management tactics currently employed by cities to
alleviate parking and related transportation problems. The five
main categories of strategies or tactics pertain to: pricing,
marketing, enforcement and adjudication, on-street supply, and off-
street supply. Some of these strategies have been quickly
discarded for failure to meet local goals and objectives. Others
require more detailed consideration.
There is no one tactic that can simultaneously achieve all the
desired goals (minimize auto usage and traffic congestion, maximize
transit patronage, provide adequate parking, and foster economic
growth). This is partly due to some fundamental conflicts in the
goals-for example, tactics which increase the parking supply are
likely to reduce the incentive to use mass transit.
While marketing/promotional activities will not have a direct
impact on achieving the Regional Center goals, publicizing the
positive steps and programs being implemented will be invaluable.
Therefore it is recommended that public relations/marketing
activities be considered a high priority in the overall plan.
The only parking spaces which the city directly controls are the
on-street spaces, which comprise 7.7% of the total supply. While
strong enforcement programs are important to insuring that the
spaces are available for intended users, such programs will not
markedly affect parking adequacy in the Mile-Square.
Several tactics were found to further the progress toward the
Regional Center goals and have been selected for further study of
the cost and benefits of the program, including:
Differential pricing carpools;
Development of a park-n-ride facility;
Construction of municipal parking facilities;
Joint public/private development of parking facilities, and,
Modified zoning requirements to require parking for new
developments in the Mile-Square.
Financial Implications
The analysis identified a number of actions or policies that could
help achieve the goals of the Regional Center Plan and ease parking
shortages in the Mile-Square. In order to select the most cost
effective tactics, a comparison of the revenues and expenses for
each alternative has been prepared.
The carpool program appears to be self-supporting and among the
most desirable alternatives. The gain in equivalent spaces,
however, is small compared to expected growth in parking demand.
If the City or other government agency already owned a core site,
development of parking would be economical at today's rates.
However, no such sites are owned and land acquisition will require
a subsidy from other funds.
An unexpected, although not unusual, Finding in this analysis was
that the subsidy for land acquisition and a new core area structure
would be less expensive than the subsidy for the park-n-ride
program. Therefore, if the City chooses to subsidize a parking
program, it is more cost-effective to acquire land for a core area
structure than to develop a park-n-ride program. There are, of
course, other considerations than cost which will influence
selections of the 'best" alternative for the City.
It appears that a private developer could have difficulty
assembling a reasonable site to develop new parking and could
likely not achieve the return considered necessary to attract
investors and financing. However, this does not take into account
the overall benefits of providing parking to a developer; a
developer might be willing to accept a lower return on the parking
portion or guarantee leases of spaces in an independent facility,
thereby lowering the risk and required return for that developer.
Even so, it does not appear likely that developers will provide
significant numbers of spaces under current market conditions. A
developer of an office building could make a reasonable return with
tax abatement on the parking portion of a project and thus be
encouraged to provide parking. Another type of assistance that the
municipality could provide would be to purchase land via its
redevelopment powers and then package it for sale to a developer
for
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page ES-12
parking. The financing package may have to delay repayment of
principal for a few years until a project is self-sustaining.
Comparison Of Alternatives
A matrix has been prepared to provide a method to evaluate and
compare each alternative and summarize the relative advantages and
disadvantages of each alternative.
Based on the matrix as weighted herein, WALKER recommends the
following overall priority of schemes.
The most desirable option is the implementation of the carpool
preferential parking program. It ranked high in all criteria
except effectiveness, as it will provide a limited effective gain
in spaces. The park-n-ride program ranked second, with its
required public subsidy being outweighed by the other benefits.
The existing but dormant Off-Street Parking Commission may be able
to take the responsibility for capital costs and operation of the
park-n-ride program, with the burden of the subsidy spread over a
relatively large special assessment district encompassing the
shuttle routes.
Private development of parking structures in core areas is the most
desirable option for gaining large number of spaces, even though
this does not further the transportation goal of reducing vehicle
trips within the Mile-Square. Three separate alternatives for
achieving private parking in core areas - construction on land by
current owners, above grade parking within development projects and
acquisition of property for construction - ranked 3,4 and 4
respectively. The likelihood of implementation of all three,
however, is judged to be only fair without further government ac-
tion.
The most effective tactic for causing expansion of the parking
supply appears to be requiring parking as part of new developments.
The current requirement for approximately one space per 1000 square
feet gross floor area (GFA) in CBD-2 zoning districts outside the
Mile-Square could be extended to cover the Mile-Square. It is also
important to require replacement of any existing spaces.
Developers could be given the option of meeting the requirements by
a combination of:
Restriping existing facilities;
Carpool incentives;
Park-n-ride incentives;
Construction of new spaces; and,
Lease commitments for other new commercial facilities.
Securing lease commitments from existing facilities should not be
considered a means of meeting the parking requirement, as this
merely transfers the deficit burden to others. It appears,
however, that this provision might discourage further development
in the Mile-Square unless certain other incentives are made by the
municipality. Those which seem to bold the most benefit are as
follows:
The City can assemble land through its redevelopment authority
and then sell it to a private developer for parking
development. In some cases, the financing package may have to
be structured to allow a slow payback of principal during the
early years, allowing the facility to build patronage and
market rates to rise to a level that is profitable. Such
parking development projects should be competitively bid so
that all interested developers can submit proposals.
The City can provide financial incentives for private
development of parking. One of the most "painless" incentives
is to abate taxes on the parking facility portion of a
project, especially if that parking is to be required. This
would bring up the return on equity to a reasonable level on a
facility in a larger development. It is likely that such
abatements would only need to be continued for a few years as
market parking rates increase to profitable levels.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
In summary, it appears that enhancement of the existing carpool
program with preferential, low-cost parking; developing the
proposed park-n-ride facility; assembling land and selling it for
parking development; and requiring some parking in new developments
with a few incentives, such as a limited period of tax abatement,
are the most desirable means for encouraging the expansion of the
parking supply in the Mile-Square.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 1
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The downtown areas of most Midwestern cities have faced a multitude
of problems in the last 25 years that have caused an erosion or
reversal of the traditional role of the downtown as a center of
activity in the community. Outlying developments, particularly
those with retail, are providing competition. Traffic congestion
and lack of parking are often perceived as reasons to avoid the
downtown.
The downtown area of Indianapolis, Indiana, also known as the
Regional Center, has experienced a loss of much of its retail base.
A strong commitment by both local and state leaders has, however,
kept the office sector strong. Moreover, there has been a reemer-
gence of the Regional Center as a viable residential and
entertainment area. This, in turn, has encouraged a return of
retail activity and the most densely developed section of the
regional center--known as the Mile-Square--is once again thriving.
In light of the continued growth and revitalization of the
Indianapolis Regional Center, the City has recognized the need for
an update of the City's parking policies.
SCOPE OF STUDY
WALKER Parking Consultants has been commissioned by the City of
Indianapolis to develop a Regional Center Parking Plan. In order
to develop a truly implementable plan, a comprehensive study of the
parking supply, demand, and adequacy in the entire Mile-Square area
have been conducted. Projections for the future parking needs of
the Mile-Square through 1992 have also been made in accordance with
an agreement dated December 12, 1986. "Sub-areas" of the Regional
Center which he outside the Mile-Square have been studied to
identify parking deficiencies that require municipal action and/or
the interrelationship with Mile-Square parking needs and concerns.
Parking policies have been reviewed and changes that would further
the goals of reducing traffic and congestion and/or encouraging
healthy economic growth have been recommended. The following
paragraphs describe the detailed herein:
Initial Tasks:
1. Meet with the appropriate officials and the Technical Advisory
Committee to identify study sub-areas and gather pertinent reports
and statistical data regarding the study area.
With the guidance of the Technical Advisory Committee, conduct the
study according to the attached Schedule of Tasks. Document the
progress of the study in a series of Task Reports which will be
distributed to the Technical Advisory Committee a minimum of five
working days prior to a scheduled meeting.
Mile-Square Sub-Area:
2. Prepare an inventory of existing spaces in the Mile-Square,
including breakdown by parking facility type (including commercial
lots, private lots, private garages, commercial garages, metered
parking, and special parking). Document hourly, daily, and monthly
parking fees for each type of facility.
3. Study the occupancy of all parking spaces at preselected times,
and perform license plate surveys at selected facilities to
determine parking characteristics such as parking duration and
turnover.
4. With the guidance and input of the Division of Planning,
identify and verify detailed land use data for the Mile-Square.
This will include existing square footage for each land use type
and trip generation factors.
5. Determine existing parking characteristics through employee
questionnaires, tenant interviews and visitor/shopper interviews at
three office buildings, three large retail establishments, one
group of smaller retail shops, and representative restaurants.
Data from WALKER studies at the State Capitol Complex and the City-
County Building will provide information on governmental users.
6. Analyze the land use and parking data and present it in tabular
and graphic form. Parking demand factors will be identified in
terms of spaces per square foot of each land use category.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 2
7. Analyze on a block-by-block basis the data collected to
determine the existing parking demand and adequacy of the existing
supply.
8. Review possible development activity anticipated within the
next five to ten years, as supplied by the City, and compare future
supply and demand conditions to determine the impact of proposed
developments on the parking situation. Identify potential sites
for increasing the available parking supply, including expansion of
existing facilities.
9. Identify and evaluate alternatives to the provision of new
parking facilities which relate to demand management. Such
alternatives include, but not necessarily limited to, such measures
as remote parking/shuttle service, and the modal shifts to transit
and ridesharing due to increasing parking costs.
10. Provide a computer model for the City's use in maintaining and
monitoring the land use, parking supply, and parking demand
information. Review the City's current. administrative
recordkeeping procedures and recommend improvements to keep parking
information current for the computer model. Written procedures
will be provided to fully describe the utilization of this model.
11. Document current City parking policies (both legislative and
administrative) and evaluate current and alternate parking
standards within the zoning ordinances.
12. Evaluate the present and near-term parking market in the Mute-
Square and the feasibility of additional private parking
development. Identify potential funding sources and available
financial incentives which could be used to encourage necessary
additional parking development.
13. Recommend public policy changes, if any, with regard to
provision of parking in the Mile-Square, and develop an
implementation program for both public and private actions.
Other Sub-Areas:
14. In conjunction with the Technical Advisory Committee, identify
the remaining sub-areas to be studied. These sub-areas should be
contiguous and have unifying characteristics such as current land
use and potential for future development.
15. Assemble and review past studies and plans for each sub-area
and interview key officials with regard to current and expected
future conditions.
16. Identify and summarize land use and parking characteristics in
each sub-area, their expected future development, and any
recommended near-term actions to be taken, including the need for a
parking permit system in the residential areas near the Mile-
Square.
Final Report:
17. Prepare 15 copies of the draft report. Following in-
corporation of all review comments provide 20 copies of the final
report. The final report will be submitted in photo-ready form,
including all associated graphics and an executive summary.
18. Make one or two formal presentations of the study's findings
to the Technical Advisory Committee, or other groups.
STUDY AREA
The study area encompasses the area known as the Indianapolis
Regional Center, with the major focus on the Mile-Square area as
illustrated in Map 1-1. The first three sections of this report
address the area known as the Mile-Square while the following
sections pertain to areas outside the Mile-Square: the Meridian
Corridor to the north; the Historic Neighborhoods to the east; the
State owned property, IUPUI, and White River Park to the west; and
the Hoosier Dome to the south. To assist in understanding patterns
of supply and demand, the Mile-Square area has been divided into
four quadrants and a State Capitol Zone.
PREVIOUS REPORTS
The Mile-Square has been the subject of several studies in the past
seven years, each of which has been reviewed in preparation of this
report. The following list identifies the report, the firm who
prepared the study, and the completion date.
INDIANAPOLIS URBAN PARKING STUDY and PLAN
Simpson & Curtin - December, 1980
PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND/and FINANCIAL ANALYSIS for INDIANA BELL
TELEPHONE
WALKER Parking Consultants - May 1982
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 3
DOWNTOWN RETAIL MALL and APARTMENT COMPLEX
WALKER Parking Consultants - March, 1983
WHITE RIVER PARK - PARKING FEASIBILITY STUDY
WALKER Parking Consultants - April, 1983
INDIANA CAPITOL COMPLEX MASTER PLAN: 1984 - 1995
Archonics with WALKER Parking Consultants -1984
UPDATE OF PRELIMINARY PARKING STUDY FOR DOWNTOWN MALL
WALKER Parking Consultants - January, 1984
PARKING STUDY FOR THE MALL BLOCK & SQUARE 88
WALKER Parking Consultants - October, 1984
CITY-COUNTY BUILDING PARKING STUDY
WALKER Parking Consultants - February, 1986
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 4
PARKING IN THE MILE-SQUARE 1987
PARKING SUPPLY
An inventory of all on-street and off-street parking in the area
known as the Mile-Square was conducted during the month of January,
1987 by WALKER and city personnel to determine the existing parking
supply. The series of articles "Who Owns the Block" published in
the Indianapolis Business Journal and various downtown maps
denoting parking were used to help verify the field counts. A
total parking supply was established at 35,945 spaces. This figure
represents a "snapshot in time" which will be compared to a similar
snapshot of demand. Of course, the ongoing development in the
Mile-Square results in almost month to month changes in supply and
demand. A discussion of this phenomenon will follow the
determination of the adequacy of parking in January, 1987. A
detailed, block-by-block breakdown is included in the Appendix
(Table A-1). Figure II-1 illustrates the breakdown of on-street
and off-street parking in the Mile-Square.
Off-street parking accounts for 92.3% of the total parking supply.
Private off-street spaces intended for customers, employees, or
business-related visitors of a specific building or business
account for 32.8% of the total off-street parking supply.
Off-street parking spaces reserved for state employees accounts for
another 7.5%. Commercial parking, defined as facilities available
to the general public for a fee, accounts for the remaining 59.7%.
Approximately one-half of all off-street spaces are located in
parking structures or garages. The remaining spaces are located in
surface parking lots.
On-street short-term parking spaces account for the remaining 2,579
spaces (7.7% of the total supply) of which approximately 67.5% are
metered. Map II-1 shows the on-street, commercial, and private
parking supply on each block. State employee spaces are included
as part of the private parking supply. Quadrant and zone totals
are also shown.
It is important that the parking supply include a sufficient
"cushion" in excess of the necessary spaces to allow for the
dynamics of vehicles moving in and out of parking stalls and to
reduce the time to search for the last few available spaces. This
cushion also allows for vacancies created by restricting lots to
certain users, misparked vehicles, snow cover, and minor
construction. Thus, a supply of parking operates at peak
efficiency when occupancy is 85% to 90%.
When occupancy exceeds this level, there may be
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 6
delays and frustration in finding a space. The parking supply may
be perceived as inadequate even though there are spaces available
in the system.
As a result, the "effective' parking supply is used for analysis of
the adequacy of the parking system, rather than the total supply or
inventory of spaces. Typically, WALKER has used 95% of the on-
street spaces, 90% of commercial and public surface lot spaces, and
85% of all private and structured spaces as the "effective" parking
supply in many central business districts.
However, in Indianapolis, downtown employees are the major parking
generators. The strong service oriented anchors located in the
downtown, such as Blue Cross/Blue Shield, American United Life, In-
diana Bell, and the many governmental facilities, house thousands
of employees who drive to the downtown every day. Most of these
employees do not search for a parking space; they park in the same
location every day. They know where to find an available spare at
a rate they are willing to pay. Transient parking demand is
minimal compared with the employee need in the area.
Occupancy studies, as discussed later in this report, have been
employed to modify the "typical" effective supply factors to
reflect actual parking practices and conditions in the Mile-Square.
Therefore, the "effective" parking supply is assumed to be 75% of
the private surface lot spaces and 95% of all commercial surface
lots and on-street spaces. A factor of 90% has been applied to
private parking structures since the majority of these are for
employees only, and to transient spaces in commercial structures.
