Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
16 OLD TOWN PARKING STUDY 02-19-08
AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 2008 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: OLD TOWN PARKING STUDY SUMMARY: City Council direction is requested regarding the parking alternatives discussed within the Old Town Parking Study. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council provide direction to staff regarding the choice of alternatives summarized in this report and fully discussed within the Old Town Parking Study prepared by Katz, Okitsu and Associates. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact to the General Fund is anticipated. However, some of the alternatives discussed within the Old Town Parking Study may involve ordinance development, program management, and /or increased parking enforcement. BACKGROUND Old Town Tustin is the traditional center of Tustin and the City's original town site. First subdivided by Columbus Tustin, Old Town has become an enclave of turn of the century and pre-World War II development largely separated from the rest of the City. This separation gives .Old Town its strong, unique identity, but it also isolates Old Town from the mainstream of community activity and traffic circulation, which has negatively impacted the area's economic development and business attraction. Businesses have been only partially successful at taking advantage of Old Town's unique location and small-town character by focusing on public events such as festivals, street fairs, a Farmers Market and similar activities to attract customers to the area. The City and Redevelopment Agency have been proactively involved in revitalizing Old Town by introducing new mixed use development, attracting new businesses, supporting the replacement of the City's existing Library, and introducing new street lighting, roadway City Council Report Old Town Parking Study February 19, 2008 Page 2 improvements, street furniture, signage, and landscaping in the area. It is the City of Tustin's continuing desire that Old Town Tustin become a vibrant and walkable town center offering shops and dining along with places to live and work. The introduction of new residents and businesses would likely generate more activity in and around Old Town and would greatly improve the existing .sense of place and expand the economic viability of the area. However, non-residential uses need parking to thrive. Retail and other commercial uses require convenient parking spaces that can handle high turnover, and businesses need parking for their employees. A vibrant mixed use area's parking needs may shift throughout the day as people come to shop, employees head to work and residents return home in the evening. In addition, the availability of public transit, flexible shared parking programs, provision of publicly owned parking spaces, in-lieu fees and other parking alternatives may help to reduce the demand for costly on-site parking while improving urban design, helping to preserve historic buildings and fostering economic development of the area. Although a majority of the Old Town built environment was constructed at pre-World War II land use and parking standards, the City of Tustin's General Plan and Zoning Code regulations do not currently differentiate development in new areas of Tustin from development in Old Town. Proposed intensification of uses and new development in Old Town have been required to meet current development standards, typically a set amount of parking for a given square footage or number of units, without regard to the neighborhood's particular mix of uses, access to transit, etc. The City has adopted zoning codes for the Old Town Tustin (Cultural Resources Overlay District and Overlay Parking District) that provides commercial and professional property developments or use conversions an alternative means of meeting on-site parking requirements including but not limited to the presentation to the City of a long-term lease of public parking spaces available within existing parking lots located within Old Town. Traditional parking standards may represent a potential barrier to better development and can discourage or even prevent development and the introduction of mixed-use residential uses or introduction of customer-attracting commercial uses (such as restaurants, theaters, etc.) that would generate jobs and greatly increase the number of persons shopping and working in Old Town Tustin. OLD TOWN PARKING STUDY Tustin City Council authorized staff to enter into an agreement with Katz, Okitsu and Associates to review parking conditions and parking codes in the Old Town Area. With input and oversight from the Redevelopment Agency, Public Works, and Community Development Departments, the consultant has now completed The Old Town Parking Study (Attachment 1) which evaluates existing parking conditions in the City Council Report Old Town Parking .Study February 19, 2008 Page 3 Old Town area, including identification and documentation of parking supply, parking demand, parking utilization, and parking regulations/management practices. The consultant also evaluated and reported options for providing new on- and off-street parking, modified parking standards, and alternative methods of addressing parking requirements within Old Town Tustin that would promote business attraction and economic development in the area. Parking standards for residential units and their guests are currently considered adequate and such parking provided for residential units in Old Town Tustin will not be available for shared use and are assumed reserved for residents and guests. Residential parking spaces were not considered for use by non-residential businesses in the Old Tustin Parking Study. The Study generally found that Old Town Tustin's existing parking supply is generally adequate and is not heavily utilized in most study areas. A few parking lots within the study area are used more heavily than other areas; however, no areas would be defined to have a severe parking shortage. Overall, the amount of parking demand in Old Town Tustin is lower than what might be expected for a comparable level of development in a more suburban configuration or land use style. The current parking conditions may present opportunities for the City to allow for additional land uses to locate within the study area and take advantage of available surplus existing parking. Further, parking management practices and provision of additional parking facilities may allow the City to improve the activity level and vitality of the Old Town district. The Old Town Parking Study provides numerous general and specific findings and recommendations for planning and management of parking in Old Town Tustin. Some recommendations provide short-term solutions to current problems identified in this report. Others provide a blueprint for future prioritization and management. The following is an excerpt of the generalized study findings taken from the Executive Summary portion of the report. • Parking demand in Old Town is generally low based upon the amount of parking now utilized in relation to the existing floor area and land use types. A comparable downtown community could have a much higher parking demand, if activity levels were higher. • Parking is generally available and underutilized in most of the study area at most times, however there are hot spots. These are generally within time limit zones in front of businesses on EI Camino Real and Main Street that have limited off street parking. Shortages occur more frequently during special events such as the Farmers Market and Jamestown Flea Market. City Council Report Old Town Parking Study February 19, 2008 Page 4 • There is evidence of violation of time limits and there is minimal enforcement in time limit zones . • There is probably not sufficient land to attain general plan goals for Old Town through use of suburban development types and at-grade off street parking. Also, land use trends in the county are not consistent with this development approach. The trend in many older downtown areas in Southern California is toward mixed-use projects requiring a creative use of parking requirements, regulations, and incentives intended to maximize parking utilization. • Mixed use developments, higher density developments, and specialty developments will likely be the rule, not the exception, for new development in the Old Town area, especially if they are consistent with the general plan vision. The Old Town Parking Study identifies and discusses Land Use/Tustin City Code Modifications, Parking Management Strategies, and Public Parking Lot alternatives to encourage revitalized economic development within Old Town. Staff would recommend that the City Council review and consider all of the implementation alternatives recommended in the report but that special consideration should be given to the following: Land Use/Tustin City Code Modifications (summarized from the report): • Continue to encourage mixed-use developments in order to make better use of available parking for present and future uses. • Review and revise the Tustin City Code to permit limited restaurant uses within existing multi-tenant buildings under special permit without the need to an increase in on-site parking requirements for such uses. • Modify the Tustin City Code to enact new or relaxed parking requirements for Old Town. • Review and revise current parking in-lieu fees to reflect the current costs of acquiring and constructing parking facilities and to acknowledge pay parking as an off-set against any established fee structure. • Continue to allow development the opportunity to utilize a variety of options to meet the City's parking requirements through the use of existing and potential alternative parking