My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
31C - CUP - 2800 N MAIN STREET UNIT 3100
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2014
>
09/16/2014
>
31C - CUP - 2800 N MAIN STREET UNIT 3100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2014 4:54:24 PM
Creation date
9/11/2014 4:49:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
31C
Date
9/16/2014
Destruction Year
2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Gregg Berwin <br />June 9, 2014 <br />Page 6 <br />Weekday vs. Weekend Parking Ratio. The shared parking model measures the parking <br />demand on a weekday as well as on a Saturday. ULI /ICSC research has indicated that a source <br />for variation in parking demand can be traced to the difference between weekday and weekend <br />demand. This variation is typically seen in the parking demand rates of the model. <br />The ULI /ICSC methodology requires that each land use select parking <br />ratio for each land use if used independently. The base ULI /ICSC <br />shopping center and restaurant were adjusted, which resulted in th <br />(combined customer and employee ratio) utilized in the model: <br />Land Use <br />Shopping Center <br />Restaurant <br />Cinema <br />Land Use <br />Health Club <br />Bowling Alley — Bowling <br />Bowling Alley — Entertainment <br />Weekday Rate <br />2.85 spaces /1,000 sf <br />12.75 spaces /1,000 sf <br />0.20 spaces /1 seat <br />Weekday Rate <br />7.00 spaces /1,000 sf <br />4.0 spaces /1 lane <br />16.75 spaces /1,000 sf <br />ratios, that is, the parking <br />parking demand rates for <br />e following parking ratios <br />Weekend Rate <br />4.60 spaces /1,000 sf <br />20.00 spaces /1,000 sf <br />0.27 spaces /1 seat <br />Weekend Rate <br />5.75 spaces /1,000 sf <br />5.02 spaces /1 lane <br />19.00 spaces /1,000 sf <br />It should be noted that the Bowling Alley category is not an identified land use in the ULI /ICSC <br />shared parking model. For the purposes of this analysis, the parking demand rates for each <br />component of the bowling alley were developed. The bowling component is derived from another <br />industry standard reference, Parking Generation, 4th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers <br />[ITE], 2010). Similar to the ULI /ICSC data, the ITE data is based on the survey of comparable <br />locations to develop parking demand rates of the particular land use. The parking demand rate of <br />the ancillary entertainment component is derived from ULI /ICSC data for a nightclub use; this is <br />conservatively assumed as a proxy for the non - bowling activities provided. Combined, this <br />methodology provides a conservative approach to estimating the demand of the proposed bowling <br />alley and its complementary entertainment use. <br />Seasonal Variation. The shared parking analysis summarized in this report was based on the <br />peak month of the year. The analysis showed that December peak conditions represent the <br />busiest month of the year for this type of development and combination of land uses; this is <br />primarily due to the predominant amount of retail space in the program. <br />Mode Split. Another factor that affects the overall parking demand at a development is the <br />number of visitors and employees that arrive by automobile (mode split). The mode split <br />accounts for the number of visitors and employees that arrive by means other than automobile <br />(transit, walk, and other means). MPM is located in a suburban setting, on the grounds of a <br />regional shopping center with nearby employment and transit service. Due to these factors, the <br />Project may experience higher volumes of public transit usage than the base model assumes <br />(no transit usage); therefore, adjustments were made to the mode split for each land use. <br />6 This analysis applies the ULI /ICSC base parking demand rates for a health club use While a recently approved <br />health club study in the City utilized a lower parking demand rate, application of the ULI /ICSC base rates provide a <br />conservative analysis. <br />31 C -23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.