Monthly and reserved parking spaces in commercial parking
structures %ill be considered 100% "effective", due to high
occupancies, as have any state employee lots. These factors
include adjustments for the fact that some parking facilities are
attended or have valet parking and often operate above capacity
(for example, 320 vehicles in 240 marked spaces). Therefore, the
"effective" parking supply as of January,1987 is established at
32,760 parking spaces.
PARKING UTILIZATION
Extensive data has been collected in order to document the actual
current parking needs of the Mile-Square. Hourly parking
accumulation counts and license plate surveys were conducted in
selected areas to determine parking occupancy, duration, and
turnover levels. The occupancy of all spaces was recorded during
the inventory process. Furthermore, in order to determine the
ability of the supply to meet peak retail needs, occupancy counts
were taken the week before Christmas 1986 in a selected area.
Occupancy counts were taken at three different periods: (1)
Saturday, December 20, 1986; (2) the week of January 12, 1987; and,
(3) Monday and Tuesday, January 27 and 28, 1987.
The first study was concentrated in the Retail Area south of
Washington Street (Map 11-2). The low occupancy (55.9%) observed
in the commercial parking spaces reflects the typical Saturday
transient shopper who prefers not to pay high hourly rates for
short-term parking; and being Saturday, the even lower occupancy
(30.7%) of the private spaces is due to the lower presence of
office employees. However, as shown in Figure II-2 below, the
occupancy of the on-street parking spaces was extremely high
(111.5%) with many vehicles illegally parking in no parking zones.
On-street parking spaces that are available on Saturday, Sunday,
and holidays, but are posted as no parking areas during the week,
have been included as available spaces in this analysis.
Click HERE for graphic.
It is clear from our observations that on Saturdays a shortage of
parking in this area is not a problem, even during the week before
Christmas. However, it appears that a very high demand exists for
convenient, inexpensive, short-term parking for weekend shoppers.
It further appears that these shoppers are resistant to paying
commercial off-street rates.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 7
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 8
The second study encompassed the entire Mile-Square which has been
divide into quadrants and zones in order to illustrate a more
refined picture of parking utilization in the study area (Map II-
2). Occupancy of all off-street parking was recorded once between
the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. during the week of January 12,
1987. Figure II-2 also illustrates the observed occupancy of on-
and off- street parking by zone. The occupancy of the off-street
spaces ranged from 79.6% in the Southeast Quadrant to 87.3% in the
Northwest Quadrant and 94.2% in the State Capitol Zone. However,
many facilities had occupancy levels of 95% to over 100%.
The occupancy of the on-street spaces ranged from 51.5% in the
Northeast Quadrant to 106.2% in the Southwest Quadrant and 109.2%
in the State Capitol Zone. This pattern reflects the density of
retail/entertainment uses in that the greatest demand for on-street
parking is in those areas with significant retail/restaurant
activity. Again, many vehicles were observed parked in no parking
areas which account for many block faces having occupancy levels of
over 100%.
In the third study, a turnover and duration study of on-street
parking was conducted in selected areas. License plate numbers of
each vehicle were recorded on an hourly basis in these areas and
the data has been used to determine the peak parking occupancy, the
average length of stay for parkers, and the parking turnover. Map
II-3 highlights the routes observed during the study. The letters
A through H on the map
Click HERE for graphic.
correspond to the areas labeled in Figure II-3 which summarizes the
peak occupancy of these spaces from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Figure
II-4 depicts the average on-street occupancy trend during the
survey day.
Click HERE for graphic.
As shown in Figure II-5, the parking duration, representing the
average length of stay per vehicle, ranged from 0.82 hours in Area
C to 1.79 hours in Area F. Overall the two-hour time limit appears
to be sufficient. However, approximately 15% of the vehicles
observed stayed over 2 hours. Some stayed more than seven hours;
this usually indicates that an area employee is using the space.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 9
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 10
Click HERE for graphic.
Parking turnover represents the average number of vehicles parked
per space throughout the observation period. Turnover is a measure
of utilization that must be used carefully. It reflects the
overall utilization of each space and is quickly affected by low
occupancy; a vacant space is obviously not "turning over".
Turnover rates of 3 to 5 are considered very good, while those
exceeding five are unusually high. The turnover rate observed
ranged from 1.39 times in Area F to 7.68 times in Area H as shown
in Figure II-6.
Click HERE for graphic.
A more detailed analysis of the parking occupancy, turnover, and
duration can be found in the Appendix (Tables A-2a through A-5d).
PARKING DEMAND
Parking demand is defined as the number of spaces which should be
provided for employees, shoppers, and business visitors that park
within the study area. A direct relationship between building use
and the parking demand it generates has been established in many
studies by various disciplines over the years. Therefore, the
parking demand for the Mile-Square has been calculated by
multiplying the square feet of building space by a "demand ratio"
which is the number of spaces required per 1,000 square feet of
generating land use such as retail, office, etc. The ration
represent a busy day in a peak month, rather than a true or once a
year peak. In order WALKER to reasonably develop parking demand
ratios to reflect local conditions, an extensive analysis of
employee and customer needs was conducted.
Data Collection
Customer interviews were conducted at eleven locations during the
week of January 12, 1987 throughout the Mile-Square area. This
survey provided information regarding modes of transportation
(driving percentage) and distances walked by customers after
parking. Table A-6 in the Appendix tabulates the results of this
survey. A "captive market" adjustment was also established that
indicates the percentage of business patrons who are also CBD
employees.
These patrons are already parked and do not contribute to parking
demand; 52.3% of retail patrons have been determined to be CBD
employees and considered a captive market and 64.1% of the
restaurant patrons are captive. The captive market factor have
been found to be 82.8% for office visitors and 45.8% of the
patrons interviewed at miscellaneous businesses. These captive
ratios are not unusual for a service and government-oriented
business district such as the Mile-Square.
Each person interviewed was asked how they travelled to the
downtown area. The analysis of this information found that 73.8%
of the employees drive to work. The Urban Transportation Planning
Package (UTPP), based on 1980 census data for the Regional Center,
states that 87.1% of downtown employees arrive by automobile.
However, UTPP also states an average of 1.25 persons per vehicle.
Taking this into account, the driving ration for the UTPP data is
69.7%. For the purposes of this report, a rounded 70% driving
factor for
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 11
the Mile-Square employees has been employed.
As shown in Figure II-7, the percentage of customers and visitors
who drove ranged from 38.6% (shoppers) to 67.5% (business visitors)
for an average of 55.1%.
Click HERE for graphic.
The estimated average length of stay for the non-captive market
visitor was 3.48 hours. This is a relatively long stay but
represents the service/business orientation of the current land
uses in the Mile-Square rather than retail.
To determine other characteristics of demand, interviews were
conducted with downtown employers concerning employee presence
levels and parking needs. Figure 11-8 summarizes the employee
levels per 1000 square feet for each type of land use. The level
of employees per 1000 square feet was found to be typical compared
to other municipalities recently surveyed by WALKER.
Click HERE for graphic.
As shown in Figure 11-9, the employee and customer interviews
revealed that 7.4% of the respondents walked rive or more blocks to
their destination and another 21.0% walked three or four blocks.
Approximately 46.9% walked one or two blocks, while 24.6% of those
responding parked on the same block as their destination.
Click HERE for graphic.
A second question was asked to determine how many blocks away
employees and patrons would park to come to the downtown.
Surprisingly, as shown in Figure 11-10, 23.7% of the respondents
stated that they would walk five or more blocks if the cost of
parking
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 12
was reasonable. On the other hand, many respondents stated that
they would not accept longer walking distances.
The demand ratios were developed to reflect local conditions found
as a result of the survey analysis, using the employee driving
ratio, the number of employees per 1000 square feet, and the
captive market adjustments. Based on ULI's Shared Parking Study
and occupancy count results a mid-day peak (between noon and 1:00
p.m.) adjustment factor was applied. December was chosen as the
peak month because of the higher level of retail activity
(increased staff and customer volumes) and decreased usage of
alternate modes of transportation (bus, walk, or bicycle). The
parking demand ratio for office use is 2.3 spaces per 1,000 square
feet, derived as follows:
Office Employees:
3.61 employees per typical day shift per 1,000 square feet
7.1% use auto to commute
1.25 persons per auto
0.90 presence at noon to 1:00 p.m. (ULI's Peak Hour Factor)
1.00 intensity for the months of December
Ratio = (3.61) x (871) x (.90) x (1.00)/(1.25
= 2.27 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Office Visitors:
0.18 visitors per 1,000 square feet (.05 x 3.61)
55.1% driving ration (includes persons per vehicle)
0.17 non-captive market
0.90 presence at noon to 1:00 p.m.
1.00 intensity for the month of December
Ratio = (.18) x (.551) x (.17) x (.90) x (1.00) x (.25)
= .02 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Total Gross Office Demand Ratio:
Ratio = 2.27 (employee) + 0.02 (visitor)
= 2.29 or 2.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet
In the Appendix (Table A-7) is a list of parking ratios used
nationally and the final ratio used for all land use types. The
primary ration such as retail, restaurant, financial, and
governmental were calculated similarly to the office use ration
shown above. Parking demand ratios for other land uses were
derived using data from the Shared Parking report published by the
Urban Land Institute, the Parking Generation Report published by
the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and Parking Allocation
Techniques, Record 395 published by the Highway Research Board.
This data was adjusted for local captive market and driving
percentages. Following is a summary of the parking ratios used for
this study. The ration are expressed as spaces per 1,000 square
feet GFA unless noted otherwise.
Retail 2.1
Office 2.3
Restaurant 1.3
Financial 2.0
Industrial 0.4
Government
City/County 3.9
State/Federal 3.0
Residential
Single-Family 0.8
Multi-Family 0.8
Elderly/Subsidized 0.4
Hotel
Rooms 0.2/unit
Meeting Rooms 1.3/1,000 sq ft
Convention 2.2/1,000 sq ft
Land Use Summary
Land use information was gathered and compiled for every building
in the Mile-Square for the "snap-shot in time" during January,
1987. The Indianapolis Business Journal was a major source for
square footage information. Discussions with property owners and
businesses determined the type of use. The breakdown of uses
within a building were identified in terms of the square footage
occupied. A total of 23,945,053 square feet of gross floor area
was identified. A 7.0% vacancy information was available.
Following is a breakdown of the major land uses:
Retail 1,769,729 7.4%
Office 8,801,392 36.8%
Restaurant 405,724 1.7%
Service 321,484 1.3%
Financial 81,599 0.3%
Ind'l/Storage 686,619 2.9%
Residential 1,369,078 6.7%
Units 1,617
Hotel 1,436,481 6.0%
Units 2,109
Government 2,227,700 9.3%
Miscellaneous 4,750,620 17.3%
Vacant 2,094,427 8.8%
TOTAL 23,945,053
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 13
Parking Demand Summary
By multiplying the ratios by the quantity of each land use present,
the existing parking demand for the Mile-Square is estimated to be
37,998 spaces for the land uses present as of January, 1987. The
average demand ratio for all land uses, excluding vacant space, is
1.74 spaces per 1,000 square feet GFA. This ratio is reasonable
compared to a range of average ratios of 1.3 to 3.0 per 1,000
square feet GFA as calculated by WALKER in recent years in a number
of other midwestern and western cities. A detailed analysis of the
parking demand by block and land use type can be found in the
Appendix (Table A-8).
This demand reflects average peak conditions--that is a busy day in
December but not the busiest possible day at all businesses. The
total demand equates to 106% occupancy of the parking supply
existing in January, 1987. During the occupancy studies the
average occupancy overall was around 90%. Those counts represent
January activity levels for the land uses present, while demand is
projected for December activity levels. Also, no events were
taking place at the Hoosier Dome/Convention Center or at Market
Square Arena at the time the data was collected. A typical daytime
event generates a parking demand for approximately 1,140 spaces.
Therefore, the demand projection is deemed reasonable.
Figure II-11 illustrates the density of different types of demand
(for example, office, retail, hotel etc.) within each zone.
Click HERE for graphic.
PARKING ADEQUACY
Parking adequacy is defined as the ability of the parking supply to
accommodate the parking demand. This is measured by comparing the
total parking demand to the "effective" parking supply. The Mile-
Square is estimated to have a deficit of 5,237 spaces as of
January, 1987. Some zones show large parking deficits indicating
localized parking shortages while others have a surplus of spaces.
It should be recognized that the deficit (or surplus) is a
comparison of the "effective" parking supply and demand solely
within that zone, without consideration of the use of the spaces on
or by neighboring zones. It is also important to note that many of
the surplus spaces are privately-owned for individual business's
employees and customers. Map II-4 highlights and compares the
existing parking demand and the "effective" parking supply.
Approximately 48% of this parking deficit is found in the two north
quadrants, 30% in the Southwest Quadrant, 21% in the State Capitol
Zone, and only 2% in the Southeast Quadrant.
A certain percentage of the total parking demand will be satisfied
outside of the study area. An analysis of both commercial and
privately-owned parking facilities located outside the Mile-Square
perimeter was conducted as part of the "Sub-Area" analysis to be
discussed later. Approximately 1,137 commercial and/or private
spaces were identified as being used by persons within the North
Quadrants. Another 1,726 spaces were identified as reserved for
state employees west of West Street. Two private lots east of the
Mile-Square provide 249 spaces. A new surface lot located south of
South Street at Senate Avenue provides 1,129 commercial spaces and,
for an additional fee, shuttle service into the Mile-Square is
available. However, because this lot has not yet reached capacity,
only 350 spaces, which reflects observed occupancy, have been
included in the analysis of the parking situation. A total of
3,249 perimeter spaces are therefore considered available to Mile-
Square parkers.
A deficit of 1,988 parking spaces still exists when perimeter
parking is included in the January analysis. However, it appears
that this is a portion of the cushion" of s aces required to
relieve the perception of a shortage of parking in the system.
That is, the parking system is saturated and, while available
spaces exists, they are difficult to find. In order to provide a
comfortable parking situation for all users, this " cushion" needs
to be incorporated into the system.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 14
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 15
As Figure II-12 illustrates, it is concluded that the greatest need
for additional spaces--1,897--is in the Northeast Quadrant. The
Southwest Quadrant also has a rather large effective deficit of
1,202 spaces which is primarily due to the retail area along
Illinois Street and Union Station. However, the Northwest Quadrant
shows a surplus of 308 spaces and the Southeast Quadrant shows a
surplus of 147 spaces. The State Capitol Zone has a surplus of 656
spaces which is not available for any other users.
Click HERE for graphic.
A detailed analysis of the existing parking adequacy by block is
included in the Appendix (Table A-9).
Click HERE for graphic.
PARKING CONDITIONS, AUGUST 1987
As of August 1987, approximately 3,400 more spaces have become
available for use. Table II-1 summarizes the changes in supply.
Approximately 88.0% of these spaces are for commercial use.
With the addition of the new spaces, a marked shift from an overall
deficit (January 1987) to an overall surplus (August 1987) is
apparent. In terms of "effective" supply, 2,857 spaces have been
added to the parking system. The Southwest Quadrant gained 1,998
spaces but only had an increase in demand of 267 spaces. The
opening of the Pan Am Plaza Garage thus appears to have eased
parking problems in the Southwest Quadrant, but substantial
development is underway in this quadrant that will absorb the
surplus in the near future. Denison's new 884 space garage on
Illinois Street is located in the Northwest Quadrant, but will also
serve the Northeast Quadrant which has a very large deficit. It is
reported that many of the spaces in this facility have been pre-
leased by developments in the area that are under construction but
not yet com-
January 1987
Effective January Available Adjusted
Parking Parking Parking Perimeter Parking
Supply Demand Adequacy Parking Adequacy
NORTHEAST 7,827 10,448 (2,621) 724 (1,897)
NORTHWEST 7,782 7,674 108 200 * 308
STATE CAPITOL 2,483 3,553 (1,070) 1,726 656
SOUTHWEST 4,921 6,473 (1,552) 350 (1,202)
SOUTHEAST 9,748 9,849 (102) 249 147
TOTAL 32,760 37,998 (5,237) 3,249 (1,988)
August 1987
Effective August Available Adjusted
Parking Parking Parking Perimeter Parking
Supply Demand Adequacy Parking Adequacy
NORTHEAST 7,827 10,448 (2,621) 724 (1,897)
NORTHWEST 8,578 7,674 904 200 * 1,104
STATE CAPITOL 2,221 3,553 (1,332) 1,726 394
SOUTHWEST 6,919 6,741 178 350 (1,202)
SOUTHEAST 10,073 9,849 223 249 147
TOTAL 35,617 38,265 (2,648) 3,249 601
* Approximately 200 of the 458 commercial spaces in the Meridian
Corridor area north of the Mile-Square business.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 16
pleted. Therefore, the improved parking conditions existing in
August of 1987 are expected to be relatively short-lived.