techniques (parking on-site, leasing spaces at City-owned parking lots within 300 feet, payment of in-lieu fees, etc.). Parking Management Strategies • Employ better management of existing public and private parking facilities in Old Town by including, where necessary, time limits for curb-side and public parking in Old Town. City Council Report Old Town Parking Study February 19, 2008 Page 5 • Adjust parking enforcement to achieve compliance with time limits and to insure parking opportunities for customers. • Review and develop policies to possibly exempt certain individuals from time restricted street parking under special circumstances (i.e., for business owners). • Advise private property owners to consider time limits in private off-street parking lots to insure maximized parking capacity and availability. Public Parking Lots • Work with Stevens Square Association to improve parking lot conditions, security and lighting. • Continue to monitor existing public directional signage. If necessary, consider additional sign installations. • Evaluate where existing public parking lots may be utilized to provide parking opportunities for non-residential elements of mixed use projects. Staff recommends that the City Council consider all of the findings and recommendations contained within the Old Town Parking Study and provide staff with direction as to how to proceed. Dana L. Ogdon Elizabeth A. Binsack Assistant Director Director of Community Development Christine A. Shingleton Assistant City Manager Attachment A: Old Town Tustin Parking Study S:\Cdd\ccrepore\parking study report2.doc Parking Study for OId Town Tustin in the City of Tustin October, 2007 Pzepared ~oz: City of Tustin City o~ Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Prepared by: KOA CORPORATION C PLANNING & ENGINECRING 1120 West La Veta Avenue, Suite 660 grange, CA 92868 74/573-037 Phone 74/573-9584 Fax Job No: JA6663 October 18, 2007 Mr, Dana Ogdon, City of Tustin 300 Centennial way Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: Parking Study for Old Town Tustin in the City of Tustin Dear Mr. Ogdon: Katz, Okitsu & Associates is pleased to provide you with the revised final report for the Old Town Tustin parking study. The report includes assessment of existing conditions, alternatives analysis, land use code modifications, parking management strategies, and recommendations for future needs. The report and appendices also contain a large amount of supporting data. The attached report presents our findings and analysis. It has been a pleasure to provide the study findings to the City of Tustin. Please contact me if you require any additional information, or if you have any questions about the subject study. Sincerely, Rock Miller, P.E. Principal J.•1~'ITIESITUSTIMIA66b3 TUDLD TDWNPARKIIVGIREPDRT~TUDLD TD~3'NP~4RKIIVGSTUDY~REV.DDC INTRODUCTION AND EXECC~TIVE SLIMMARY :..............................................................................................I 1. EXISTING LAND USE AND REGULATIONS ..............................................................................................5 1.1 EXISTING LAND USE INVENTORY .................................................................................................................5 1.2 EXISTING CITY PARKING CODES, ORDINANCES, REGULATIONS, AND ENFORCEMENT ................................ ..9 1.3 EXISTLNG PARKING REGULATIONS ............................................................................................................ 11 1.4 EXISTING PARKING ENFORCEMENT ............................................................................................................ 13 1.5 EXISTING LICENSES I~OR PUBLIC PARKING ................................................................................................. 13 2. PARKING DEMAND AND OCCUPANCY ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 15 2.1 PARK[NGSUPPLY ........................................................................................................................................ !5 2,2 PARKING DEMAND .................................................................................................................................... 15 2.3 PARKING DEMAND RATES .......................................................................................................... ............... 32 2.4 EXISTING PARKING DEMAND SY LAND USE ............................................................................................... 32 3. PARKING TURNOVER ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................34 3.1 OLD TOWN CORE AREA, WEEKDAY SURVEY ............................................................................................. 35 3,2 OLD TOWN CORE AREA, WEEKEND SURVEY ............................................................................. ...............37 3.3 FARMER'S MARKET AREA ..........................................................................................................................37 3.4 ,IAMESTOWN FLEA MARKET AREA ............................................................................................................. 39 3.5 PARKING DURATC4NITURNOVER SUMMARY ..............................................................................................41 4. PARKING NEEDS ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................44 4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... ............... 44 4.2 KEY ISSUES -PARKING TRENDS, PROBLEMS, AND DEFCCIENCIES .............................................................. 44 4.3 FUTURE LAND USE PR01EC'I'IONS ...................................................................... ...................................... 51 4.4 EXPECTED PARKING DEMAND .................................................................................................................... 53 4.5 PARKWGNEEDS BY SUBAREA .................................................................................................................... 57 5. PARKING ALTERNATIVES AND OPPORTUNITIES .............................................................................. 61 5.1 MIXED-USEDEVELOPM ENTS ...................................................................................................................... b! 5.2 SHARED PARK[NG ....................................................................................................................................... b2 S.3 PUBLIC CFF-STREET PARKING I.OTS .......................................................................................................... bS 5.4 PARKCNG CODES IN OTHER CITIES ............................................................................................................. b7 6. PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ................................................................................................ 69 b. l TIME LIMIT PARKING .................................................................................................................................. b9 b.2 PARKING ENFORCEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 73 b.3 PERMIT PARKING ........................................................................................................................................ 74 b.4 PARKING SIGNAGE ...................................................................................................................................... 75 b.5 CONDITIONS OF THE C STREET PARKING STRUCTURE ................................................................................ 77 b.b RECOMMENDED PARKING CODE REQU[REMENTS ....................................................................................... 78 b.7 IMPACTS 4F PARKING MANAGEMENTPLAN ............................................................................................... 82 b.8 FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION aF PUBLIC PARK[NG ............................................................................ $2 7. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 87 ~t„ K~A CORPORATION city o f Tustin ' ~LAIVNING & ENGINEERING i Old Town Tustin Parking Study FIGURE 1.1 - STUDY AREA .............................................................................................................................................5 FIGURE 1.2 - OLD TOWN SUBAREA ZONES ........................................................ FIGURE 1.3 - EXISTWG PARKING R,EGULATIONS ......................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 2.1 - OLD TOWN TUSTIN PARKING SUPPLY ...................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 2.2 - PEAK PARKING OCCUPANCY, WEEKDAY ................................................................................................. 19 FIGURE 2,3 - PEAK PARKING OCCUPANCY, WEEKEND ................................................................................................. 20 FIGURE 2.4 - PARKING ALONG ELCAMINO REAL ........................................................................................................ 2~ FIGURE 2.5 - PARKING IN THE PROSPECTI3`~ ST. LOT .................................................................................................. 21 FIGURE 2.6 - WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 9 AM ............................................................................................... 23 FIGURE 2.7 - WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 11 AM ............................................................................................. 24 FIGURE 2,$ - WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, l PM ................................................................................................ 25 FIGURE 2.9 - WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 3 PM ................................................................................................ 26 FIGURE 2.10 -WEEKDAY PARKING OCCI.]PANCY, 5 PM .............................................................................................. 27 FIGURE 2.11 - WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 7 PM ................................................................................................ 2$' FIGURE 2,12 -WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 9 PM .............................................................................................. 29 FIGURE 2.13 -WEEKDAY PARKING OCCUPANCY, 11 PM ............................................................................................ 30 FIGURE 2.14 - ~AMESTOWN LOT ................................................................................................................................... 31 FIGURE 2,15 -ASSISTANCE LEAGUE LOT ..................................................................................................................... 3I FIGURE 3.1-~ PARKING DURATION, OLD TOWN WEEKDAY .......................................................................................... 36 FIGURE 3.2 - PARKING DURATION, OLD TOWN WEEKEND .......................................................................................... 3$ FIGURE 3.3 -- PARKING DURATION, FARMER'S MARKET .............................................................................................. 40 FIGURE 3,4- PARKING DURATION, JAMESTOWN FLEA MARKET ................................................................................. 43 FIGURE 6,1- RECQMMENDED PARKING REGUI,ATIONS ............................................................................................... 74 FIGURE b.2 - C STREET PARKING STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................. 7$ TABLE 1, l -TOTAL LAND USE BY SUBAREA ..................................................................................................................$ TABLE 1.2 -VACANT LAND USE BY SUBAREA .............................................................................................................. $ TABLE 1,3 - ExISTWG CITY PARKING CODES, CULTURAL RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT .........................................9 TABLE 2,1 -EXISTING PARKING INVENTORY BY SUBAREA .......................................................................................... 15 TABLE 2.2- EXISTING SHORT-DURATION PARKING USE BY SUBAREA ........................................................................ 22 TABLE 2.3- EXISTING LONG-DURATION PARKING USE BY SUBAREA .......................................................................... 32 TABLE 2,4 -EXISTING PARKING DEMAND RATES BY SUBAREA .................................................................................. 33 TABLE 2.5 -EXISTING PARKING DEMAND BY LAND USE ............................................................................................. 33 TABLE 3.1 -WEEKDAY PARKING DURATION, OLD TOWN CORE AREA ...................................................................... 35 TABLE 3.2 -WEEKEND PARKING DURATION, OLD TOWN CORE AREA ......................................................................39 TABLE 4.1 -OLD TOWN PEAK PARKING DEMAND PROJECTION ................................................................................. 54 TABLE 4.2 ~-NEAR-TERM FUTURE PEAK PARKING DEMAND BY SUBAREA .................................................................. 55 TABLE 4.3 -NEAR-TERM FUTURE PEAK PARKING DEMAND BY LAND USE ................................................................ 55 TABLE 4.4 -1 O YEAR FORECAST PEAK PARKING DEMAND BY SUBAREA .................................................................... 56 TABLE 4.5 1 O YEAR FORECAST PARKING DEMAND BY LAND USE ............................................................................ 56 KO~ CORPCIRATION Ciry o f Tc~srin PLANNING & ENGIN~f_f21NG ii Old Town Tustin Parking Study TABLE 4.6 -EXISTING SHORT-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA ....................................................................57 TABLE 4.7 ~- PROJECTED NEAR-TERM SHORT-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA ......................................... ..58 TABLE 4.8 - 10-YEARFORECAST SHORT-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA ................................................ ..58 TABLE 4.9 -EXISTING LONG-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA ................................................................... ..59 TABLE 4.10 -PROJECTED NEAR-TERM LONG-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA .......................................... .. b0 TABLE 4.11 - 10-YEAR FORECAST LONG-DURATION PARKING NEEDS BY SUBAREA ................................................. .. b0 TABLE 5.1-REPRESENTATIVE WEEKDAY HOURLY PARKING ACCUMULATION ........................................................ ..64 TABLE 5.2 -NEAR-TERM PEAK PERIOD SHARED PARKING REQUIREMENT ............................................................... .. b5 TABLE 5.3 -10-YEAR FORECAST PEAK PERIOD SHARED PARKING REQUIREMENT ................................................... .. b5 TABLE5.4 -PARKING RATES IN OTHER CITIES .......................................................................................................... ..b7 TABLE 5.5 -PARKING DEMAND RATES FROM OTHER PARKING STUDIES ................................................................... .. b8 TABLE 6. I -OLD TOWN ALTERNATIVE PARKING CODES ........................................................................................... .. $2 TABLE A-1-OLD TOWN TUSTIN EXISTING PUBLIC PARKING SUPPLY ...................................................................... ..94 TABLE A-2 -OLD TOWN TUSTIN EXISTING PRIVATE PARKING SUPPLY .................................................................... .. 9b TABLE A-3~- OLD TOWN TUSTIN WEEKDAY PARKING DEMAND, PUBLIC LOTS & STREETS ...................................... ..98 TABLE A-4-OLD TOWN TUSTIN WEEKDAY PARKING DEMAND, PRIVATE LOTS ....................................................... 100 TABLE A-5-OLD TOWN TUSTIN WEEKEND PARKING DEMAND, PUBLIC LOTS ~. STREETS ........................................ 102 TABLE A-b-- LLD TOWN TUSTW WEEKEND PARKING DEMAND, PRIVATE LOTS ....................................................... 104 TABLE A-7 EXISTING PARKING DEMAND BY LAND USE ........................................................................... .............. ... 1.06 TABLE B-1 EL CAMINO REAL DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY WEEKDAY .............................................................. 108 TABLE B-2 EL CAMINO REAL DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY WEEKEND .............................................................. 108 TABLE B-3 C STREET DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY WEEKEND ........................................................................... 109 TABLE B-4 2N°' 3RD, & MAIN STREET DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY WEEKEND .................................................... 109 TABLE B-5 FARMER'S MARKET PARKING DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY ............................................................. 110 TABLE B-b ~AMESTOWN FLEA MARKET PARKING DOCUMENTED LENGTH OF STAY ................................................ 111 TABLE D-1 LAND USE INVENTORY BY SUBAREA ...................................................................................................... 117 TABLE D-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE BY SUBAREA ................................................................................................... 119 TABLE D-3 LAND USE VACANCY BY SUBAREA ........................................................................................................ 119 TABLE D-4 PARKING RATES FROM OTHER STUDIES ................................................................................................. 120 TABLE D-5 PARKING RATES [ROM OTHER STUDIES .................................................................................................. 121 TABLE D-6 -PARKING CODES BY CITY ..................................................................................................................... 122 Appendix A -- Paxking occupancy Counts Appendix B - Paz~<ing DuzationlTuznover Data Appendix C -City Paxking Codes and ~zdinances Appendix D--Land Use Data ~,r,/.; KOA ~ORPC~RATION c"y °fT"5"~ '!.