The comparison of parking conditions in January and August of 1987
is particularly instructive in that it illustrates the fluctuations
that occur when large projects "come on stream", especially with
the strong development climate in the Mile-Square. The opening of
two major parking facilities has substantially shifted the
supply/demand balance. The opening and occupancy of several
demand-generating projects now under construction will cause the
balance to shift again. It is therefore important to project what
conditions would exist if and when all currently proposed projects
are completed and occupied. This will give a more accurate
understanding of whether or not the private sector is keeping up
with the growth in demand generated by development in the Mile-
Square than either of the "snapshots" taken in 1987.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 17
MILE-SQUARE FUTURE PARKING CONDITIONS
In order to determine the future parking needs in the Mile-Square
it is necessary to consider the many proposed development projects
and their impact on the parking supply and demand. A number of
developments are already under construction, while others appear
likely to occur in the next few years. Following is a brief
description of the projects which are presumed to be in place by
1992. A 7% vacancy rate will be applied to all new office
development in the Mile-Square.
Block 9: The Kuhn House is currently under renovation; 6500 square
feet of office space will be provided upon completion.
Block 12b: This entire block has been vacated for a new
residential project known as the Canal Overlook. Approximately 121
apartments are to be constructed and a 141 space parking garage is
planned.
Block 17: An additional 45,000 square feet of office space is
being added on this block as well as the renovation of 55,000
square feet of vacant space for office use. An 80 space private
lot on Delaware will be forfeited for a 350 car commercial garage.
Block 19b: Lockerbie Inn will provide 10 new housing units on this
block.
Block 26: Denison is constructing a 884 space commercial garage on
Illinois Street.
Block 29: The Canal Commons project on this block includes a hotel
with 225 rooms; an apartment complex with 216 apartments; and
28,000 square feet of retail space as well as a 500 space parking
garage. A 320 space commercial lot will be displaced. The Emilie
Building is currently being renovated; 13,480 square feet of office
proposed with approximately 6,740 square feet of retail on the
first floor.
Block 30: Land has been cleared on this block for the Sycamore
Group project. Approximately 50,000 square feet of retail space,
352 apartments and a 1,500 space parking garage is proposed; 96
state employee parking spaces will be displaced at this location.
Block 33: The State of Indiana has plans for a new judicial
building on this block including an underground garage with
approximately 1,000 parking spaces. However, this project will
displace 552 existing parking spaces and an existing building.
Block 44: Construction of the First Indiana Building on this block
is already in progress. This new facility will house approximately
400,000 square feet of office space, 16,000 square feet of retail
space, and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. A 400 space commercial
garage is also part of this development.
Block 45: Construction of the Bank One Tower is expected to begin
in the near future. This new facility will house approximately 1.3
million square feet of office space and a 700 space parking garage.
Block 46: The new Market Tower will provide approximately 500,000
square feet of office space and 75,000 square feet of retail. A
150 space parking garage is also proposed.
Block 47: The new 101 West development on this block will house
259,000 square feet of office space, 1000 square feet of retail,
3000 square feet of restaurant, and 34,000 square feet of auxiliary
and storage areas.
Block 51: The State of Indiana has proposed a new 600,000 square
foot State Office Building on this block which will displace 68
parking spaces. It should be noted that the State plans to
consolidate its agencies now located outside the State Capitol Zone
but not necessarily outside the Mile-Square. Therefore, as the
agencies relocated, other facilities in the Mile-Square will be
available for new tenants or redevelopment.
Block 54: This block is part of the proposed Circle Centre Mall
Project, planned by Melvin Simon and Associates. All existing
buildings will remain and 170,000 square feet of office will be
added to Block's Building.
Block 55: The Circle Centre Mall will radically change this block.
Three buildings will remain. Retail, office, restaurant, and
vacant space will be replaced by 225,000 square feet of retail
space, 160,000 square feet of office, and 15,000 square feet of
restaurant/entertainment. Approximately 557 parking spaces will be
provided in an underground parking facility that will span four
blocks; 38 private parking spaces will be lost. Block 56: A 42-
story apartment building, known as Symphony Towers, will be erected
on this block. Nine floors of parking will provide approximately
766 parking spaces for 401 apartments and 18,095 square feet of
retail space.
Block 66: The Circle Centre Mall will also dominate this block.
Ayres' buildings and two others will remain; other retail and some
vacant space will be replaced by 256,700 square feet of retail
space, 600,000 square feet of office, and 19,300 square feet of
restaurant/entertainment. Approximately 1,026 parking spaces will
be provided in the underground parking facility on this block but
110 private parking spaces will be displaced.
Block 67: Approximately 16,000 square feet of retail space will be
constructed to connect Merchants Plaza with the Circle Centre Mall.
The parking supply is projected to decrease by approximately 28
spaces.
Block 68: The new Westin Hotel is expected to have 600 rooms and a
1,070 space parking garage.
Block 70: The State of Indiana has proposed a 3,000 space parking
facility on this block. The garage will cover approximately 85% of
the block leaving the remaining land for future development. This
garage will displace 262 existing state employee parking spaces.
Block 74: Two parking garages, housing 662 spaces, will be
demolished and replaced by 200,000 square feet of office, 49,300
square feet of retail, 300 hotel rooms, 120 apartments, a 1,400
seat theater, and 2.013 underground parking spaces as part of the
Circle Centre Mall.
Block 75: Two vacant buildings on Maryland will be untouched by
the Mall Project. The Cantebury Hotel and other buildings on
Illinois will also remain. Other office and restaurant space will
be replaced by 200,000 square feet of office space, 205,900 square
feet
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 18
of restaurant/entertainment, and 500 additional hotel rooms.
Approximately 1,535 parking spaces will be provided in the
underground parking facility; 760 parking spaces, both private and
commercial will be displaced.
Block 77: A 400 space parking garage has been demolished and is
being replaced by a new 700 space facility; 550 spaces will be
reserved for Jefferson National Bank employees.
Block 88: Pan Am Plaza, now under construction, will provide
125,00 square feet of office space and an 1,150 space parking
garage that became available for use in April, 1987.
Perimeter: The State of Indiana has indicated that plans have been
made to relinquish all of its perimeter parking, 1,726 spaces west
of West Street, upon completion of their new garages.
Other projects are proposed for development and construction in the
long-term future but in some cases in very limited detail. The
impact of these projects has not been included.
FUTURE LAND USE SUMMARY
The proposed projects will add substantially to the quantities of
land uses present in the Mile-Square. Following is a summary of
the changes in major land uses categories.
Retail 2,303,235 +30.1%
Office 12,474,552 +41.7%
Restaurant 619,424 +52.7%
Service 372,884 +16.0%
Financial 84,599 +3.7%
Ind'l/Storage 694,536 +1.2%
Residential 1,937,323 +41.5%
Units 2,838
Hotel 1,586,481 +10.4%
Units 3,734
Government 3,157,700 +41.7%
Miscellaneous 4,631,688 -2.5%
Vacant 1,949,600 -6.9%
TOTAL 29,812,022 +24.5%
PROJECTED PARKING SUPPLY, 1992
The previously listed projects will result in a total future
parking supply of 49,309 spaces, a net gain of 13,364 spaces by
1992. The breakdown of spaces is shown in Figure III-1.
The on-street supply is not expected to change substantially; if
anything, spaces are occasionally removed for traffic control
reasons or at the request of the developer of a major project.
Therefore, as the total supply increases, on-street parking will
become a smaller proportion of the total--5.6% compared to 7.7% as
of January 1987. The state's construction program will add a
substantial number of spaces within the Mile-Square, increasing the
percentage of total supply from 7.5% to 11.2%. It should be noted
however that the state will give up approximately 1,700 spaces that
it now uses to the west of the Mile-Square. Minor adjustments in
proportion of total supply will also occur in the other two primary
categories. Commercial parking facilities will increase from 53.6%
of the supply to 57.7% while private parking will decrease from
30.2% to 25.5%.
Click HERE for graphic.
As before, this supply must be adjusted to reflect the 10% to 15%
"cushion" needed for a parking area to operate at optimum
efficiency levels. Therefore, the projected "effective" parking
supply is 45,131 spaces. Map III-1 illustrates the projected
effective parking supply by block and resulting quadrant totals.
For further details, see Table A-10 in the Appendix.
PROJECTED PARKING DEMAND, 1992
Figure III-2 depicts parking demand with both committed and
proposed new projects in place. All parking ratios, except one,
used to calculate current parking demand have been employed to
calculate future demand. For the Circle Centre Mall only, the
retail parking demand ratio has been adjusted for a much lower
captive market, 30% compared to 50%. A key factor to the success
of this project is to broaden the market area and develop the mall
as "destination" shopping
in strong competition with suburban malls. The resulting ratio 2.8
spaces per 1000 square feet GFA of retail space.
As shown in Table III-1, the parking demand is expected to increase
to varying degrees in all quadrants and zones. The Northeast
Quadrant is expected to
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 19
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
Click HERE for graphic.
have an increase in parking demand of 3,902 spaces (37%) by 1992,
due primarily to new office development and secondly, housing
development. An increase in parking demand of 2,629 spaces (34%)
is projected for the Northwest Quadrant by 1992 due primarily to
new housing development and some office and retail development.
The State Capitol Zone is expected to experience an increase in
parking demand of 2,399 spaces (68%) by 1992. The Circle Centre
Mall will have a greater impact than any other single development
in the Mile-Square. Parking demand in the Southwest Quadrant is
projected to increase by 5.319 spaces (82%) primarily due to this
project. In the Southeast Quadrant, the parking demand is
projected to increase by only 378 spaces (4%).
Click HERE for graphic.
A total increase in parking demand of 14,626 is projected resulting
in a total parking demand within the Mile-Square of 52,624 spaces
(an overall increase of 39%) by 1992 (see Table A-11 in the
Appendix).
PROJECTED PARKING ADEQUACY, 1992
It must be recognized that projections for future parking demand
have been based on some committed projects and some optimistic but
likely developments for 1992. As shown in Table III-1, the overall
parking deficit is projected to increase to 7,493 spaces by 1992.
A detailed analysis of the future parking conditions by block can
be found in the Appendix (Table A-12).
The January 1987 effective parking deficit in the Northeast
Quadrant is projected to increase from 2,621 spaces to 5,279 by
1992. The Northwest Quadrant parking surplus is projected to drop
from a surplus of 108 spaces to a deficit of 964 spaces by 1992.
The State Capitol Zone is projected to accommodate most of its
expected growth, decreasing its parking deficit to 348
Table III-1: Future Parking Conditions, 1992
1987
Effective Existing Available Adjusted
Parking Parking Parking Perimeter Parking
Supply Demand Adequacy Parking Adequacy
NORTH EAST 7,827 10,448 (2,621) 724 (1,897)
NORTH WEST 7,782 7,674 108 200* 308
STATE CAPITOL 2,483 3,553 (1,070) 1,726 656
SOUTH WEST 4,921 6,473 (1,552) 350 (1,202)
SOUTH EAST 9,748 9,849 (102) 249 147
TOTAL 32,760 37,998 (5,237) 3,249 (1,988)
1992
Effective Future AvailableAdjusted
Parking Parking Parking PerimeterParking
Supply Demand Adequacy Parking Adequacy
NORTH EAST 9,072 14,350 (5,279) 724 (4,555)
NORTH WEST 9,340 10,303 (964) 200* (764)
STATE CAPITOL 5,605 5,952 (348) 0 (348)
SOUTH WEST 10,100 11,792 (1,692) 1,129 (563)
SOUTH EAST 11,016 10,227 789 249 1,038
TOTAL 45,131 52,624 (7,493) 2,302 (5,191)
* Approximately 200 of the 458 commercial spaces in the Meridian
Corridor area north of the Mile-Square are available for Mile-
Square business.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 21
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 22
spaces by 1992. Although over 5,000 spaces will be added to the
parking supply in the Southwest Quadrant, new development will fill
the spaces as fast as they are built. The parking deficit in this
quadrant is estimated to increase from 1,552 spaces to 1,692 spaces
by 1992. The 102 space parking deficit in the Southeast Quadrant
is expected to change to a significant surplus of 789 spaces. Map
III-2 illustrates the future parking supply, demand and adequacy by
block.
Also shown in Table III-1 is the adequacy of the parking system
when perimeter parking is included in the analysis. The full
capacity of the shuttle lot south of South Street has been included
for this analysis. A deficit of 5,191 parking spaces still would
exist under the assumption herein. This is in comparison to the
January 1987 adjusted deficit of 1,988 spaces and the August 1987
surplus of 601 spaces. Figure III-3 summarizes the conditions by
quadrant.
Click HERE for graphic.
It appears that some attempt has been made to provide adequate
parking for future development projects, particularly for retail,
residential, and hotel uses. However, parking is not being
provided at an adequate rate for office developments, and a
substantial parking deficit will occur. Figure III-4 illustrates
that the parking supply and the parking demand are expected to
diverge at an increasing rate over the next few years.
Click HERE for graphic.
The private sector's response to the growing market may not be
fully reflected in this picture. It is likely that deficits such
as those projected for 1992 would cause market rates for parking to
rise, which in turn would encourage the development of more
parking. It is also possible that economic development would be
discouraged if not halted without new, convenient, and affordable
parking.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 23
SUB-AREA ANALYSIS
It has been apparent throughout this study that many parkers were
crossing the Mile-Square boundaries. Therefore, a more complete
understanding of the parking needs of the Mile-Square requires that
the following sub-areas also be taken into consideration: The Mile-
Square Fringe Area, the Meridian Street Corridor, the Historic
Neighborhoods, Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis
(IUPUI), White River Park, and the Hoosier Dome/Convention Center.
These sub-areas were chosen to represent the sections of the
Regional Center that have the greatest interaction with the Mile-
Square and are shown in Map 1-1 (Introduction Section).
A numbering system was developed to assist in the
identification/coding of blocks. Specifically, this involved
dividing the Regional Center into zones which were both
geographically and logically meaningful. A map designating both
the location and code of each block is included in the Appendix
(p.A-29).
MILE-SQUARE FRINGE AREA
The Mile-Square Fringe Area, as shown in Map IV-1, is defined as
the two-block wide perimeter of the Mile-Square. This area
contains a number of commercial and private parking facilities
which have been identified as being primarily used by businesses
inside the Mile-Square. It was noted in the analysis of parking
adequacy in the Mile-Square that parkers were willing to walk a
distance of three to five blocks for a reasonably priced parking
space. However, field observations indicated that persons within
the Mile-Square were not walking more than two blocks past North,
South, East, or West Streets simply because no commercial parking
is available further out.
Map IV-1 shows the location of the lots used to satisfy part of the
demand generated from within the Mile-Square. It must be noted
that the parking demand for commercial spaces generated from
outside the Mile-Square must also be satisfied in these lots. A
total of 821 commercial spaces were identified north of North
Street; 458 of these spaces are in the Meridian Street Corridor.
Based on the demand analysis of the Corridor, only 200 of the
commercial spaces in the Corridor are available for use by
businesses within the Mile-Square for a total of 563 commercial
spaces north of North Street. Bank One provides a private employee
lot located just east of East Street (Block ES1) with 181 spaces.