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 111 Old Town Tustin Parking Study The City of Tustin has initiated a Parking Study for OId Town Tustin to review parking conditions and parl~ing codes in the old Town area. Much of the parking in the Old Town area is provided by on sheet parking and within off street parking facilities that are open to the public. Some of the newer developments provide private off street parking that is sized based upon contemporary parking requirements. The old Town Tustin Parking Study evaluates existing parking conditions in the old Town area, including identification and documentation of parking supply, parking demand, parking utilization, and parking regulations/management practices. The study also identifies strategies that may better utilize existing or expanded parking facilities, defines appropriate parking usage codes for new developments in old Town, and makes recommendations for the most timely and cost effective parking improvements appropriate for old Town. The study found that the existing parking supply is generally adequate and is not heavily utilized in most study areas. A few lots within the study area are used more heavily than other areas; however, no areas would be defined to have a severe parking shortage today. Overall, the amount of parking demand is lower than what might be expected for a comparable level of development in amore suburban configuration or land use style. The current parking conditions may present opportunities for the City to allow for additional land uses to locate within the study area and take advantage of available surplus existing parking. Further, parking management practices and provision of additional parking facilities may allow the City to improve the activity level and vitality of the Old Town district. within this report are numerous general and specific findings and recommendations for planning and managen~ent of parking in nld Town Tustin. Some recommendations provide short-term solutions to current problems identified in this report. Others provide a blueprint for future prioritization and management. The following is a summary in generalized forte. of the study findings identified in this report. • Parking demand in old Town Tustin is generally low based upon the amount of parking now utilized in relation to the existing floor area and land use types. A comparable downtown community could have a much higher parking demand, if activity levels were higher. • Parking is generally available and underutilized in most of the study area at most times, however there are hot spots. These are generally within time limit zones in front of businesses on El Camino Real and Main Street that have limited off street parking. KOA CORPORATION c"y of T~`Sr`H PLANNING & ENGINEERING 1 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Shortages occur more frequently during special events such as the Farmers Market and Jamestown Flea Market. • There is evidence of violation of time limits and there is minimal enforcement in time limit zones, • There is probably not sufficient land to attain general plan goals for OId Town through use of suburban development types and at-grade off street parking. Also land use trends in the county are not consistent with this development approach. • Mixed use developments, higher density developments, and specialty developments will likely be the rule, not the exception, for new development in the Old Town area, especially if they are consistent with the general plan vision. The following is a list of genezal l<ey recommendations made throughout this study. Further discussion can be found within the report sections. Land [Jsel Tustin Cit Code Madif ications • Continue to encourage mixed-use developments in order to mal<e bettez use o~ available parking for present and future uses. • Review and revise the Tustin City Code to permit limited restaurant uses within existing multi-tenant buildings under special permit without the need for an increase in on-site parking requirements Eor such uses. The amendment process might also look at identifying specific criteria that can assess existing parking opportunities on such sites and available parking management strategies. • Modify the Tustin City Code to enact new or relaxed parking requirements for Old Town. This includes specific rates for certain more common land uses as identified In the report, allowances for joint and shared parking without the need for special Planning Commission or City Council discretionary approvals, The amendment process might also identify certain minimum criteria which could assist in the staff approval process. • Review and revise any currently permitted in-lieu fees for parking to reflect the current costs of acquiring and constructing parking facilities. This may be necessary in both the Parking Overlay District and Historical Overlay District. The madificatior~s should also acknowledge that if pay parking is utilized as funding and/or implementation technique, any recommended in-lieu fee structure should reflect this as an off-set against any established fee structure. ~;KOA CORPORATION c"y o fT"Sr~~ '~." PLANNING & ENGINEERING 2 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ~ntYac~zrctian an~E.~ecc~tive Summ~tyy « When commercial and professional properties are developed or converted to permitted uses, on-site parking requirements may be modified under any one or a combination of the following provisions; o Property that lies within a Vehicle Parking Assessment District or Business Improvement Area should be exempt from the on-site parking requirement, subject to the provisions of the Parking or Improvement District ordinance. An in-lieu fee maybe required. 0 0n-site parking requirements may be waived upon presentation to the City of a long-term lease, running with and as a condition of the business license, for private off-site parking accommodations within 300 feet of the development. o All or a portion of the required number of parking spaces may be satisfied by depositing With the City an amount, to be used for public earl<ing accommodations within the area, equal to at least the value of Z00 square feet of property within the project area, for each required parking space not otherwise provided by the project. Parkin Mana enaent Strate ies « rn general, employ parking management strategies to better regulate and optimize the use of public and private parking facilities in old Town. « Review and revise, where necessary, time limits for curb-side and public earl<ing in old Town to achieve the optimum utilization of parking areas for business and non-residential uses, with the shortest time limits applied to the most valuable parking areas. Longer time periods should also be considered in secondary areas where such restrictions may induce Long-term packers to relocate into off-street parking facilities. • Adjust parking enforcement to achieve compliance with time limits and to insure parking opportunities for customers, « Review and develop policies for consideration of limited parking time limit exemption permits to allow continued use of some on-street parking for long-term use under special circumstances, provided that the number of permits can be managed with objective criteria. Consider a charge for such permits as means to control the management, enforcern.ent, and limit the number of permits issued. • Working with property owners, advise them to consider time limits in any private of (- street parking facilities only at a point where utilization seems to be approaching capacity KOA CORPORATION c"y o fTusr~~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 3 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .Intra~i~ctian ~~~ .Execc~tive Str~nm~try and problems are evident, except far overnight parking restrictions necessary for security and public health and safety considerations. Public Pax«n~ts • Worl< with the Stevens Square Association regarding the use of code enforcement and legal remedies, as necessary, to improve parking lot surface conditions, security and lighting within those portions of the C Street Parking Structure available for public parking. • Continue to monitor whether new Old Town public parking directional signage is effective in directing motorists, particularly to the C Street structure public parking area, Consider undertaking focused interviews of shoppers to determine whether they know the location of public parking lots in Old Town. zf determined necessary in the future, consider incremental installation of additional public parking directional signage in Old Town. • Evaluate situations where existing public parking lots may have adequate available parking spaces to provide parking opportunities for non-residential uses proposed in future mixed use projects inclose proximity to the lots in order to enhance overall parking supply. The attached report presents our complete findings and analysis far the Old Town Tustin Parking study. Recommendations made as part of this study are intended to help the City to better understand parking patterns, management practices, and part<ing opportunities in Old Town. These recommendations will help to better facilitate continued revitalization of the area without the inhibiting factors that may stem from suburban parking supply and management practices. ,,,.; KOA CORPORATION S,' PLAf~S~IING & ENGINEERING 4 City o f Tustin Old Town Tustin Parking Study 1, 9 existing sand Use Inventor Land use in old Town is primarily composed of cornmerciai uses, described in the City's General Plan as "old Town Commercial". This includes retail, professional offices, restaurant, entertainment, and service-oriented businesses. Mixed-use projects are currently being added to this land use mix, and more residential uses may be added in the future, Currently about 460,000 square feet of commercial uses exist in old Town. The City estimates the near-term ~5 years growth potential to be about 90,900 square feet of land uses and 112 dwelling units within Old Town, The growth potential over the subsequent 5-year time frame is estimated at an additional 48,455 square feet of non-residential land use and an additional 20 dwelling units. There has been substantial land use growth on the periphery of old Town, particularly in the retail /commercial centers Located immediately to the east near Main Street andNewport Avenue, Land uses in these areas are shopping center, traditional stand-alone retail, restaurant, commercial, and office, and recently constructed single-family homes. The City administrative center is also in this area, and the City is currently expanding its facilities for the Tustin Library. The commercial uses on ~Id Town's periphery generally share parking with other uses within their respective shopping centers or developments. This shared use was planned with the commercial mix and square footage of each center integral to the number of parl<ing spaces provided. N1.any of the commercial businesses in old Town are howevez stand-alone in that they are neither part of a shopping center or a mixed-use development, although they share parking with other nearby stand-alone businesses, The traditional parking requirements for stand-alone uses aze therefore not well suited to old Town, as there is substantial opportunity for shared use within this area, Figure 1.1 provides an overview of the parking facilities in the old Town study area, The trend in old town and downtown land use development is the mixed-use project, combining residential, office, commercial, retail, and/or restaurant land uses into a single planned project, The first project of this type to be built in ~Id Town, Prospect Village, is currently under construction on the northwest corner of Prospect & Main. old Town's five-year plan identifies mixed-use projects like Prospect Village as a major potential growth area. There are several vacant and underutilized sites in old Town that may be appropriate for these and other types of developments, as listed below, For the purposes of this study, sub-areas have been established to study land use and parking conditions, trends, and needs in old Town. These sub-areas are shown in Figure 1.2. ,y KOA CORPORATION Crry o f Tusrrn ~.' PLANNING c~ ENGINEERING 5 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U Third St. m LEGEND Public Parking Lots Private Parking Lots Temporary Parking Lots Study Boundary N Not to Scale P~ospectlMain Lot VI1. Main St. rB ~`~ ~.