Located on the same block, is a 68 space private lot used by the
Indiana Department of Education. A new surface lot located south
of South Street at Senate Avenue provides 1,129 commercial spaces;
for an additional fee, shuttle service into the Mile-Square is also
provided. However, utilization of this lot has been noticeably low
possibly due to influx of new spaces in the Southwest Quadrant in
the spring and summer of 1987.
Another 1,726 spaces were identified as reserved for state
employees west of West Street; however, the State of Indiana has
indicated that plans have been made to relinquish all of its
perimeter parking upon completion of its new garages. These lots
will be used as parking for White River Park or used for other park
development.
Observations of parking patterns in the fringe areas indicated that
parking is generally adequate for the uses present. Certain areas
that overlap with the fringe areas, however, have special needs
that merit a more detailed analysis herein.
MERIDIAN STREET CORRIDOR
The Meridian Street Corridor is a three block wide area running
from the north central boundary of the Mile-Square to 1-65 (see Map
I-1). Geographically, it is bounded by 12th Street Oust north of
I-65), North and Pennsylvania Streets, and Capitol Avenue. The
high volume of north/south commuter traffic that flows through the
Corridor has led to its partitioning by primary arterials.
Briefly, Meridian Street, a two-way arterial from which the
Corridor takes its name, conveys both morning and evening rush hour
traffic from the north and from the south respectively. The
remainder of the traffic is moved along one of three one-way
arterials: Capitol Avenue, morning traffic one-way south; Illinois
Street, evening traffic/one-way north; and Pennsylvania Street,
morning traffic/one-way south.
Parking Supply and Utilization
An inventory of all parking and land use within the Meridian Street
Corridor was conducted from June 15 to 25, 1987 by WALKER
personnel. Off-street park-
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 24
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 25
ing one block east and west of the Meridian Street Corridor was
included whenever it was determined to be used by a business
located in the Corridor. Finally, for descriptive purposes, the
Corridor was subdivided into two parts--north and south of 9th
Street. This was done to reflect the fact that much of the
commercial parking south of 9th Street is used by persons inside
the Mile-Square.
Figure IV-1 illustrates the breakdown of the parking supply in the
Meridian Street Corridor. A total parking supply of 3,858 spaces
was identified. Off-street parking accounted for 86.8% of the
total parking supply. Private, off-street parking intended for
customers, employees, or business-related visitors of a specific
building or business accounts for 86.3% of the total off-street
parking supply. Commercial parking, available to the public for a
fee, accounts for the remaining 13.7%.
Click HERE for graphic.
In the area south of 9th Street, a total parking supply of 1,807
spaces was established. Of the 1,429 off-street parking spaces,
32.1% were identified as commercial, and 67.9% were identified as
reserved for private usage. The remaining spaces are located on-
street.
For analysis purposes, the blocks occupied by Landmark Center and
its related parking have been tallied separately from the area
north of 9th Street. Landmark Center provides 1,027 private
parking spaces in seven different lots on surrounding blocks.
(These include all or parts of the following blocks: NE19, NE26,
NE26, NE27, NE28, NF-29, NW17, and NW25.)
A parking supply of 1,017 spaces was found north of 9th Street
(excluding Landmark Center and its related parking). Of these,
88.1% were private off-street spaces and the remaining 11.9% were
on-street spaces. No identifiable commercial off-street parking
was found north of 9th Street.
As was discussed previously, a supply of parking operates most
efficiently at 85% to 90% occupancy. Therefore an "effective'
supply is used to analyze the adequacy of a parking system. The
same factors used for the Mile-Square were applied to the Meridian
Street Corridor parking supply for an "effective" supply of 3,096
spaces.
Parking occupancy of all off-street and on-street parking was
recorded once between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. during
the inventory process. As shown in Figure IV-2, an overall
occupancy of 70.4% was observed; 82.8% of the commercial off-
street, 72.0% of
the private off-street and 44.6% of the on-street spaces were full.
Click HERE for graphic.
When analyzed by area, it was found that south of 9th Street 70.1%
of the private spaces and 82.8% of the commercial spaces were
occupied. In comparison, Landmark Center's lots displayed an
overall occupancy of 80.2%, while the remaining private lots north
of 9th Street had only 65.8% observed occupancy. A more detailed
breakdown of the parking supply and utilization can be found in the
Appendix (Table A-13).
Land Use and Parking Demand
At present, the Meridian Street Corridor is zoned for 1987
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 26
Central Business District usage. Therefore the park ing ratios
developed for the Mile-Square (Table A-7) have been used to
determine parking demand. The principal land uses south of 9th
Street are: the American Legion, the Scottish Rite Cathedral, the
Marion County Public Library, and Indiana Business College. The
unique mix of land use in this area generates a parking demand for
961 spaces.
The principal land uses north of 9th Street are office, storage,
and service. In addition, there are 553 residential units. By far
the major land occupant is the Landmark Center and its related
parking lots. Parking demand for the northern portion of the
Corridor is 1,522 spaces of which a demand for 660 spaces is
generated by Landmark Center. A more detailed analysis of the land
use and parking demand can be found in Table A-14 in the Appendix.
Click HERE for graphic.
In sum, the parking demand for the entire Meridian Street Corridor
is 2,483 spaces as reflected in Figure IV-3.
Parking Adequacy
As defined previously, parking adequacy is defined as the ability
of the parking supply to accommodate the parking demand. This is
measured by comparing the total parking demand to the "effective"
parking supply. Figure IV-4 shows the adequacy of the existing
parking system in the Meridian Street Corridor.
As can be seen, some areas display parking deficits indicating
localized shortages while others have a surplus of spaces. It
should be recognized that the surplus (or deficit) is a comparison
of the "effective" supply and demand solely within that area,
without
Click HERE for graphic.
consideration of the use of spaces on or by neighboring areas. It
is also important to note that many of the surplus spaces are
privately-owned for individual business' employees and customers.
This creates greater inefficiencies in utilization of the parking
supply than commercial facilities that serve multiple buildings.
Map IV-2 highlights and compares the existing demand for parking
and the "effective" parking supply. Table A-15 in the Appendix
lists parking adequacy by block for the Meridian Street Corridor.
It is worth noting that the Meridian Street Corridor is estimated
to have a current overall surplus of 612 spaces. When specific
locations within the Corridor are examined, the area south of 9th
Street was found to have an overall surplus of 571 spaces. The
parking demand for this area is 961 spaces, with an observed
occupancy of 1,164 cars. This would suggest that approximately 200
drivers who parked in the southern portion of the Meridian Street
Corridor were destined elsewhere (for example, the Mile-Square).
When the area north of 9th Street is examined, the Landmark Center
was found to have an effective supply of 777 spaces, providing it
with a surplus of 117 spaces. On the other hand, the remainder of
the northern portion of the Meridian Street Corridor shows a
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 27
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 28
deficit of 75 spaces. One contributor to this deficit is the fact
that no parking is provided for 381 subsidized housing units
located on Block NW19; the parking demand generated by these units
is 152 spaces.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS
The Chatham-Arch and Lockerbie Square Historic Neighborhoods are
situated within the northeast corner of the Regional Center shown
in Map VI-3. This portion of the Regional Center sustains a
substantial flow of commuter traffic and as a consequence has
become segmented by one-way primary arterials: East Street, morning
traffic/one-way south; College Avenue, evening traffic/one-way
north; New York Street, evening traffic/one-way east; and Michigan
Street, morning traffic/one-way west. Finally, Massachusetts
Avenue, a six-lane two-way primary arterial, provides both a
physical and a psychological border separating these two historic
districts with Chatham-Arch to the north and Lockerbie Square to
the south.
Lockerbie Square
The current mix of land uses in Lockerbie Square is indicative of a
residential area in an urbanized setting. Specifically, the heart
of the residential area--bounded by New York, Michigan, and East
Streets, and College Avenue--is comprised of single- and two-family
houses, condos, flats, and apartment buildings. Commercial land
use is largely confined to the periphery of the Lockerbie Square
Historic District,where its impact on the residential core is
limited. Particularly heavy commercialization exists along the 300
block of College Avenue, the 600 block of Michigan Street, and the
400 block of East Street.
Many of the commercial uses in the periphery are fight industrial
in character (for example, a commercial laundry, printing company,
radiator shop, and rubber stamp company) and existed before the
designation of the Lockerbie Square Historic Area. Much of the
traffic generated by these businesses is symptomatic of the service
sector: generally beginning in the early morning and ceasing by
late afternoon on weekdays.
The James Whitcomb Riley Home, which is on the National Register of
Historic Places and is a National Historic Landmark, serves as the
focal point of the residential core.
The streets within the residential core (Vermont and Lockerbie
Streets, Lockerbie Circle, and Park Avenue) function as local
streets generally conveying neighborhood and commercial traffic as
well as a number of tourists. Each of the interior streets is
limited to two-hour parking between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. which was
imposed in response to neighborhood residents' concerns of all-day
parking by downtown commuters.
The Lockerbie Square People's Club has worked out an informal
agreement with the Department of Transportation and the
Indianapolis Police Department giving the Club permission to
distribute parking permits at no cost to residents of Lockerbie
Square. Anyone with such a permit on his or her car may then park,
within the residential core throughout the day in any two-hour
limit space.
In addition to the residential permit system, most of the houses in
the residential core have access to rear entrance alleys. (The
exception being the houses in the block bordered by New York
Street, College Avenue, Lockerbie Street, and Park Avenue.) Some of
these residents have chosen to give up a portion of their yard
space to provide parking spaces behind their homes.
Residents' perceptions are that the residential permit system
adequately meets daytime needs. Residents indicated, however, that
they often have problems finding parking spaces in the evening--
when neither time restricted parking nor the residential permit
system are in effect. They further indicated that this is par-
ticularly true on those nights when occupants of the Lockerbie
Glove Company Condominiums have parties.
Finally, some on-street parking is permitted during off-peak
traffic flow periods on the one-way streets along the periphery of
the residential core. The exceptions include no parking on:
Michigan Street and College Avenue from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and from 3
p.m. to 6 p.m.; New York Street from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.; and, East
Street from
1 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Chatham-Arch
Unlike Lockerbie Square, the renovation or restoration of most of
the residential core of the Chatham-Arch Historic Area (bounded by
10th, St. Clair, and East Streets, and College Avenue) has yet to
start. Much of the existing housing stock is deteriorated.
However, restoration has either taken place and/or is currently
underway on a number of blocks. Chatham-Arch shows definite
potential for upgrading the quality of both its housing and
neighborhood.
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 29
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 30
The streets within the residential core of Chatham Arch (Broadway,
9th, and Arch Streets, and Park Avenue) function as local streets
generally conveying a small volume of local traffic. There are no
posted restrictions placed upon on-street parking within the Core.
On-street parking is permitted during off-peak traffic flow periods
on the streets along the periphery of the residential core.
Parking is not permitted on East and 10th Streets from 6 a.m. to 9
a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. Parking is not permitted at any time
on College Avenue and on 10th Street.
Parking Utilization
Parking occupancy of the on-street spaces in the Lockerbie Square
and Chatham-Arch Historical Districts was observed by WALKER
personnel on Friday and Monday, June 19 and 22. Overall, only
21.6% of the on-street spaces were occupied. Only a few blocks
displayed occupancy of more than 30%. Massachusetts Avenue on
Blocks EN21A and EN21B had the highest occupancy in the area; yet
only 25 of the 38 spaces or 65.8% were occupied. A more detailed
analysis of the parking supply and utilization can be found in the
Appendix (Table A-16).
An examination of the residential core of Lockerbie Square
indicated that 52.0% of the on-street spaces were occupied.
Moreover, almost all of these vehicles displayed a residential
parking permit. Both of these observations are consistent with
residents' comments indicating that the residential permit system
is having the desired effect of restricting daytime parking to
Lockerbie Square residents.
Click HERE for graphic.
The enforcement of this program should be continued in order to
maintain the image of these historic districts. it is, however,
recommended that the City work with the Lockerbie Square People's
Club in adopting a more formal residential parking policy, which
might have application to other neighborhoods in the future, and
that the evening parking problems be studied and addressed.
IUPUI
Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis is the third
largest college campus in Indiana. As shown in Map 1-1, its
boundaries are generally regarded as Fall Creek and Indiana Avenue
on the north, West and Blackford Streets on the east, and the White
River on the south and west. This area also contains several
health-related neighboring institutions such as the State Board of
Health, Krannert Institute of Cardiology, LaRue Carter Hospital,
Regenstreif Health Center, Veteran's Hospital and Wishard Memorial
Hospital.
The IUPUI urban campus houses many functions including education,
research and health care. It is also well known for its
outstanding athletic facilities. The growth of the campus is
demonstrated by the $60 million in new construction recently
completed or under way, including a hotel and conference center,
medical research building, major parking garage expansion and the
National Center for Fitness and Sports.
it is estimated that about 25,000 vehicles park each day in the
12,000 available spaces. Parking patrons include students (about
22,000), faculty and staff, 800,000 annual visitors to Indiana
University Medical Center hospitals and outpatient clinics, over
100,000 sports participants and spectators, and various other
visitors and conferees.
Historically, IUPUI has provided for all of its own parking needs.
Localized shortages do occur, requiring longer walking distances
than may be desired by the parking patron. Overall, sufficient
spaces are provided on campus to accommodate the University's own
parking demand. This pattern is expected to continue into the
future, as the campus continues to develop.
WHITE RIVER PARK
The area of the White River Park as shown generally on Map 1-1,
includes the new Indianapolis Zoo which is currently under
construction as well as existing Military Park at New York and West
Streets.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 31
A preliminary parking feasibility study for the park was prepared
in early 1983. While the plans for various elements of the park
and their timing have changed dramatically in the intervening four
years, no formal parking analysis has been undertaken. Thus, no
definitive parking plan is currently available.
The overall strategy for parking, however, is to provide within the
confines of the park enough parking spaces to satisfy the park's
own peak weekday parking needs in the peak season (Summer). Since
weekend daytime parking demand exceeds weekday demand, off-site
spaces will be required in peak seasons on weekends. The most
notable candidate to provide nearby, convenient, off-site weekend
parking is the 3,000 space State of Indiana garage currently under
construction immediately across West Street from the park. Infor-
mal discussions to this end have taken place between
representatives of the State and the White River Park Commission.
The new Indianapolis Zoo will have its own surface parking lot, and
also has an arrangement with the General Motors site south of the
zoo to handle overflow parking on weekends via a shuttle system.
Although the zoo is therefore theoretically self-sufficient, it
seems likely that some visitors will visit both the zoo and the
park, and thus park in the park's lots or garages.
As additional plans for the park become firm, it would appear
advisable to analyze in detail the interrelate parking needs and
resources of the major land uses the area, namely IUPUI, the State
of Indiana, White River Park, Indianapolis Zoo, and the Hoosier
Dome and Convention Center. With the exception of the State, each
of the others will generate parking demands with large fluctuations
on a seasonal or special event basis. A level of confidence should
be established that overlapping of these peak needs will n cause
failure of the parking system.
HOOSIER DOME/CONVENTION CENTER
The Dome/Convention Center area shown in Map I-1 identifies the
immediate impact area of this complex. A parking analysis was
conducted for this complex Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff in
198 Based on that analysis, a Hoosier Dome event (for ample,
football game) assumes attendance of 60, persons creating a parking
demand for 15,000 spaces (four persons per vehicle). During this
type of event
which is assumed to occur on a Saturday or Sunday approximately 400
on-street spaces are available south of the Dome area. The
Dome/Convention Center provides approximately 800 spaces and the
new shuttle lot south of South Street provides 1,129 spaces that
are generally not used for other purposes on a weekend. A number
of private lots located south of the Dome area, roughly 1,500
spaces, are available for a fee during major weekend events.