~A ~[~RP~R~T~~~ City of Tustin Figure 1.1 °--~~' ~~~~~~>>~~~hl~ ° ~~GiNE~~~I~u Old Town Tustin Parking Study Study Area First St. U m ., ~, Second St. r-, C Street ~~ ~ Structure o (Public ~ Upper Level) U w Third St. Prospectl3rd Lot ProspectlMain Lot 1111. Main St. l__/ Nat tv Scale ~~~ ~~~P~~AT~~~ City of Tustin Figure 1.2 ~;;.~ ~~n~~Ni~~c~ ~~ ~~~c,z~:E ;;~uc~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study ald Town Subarea Parking Zones Existing .~~nd Use crud .Regcr~ations Table ~.1 documents the existing land use inventory in Old Town by square feet, subdivided into the various subareas. Table ~.2 documents building area vacancy by subarea. Detailed land use information by subarea is provided in Appendix D o~ this report. Table ~ . ~ -Total Land Use by Subarea1 Land Use . Subarea ~. Z 3 4 5 d 7 $ 9 Total Residential ~ 1 2 14 3 - _ - - 21 Service- - 1,109 10,321 14,174 - - - - 2,554 28,158 Commercial - - 11,500 - 4,268 - - - 18,065 33,833 Retail - 14,753 2,960 11,393 27,550 26,447 2,958 100,547 3,312 189,920 Restaurant ~ - - 1,344 1,625 10,000 - - - 954 13,923 General o~~ice 30,100 21,107 31,131 12,183 5,579 19,546 - 12,523 - 132,169 Government office - - - 7,087 - - - - - 7,087 Medical office 5,223 3,297 - 2,321 - - - - - 10,841 Recreational/Social - - 6,637 ~ 1,789 _ - - - 8,426 Religious - - - - - - 8, 893 7, 220 - 16,113 Manufacturing - - 3,000 - - - - - - 3,000 Municipal - - - - - - ~ - - 0 Storage - - - - - - - - - 0 other - - - 17,185 - - - - - 17,185 TOTAL 35,323 40,266 66,893 65,968 49,186 45,993 11,851 120,290 24,885 460,655 Note ~: ~iuilding area ~n square xeet (except residential units. Source: City o~ Tustin Planning llepartment Table 1.2 -Vacant Land Use by Subarea Land Use Subarea ~ Z 3 4 5 d 7 $ 9 Total Residential - - - - - - - - - - Service- - - - - - - - - - - Commercial - - 11,500 - - - - - - 11,500 Retail - - - - - - - - - - Restaurant - - - - - - ~ - - - office 2,300 5,564 1,650 - 4,268 - - 796 - 14,578 Recreational/Social - - - - - - _ - - - Manuf acturing - - - - - - - - - - Storage - - - - - - - - ~ - other - - - - - - - - - - ToTAL 2,300 5 5~4 ~3 X50 0 4 268 0 0 796 0 26 078 Note ~: wilding area in square feet source: City o~ Tustin and KQA field survey, May 1~, zUU/ /KOA CORPORATION 't PLANNING & ENGINEERING 8 Cit y o f Tustin Old Town Tustin ~'arking Study E~~fisting L~~rd Use c~~rd .Regirl~criaMs 1.,Z Existing City .Parking Codes, ~rdiuances, Regulations, and En forcemeat A numbez of parking codes, ozdinances and regulations aze cuzzently in effect in Old Town Tustin. The following is a summary of parking codes and ozdinances cuzrently in eff ect in Old Town. The complete text of these codes and ozdinances is pzovided in Appendix G of this repozt. Parking overlay District The Cultural Resource Ovezlay Distzict is generally bounded by First Street on the north abut not including the parcels fronting on 1st Stzeet~, Sixth Street on the south, the SR-55 Freeway on the west, and Prospect Avenue an the east. The City of Tustin has established parking code requirements foz off-street parking in the ovezlay parking district, as shown in Table 1.3. Table ~ .3 -Existing City Parking Codes, Cultural Resources Overlay District Land Use Spaces/ Floor Area Loading S aces Spaces per Em to ee Spaces per Seat Spaces per Raom Retail Stores 1 sp/200 sf 1 sp/10,000 sf - - - ~ffice Building 1 sp1300 sf - - - - Wholesale 1 sp/2000 sf' 1 sp/5,000 sf 2 sp/3 emp - - industry 1 sp/2000 sf 1 1 sp/5,000 sf 2 sp/3 emp - - Restaurant - - - 1 sp/3 seats - Public Assembly - - - 1 sp/3 seats - Theater - - - 1 sp/3 seats - Hotel - - - - 1 sp12 zooms Hospital 1 sp/1,000 sf - - - - Clinic 1 sp/200 sf - - - - Note ~: IVlinimum. Parking requirement based on employees iE minimum is exceeded. Note 2: Source City Municipal Code Section 925 Combining Parking District, 9252 Cultural Resource District The City provides for waiver of these parking code ze~uirements undez the following guidelines and critezia, in order to provide for maximum flexibility in design and development for various lot sizes: • Front building setbacks may be established at the property line except for corner propezties re~uizing a five-foot Line of sight clearance. • Rear yard setbacks shall be established at fifteen ~15~ feet from. the tear propezty line, or in the event the development extends to the next intezvening street, the rear setback line shall be construed as the fzontage an "C" oz Prospect Stzeets. KO~ CORPORATION city o f 7'usr~n PLANNING & ENGINEERING 9 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Existing L~n~ Use ~~~ ~egc~lations • As an exception to the general sections o~ this Chapter and other provisions o~ the Zoning ordinance, when commercial and professional properties are developed or converted to permitted uses under the provisions o~ this section, an-site parking requirements may be modified under any one or a combination o~ the following provisions: o Property oz properties that lie within a Vehicle Pazl<ing Assessment District or Business Improvement Azea shall be exempt from the requirement for on-site parking accommodations, subject to the provisions o~ the Parking or Improvement District ordinance. 0 0n-site parking requirements may be waived upon the presentation to the City o~ Tustin a long term lease, running with and as a condition o~ the business license, for private o~~-site parking accommodations within 300 feet o~ the business or activity to be served . o All oz a portion o~ required number o~ parking spaces may be satisfied by depositing with the City an amount, to be used for public parking accommodations within the area, equal to at least the value of Z00 square feet o~ propexty within the project area, ~oz each required parking space not otherwise provided. Designation by the City of Pubic Parking Areas Any available and suitable City-owned propexty within the City, oz any portion thezeo~, may be designated as a public pazl<ing area by the Czty Council. In determining whether to make such a designation, the City Council takes into account the existing parking conditions in the area and the extent o~ the desire and need o~ residents and/or commercial proprietozs in the area for the public parking area. ~~Vlunicipal Cade Chapter g, Section 79n5 Designation o f Public Parking Areas Any propexty designated by the City Council as a public parking area wiii be held open to the general public solely for the purpose o~ temporary parking o~ automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, or other motor-driven dorms o~ transportation The City Council retains the right to concurrently use the property ~oz whatever additional purposes the City Council or its designee reasonably determines are necessary or convenient and consistent with such parking use. ~~Ulunicipal Code Chapter 9, Section 791 D Use o f Designated Parking Areas. An additional summary o~ pertinent provisions o~ the authorizing ordinance also includes the following: The City Council may, by resolution, de-designate City-owned propexty pzeviously designated as a public parking area pursuant to Section 7905 0~ the Municipal Code: The de-designation is dependent on either the subject propexty being needed for a significant public use; the continued use o~ the property as a public non-exclusive parking area is inconsistent or incompatible with KOA CORPORATION cry o f Tusr« Y~.aNNiN~ & EN~w~EaiN~ 10 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Exrstir~g ~~c~d Use ~n~Regul~tro~s such othez public use; and the loss o~ the public pail«ng azea will not have a signz~~cant advezse impact on parking in the vicinity o~ the public pail«ng azea. ~.1V~unicipal Code Chapter 9, Section 7915 De-Designation o f Public Parking Areas} Prior to the adoption o~ a zesolution designating oz de-designating City-owned pzopezty as a public parking azea, the City Council shall hold a public heating and shall considez coznznents zeceived ~zom the public, propezty ownezs within dive hundred X500} feet o~ the public parking azea, and any othez intezested pezsons oz pzopezty ownezs. ~.1U~unicipat Code Chapter g, Section 7924 notice and Hearing Requirements} The resolution designating a public parking azea znay provide such special conditions, zules, and zegulations, including without limitation, houzs o~ opezation and duration, as the City Council deems necessary oz appzopziate in ordez to assuze pzopez and appzopziate use o~ designated public parking azeas and to pzevent inter~ezence with the, orderly and elficient conduct o~ the City's business. ~1Vlunicipat Cade C1~apter 9, Section 7925 Establishment o f Conditions, Rules, and Regulations) The City M.anagez oz the City Manager's designee shall ezect, place, and maintain appropziate signs and mazl<ings at each designated public parking azea giving notice o~ alI special conditions, zules and zegulations applicable thezeto, adopted pet Section 7925 and imposed under Vehicle Code Section Z~ 1 ~3. ~.lV~unicipal Code Chapter 9, Section 7930 Ea forcemeat o f Regulations Applicable to the Designated Public Parking Areas} 1.3 Existing Parking Regulations The following is a summazy o~ parking zegulations curzently in e~~ect in Old Town Tustin. Figuze ~.3 illustrates locations in Old Town wheze these regulations ate in e~~ect. 2-Hour Parking Anytime This time limit regulation is imposed on the peziphery of Old Town, along First Street between C Street and Prospect ,A.venue. This limit does not allow parking foz longez than Z hours at any time on any day or night. 2-Hour Parking 9 am - d prn This time limit zeguiatian is cuzzently imposed along El Camino Real between First Street and Thizd Street, along Main Street between C Street and Prospect Avenue, and along C Street. Zt pzovides ~oz longer tezm pazl<ing a~tez houzs and overnight in azeas so designated. KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tustin N~AN~viN~ & ENGiNE~RiN~ 11 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m LEGEND Unrestricted Parking 2 HR Parking Anytime 2 HR Parking Gam-6pm 2 HR Parking gam-6pm 2 HR Parking Sam-6pm Mon-Fri ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ 2 HR Parking Sam-6pm exc Sat, Sun, and Holidays ® Sam-noan Thurs Street Sweep ^^^1 No Parking 1 Qpm~5am ~ No Parking Any Time 24 Min Parking Study Boundary W. Main St. Not to Scale -='~ ~~A ~~~A(J~ATZ~N City of Tustin Figure 1.3 y~ .~.~~~~~~~h~U ~ k~U °-r.:E~~~J~ ~Id Town Tustin Parking Study Existing Parking Regulations E~~cisti~g Lc~~~t Use ~~d Regcrl~tions 2-Hour Parking S am - d pm, Monday-Friday Currently this time limit regulation is imposed only on El Camino Real between Third Street and .Main Street, and on the periphery o~ Old Town, along the west side o~ C Street between first Street and Third Street. This designation allows for longer term parking on weekends, evenings, and overnight. No Parking ~ 0 pm - 5 am This time limit regulation prohibiting overnight parking is currently imposed along Sixth Street between C Street and Newport Avenue. No Parking Any Time This is the most restrictive parking regulation. Small areas o~ no earl<ing are located throughout the district, adjacent to driveways, dire hydrants, short curves, etc. The only long continuous location in Old Town where this restriction is in e~~ect is along El Camino Real just north o~ Newport Avenue. 1,l~ .Existing Parking En f~rcement An analysis of parking citations issued in Old Town showed that there were ~5 citations issued within the study area within the past 5 years, This suggests that the existing time limits are probably enforced only upon specific complaint. This may be due to City policy or to the relative lack o~ parking congestion in Old Town. Of the ~5 citations issued, ~ were in violation o~ Z-hour limits. All but one o~ these time limit violations were issued on Main Street. The remaining 6 citations were issued in areas without time limit parking restrictions, and dive o~ the six were issued on Prospect Avenue, The analysis revealed that many more parking citations were issued on Main Street in areas west o~ the study area than for all of Old Town. This would suggest that there is currently a low demand for parking en~ozcement o~ time limits within Old Town. This is not surprising, since parking demand surveys indicate that parking is generally available and plentiful within Old Town. This results in a low demand for enforcement of time limit parking. It probably also results in a significant amount o~ violation o~ time limit parking in the areas so designated. ~.5 Existing .Licenses for Public .Parking Public Parking in the C Street Structure is currently licensed to a variety o~ users in the Old Town area in order to o~~set their on-site parking requirements. Currently, o~ the 8~ public parking ~KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"5"~ '~.' PIANi~lING & ENGINEERING 13 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .E.~rstir~g ~.a~d Use ~~~ Regl~latro~~s spaces in the C Street structure the Redevelopment Agency has issued licenses fox 72 spaces. The current provisions of the ordinance provide for a very low fee structure, $36 per month or $432 per year per space. The agency has generally waived its Fees For licensing these spaces, however. Additionally, the City and Redevelopment Agency have entered into a development agreement with Pzospect Village L.P., that precludes the City from removing the designation a~ public parking within the Prospect/Main lot ~"waterworks Lot"~, and the Pzospect/3rd St lot without public notice, and also provides that the City will give notice to the developer in the event that the City needs access to the lot. ~KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ ^.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 14 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ~.9 Parking Su~~1y Z~atz, nkitsu & Associates conducted an, inventory of the available parking spaces at old Town Tustin. The inventory of available parking was done on a lot-by-lot and curb-by-curb basis within the study area. Figure 2. ~ shows the pazking supply inventory by street and by lot for old Town Tustin. Table. 2. ~ summarizes available pazking supply by subarea far public parking lots, private parking lots, and street segments in the old Town area. A map identifying parking lot and curb parking locations along with complete parking lot inventory and occupancy Gaunt data is provided in Appendix A of this report. Table 2,1 ~ Existing Parking Inventory by Subarea Sub Area Description Curb Parking Inventory Public Parking Lot Inventory Private Parking Lot inventory Total Parking Inventory 1 Northwest Area 33 0 133 ~ 66 Z Northeast Area 20 0 123 143 3 Northwest Core 70 0 160 230 4 Northeast Core 98 73 72 243 5 Southwest Core 40 81 183 304 d Southeast Core 56 0 162 ~ 18 7 East Central Area 16 0 81 97 8 Southwest Area 57 0 522 579 9 Southeast Area 11 0 109 120 Total 401 154 1,545 2,100 The overall on-site pazking supply for old Town is provided at an overall rate of 3.36 stalls per 1,000 square feet of floor area abased on the square footages identified in Table 1.1~. This is near to but lower than the amount of parking traditionally required on private property sites for retail ar office uses in many communities, When public parking and curb parking are taken into account, the rate goes up to 4.31 stalls per 1,000 square feet of floor area, which is a slightly higher standard than normally found in many communities. ,/ KOA CORPORATION crry of 7'usr;n t.' PLANNING & ENGIN[ERING 15 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U (/} m ~~ 10 9 35 12 ~5 l1 15 46 31 6 ~~ 6S~onr~~ ~ ~7-~ ~.~ '.: !,- m~_ ~____ _ ~ ~ 1~120 ~. ~2 60 17 30 ,. r s,. ~ 1 a 4 26 14 7Y~ 1 r 51 .~~- ~-.-9. ~~ ~ ._ 7 _ ~~ a C_ E~ U wry LEGEND ~ Number of Parking Spaces Public Parking Lats Private Parking Lots Temporary Parking Lots Study Boundary Third St. 3 26 M~ 47 _12 W. Main St. ~ `7 6- 2 63 81 32 14 r~ ~ ~ ...~~ . 41 ~° 30 Sixtl 2 2 ~, 39 9 44 \~J/ / /~ ~.~.~ ~~RP~RATI(~N City of Tustin Figure 2.1 r~ ~~~ ! ~~~~~ a~~~ px ~ ~~c~~ ~L~-~~~~G Old Town Tustin Parking Study 0!d Town Parking Supply \ Not to Scale Peking De~n~znd ~n~ ~ccUp~cncyAn~lysis z.z ~'arking ~emaMd Each public parking lot, private parking lot, and on-street parking area in old Town was surveyed on a weekday and on a Saturday to determine the maximum extent of parl<ing demand and utilization throughout the day. Parking occupancy counts were conducted at two-hour intervals from 9:00 AM to ~ ~ :00 PM for each lot and curb parking area on several days f tom anuary through March, 2007. Supplemental parking occupancy counts were conducted on a Wednesday far the Farmer's Market, and on a Sunday for the Jamestown Flea Market. The parking occupancy surveys were used to determine the overall parking occupancy of each public parking lot, private parking lot, and curb parl<ing area in Qld Town during the days of the surveys. Figure 2.2 indicates the maximum weekday parking demand far each public lot, private lot, and curb pari<ing area. As shown in the figure, weekday parking is lightly utilized in old Town, even during the hours of peak parking demand. Weekday peak parking demand occurs at 1 PM with an overall occupancy rate of only 42°/°, Figure 2.3 indicates the maximum weekend parking demand for each public lot, private lot, and curb parking area. The weekend parking occupancy rates are even lower than weei<day rates, with weekend average parking occupancy rate of 23%, Peak demand appears to be driven by lunchtime patrons. Curb parking occupancy on El Camino Real between Second and Main, C Street south of Main, and Third Street between C Street and E1 Camino Real is about 90°/° at this time, however far most of the day average parking occupancy is about 50°/° - 60% on these streets. Most public parking lots in the study area had occupancy rates of ~0°/° to 25°/° during the peak hour. These law rates are likely the result of new construction that will use available parking in the public lots for example the Prospect Village project. occupancy rates for private Lots were more varied, with a weekday average rate of only 33°/° occupancy observed for private parking lots in old Town Parking along El Camino Real is on average about 50°/° occupied between 2nd and 3rd Street dozing the weekend peak period. Main Street experiences on