Therefore a capacity event at the Dome would generate a demand for
approximately 11,500 more spaces outside of the Dome area. As of
August 1987, event parkers would have to park four blocks north and
five blocks east of the Dome, and occupy all commercial and on-
street spaces to find enough parking. Needless to say, other
businesses will require parking concurrently which would suggest
the event parkers are parking even further away. However,
substantial parking development is taking place in the area, the
most significant of which is the 3,000 space State garage. With
these new spaces, the Dome demand can be satisfied within two
blocks north and three blocks east of the Dome on a weekend. The
latter analysis assumes that on-street and commercial parking will
be used entirely by event parking, except for that directly
associated with hotels, Circle Centre Mall and Union Station.
A major weekday or evening event assumes attendance of 1-5,000
persons creating a demand for 4,800 spaces (at 3.2 persons per
vehicle). Approximately 40% of this demand could be satisfied
within the Dome area forcing 60% or nearly 3,000 parkers into the
surrounding parking system. This can be easily accommodated in the
evening, if the starting time is late enough to avoid overlap with
office hours. Although additional spaces have and will be added in
the Southwest Quadrant, few of the spaces will be available for a
weekday event. However during the day, the southwest quadrant and
in fact the Mile-Square is projected to have a deficit in parking
similar to the current magnitude (January)--thus the additional
parking of a major weekday event will likely continue to overload
the system.
Typical weekday events held at the Convention Center occur
approximately 140 days per year (over 50% of the weekdays
available). These events have an average attendance of 3,000
persons creating a parking demand for 960 parking spaces. The 800
parking spaces provided at the Convention Center will accommodate
most of this demand with the remaining demand being satisfied in
surrounding commercial and on-street facilities.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 32
PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND CONTROLS
Although a municipality may not directly control substantial
portions of the parking supply in its Central Business District
(CBD), the traditional encouragement of high densities places
certain responsibilities on local governments. High-priority
objectives sometimes conflict, requiring municipal action. For ex-
ample, economic growth may be difficult to achieve when
transportation facilities such as street capacity and/or parking
supply are limited. If the City wishes to encourage economic
growth, it must ensure that transportation facilities are adequate.
It is important, therefore, for municipalities that are growing and
changing to: (1) establish goals and objectives and, (2) assess
priorities and adopt policies, programs and controls that
facilitate achieving the goals.
In Indianapolis, the City/County Government has taken a more formal
approach to establishing goals and objectives for its CBD than most
communities. The adoption of goals and objectives has been
achieved in large part through the development of the Regional
Center General Plan (1981). The overall Regional Center goal is as
follows:
Implement projects and programs which continue the development
of the Indianapolis Regional Center as the physical social,
and economic heart of the city and state.
Goals and objectives have also been developed in the areas of.
urban design, transportation, historic preservation, recreation and
tourism, housing and neighborhoods, office development, industrial
development, retail development, and public facilities. Priorities
were also established with the aid of an evaluation matrix which
included scoring for compatibility of each objective.
In the transportation area, the Plan concluded that:
..the street system will remain viable and that most people
will continue to rely on private cars to come into the area.
There are, however, pending opportunities that may encourage
people to change their current travel habits.
The transportation analysis indicates a continuation of the long
established City policy of letting the private marketplace respond
to the parking needs of the Mile-Square. Consequently, there are
few controls on the private system, and parking is currently not
required in Mile-Square developments. While this "laissezfaire"
approach has been largely successful more recently a concern has
emerged that the market rate of parking will impact negatively on
the decisions of potential tenants to locate downtown. This could
stymie the economic growth of the Regional Center.
It is extremely difficult to determine at what point the cost of
parking will come to be perceived as"too much" vis-'a-vis the
benefits of CBD location over suburban space. It is likely, of
course, that market forces would react in such an event, causing an
adjustment of land value, market rental rates, and parking rates.
The problem is that until, and in fact, unless this happens,
development and tenant dollars are likely to flow to suburban
locations. The image and the momentum of economic vibrancy in the
Mile-Square may well be lost. This, in turn, would negatively
impact the success of development in the surrounding neighborhoods
of the Regional Center.
The City of Indianapolis can influence the marketplace and moderate
the "downside" swings of the economic growth cycle for the Regional
Center without abandoning its reliance on the private sector to
meet parking needs. Before determining what programs and policies
should be adopted, it is important to understand what controls are
currently in place, and what modifications, if any, to those
controls are desirable in light of the information and insights
gained in the supply/demand analysis of this study.
CITY ORDINANCES
The Indianapolis Regional Center is comprised mainly of commercial
and industrial districts with the remainder being zoned for
dwelling and special usage. The Mile-Square consists primarily of
commercial districts known as Central Business Districts (CBD) 1,
2, and 3 (see Map V-1).
Most of the parking requirements are included in the zoning
ordinance for these districts. There are, however, substantially
more requirements for parking in the "Commercial Zoning Ordinance"
(applicable to commercial districts outside the Regional Center)
which may be desirable for incorporation in the CBD
Walker Parking Consultants
Regional Center Parking Study Page 33
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page34
district ordinance. Finally, commercial parking facilities must
meet certain requirements outlined in the "Licenses and Business
Regulations" Ordinance. A brief description and analysis of
current parking requirements pertaining to these three ordinances
follows.
Central Business District Zoning Ordinance
The Central Business District Ordinance includes three subclasses
of districts, with slightly different parking requirements in each
district.
Central Business District-1 (Sec. 2.01)
Access to parking garages in CBD-1 from Meridian Street, Market
Street, and excluded segments of Washington Street, Ohio Street,
Pennsylvania Street, and Illinois Street is not permitted unless a
Special Exception Permit is issued by the Metropolitan Board of
Zoning Appeals. Because there are separate categories of
"accessory off-street parking" with buildings and "off-street
parking garages" there is the potential for confusion as to whether
several requirements, including the limitations on access points to
certain streets, apply only to garages or to all parking
facilities. It should be clarified, therefore, that larger private
and/or commercial parking facilities that are incorporated within a
building are classified as garages, and that only small, private
facilities are considered "accessory parking".
A few general design standards for surface parking lots are also
specified by this ordinance. There are also a few provisions
regarding distance of driveways from intersections. However, there
are no requirements for supplying off-street parking or for the
design of parking structures.
Central Business District-2 (See. 2.02)
Accessory off-street parking facilities must be provided for all
uses of land in CBD-2, with the exception of those in the Mile-
Square. Specifically:
1. Number of Required Off-Street Parking Spaces: One (1)
parking space at least nine (9) feet in width and at
least twenty (20) feet in length, exclusive of access
drives, aisles, ramps, lanes, etc., shall be provided for
each eight hundred (800) square feet of the building's
Total adjusted net floor area.
2. Location of Required Parking: All required off-street
parking facilities shall be located either on the same
lot as the use served or within four hundred (400) feet
thereof.
3. Collective Facilities: Off-street parking facilities for
separate uses may be provided collectively if the total
number of spaces so provided collectively is not less
than the sum of the separate requirements for each such
use, and provided that such parking facilities are within
four hundred (400) feet of all said separate uses.
WALKER recommends that the size of the stall be eliminated from
this paragraph and be included in a more comprehensive set of
standards for design of parking as will be discussed in later
paragraphs. The parking requirement ratio utilized in paragraph 1
above is less than the demand ratios for retail/office uses derived
in the supply/demand analysis portion of this study. If the total
adjusted net floor area is 85% of the gross floor area (GFA), then
the parking requirement ratio is approximately one space per 1,000
square feet of GFA; this is in contrast with the ratios of 2.1 for
retail and 2.3 for office (spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA).
The current requirement, therefore, provides for less than one-half
of a development's actual needs. Modification of this provision
would be a major policy change and is addressed in greater detail
in the "Parking Policy Alternatives" chapter of this report.
The collective facilities clause does not take into account the
benefits of shared parking, which have been recognized in the
Commercial Zoning Ordinance. Adoption of the requirements in the
Commercial Ordinance with modifications as discussed herein is
recommended.
Requirements for the location of driveways near intersections and
for the design of off-street parking lots in CBD-2 are similar to
those for CBD-1.
Central Business District-3 (Sec. 2.03)
As in the case of CBD-1, there are no requirements for providing
off-street parking within CBD-3. The same restrictions on the
location of driveways and the design requirements for parking lots
in the other two business districts apply to CBD-3.
Commercial Zoning Ordinance
Although the Commercial Zoning Ordinance does not
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 35
apply to the CBD, it does set forth standards which, with certain
modifications, WALKER recommends be adopted for the CBD.TO aid in
the development of suitable recommendations for an effective
parking management program, the relevant off-street parking
regulations for Commercial Districts are examined in the following
paragraphs.
Common or Combined Parking Areas (Sec. 2.09.3)
According to the ordinance, accessory off-street parking facilities
for separate uses may be provided collectively; such facilities are
referred to as common or combined parking areas. In both the
development and parking industries, the common terms are "shared
parking" in "mixed-use" developments.
WALKER recommends no changes in Sec. 2.09.3, Part (c), which
states:
A site and development plan for each such common or combined
parking area shall be filed with the Division of Planning of
the Department of Metropolitan Development and approved by the
Metropolitan Development Commission or the Administrator of
the Division of Planning and Zoning if so authorized by said
Commission, prior to the development and use thereof and prior
to the issuance of an Improvement Location Permit for any use
served thereby.
The specific requirements of such a plan are also identified.
Sec.2.09.3, Part (d) stipulates that the total number of required
spaces contained within a combined parking area may be reduced 10%
below the sum of the separate requirements for each of the primary
buildings or uses. This sort of shared or collective use clause,
with its maximum 10% reduction is too stringent. A more
manageable/flexible requirement suitable for the needs of the CBD--
and, in fact, any zoning district-- would be:
Cumulative parking space requirements for common mixed-use
occupancies may be reduced where it can be demonstrated that
the peak requirement of the several occupancies occur at
different times (such as mid-day for office uses and evening
for residential uses). Variances in the total number of
spaces required by all common uses as specified in this
Ordinance may be considered if supported by a parking demand
study prepared by a qualified parking or traffic consultant
and approved by the Metropolitan Development Commission or the
Administrator of the Division of Planning.
Minimum Parking Lot and Stall Dimensions (Sec. 2.09.4)
Existing geometric design requirements for parking facilities are
based upon the sixth edition of the of the Architectural Graphic
Standards (AGS) which was published in 1971. These standards are
outmoded especially with respect to stall length and aisle. In
particular, the stall and aisle dimensions are those required for
the maximum size vehicle manufactured in the early 1970's. Since
then, a series of oil shortages has resulted in the significant
"downsizing" of newly manufactured. The length of new cars has
been reduced substantially more than the width. This permits not
only a reduction in stall length, but also a reduction in aisle
dimensions due to decreased turning radii. The current Commercial
Zoning Ordinance, however, does not take this into account.
Table V-1 summarizes: the sixth edition AGS standards (the current
requirements of the ordinance); the seventh edition AGS standards;
minimum comfort design standards developed by WALKER; and WALKER's
recommendations for revisions to the City of Indianapolis'
ordinance. The table does not cover all requirements of an
ordinance, but rather a number of key provisions; the preparation
of a complete ordinance is outside the scope of the current study,
but should be undertaken.
The proposed ordinance includes dimensions for "one size fits all'
designs as well as designs with some "large car" and some "small
car" spaces. That is, a design with all "one size fits all" spaces
or a mix of large and small car spaces. It is recommended that the
percentage of small car stalls in the large/small space system be
limited to 40% of the capacity. In each case, the stall and
aisle/module dimensions are based on the requirements of the 85th
percentile vehicle in the mix of vehicles expected to park in the
stalls. Quite logically, when smaller cars are separated out of
the mix, it is much more likely that several large vehicles will
park side by side, requiring not only larger stall widths and
lengths, but also a wider module to maintain comfort of turning
movement into the stalls.
The dimensions proposed by WALKER are similar to those being
finalized by a committee of the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE). If the City prefers to
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 36
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page37
reference such a standard, we would urge that the new ITE endorsed
dimensions--with appropriate modifications for local conditions--be
adopted once they are published.
If adopted, these requirements would permit renovation of existing
facilities with the effect of gaining moderate numbers of spaces
and would allow maximizing the efficiency of dollars spent on new
facilities, whether public or private. The gain in spaces will
vary according to the site dimensions available; typically, a gain
in capacity of 10 to 20% can be expected. WALKER believes that the
requirements should apply to all parking facilities in the City,
not just those in one district.
The recommended dimensions make it possible to tailor parking
layouts to meet specific needs. We propose a basic set of
dimensions that will be applicable and comfortable for nearly all
conditions. The provision of certain construction details, such as
a curb or bumper stop at all spaces, quite reasonably permits
tighter dimensions to be used without loss of comfort and function.
For further improvement of the zoning ordinance, WALKER recommends
that a comprehensive set of design requirements covering both
surface lots and structures be adopted as a separate section of
each district ordinance.
WALKER recommends that design features pertaining to access to and
from parking areas (Sec. 2.09.5), screening and landscaping (Sec.
2.09.6), and use of parking area (Sec. 2.09.7) be adopted in their
current form for the CBD. Commercial Zoning rates for the minimum
required number of off-street parking spaces (Sec. 2.09.9) are not
applicable to CBD districts without a substantial change in policy.
Licenses and Business Regulations
Article YXV, Commercial Parking Facilities of these regulations,
provides requirements in order to obtain the required license from
the City. The significant features of the Ordinances are described
below.
Division 1. Generally.
Reading of the article would be enhanced via the placement of the
definition of terms in the front (Sec. 17-861). A definition of
"self-parking" should be added to this list. In addition, the
formula used to define "vehicle capacity" should be modified so as
to reflect the downward shift in the size of automobiles that has
occurred since the passage of this article. For instance, the
vehicle capacity for an attendant-park facility should be
determined by the following formula:
nominal capacity = total sq ft */300 sq ft per space**
*the amount of square feet available for use by motor vehicles
as aisles and parking spaces in the facility.
**the average efficiency of parking areas employing downsized
design dimensions.
We would recommend employing the actual capacity of self-park
facilities rather than applying the above formula. The remaining
definitions (that is, attendant parking, commercial parking
facility, motor vehicle, and motor vehicle reservoir area) are
acceptable in their current form.
The sections on maintenance (Sec. 17-863), prohibited uses on
premises (Sec. 17-864), and unauthorized use or removal of motor
vehicles (Sec. 17-865) are adequate.
The final two sections in Division 1 of the Article pertain to the
duty to permit inspection (Sec. 17-868) and violations and penalty
(Sec. 17-869). Both are sufficient.
Division 2. Licenses.
Prior to the issuance of a license for the operation of a
commercial parking facility, the interested parties are required to
submit a written application with supporting documents (Sec. 17-
880) to the City Controller. To summarize, the division of code
enforcement requires: the name and addresses of all persons who are
leaseholders and/or operators of the commercial parking facility in
question; the address and legal description of the real estate on
which it is to be located; and a plot plan of the facility. As
indicated earlier, design requirements should be built into the
appropriate zoning ordinances. The license requirements should
serve as a check to ensure compliance.
The section pertaining to license fees for commercial parking
facilities (Sec. 17-882) needs to be updated to reflect the
proposed schedule of capacities.
The reporting of changes of circumstances relative to a commercial
parking facility (Sec. 17-888) should be amended so as to require
the City Controller to report such changes to the Division of
Planning which will be
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 38
responsible for updating the Parking Database. An appropriate
reporting form should contain:
Name, address, and phone number of each of the principal
owners;
Name, address, and phone number of the operator;
Address and legal description of the real estate on which the
facility is located;
A plot plan of the facility,
Total number of parking spaces in the facility and, if known,
a breakdown by type (for example, monthly, transient); and
Parking rates, if known, for each type of parking space.
The remaining sections in Division 2 appear to be adequate.
Division 3. Premises Requirements.
The design features prescribed in Division 3, with appropriate
expansion and modifications, should be incorporated into the City's
zoning and building codes rather than in the licensing ordinance.