average 20°/° parking occupancy, while C Stzeet south of Main Street is on average 60°/° occupied during the peak period. High occupancy rates on these streets are the exceptions, only occurring during a short lunchtime peals period. Zn general old Town parking is grossly underutilized during the day. Public parl<ing lots in the study area generally had occupancy rates of 25% or less during the peak hour on Saturday. Most private lots generally had lower occupancy rates on the weekend than weekday, although occupancy rates vary considerably for each lot. Although some individual lots were full, such as the Assistance League and ~l.d Town Plaza, other lots, particularly those associated with offices, were very lightly utilized on the weekend. Although curb parking occupancy on El Camino Real and nearby streets generally peaks at around 80°/° - X00°/° o£ capacity at X2:00 Neon during the Farmer's Market, other parking facilities in the KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tustin '~ ~~aNr,w~ s~ ENGir~~ r~iiN~ 17 Old Town Tustin Parking Study harking .DemaE~d aid Occlrpancy Analysis area are very lightly utilized at this time. For example the municipal lot at 3r~/Prospect is only 5°/° occupied. Although curb parking occupancy was at or neat X00°/° during the Jamestown Flea .Market, the public spaces in the nearby C Street parking structure were only about 30°/a occupied at this time. Figure 2.4 shows part<ing occupancy typical of El Camino Real during the Farmer's Market, while Figure 2.5 shows the relatively low occupancy o~ the Prospect/3`a Street lot. KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"5"" ~ PLANNING & ENGINE[RING 18 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m E ^ , _y:~ Q ' U E P ~ I~ - ~, 1 Second St. 0 LEGEND 0°/0-60°/° Occupancy 61°l°-70°lo Occupancy ~~~ ~ ® 71 °/°-SO°/o Occupancy ^ ^ ^ ^ 81 °/°90°/o Occupancy ^^^1 91 %-100% Occupancy ^ "' Study and Subarea Boundaries ^~ , N Third St. ^ ^ ~,o/ © „ r M 11% ~`~ "' ~ W. Main St. c~ U w PARKING LOT LEGEND 0°/0-40°/o Occupancy 41 %-60% Occupancy w 61 %-80°/o Occupancy N 81 °/°100% Occupancy Not to Scale ~~~ ~A ~~~P~ City of Tustin Figure 2.2 x:~ ~~ ~~,~~r~iw~ ~ ~r~~c~: ::_ _a,¢~c, Old Town Tustin Parking Study Weekday Peak Hour Parking Occupancy First St. ~i U 00 I I ^ 0 Q I 0 ~ ~ a ^ i A ~ a 0 ~ ~ Second St,:~ ~ ~~ 0 0 ~ ^ 1 ~i ~ D Study and Subarea Boundaries Third St. 0 4% ^ 11% W. Main St. ^ 33°/0 0 C U W Sixth St. J44 LEGEND R D%-60°/° Occupancy 61 %-l0°I° Occupancy ~' ~-1 l1 %-80°/° Occupancy ^ ^ ^ ^ 81 °/090°/o Occupancy ^^^~ 91 °/°-100% Occupancy ,~. ~~' QO 0~ PARKING LOTLEGEND 0%-40°/o Occupancy 41 °/0-60°/° Occupancy 61 %-80°/° Occupancy 81 °/0100°/° Occupancy N Not to Scale ~~ K~IA ~(~RP~~,ATI~N City of Tustin Figure 2.3 ~~~~ ~i.t1~~~~,i~vU ~ FAG=~~~~~~~~~~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Weekend Peak Hour Parking Occupancy P~crking ~elnand anc~ ~ccu~~~cy Au~Iysis FIGURE 2.4 - PARKING ALONG EL CAMINO REAL DURING FARMER'S MARI{~,T FIGURE 2.5 - PARKING ZN THE PROSEECT/3~D ST, LoT DURING FARMER'S .MARKET KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tusrin ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 21 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~Y~i~g Der~~~d end Occc~p~~cy A~c~lysrs Table 2.2 summarizes the existing old Town peak parking usage and surplus parking available by subarea for short-duration bless than 4 hours}, As shown in the figures and tables, short-duration parking in nld Town is significantly underutilized, generally with occupancy rates o~ about 10°/a to 35%, even during the peak times, Some sections o~ El Camino Real reach X00% occupancy at this time, however. As shown in Table 2.2, existing short-term parking demand is less than half of the part<ing supply, even during the peak hours. Figures 2.6 - 2.13 show parking occupancy for old Town parking Lots and streets at 2-hour intervals from 9 AM to 11 PM on a weekday, including all public lots, private lots, and curb parking. As shown in the figures, parking demand is highest along El Camino Real and nearby lots and streets but only during specific times. Parking demand peaks at 1 PM, as shown in Figure 2,8, likely due to the lunchtime patrons o~ restaurants, To summarize, old Town's parking "hot spots" or deficiencies are generally along El Camino Real between 2nd Street and Main Street, along Main Street between C Street and Prospect Avenue, and along 2r'd and 3rd Streets west o~ El Camino Real, Table 2.Z- Existing Short-Duration1 Parking Use by Subarea Subarea Total Short- Duration Parking Inventory Existing Short- Duration Peak Parking Demand Short-Duration Parking Space Surplus ~. Northwest Area 33 22 11 2 Northeast Area 20 10 10 3 Northwest Core 70 45 25 4 Northeast Core 98 42 56 5 Southwest Core 40 25 15 d Southeast Core 56 18 3$ 7 East Central Area 16 0 16 S Southwest Area 57 9 48 9 Southeast Area ~ 1 0 11 Total 401 171 230 Note ~ : 1 ime limit parking less than 4 hours d oration /KOA CORPORATION ctry o f T~~sr« \.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 22 Old Town Tustin Parking Study LEGEND First St. m ^ ~ ^ 0 °' ~~°.. ^ ^ ^ } ~ ~ 0°/°-60% Occupancy 61 %-70°/° Occupancy ~l ~~ ~ 71%-80°/° Occupancy ^ ~ ~ ~ 81 °/°90°/° Occupancy ^^^~ 91 %-100°/fl Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries :~ Oq O C 3/ Thud S~. 9 / W. Maln St. ~~ U N Not to Scale ~ ~~A ~a~,P~]RATI~N City of Tustin Figure 2.6 °~~~' ~~~iN,~~i~c~ ~ ~~~~~~~=~~;i~~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 9:OOam LEGEND First St. m ° ^ '^ ~ " °^ 6, U 1 ^ ^ 2, F ~ E s 0°/°-60°/° Gccupancy ~; 61 %-70°/° Occupancy ® 71 °/°-80°/° Occupancy ^ ^ ^ ^ 81 %90% Occupancy ~~~~ 91 °/°-100°/° Gccupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries Third St. $% 11% UV. Main 5t. N Nat to Scale ORP~R T ~~ City of Tustin Figure 2.7 ~~ ~~ ~ .~ ~ w~~ ~~~~N~N~ ~ ~~~Gt~F~~i~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 11:OOam LEGEND First St. m ^ ~ ^ ^ ~ sew°~. ^ ^ ^. 5/ o ,o, ' ~ ~ ~ ^^ . . ^ U r ~ ~ 0%-60% Occupancy r 61°/°-70°/° Occupancy ~J ~ 71°/°-80°/° Occupancy ^ ^ w ~ 81 %90°/° Occupancy ^^^~ 91 %-140°/° Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries Third St. 8°~° 11% V11. Main St. N Not to Scale ~~~ ~~~~~~A~-,~~~ City of Tustin Figure ~,8 ~~~~~~~~~~ . ~_~~~~~~~~~~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 1:OOpm LEGEND First St. m ^ ~ ^ ~~ 5e~o~°.. ^ ^ ^ 0%-60% Qccupancy :y ~: 61°/°-l0°/° Occupancy ~~ ~ l1 °I°-80°I° Qccupancy 81°/°90°/° occupancy 91 °/°-100°/° Gccupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries ~. ~° 3 /° 0 3°I° Third St. ~~~ "~ ~~~ ~_.{ ~~ 0 0 E ~ 4°/° i 6°I° i ® , ~ W. Main St. U 1 ^ d 30, 1 l__/ N Not to Scale ~, ~~~ ~`(}RP~RAT[~N City of Tustin Figure 2.9 F ~~ ~~~~~~~ir~:~ ~..:~cE~°.:~~wc Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 3:OOpm LEGEND First St. N m U ° ^ ^^ b ~ ~ ; 0%=60% Occupancy 61°/°-70°/° Occupancy ® l1°/°-80°/° Occupancy 81 °/°90°/° Occupancy 91 °/°-100°/° Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries ~°i°~ ~ `r~ ~ "°' _ .~ !°- Thir~ St, ...,- `i ~ . - 1 © o°~ 1 r Q 1 ~ W. Main 5t. . ~ ,~ ^~~^^^ ~. Q 25°/° 1 I ., i ro a~ C ~~~, ~~ ~r. (~ w l__/ PARKING LOT LEGEND 0%-40% Occupancy ~ 61 %-80% Occupancy 81%100°/° Occupancy 41 %-60°/° Occupancy N Not to Scale ~~~ ~RP~RAT~C~N City of Tustin Figure 2.10 ~~ ~~~~~~~~U ~~ ~~~G,n~~ ~i~i~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 5:OOpm ~ai~i LEGEND First St. m U ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ °~ ^ ^ ^ °' o ,6, o' 0 00 ^ ^~o; ~ 3„ 0 ro ~. o '~ E U W/ ^~ - 0°/°-60°/° Occupancy y 61 °/°-l o°/° Occupancy ~~ ~~ ~ 71 °/°-80°/° Occupancy w ~ ~ ~ 81 %90°/° Occupancy ^^^~ 91 °/°-100°/° Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries Thin St, ~% 2°/° W. Main St, PARKING LOT LEGEND 0%-40°/° Occupancy 41 °/°-60°/° Occupancy 61 °/°-80°/° Occupancy 81 %100°/° Occupancy N Not to Scale ' ~~ ~~~ ~~R~O~ATI~N City of Tustin Figure x.11 p~n~~~vi~c~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ; ~~~~~, Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 1:00pm . a~ ^ ,~ ^ o ~ o ^ ~ LEGEND First St. m U f ~ F ~ ~ 0°/°-60°/° Occupancy 61%-l0% Occupancy 71°/fl-80% Occupancy ~ ~ ~ ^ 81 °/°90°/° Occupancy ^^^~ 91 %-100% Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries oq, ^ '., [- ~o> m~ra s~. N Not to Scale ~~.~ ~ORF~~AT~ON City of Tustin Figure 2.12 °~~~~~~}~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Occupancy 9:OOpm First St. m U~ ^ ~ ^' p ^ ^ ^~ ~~°.. ^ ^ ^ a ~~° ,o, 0 0 oo . nnn LEGEND k ~ r 0%-60°/° Occupancy 61 °/°-l0°/° Occupancy ~! ~ ~ ~ 71 °/°-8D°/° Occupancy ... ~ 81 °/°90% Occupancy ^^^~ 91 °/°-100°/° Occupancy Study and Subarea Boundaries Yhird St. ~% a~io VII. Main 5t. ~ ~ P~~kir~g D~m~nd ~~~ Occcrp~rr2cy Analysis Figures 2. ~4 and Z.15 show weekday parking occupancy in two o~ the private lots in Old Town, the Jamestown Iot and the Assistance League lot. As shown, these lots aze very lightly utilized. Additional parking demand information is presented in Appendix A of this report. FIGURE 2. ~4 - ~AMESTQwN LOT, WEEKDAY 1 PM ~M~~ ~ ~a~ ~ ~~, ~~ 1 F'I~i~ of i~. i ti _ i ~ , . a ,4 ~'.