Such features would then be applicable to all public, commercial,
and private parking facilities.
Requirements pertaining to parking spaces and aisles for facilities
in which attendant parking does not occur (Sec. 17-909) need to be
spelled out in the proposed ordinance. WALKER's recommended
standards for the design of parking geometries, reviewed earlier
(see Table V-1) should be adopted.
The standards for surfacing and barriers (Sec. 17-910) are
improperly worded. First, if the provision in Part (a) of this
section, that there be a "level surface for parking" were to be
strictly enforced, it would create drainage and circulation
problems for some, facilities. WALKER recommends that the
following alternative wording, which is consistent with the
apparent intent of the code, be substituted into the statute:
... The ground or floor surface of the commercial parking
facility shall be such as to provide a smooth surface for
parking and shall be free of depressions, gaps, holes or
similar surface aberrations. Further, such ground or floor
surfaces shall be sloped a minimum of 1% so as to provide
adequate drainage (see Sec. 17-914)...
Sec. 17-910, Part (b), in its current form establishes requirements
for protective barriers that are nearly impossible to design and
thereby imply certain liability problems. An engineer must assume
an impact force to design a barrier railing; the force applied by a
car moving at 5 miles an hour is not a generally published
standard. WALKER encourages the adoption of the wording of the
National Parking Association's Recommended Building Code Provisions
for Open Parking Structures (Revised, 1987) in reference to
protective barriers:
1. Barrier railings should be placed at the ends of the
drive lanes, at the ends of parking spaces, at the perimeter
of the structure and at the end of parking spaces where the
difference in floor elevation is greater than one foot.
Barrier railings should be not less than two feet in height
and should be designed for a minimum horizontal ultimate load
of 10,000 pounds applied at a height of one foot six inches
above the floor [horizontally] at any point along the
structure.
2. Openings in railings or spacing of railing components
should be established by other sections of the Code.
3. If barrier railings...are used, no other barriers such as
wheel stops or curbs should normally be necessary.
To ensure that pedestrian as well as vehicular safety is
maintained, provisions for the incorporation of regulations
pertaining to protective handrails should be adopted. The local
building code will adequately cover most situations. However,
WALKER suggests that the following language from the Recommended
Building Code Provisions for Open Parking Structures will clarify
application to parking conditions.
Handrails. All wells, shafts and other open, exposed spaces
throughout, except floors at grade, should be enclosed and
protected with continuous walls or protective handrails at
least three feet six inches [3'6"] in height, except that in
structures where vehicles are hoisted to the desired level and
placed in the parking space entirely by approved mechanical
means, the three foot six-inch [3'6"] continuous wall of
protective handrail may be omitted on the side of the parking
levels adjacent to the space occupied by the
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page39
hoisting and placing equipment.
Regulations for a required reservoir area, Sec. 17-911 Part (b),
need the following change in wording:
... Unless a detailed queueing analysis is prepared by a
qualified traffic engineer or parking consultant, the motor
vehicle reservoir area shall contain, in the case of
commercial parking facilities with the vehicle capacity of six
(6) through fifty (50) motor vehicles, three (3) nine (9) foot
by twenty (20) foot spaces and in the case of all other
commercial parking facilities, four (4), nine (9) foot by
twenty (20) spaces...
Other sections of Division 3 appear to be sufficient for
incorporation into a design standard in the zoning ordinance.
PARKING FOR THE HANDICAPPED
WALKER has reviewed the requirements for the provision of parking
for the handicapped in the City. Handicapped parking is currently
regulated by state laws and local codes. Although the City/County
government does not have the authority to change state law, an
understanding of state requirements is necessary for coordination
with local policies. The Indiana State Legislature has set forth
requirements for reserved handicapped parking in parking facilities
for public agencies and free parking facilities available to the
public. We recommend that private and commercial parking
facilities also be included.
According to Indiana state law (IC 5-9-9) the Indiana
Rehabilitation Services Agency is authorized and empowered to issue
a placard to any individual of any age who:
(A) has a temporary or permanent physical disability that
requires the use of a wheelchair, walker, braces, or crutches;
(B) has temporarily or permanently lost the use of one (1) or
both legs;
(C) is certified by a physician having an unlimited license
to practice medicine in Indiana to be severely restricted in
mobility, either temporary or permanently, by a pulmonary or
cardiovascular disability, arthritic condition, or orthopedic
or neurological impairment; or
(D) is certified by an optometrist or ophthalmologist
licensed to practice in Indiana to be blind or visually
impaired as those terms are defined in IC 16-7-17-1.
In addition, a person may apply to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles
under IC 9-7-4.1 for the issuance of a handicapped registration
plate. Any person issued such a placard or registration plate may
park in spaces specifically reserved for them by an official blue
Handicapped Parking sign (see IC 5-16-9-2 Subsec. b). By Indiana
law, therefore, the handicapped user of a reserved space may be
either the driver or a passenger.
The use of such spaces by others is prohibited (Sec. 5), and is a
Class C misdemeanor subject to a fine. WALKER would recommend that
the state law also permits use of handicapped spaces by vehicles
showing a valid out-of-state permit. The Congress of the United
States is currently considering a law that would require such
reciprocity.The design specifications of parking spaces and access
facilities (Sec. 4) need to be updated to reflect the latest
specifications established by the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI). WALKER would further recommend that the
Recommended Standards for the Design of Parking for Physically
Handicapped Persons, by the National Parking Association (NPA)
Parking Consultants Council (1987) be reviewed and adopted. These
standards are fully in accordance with ANSI requirements, but have
been expanded to clarify good design concepts for handicapped
parking.
Parking facilities under the jurisdiction or control of a public
agency are now required to set aside parking spaces for the
exclusive use of the handicapped in accordance to the following
schedule (Sec. 2):
Total Spaces Handicapped Spaces
51 to 75 1
76 to 100 2
101 to 150 3
151 to 200 4
201 to 300 5
301 to 400 6
401 to 500 7
501 to 1000 8
over 1000 10
Free parking facilities available to the public are also subject to
this schedule of requirements (Sec. 6). However, Indiana state law
imposes no requirements on commercial or private parking with
respect to reserving spaces for the exclusive use of the hand-
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 40
icapped. WALKER would recommend that the State regulation or local
ordinance be expanded to require that handicapped spaces be
provided on the basis of locally derived data on the actual demand
for and usage of such spaces or, in the absence of such data, in
accordance with the NPA Consultants Council recommendations in all
parking facilities. The NPA standards allow for three categories
of expected utilization by the handicapped (high, moderate, and
low) with a minimum number of accessible spaces for each group
according to the following schedule:
Accessible Spaces Provided
Total Spaces High Moderate Low
1 to 25 1 1 1
25 to 50 2 1 1
51 to 75 3 2 1
76 to 100 4 2 1
101 to 150 5 3 2
151 to 200 6 3 2
201 to 300 7 4 2
301 to 400 8 4 2
401 to 1000 2% 1% 0.5%
over 1000 20% plus 10% plus 0.5% 0.5%
over 1000 over 1000
High uses are those where the handicapped are most likely to be
present, such as, medical offices, rehabilitation centers, and
hospitals. Moderate uses cover most other public parking
facilities. Low uses are those where handicapped persons are least
likely to be present, such as, industrial plants and employee park-
ing areas. In cases of regular use by one individual, it is most
effective to provide one parking space for each handicapped
employee , resident, etc. As will be discussed below, the
Indianapolis Code permits just this.
Indianapolis Code
The City of Indianapolis has granted additional special parking
privileges to physically incapacitated persons. The Indianapolis
Code pertaining to handicapped parking was enacted for the purpose
of supplementing Indiana State law. According to the code (Sec.
29-257, Subsec. b), the phrase "physically incapacitated person'
refers to:
1. Any person having an ambulatory defect of eighty-five (85)
percent or more and has a valid operator's license issued by
the State of Indiana; and
2. Any person eligible for a handicapped special registration
plate as provided in Indiana Code 1971,9-7-4.1-1.
The relatively restrictive requirements of the first standard will
almost always be superseded by the State definition, thereby
rendering the first standard moot. The City requirements should
therefore be amended to simply reference the State definition.
In order to more clearly understand bow the City of Indianapolis
regulates parking for physically handicapped persons, it is useful
to highlight the more relevant aspects of the code:
The Director of Public Safety of the City of Indianapolis
is... authorized and empowered to grant to incapacitated
persons... the right to park vehicles for periods not to
exceed twelve (12) hours at any one time on streets and in
areas, including metered areas, where parking is limited but
not prohibited by ordinances. (Sec. 29-256a)
The Department of Transportation of the City of Indianapolis
is... authorized and empowered to grant physically handicapped
persons the exclusive use ... of one parking space adjacent to
or directly across the street from the applicant's place of
residence and one parking space adjacent to or directly across
the street from the applicant's place of employment, where ap-
plicable. (Sec. 29-256.1)
This gives a handicapped person the option of. (1) parking for free
in any metered parking space; or (2) having a specific parking
space reserved for her or his sole use. Such a progressive policy
is to be commended. It provides a practical solution to the
problem of furnishing access to buildings in areas where parking
facilities either are not required or do not have handicapped
spaces. There is no guarantee however that a metered space will be
available near to public buildings and destinations. In August of
1987, the City Council considered extending this policy by
reserving one space on each block face in the Mile-Square for
handicapped parking. The plan has been referred back to committee
to determine whether the spaces will be free of charge to
handicapped users or whether normal meter rates will apply. This
plan would set aside about 250 meters for exclusive use by the
disabled which removes the spaces from the supply for other users.
The Department of Transportation intends to monitor use of these
spaces and request that underutilized spaces be put back in regular
use. Based on studies of occupancy of handicapped stalls by a sub-
committee of the Institute of Transportation En-
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 41
gineers WALKER suspects that nearly all of the spaces will be
"underutilized"; and that there will be substantial pressure from
property owners along a block face to return the spaces to general
use. However, a very real need remains for the community to take
measures to insure that the handicapped have access to the area
which the City considers to be its "heart".
It should further be noted that on-street parking is not the safest
or most desirable location, especially in congested areas.The
requirement of handicapped spaces in all off-street facilities in
accordance with locally derived data or the NPA Consultants
Council's standards supplemented by a smaller number of reserved
on-street spaces in areas where off-street parking is not available
would be preferable. If the State cannot by moved to change its
law to require accessible spaces in all parking facilities, the
City should adopt more comprehensive standards. WALKER would also
recommend that a much stiffer fine of $50 (compared to the proposed
$7.50 fine) be levied against violators. The net impact of the
proposed changes by WALKER would be to insure that a reasonable
number of spaces are reserved, with enforcement of the stiff fine
insuring that the spaces are available.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE CHANGES
In summary, the following major amendments are recommended.
A complete set of design standards applicable to all parking
facilities in all zoning districts should be adopted. The
required dimensions should reflect the downsizing of vehicles.
Specific changes are also recommended for certain design re-
quirements now in the license ordinance that should be
transferred to the zoning ordinance.
A "shared use" clause that is more flexible and manageable
than a blanket 10% reduction should be adopted for common, or
shared, parking facilities. Modifications to the definitions
and determination of capacity in the License Regulations are
recommended, to reflect current design practices.
The City Controller's office should be required to report
information from license applications to the Division of
Planning for incorporation into the Parking and Land Use
Database. Likewise, the DOT should be required to report
changes to the on-street parking supply.
While the City has no control over state regulations, WALKER
has recommended that either the State regulations for
handicapped parking be updated or local ordinances be expanded
to reflect current ANSI and NTA recommended handicapped
parking standards and be applied to all parking facilities.
This would include requirements for the number of spaces to be
provided in the absence of locally derived data on the demand
for and the usage of such spaces.
The currently proposed plans to reserve one on-street space
per block face for the handicapped would not be required if
all off-street facilities contained handicapped spaces; only a
few reserved spaces on-street in areas without commercial
parking would be required. WALKER also recommends that a much
stiffer fine such as $50 be imposed when a handicapped stall
regulation is violated.
One key policy decision which requires further study is whether or
not the City should modify the requirements (or exemptions) for
providing parking. It has been determined that more parking than
is currently being provided by the private sector on a voluntary
basis is necessary to meet the growth of the Mile-Square. The
following sections discuss a number of techniques, including
requiring parking, that the City can employ to realize expansion of
the parking supply.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 42
PARKING POLICY ALTERNATIVES
A variety of parking management tactics are currently employed by
cities to alleviate parking and related transportation problems.
The five main categories of strategies or tactics pertain to:
pricing, marketing, enforcement and adjudication, on-street supply,
and offstreet supply. The following briefly describes the program,
a municipality may employ in each area. Some of these strategies
may be quickly discarded for failure to meet local goals and
objectives. Others require more detailed consideration.
PRICING TACTICS
Pricing is a major force in determining downtown parking
conditions. Map VI-1 shows the prevailing monthly and monthly
reserved parking rates throughout the CBD in the Spring of 1987.
The highest monthly rate is $80 per month and most of the
facilities within two blocks of Monument Circle charge monthly
rates of $70 or more with reserved parking in the range of $90 to
$1M per month. The monthly rates generally drop as the distance
from the Circle increases, reaching lows of $25 to $15 per month in
the southeast perimeter of the Mile-Square. A new commercially-
operated "park-n-ride" facility located south of the Hoosier Dome
offers a monthly rate of $40 to those who use the shuttle and $25
to those who do not. Utilization has been steadily increasing
since opening in late 1986; approximately 350 vehicles per day were
observed in March, 1987.
Maps VI-2 and VI-3 identify the average daily and average hourly
parking rates, respectively, throughout the Mile-Square. Again,
the lower rates are found in the Southeast Quadrant with rates as
low as $1.75 per day. Within two blocks of the Circle rates are as
high as $7.00 per day. Hourly rates range from $0.75 per hour to
$2.50 per hour.
On-street meter rates are much lower at $0.25 for 37.5 minutes.
On-street parking is intended to serve the specific need for very
short-term, convenience parking for the service/retail uses present
in an area. The turnover and duration observed in metered areas
were generally very good, indicating that the meters are serving
their intended purpose. A recent study published by the ENO
Foundation in its Transportation Quarterly(1) also found that the
demand for onstreet parking is somewhat independent of the demand
as a whole; certain users, especially those who intend very short
stays, are willing to circle an area looking for an on-street space
but resist parking in a readily available off-street space. This
parallels the findings of the occupancy studies on a Saturday in
December, 1986 which found very heavy usage of onstreet spaces and
much lower usage of off-street facilities. Given that less than 6%
of the parking supply in the Mile-Square is on-street metered
parking, changing meter rates would not appear likely to cause any
substantial progress toward meeting the transportation goals of the
Regional Center.
Indianapolis/Marion County government and associated agencies do
not control or operate any major sources of parking in the CBD.
Several facilities are owned by the City/County but are leased to
private operators who have control over rates, such as, the lot
north of the jail/sheriffs complex and Market Square Arena.
Therefore direct action to change parking rates for off-street
parking is not an option for local government.
The municipality could, however, unilaterally raise parking rates
by imposing a tax or surcharge on all commercial parking fees. If
rates were to go up, as previously discussed, economic growth could
be adversely affected. A benefit of higher rates would be an
encouragement of alternative modes of transportation (one of the
goals of the Regional Center Plan).
Similar action to reduce rates is more difficult; WALKER is not
aware of any communities with "rate control" laws which
conceptually would be similar to "rent control" used in New York
and some other major cities to control increases in apartment rent.
The only option the City has to lower rates would be to build
municipal facilities until an over-supply of parking is achieved,
forcing market rates down.
(1) Adiv, A. and Wang, W., "On-Street Parking Meter Behavior',
Transportation Quarterly Vol. 41, No.3 July 1987, 281-307. ENO
Foundation for Transportation, Inc., Westport, Connecticut.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 43
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 44
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 45
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 46
If market rates were to go down, the concern over competitiveness
of Mile-Square rental space would be eased. More employees might
then choose to drive, and more parking would be needed for
accelerated growth. Lowered market rates, however, would decrease
the private sector's incentive to construct new parking, which is
already falling behind the current pace of economic growth.
Given the current concern over high fees and the early success of
the commercial shuttle program, WALKER would recommend lowering the
cost of using alternative modes of travel, rather than increasing
the top end parking rates. The options for lowering the cost of
alternative travel modes are several:
Employer subsidies for city bus and/or park-n-ride
utilization;
Employer subsidies for car and van pool parking;
Municipal subsidies for special "Mile-Square" bus passes in
peak hours;
Municipal operation or subsidy of park-n-ride programs; and,
Differential pricing for carpool high occupancy vehicles
(HOV).
Employer subsidies, of course, require the participation of the
businesses in question. One of the few concerted influences a
governmental agency can bring to bear would be to provide zoning
concessions in return for written agreements that developers would
subsidize bus or park-n-ride services for tenants. As previously
discussed, presently few parking requirements exist in the Mile-
Square and therefore there are few concessions to grant.
An increased municipal subsidy of bus services is likely to be
expensive because current bus users will be the first to take
advantage of the subsidy. Only when"new' riders join the program
will there be a reduction in parking demand; the City will be
subsidizing many current users to gain a limited net reduction of
parking demand and traffic congestion.
Park-n-ride programs tend to be expensive due to the operating
expenses of the shuttle. It has generally been found that such a
shuttle must operate on a headway of 5 to 8 minutes during peak
hours to attract substantial usage. The benefits to a park-n-ride
program are the reduction of vehicle trips to the center of the
city and the reduced need for parking facilities, releasing land
for other development.
Creating preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles (HOVS) is
also a desirable alternative. One of the most effective techniques
is to allow carpools to park free or at a reduced rate in
municipally-controlled spaces. Under such a system, carpoolers
would apply for a permit from a designated department of the
government. The permit would allow the bearer to park all day
without further charges in short-term, onstreet spaces in
designated areas.
This sort of long-term, on-street parking should exclude areas of
major retail and entertainment activity, such as the Southwest
Quadrant, where short-term parking is in greatest demand.
Approximately 1,850 short-term spaces would then be available for
carpool use. It is not recommended, of course, that this many
permits be issued. For instance, the City of Portland has 2,615
available short-term spaces. In 1979, when it adopted a
preferential parking program, it authorized a limit of 500
preferential parking permits for carpoolers. In 1986, the City
issued, on the average, approximately 150 permits. While 150
permits may seem like a small number, it results in a net reduction
in the parking demand of 300 to 400 spaces. The construction cost
alone of that many spaces in a parking structure is over
$2,000,000. Carpool permits generally have a nominal fee to cover
administrative and operational costs of the program; little or no
capital and enforcement costs are involved. The existing
Indianapolis Ridesharing Program (IRSP) established in 1981 is
responsible for reducing the number of vehicles on the road by
2,220 as of August 1986. In addition to helping individuals form
carpools and disseminating information, the IRSP could be
responsible for issuing the reduced rate parking permit.
Another pricing tactic would be subsidizing market rates for
carpool vehicles in commercial facilities. Private operators would
certainly not participate unless the City or the employer paid the
difference in fee; such programs are therefore likely to be
relatively expensive, but maybe cost-effective vis-'a-vis other
solutions.
ENFORCEMENT AND ADJUDICATION
The only parking spaces which the city directly controls are the
on-street spaces, which comprise 7.7% of the total supply. While
strong enforcement programs are important to insuring that the
spaces are available
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 47
for intended users, such programs will not markedly affect parking
adequacy in the Mile-Square.
MARKETING
While marketing in itself will not increase parking supply or
reduce demand, it will be very valuable to publicize any and all
steps taken to improve parking downtown. The success of such
projects as Circle Centre Mall may well hinge on the perception of
parking availability. Publicity about improving parking conditions
in the Mile-Square can change public opinion and foster more
economic growth in areas identified as important by the Regional
Center Plan.
Public and private sectors must, therefore, work together to update
maps of available parking, and coordinate publicity and advertising
to the benefit of all. Marketing of programs for alternative
travel arrangements are also critical to the success of such
programs.
ON-STREET SUPPLY TACTICS
Parking management strategies involving the on-street supply
include: adding or removing spaces, changing the permitted time
limit, restricting parking to certain times or users, and employing
on-street spaces for preferential carpool parking.
As noted earlier, the on-street supply currently comprises 7.7%
(2,579 spaces) of the total supply. About 83% of the on-street
spaces are designated for short term parking with limits ranging
from thirty minutes to two hours. Of the remainder, 8% are not
time-restricted and 9% are reserved for specific users (primarily
for police). The occupancy, turnover, and duration surveys taken
in December 1986 and January 1987 indicate that the spaces are
generally well utilized and that violation of time limits is
relatively low. Therefore, changing the number of spaces, the
permitted duration, or existing restrictions on the on-street
spaces is not recommended.
OFF-STREET SUPPLY TACTICS
The municipal government can cause expansion or restriction of
supply as deemed appropriate to local needs. The first decision,
of course, must be which of the two approaches best meets the goals
and objectives of the community. Restrictions on supply are
generally employed when the street system is inadequate. For
example, in the City of Boston, there is a limited number of
parking spaces permitted in central areas. Developers who wish to
build parking must buyout the license(s) held by existing parking
facilities which must then close.
Restrictions on parking supply also imply the responsibility of
local government to provide alternative modes of transportation.
In most cases where restrictions are used, both commuter rail and
bus services are available. Because the street system in the
Regional Center is believed to be adequate for future needs,
restrictions on supply are not considered necessary or desirable in
Indianapolis.
Expansion of the supply is possible through several different
methods. The municipality can build and operate parking
facilities. In most cases, municipal parking facilities are not
self-supporting and must be subsidized by other sources. The most
common are:
General fund/obligation of the City;
Revenues from other parking structures and/or meter revenues.
In such cases, a separate formal parking authority is
generally required;
Special assessment district where property owners are taxed to
supply any deficits; and,
Tax increment districts in which the additional sales and/or
property taxes generated by private redevelopment in an area
are dedicated to paying for associated municipal expenditures.
A less common technique for financing municipally operated parking
facilities is to require local developers (who do not provide
parking), to contribute to a fund for parking improvements. In its
original application, required parking spaces were waived when a
contribution was paid in an amount set to allow the municipality to
construct the needed spaces.
This technique has generally been employed with limited success in
smaller communities. The chief problem has revolved around the
length of time required to accumulate any significant amount of
funds to develop parking. A recent variation is the "impact fee"
generally imposed when development in a rapidly growing area will
saturate existing transportation facilities. In most such cases,
the fee is negotiated as part of the approval process for planned
unit development zoning. Instituting this type of program would
most likely require modifying zoning requirements in the CBD. The
desirability and the return on equity for
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 48
building in the impact fee area must, of course, outweigh the
required fees.
There is a parking authority already in place; however it has been
relatively inactive since the 1960's. Reactivation of the
authority and/or use of special assessments would appear to be the
most feasible alternative for municipal parking programs that would
add spaces to the supply.
Another route, more compatible with the policy of having the
private sector provide parking, would be to amend the zoning
ordinance to require parking as part of each development in the
Mile-Square. The requirement need not be for the full need of
every project but rather, the replacement of any existing spaces
lost plus a minimum amount of new spaces. The requirement to
replace spaces is especially important if there is to be any net
gain in spaces. This would not be too onerous for hotel and retail
developments, since it appears that those projects are already
voluntarily providing parking. The economic impact on office and
other developments will be addressed later.
A final option is to develop public/private cooperation in
providing parking. Several approaches that may prove to be cost
effective will be discussed in the following section.
BENEFITS OF PARKING MANAGEMENT TACTICS
As seen in Table VI-1 there is no one tactic that can
simultaneously achieve all the desired goals (minimize auto usage
and traffic congestion, maximize transit patronage, provide
adequate parking, and foster economic growth). This is partly due
to some fundamental conflicts in the goals--for example, tactics
which increase the parking supply are likely to reduce the
incentive to use mass transit.
Those tactics which produce little or no positive progress towards
the regional center goals can be quickly discarded from further
consideration including:
Municipal actions to modify or control parking rates;
Modifications in enforcement/adjudication;
Modifications in the on-street parking controls; and,
Restriction of the off-street parking supply.
While marketing/promotional activities will not have a direct
impact on achieving the regional center goals, publicizing the
positive steps and programs being implemented will be invaluable.
Therefore it is recommended that public relations/marketing
activities be considered a high priority in the overall plan.
Several tactics were found to further the progress toward the
regional center goals and have been selected for further study of
the cost and benefits of the program, including:
Differential pricing for carpools;
Development of a park-n-ride facility;
Subsidized transit programs;
Construction of municipal parking facilities;
Joint public/private development of parking facilities; and,
Modified zoning requirements to require parking for new
developments in the Mile-Square.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The previous analysis identified a number of actions or policies
that could help achieve the goals of the Regional Center Plan and
ease parking shortages in the Mile-Square. In order to select the
most cost effective tactics, a comparison of the revenues and
expenses for each alternative is necessary. Table VI-2 discusses
actions which would be financed and, in some cases, subsidized by
the municipality. The various alternatives are as follows:
Subsidy of transit fees for Mile-Square destinations;
Preferential carpool parking on-street;
Development of a park-n-ride facility on property below or
adjacent to the interstate along the northern boundary of the
Regional Center;
Construction of a parking facility on municipally owned land
in a perimeter location; and;
Construction of a parking facility on land either already
owned or land to be acquired in a "core" location.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 49
Click HERE for graphic.
The various assumptions employed in the analysis are:
Location: A "core" site is defined as one which has a land
value of $100 per square foot and would generate a monthly
parking fee of $90 per month. A perimeter site is one which
would cost $50 per square foot to acquire and clear, meriting
a monthly rate of $45 per month. A distant site is one which
would require shuttle service.
Equivalent Number of Spaces: Because of the magnitude of both
current and projected deficits, all new structures are assumed
to provide 1,000 spaces. It is further assumed that 500
people each will participate in: a park-n-ride site
identified by City staff; a transit subsidy program; and in an
enhanced carpool program (that is, enhanced by preferential
parking). It should be noted that the 500 new participants in
the carpool program translates to about 150 permits
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 50
Click HERE for graphic.
and a reduction in demand of about 350 spaces. This latter
figure then is the equivalent "gain" in spaces.
Site Cost: The parking structure sites are each presumed to
be 50,000 square feet. It should be noted that land values
throughout the Mile-Square vary substantially, according to
the goals of the individual buyers and sellers concerned. An
individual "core" area parcel may be available for far less
than the asking price, if there is any, for adjacent property.
Few, if any large parcels are available for development in the
core area of the Mile-Square; assembling several parcels
nearly always increases the cost per square foot. It is
therefore assumed that the cost to assemble and clear a 50,000
square foot site is $100 per square foot for a "core" site and
$50 in perimeter areas. The park-n-ride site is currently
owned by the State. Recent discussions indicate that the
State would permit the City to use the site for a nominal
charge, with the restriction that it is to be used for
transportation purpose.
Total Construction Cost: The improvements to the park-n-ride
site are assumed to cost $1,500 per space. Parking structure
costs are assumed to be $6,500 per space.
Design Fees and Contingencies: These costs are estimated to
be 15% of construction cost for the surface lot and 10% for
the structures.
Parking Revenues: Monthly rates of $90 Core/$45 Perimeter are
applied to 80% of the spaces in the structures. The other 20%
are presumed
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 51
to generate an average income of $7.50 per day (including weekends
but not holidays) in core locations and $3.75 per day in perimeter
locations. This is an equivalent parking fee of $3.00 per use with
an average turnover of 2.5 in core locations and 1.25 in perimeter
locations. The "Mile-Square" bus passes are presumed to cost users
$20 per month; carpool parking permits are assumed to be $25 per
month; and park-n-ride fees (including shuttle service) are assumed
to be $1.50 per day, an equivalent of $30 per month.
Operating Expenses: Monthly expenses for the bus pass program are
assumed to be the current bus pass rate of $40 per month. The
difference between revenues and expenses is thus the subsidy
required. The cost of the carpool program, as previously
discussed, is relatively small. Advertising, printing of forms and
passes, and staff time to administer the program are included in
the estimate.
Operating expenses for the park-n-ride program include $75 per
space per year for operation and maintenance of the lot, and
$100,000 per year for shuttle operations. Operating expenses for
the structure alternatives are assumed to be $250 per space per
year. This figure is based on WALKER research and experience and
includes payroll and fringe benefits for personnel, utilities,
supplies, insurance, daily maintenance, and a sinking fund for
periodic major expenses such as repairs and application of sealers,
etc.
Financing Criteria: In the absence of any proven source revenues
which could be dedicated to the parking bonds, such as surplus
revenues from existing municipally-owned facilities, any bond issue
will have to be backed by the full faith and credit of the City.
Therefore, all options requiring financing are assumed to employ
general obligation bonds. The annual deficits can of course be
paid from other sources than the general fund, such as special
assessment districts, as previously discussed. It is assumed that
the interest payment on the bonds that would be due during the
construction year will be capitalized (that is, included in the
borrowed amount). The interest earned during construction is based
on Parking Facility Construction Payout Study by E. Carlton
Heeseler and William C. Arons. The assumed interest rate and term
are shown in the table.
The calculation shown is for the third year of operation. It is
generally reasonable to assume that a new parking facility will be
fully utilized by the third year of operation. The last three
lines (annual surplus/deficit, annual surplus/deficit per space and
the monthly fee to break even) provide the critical information for
selecting the most cost-effective alternatives. The annual surplus
or deficit for each program is expressed both in total dollars and
per (equivalent) space. The latter is important in comparing
alternatives as there is some variation in the size of the
programs. The monthly revenue per space "to break even" is par-
ticularly interesting in that it indicates at what market rate the
program is self-supporting. Of course, if one waits until the
market rate rises naturally to this level, operating expenses may
also inflate.
The carpool program appears to be self-supporting and among the
most desirable alternatives. The gain in equivalent spaces,
however, is small compared to expected growth in parking demand.
If the City or other government agency already owned a core site,
development of parking would be economical at today's rates.
However, no such sites are owned and land acquisition will require
a subsidy from other funds.
An unexpected, although not unusual, finding in this analysis was
that the subsidy for land acquisition and a new core area structure
would be less expensive than the subsidy for the park-n-ride
program. Therefore, if the City chooses to subsidize a parking
program, it is more cost-effective to acquire land for a core area
structure than to develop a park-n-ride program. There are, of
course, other considerations than cost which will influence
selections of the "best' alternative for the City, as will be
discussed later.
Table VI-3 discusses actions which would be financed by the private
sector. The various alternatives explored are as follows:
Construction of a parking facility on land already owned in a
perimeter location;
Construction of a parking facility on land to be acquired in a
perimeter location;
Construction of a parking facility on land already owned in a
core location;
Construction of a parking facility on land to be acquired in a
core location;
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 52
Click HERE for graphic.
Construction of a parking facility on land to be acquired in a
core location with a tax abatement;
Construction o a parking garage under new office development
on land to be acquired in a core location; and,
Construction of a parking garage under new office development
on land to be acquired in a core location with a tax
abatement;
The various assumptions employed in the analysis are:
Location: Same as for public sector.
Equivalent Number of Spaces: All new structures are assumed
to provide 1,000 spaces as discussed previously.
Site Cost: Same as for public sector.
Total Construction Cost: Same as for public sector, except
for the two options with a parking garage incorporated into an
office building which would increase the cost per space to
$10,000 above grade and $20,000 below grade.
Design Fees and Contingencies: Same as for public sector.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 53
Parking Revenues: Same as for public sector.
Operating Expenses: Same as for public sector.
Financing Criteria: All alternatives are assumed to be
financed through commercial bank loans with 80% permanent
financing issued upon completion of construction, and 20%
equity by the developer. The interim loan is assumed to be a
draw down type loan as expenses are incurred at 7% interest
with the principal paid out of permanent financing. The
interest rate is 10% and term is 20 years. Property taxes are
assumed to be one-third of the total land and construction
cost times a mil rate of .1119 (land cost is included at
present market value even when not included in project cost).
The depreciation rate is assumed to be straight-line for 31.5
years per current tax law.
In the current marketplace, it is generally accepted that the sum
of the annual depreciation and net cash flow (excluding income
taxes) should equal 18% of equity to be attractive to investors and
financial institutions; this takes into account the 1986 tax law
impact. This analysis does not, however, consider the indirect
marketing benefits of providing parking for the developer of a
larger project. A developer may well accept a lower return on the
portion of funds spent on parking, or be @g to guarantee revenues
to an independent commercial facility, thereby lowering the risk
and, in turn, the necessary return for the investors in the parking
facility. The last three lines again provide the critical
information for evaluating the most cost-effective alternatives.
Also shown is the monthly revenue per space required to achieve the
18% return on investment.
It appears that a private developer cannot achieve the 18% return
considered necessary to attract investors and financing under any
of the scenarios. However, a developer could make a return of 14%
on an independent parking facility if the site was already owned.
A developer of an office building with a garage could also make a
return of about 11% with a tax abatement; this should not be a
burden to the overall profitability of a project.
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
The matrix shown in Table VI-4 has been prepared to provide a
method to evaluate and compare each alternative and summarize the
relative advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. The
potential parking solutions are evaluated on the basis of the
following criteria:
Public Cost: The cost to local government in terms of the
annualized surplus/deficit per equivalent added space.
Private Cost: The cost to the user or parker. This is an
important measure because it addresses the concern that the
market rate of parking will drive tenants from the Mile-
Square. For the publicly financed solutions, the cost is the
assumed parking fee. For the privately financed solutions,
the cost is measured by the market rate necessary for the
developer to realize a reasonable return on his equity, and
how close this is to the market rate for that location.
Effectiveness: The net effective increase in supply and the
location/ desirability of the spaces to meet needs. Private
cost and effectiveness combined represent the extent to which
economic growth is supported and encouraged by the alter-
native.
Implementation: The ability to implement the alternative
within a reasonable time frame. For example, the carpool
program could be implemented very quickly, while park-n-ride
would take several months. The municipality does not now own
any core area property upon which to build parking so this
alternative is not "implementable". In addition to the time
required, a deduction of one point(s) is made where the
private owner is unlikely to implement the project voluntarily
or without further government action such as condemnation for
land assembly or requiring parking in new developments.
Traffic Impact: The extent to which traffic/transportation
goals of the Regional Center Plan are achieved. Environmental
impact is closely tied to traffic congestion; therefore,
traffic impact includes the effect on air quality.
Each of the criteria was given a weight of 15% to 25% dependent
upon its relative importance in the evaluation process. For
example, on a relative basis, public cost was considered somewhat
more important the traffic impact; thus, public cost was weighted
at 25% while traffic impact was weighted at 20% to determine the
average score.
A score of 1 to 5 was determined for each of the criteria
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 54
with 5 being the best rating (excellent) and 1 being the worst
rating (poor). The other ratings were very good (4),good(3),and
fair(2). For example, those solutions that generated an annual
surplus and those private solutions that require no government
assistance were rated 5 for public cost. Those that required a
public subsidy of less than $100 per space per year were rated 4,
those with a subsidy of $100 to $250 received a 3, and so on. The
total unweighted rating and the weighted average score were
determined for each of the alternatives. The alternatives were
then ranked utilizing the unweighted total rating and weighted
average rating with the lower rankings being the better
alternatives. The final determination of alternative solutions
must rest with the City of Indianapolis. Based on the matrix as
weighted herein, WALKER recommends the following overall priority
of schemes.
Click HERE for graphic.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 55
The most desirable option is the implementation of the carpool
preferential parking program. It ranked high in all criteria
except effectiveness, as it will provide a limited effective gain
in spaces. The park-n-ride program ranked second, with its
required public subsidy being outweighed by the other benefits.
The existing but dormant Parking Authority may be able to take the
responsibility for capital costs and operation of the park-n-ride
program, with the burden of the subsidy spread over a relatively
large special assessment district encompassing the shuttle routes.
Private development of parking structures in core areas is the most
desirable option for gaining large number of spaces, even though
this does not further the transportation goal of reducing vehicle
trips within the Mile-Square. Three separate alternatives for
achieving private parking in core areas - construction on land by
current owners, above grade parking within development projects and
acquisition of property for construction - ranked 3,4 and 4
respectively. The likelihood of implementation of all three,
however, is judged to be only fair without further government ac-
tion.
In the opinion of WALKER, the City should modify its policy and
require some parking as part of new development,within the Mile-
Square. The current requirement for approximately one space per
1,000 square feet GFA in CBD Zoning districts outside the Mile-
Square could be extended to cover the Mile-Square. As previously
discussed, it is also important to require replacement of any
existing spaces. Developers would be given the option of meeting
the requirements by a combination of-.
Restriping existing facilities;
Carpool incentives;
Park-n-ride incentives;
Construction of spaces; and
Lease commitments from other new commercial facilities.
Securing lease commitments from existing facilities should not be
considered a means of meeting the parking requirement, as this
merely transfers the deficit burden to others.
It appears from the financial analysis, however, that this
provision might discourage further development in the Mile-Square
unless certain other concessions are made by the municipality.
Those which seem to hold the most benefit are as follows:
The City can assemble land through condemnation by the
redevelopment authority and then sell it to a private
developer for parking development. In some cases, the
financing package may have to be structured to allow a slow
payback of principal during the early years, allowing the
facility to build patronage and market rates to rise to a
level that is profitable. Such parking development projects
should be competitively bid so that all interested developers
can submit proposals.
The City can provide financial incentives for private
development of parking. One of the most "painless" incentives
is to abate taxes on the parking facility portion of a
project, especially if that parking is to be required. This
would increase the return on equity to a reasonable level on a
facility in a larger development. It is likely that such
abatements would only need to be continued for a few years as
market parking rates increase to profitable levels. Due to
the interrelationship between construction cost, financing
fees, and parking rates, it might be most desirable to
negotiate the length of abatement for each individual project.
The city might also participate in certain upfront costs such
as financing land acquisition with repayment deferred until
market parking rates reach profitable levels.Again the
structure of such agreements will vary from project to
project.
In summary, it appears that enhancement of the existing carpool
program with preferential, low-cost parking; developing the
proposed park-n-ride facility; assembling land and selling it for
parking development; and requiring some parking in new developments
with a few concessions, such as a limited period of tax abatement,
are the most desirable means for encouraging the expansion of the
parking supply in the Mile-Square.
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 56
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A total parking supply of 35,945 spaces was found in the Mile
Square in an inventory conducted in January, 1987. Commercial
spaces in lots and garages comprise about 60% of the off-
street spaces; the remainder are private spaces for a specific
building or complex
The "effective" parking supply includes adjustments for
efficient utilization of the available spaces, and has been
established as 32,760 spaces.
Occupancy of off-street spaces in the Northeast and Southwest
Quadrants of the Mile Square was observed at approximately
80%, while the Northwest and Southeast Quadrant occupancies
were a little higher at around 87%. The highest off-street
occupancies observed were in the State lots, with an average
occupancy of about 94%.
Occupancy of on-street spaces varied more widely, ranging from
a low of 51.5% in the Northeast quadrant to highs of 106% and
109% in the Southwest and State Capitol zones.
Occupancy of parking in most of the Southwest Quadrant was
also observed in a Saturday in December, 1986 to illustrate
parking conditions at peak retail activity. It appears that
retail shoppers resist parking in commercial lots and garages
as the occupancy of the off-street spaces was only 52%
compared to an occupancy of 112% in onstreet spaces.
Turnover and duration studies found relatively short lengths
of stay, less than 2 hours in all the on-street spaces
observed. Turnover varied somewhat more, from 1.39 in the
Northwest quadrant to nearly 8 times per day near Union
Station. The meters with a two-hour time limit therefore
appear to be serving the intended purpose of providing short-
term, convenience parking for visitors to the Mile-Square.
Parking demand has been calculated by multiplying "demand
ratios" by the square footage of land use present on each
block.
The demand ratios have been developed for local conditions
through surveys establishing employee driving ratios, the
density of employees per square foot of land use, and captive
market adjustments. The latter account for the percentage of
visitors who are employees of another Mile-Square business and
therefore do not generate any parking demand.
The parking demand in the Mile-Square as of January 1987, is
estimated to be 37,998 spaces. The average demand ratio for
all land uses, excluding vacant space is 1.74 spaces per 1,000
square feet (gross).
Comparing the total demand to the effective supply, the Mile-
Square is estimated to have a deficit of 5,237 spaces as of
January, 1987.
Some of the deficit is served by parking on the perimeter of
the Mile-Square. An effective supply of 3,249 spaces was
identified as existing on the perimeter.
The adjusted deficit for the Mile-Square is therefore 1,988
spaces as of January 1987. This deficit is actually a portion
of the effective supply cushion--that is, although there are a
small number of spaces available, they are difficult and
frustrating to find. In order to serve the land uses present,
1,988 more spaces are needed to accommodate the parking needs
of the Mile-Square.
The need for additional spaces is most acute in the Northeast
(deficit of 1,897 spaces) and the Southwest (deficit of 1,202
spaces) quadrants. Surpluses ranging from 147 to 656 spaces
exist in the other zones.
As of August, 1987, approximately 3,400 more spaces have
become available for commercial use. This has caused a marked
shift in the overall deficit of nearly 2,000 spaces to a
surplus of about 600 spaces. Parking conditions have markedly
improved in the Southwest quadrant, particularly. However,
several projects which the new spaces are intended to serve
are not yet completed; therefore the surplus is believed to be
temporary.
All known proposals for development in the Mile-Square have
been included in projections for future parking demand and
supply.
The parking supply is expected to increase to 49,039 spaces by
1992, a net gain of 13,364 spaces over January of 1987. The
projected effective
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 57
supply is 45,131 spaces.
A total increase in parking demand of 14,626 spaces is
projected, resulting in a total demand of 52,624 by 1992.
This would be an increase of 39%.
The deficit within the Mile-Square (excluding perimeter
parking) is therefore projected to increase to 7,493 spaces by
1992, compared to deficits of 5,237 in January, 1987 and 2,648
spaces in August, 1987.
Including perimeter parking, a deficit of nearly 5,200 spaces
is projected by 1992, compared to a deficit of 2,000 spaces in
January and a surplus of about 600 spaces in August, 1987.
The need for additional spaces will remain most acute in the
Northeast Quadrant, with an adjusted deficit of 4,555 spaces.
It appears that most retail and hotel developments are
planning to provide for most of the project's parking needs;
however, office developments tend to add to area deficits.
Another area studied in some depth was the Meridian Street
Corridor, stretching north from the Mile-Square to I-65. This
area was found to have adequate parking, with an overall
surplus of about 600 spaces. However, only 200 of the spaces
are located so as to provide parking for Mile-Square users.
Parking supplies were also found to be adequate for daytime
needs in the Chatham-Arch and Lockerbie Square areas, as
indicated by parking occupancies of 20 to 65% of available
spaces.
The informal residential parking permit system instituted by
the Lockerbie Square People's Club and the Indianapolis police
and Department of Transportation appears to be successfully
controlling commuter parking. It is recommended that this
program be formalizes by the City County Council.
A shortage of parking reportedly exists in the Lockerbie
Square area during evening hours, especially for visitors and
guests when parties occur. While beyond the scope of this
study, it is recommended that the City of Indianapolis work
with the People's Club to quantify and resolve the problem.
A review of parking conditions for events at the Hoosier
Dome/Convention Center found that as of August, 1987, major
weekend event parkers may have to park as far as five blocks
east and four blocks north of the Dome. The opening of the
State garage with 3,000 spaces will substantially reduce these
distances. Evening event parking demand also can be
comfortably served by parking in the area. However, a major
daytime event on a weekday will continue to overload parking
in the Southwest Quadrant.
The two major land uses to the west of the Mile-Square, Indian
University-Purdue University at Indianapolis and White River
Park have plans to provide adequate parking for their every
day needs.
Because it is possible for major activities to occur at all
three of these entertainment/recreational centers, a more
detailed study of the interrelationship of parking supplies
and needs is recommended in order to develop a level of
confidence that peak needs of all three users will not cause
failure of the parking system.
A complete set of design standards applicable to all parking
facilities in all zoning districts should be adopted. The
required dimensions should reflect the downsizing of vehicles.
Specific changes are also recommended for certain design
requirements now in the license ordinance that should be
transferred to the zoning ordinances.
A "shared use" clause that is more flexible and manageable
than a blanket 10% reduction should be adopted for common
parking facilities.
Modifications to the definitions and determination of capacity
in the License Regulations are recommended, to reflect current
design practices.
The City Controller's office should be required to report
certain information from license application to the Division
of Planning for incorporation into the Parking Data Base.
Likewise, the DOT should be required to report changes to the
on-street parking supply.
While the City has no control over state regulations, WALKER
has also recommended that either the State regulations be
updated or local ordinances be expanded to reflect current
American National Standards Institute and the National Parking
Association Consultants Council's recommended standards for
the
Walker Parking Consultants
1987 Regional Center Parking Study Page 58
provision of handicapped parking. This includes the required
number of spaces in the absence of locally derived data on the
actual demand for and usage of such spaces.
WALKER recommends that public relations/marketing activities
be considered a high priority in the overall plan.
Several tactics were found to further the progress toward the
Regional Center goals and were analyzed for the cost and
benefits of the program, including:
Differential pricing for carpools;
Development of a park-n-ride facility;
Subsidized transit programs;
Construction of municipal parking facilities;
Joint public/private development of parking
facilities; and,
Modified zoning requirements to require parking for
new developments in the Mile-Square.
The carpool program enhancement appears to be self-supporting
and among the most desirable alternatives. The gain in
equivalent spaces, however, is small compared to expected
growth in parking demand.
If the City or other government agency already owned a core
site, development of parking would be economical at today's
rates. However, no such sites are owned and land acquisition
would require a subsidy from other funds.
A developer of an independent garage cannot achieve the return
considered necessary to attract investors and financing under
any of the scenarios considered, unless risk is reduced by
pre-leasing the spaces to developers of office projects.
It is also extremely difficult for a private developer to
assemble a suitable site for an independent parking facility
in the "core" area.
A matrix was prepared to provide a method to evaluate and
compare each alternative and summarize the relative advantages
and disadvantages of each alternative.
The most desirable option is the implementation of the carpool
preferential parking program. It ranked high in all criteria
except effectiveness, as it will provide a limited effective
gain in spaces.
The park-n-ride program ranked second, with its required
public subsidy being outweighed by the other benefits.
Private development of parking structures in core areas is the
most desirable option for gaining large number of spaces, even
though this does not further the transportation goal of
reducing vehicle trips within the Mile-Square. The likelihood
of implementation, however, is judged to be only fair without
further government action.
The most effective tactic for causing expansion of the parking
supply appears to be requiring parking as part of new
developments. The current requirement for approximately one
space per 1,000 square feet GFA in CBD Zoning districts
outside the Mile-Square could be extended to cover the Mile-
Square. Developers would be given the option of meeting the
requirements by a combination of:
Restriping existing facilities;
Carpool incentives;
Park-n-ride incentives;
Construction of spaces; and,
Lease commitments for other new commercial
facilities.
It appears, however, that this provision might discourage
further development in the Mile-Square unless certain other
concessions are made by the municipality such as:
Assembling land through condemnation by the
redevelopment authority and then selling it to a
private developer for parking development. The
financing package may have to be structured to allow
a slow payback of principal during the early years.
Abate taxes on the parking facility portion of a
project. It is likely that such abatements would
only need to be continued for a few years as market
parking rates increase to profitable levels.
Walker Parking Consultants