~ i ~~ (sue '"~M i" ~ti ~^ ~ I (~~ , w ~; KOA CORPORATION clry ofT~~srt~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 31 Old Town Tustin Parking Study FIGURE Z. ~5 -ASSISTANCE LEAGUE LQT, WEEKDAY 1 PN~ P~cYki~g De~na~d ~~c~ ~ccu~c~~~ey A~~~ysis Table 2,3 shows the existing old Town peak parking usage and surplus parking available by subarea for long-duration amore than 4 hours}, As shown in the figures and tables, public and private parking lots in old Town are significantly underutilized, generally with occupancy rates of about 50°/°, even dozing the peak times. pzivate parl<ing lots tend to be mote heavily utilized than the public lots, generally with occupancy rates of about 60°/° to 90°/° during the peak times, but much lower in of f peak and weel<ends, especially for o~~ices. As shown in Table 2.3, existing long- term parking demand is about half of the parlci,ng supply, even dozing the peak hours, Table 2.3- Existing Long-Duratian1 Parking Use by Subarea Subarea Total Long- Duration Parking inventory Existing Lang- Duration Peak Parking Demand Long-Duration Parking Space Surplus 1 Northwest Area 133 7~ 62 Z Northeast Area 123 59 64 3 Northwest Core ~ 60 ~ ~ 5 45 4 Northeast Core 145 59 86 5 Southwest Core 264 37 227 d Southeast Core 162 SO 82 7 East Central Area 81 10 71 8 Southwest Area 522 350 172 9 Southeast Area 109 53 56 Total 1,699 S34 865 Note 1:1'arl<ing with time lima of a .hours or more, or no time limit .~.3 Parking Demand Rates Parking occupancy data was used to derive existing parking demand rates by subarea. These rates are based on occupied parl<ing spaces per 1,000 square feet o~ building azea for weekday and weekend conditions, as shown in Table 2,4 on the following page, z.4 Existing Parking Demand by .hand Use Existing parking demand by land use was determined based on existing land use inventory provided by the City, vacancy rates established through field review, and existing peak parking demand determined by the parking occupancy survey, The existing demand for the major land use categories is presented by subarea in Table 2,5, ,~ KOA CORPORATION cry o f Tusri~ 'dam PLANNING & ENGINEERING 32 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Demand and Occupancy Analysis Table 2.4 -Existing Parking Demand Rates by Subarea' per 1004 S~. Ft} Subarea Description Occupied Square Feet ~~V'eelcday} Occupied Square Feet ~Weelcend} Total Square f eet ~weelcday} Total Square Feet ~VL~eelcend} Parking Supply 1 Total Sq Ft ~, Northwest Area 2.4 0.5 2.3 0.5 4. ~ Z Northeast Area 2.6 ~.3 2,2 1,0 4.5 3 Northwest Core 3.2 2. ~ 2 , 6 ~ .6 3.3 4 Northeast Core 1,3 ~,~ ~.3 ~.~ 4.3 5 Southwest Core 2.5 3.2 1.4 1.9 4.5 6 Southeast Core 5.5 6.0 3.0 3.3 5.5 7 East Central Area 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.6 8.2 8 Southwest Area 3.0 2.2 3.0 2.2 5. ~ 9 Southeast Area ~.8 3.i 2.0 3.0 4.2 Weighted Average 2.5 2 2.3 1.8 4.6 Note 1: Spaces per thousand square feet Table 2.5 -Existing Parking Demand by Land Use Land Use Subarea -~ Parking Demand Spaces} ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 Total Residential - 2 5 ~3 4 - - - - 24 Mixed Use - - - - - ~ - - - ~ ~ Retirement Home - - - - - ~ - - - 0 Service- - 2 2 - - - - - ~4 ~8 Commercial - - - - - - - - 4 4 Dance Studio - - 8 - - - - - - 8 Sho in Center - - - ~ 7 $ 38 - 342 4 409 Nurser - - - - - ~0 - - - ~0 Retail - 7 ~0 - - z ~ - - - 28 Restaurant - - - - 24 - - - 3 i 55 ,General D~fice 73 38 9~ ~~ 2~ 38 - 17 - 289 Medical0~f~ice i2 4 - - - - - - - ~6 Mortuar - - - - - - i 0 - - ~ 0 Public Utilit - - - 5 - - - - - 5 Recreational - - ~4 - - - - - - ~4 Entertainment - - - ~4 - - - - - ~4 Museum - - - ~0 - - - - - ~0 Reli ious Center - - - - - - - - - 0 Hotel/Motel - - - - - .. - - - Q Industrial - - 9 _ _ _ _ _ _ g Stora e - - - - - - - _ - Q Other $ ~6 2~ 3~ 5 - - - - 8~ TOTAL 93 69 ~ 60 ~ 0 ~ 62 98 ~ 0 359 53 ~ 005 ~KOA CORPORATION `~a° PIANNING & E~lGINEERING 33 City of Tustin Dl.d Town Tustin Parking Study A license plate survey was conducted to determine length of stay for zelevant pazking lots and curb pazking azeas. The azeas suzveyed are locations that experienced high pazking demand and wheze time limits may be in place or necessary due to high demand for short-duration bless than 4 hours} pazking spaces. The survey was conducted at ~-hour intezvals and documented the duration of stay and space turnovez for individual parking lots and on-stzeet earl<ing azeas wheze demand may show justification far time-limit pazking. The turnover analysis was conducted for the old Town core area along El Camino Real, C Street, Zn~ Street, 3"` Street, and Main Street on a weekday and a weekend day. Zt was also conducted for the streets in the vicinity of the Farmer's Market while the Farmer's Market was open, and in the vicinity of the Jamestown Flea Mari<et while the Flea Market was undezway. Many of these streets have time limits, as indicated below. The stzeet segments and lots included in the duration of stay/turnover survey areas follows: old Town Core Area: • El Camino Real between 2nd Street and 6th Street (2 hour parking north of 6`h St.) • C Street between 2"d Street and 6th Street (2 hour parking north of 6`h St.) • 2nd Street between C Street and El Camino Real (no time limits) • 3rd Street between C Street and El Camino Real (no time limits) • Main Street between C Street and El Camino Real (24 min & 2 hour parking) Farmer's Market Area: • El Camino Real (2 hour parking north of Main Street) • 2°a Street (no time limits) • 3`d Street (no time limits) • 3cd/Prospect Unpaved Lot temporary parking duzing Fazmer's Marl<et only} • 3`d/Prospect .Municipal Lot ono time limits} Jamestown Flea Market Area: • El Camino Real (no time limits south of 6`'' Street) • C Street (2 hour parking south of Main Street) • Jamestown Lot (no time limits) • Armstrong Lot (no time limits) The following is a discussion of the results of the duration/turnover suzveys for each of the fouz suzveys included in the license plate pazking duration/turnover analysts. Complete results of the duration/turnover analysis for individual pazking lots and street segments are presented in Appendix B of this report. KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tc~srrn PLANNING & ENGINEERING 34 Old Town Tustin Parking Study PaYktng ~'crrnover Analysis 3.9 n1d ~'a~vu Core ~4rea, U~eekday Survey For the purpose o~ this analysis El Camino Real was divided into 3 segments in the Old Town cote area, with the east and west sides of the streets analyzed separately. As shown in Table 3. ~, the duration o~ stay was generally about ~t/z hours for all street segments, with a daily tuxnovez of about 4 vehicles per space. C Street was divided into 3 segments in the Old Town core area, with the east and west sides o~ the streets analyzed separately. The duration o~ stay was about 2~/a hours for all street segments, with a daily turnover o~ about 2.7 vehicles per space, although there was greater variation along C Street compared with El Camino Real. For example, the west side o~ C Stzeet between 2nd Stzeet and 3rd Street had an average length o~ stay o~ 3.3 hours, while the west side between 3rd Stzeet and N~ain Stzeet had a length o~ stay o~ only 1.4 hours. For the weekday parking durationlturnover survey on 2r~d, 3rd, and N~.ain Streets, these streets were all divided into 2 segments each, with the north and south sides o~ the streets analyzed separately. As shown in the table, the duration o~ stay was generally about 41/4 houzs for all segments o~ Ind Street, about 3 hours for 3rd Street, and about ~ 1/a hours for Main Street. Table 3. ~ -weekday Parlung Duration, Old Town Core Area Average Average Parlung Space Average Parlung Area Durat~an Turnover Inventory ~ccupanc hours} fuse per day} El Camino Real 67 57% ~ .6 4.0 C Street 50 40°/° 2.2 2.7 2nd Street 19 50°/° 4.2 ~ .5 3rd Street 22 50°/° 3. ~ 2.2 Main Street 21 40°/° ~ .4 3.2 Farmer's Market -~ Street Parking 90 50°/° 1.8 2.5 - Unpaved Lot 25 ~4°/° ~.~ 2.2 - Municipal Lot 26 5°/° 4.0 0. ~ As shown in Table 3.1, average occupancy for most o~ these street segments was 50°/° oz less the majority o~ the time, with the exception o~ El Camino Real between Main Street and 2nd Street. Figure 3. ~ illustrates the average weekday duration o~ stay for each o~ the street segments that were included in the parking lot license plate surveys for the Old Town cote area. ,/ KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"5"K 't.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 35 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m r. C] -~ ,w ~ _ ;_ ^ ~, :~ _ i. ~ _ ., ! Third St. W. Main St. l__/ Not to Scale .~~A ~aRP[~R.AT~O~ City of Tustin Figure 3.1 ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~c~3~~~~i~c Old Town Tustin Parking Study 41d Town Weekday Length o~Stay Perking Tcrrnover A~~rlysis 3.2 ~1d ~'o~n Core Area, ~"eeker~d Survey For the weekend survey El Camino Real was divided into 3 segments in the old Town cote area, with the east and west sides of the streets analyzed separately. As shown in Table 3.2, the duration of stay was generally about ~3/4 hours for all street segments, with a turnover o~ about 2,5 vehicles per space. C Street was also divided into 3 segments in the Old Town core area, with the east and west sides of the streets again analyzed separately. As shown in the table, the duration of stay was generally about 2 ~/3 hours for all street segments, with a turnover of about 2.3 vehicles per space, although there was greater variation than with EI Camino Real, The east side of C Street between 2r'd Street and 3`d Street had an average length of stay of 4 hours, while the west side between 3rd Street and Main Street had a length of stay of only ~.2 hours. As shown in the table, the duration of stay for 2r'd, 3~a, and Main Streets was generally about ~ ~/3 hours, 23/~ hours, and 4 hours, respectively, but with wide variation depending on side of street. As shown in Table 3.2, most of these street segments were lightly occupied on the weekend. Figure 3.2 illustrates the average weekend duration of stay for each of the street segments that were included in the parking lot license plate surveys for the old Town core area. 3.3 Farmer's 1V~arketArea The parking duration/turnover survey for the Farmer's Market was conducted on a Wednesday morning and afternoon to include all parking activity attributable to the Farmer's Market. Of~- Street parlcing for the Farmer's market is available adjacent to the marlcet site. For the purpose of the study the Farmer's marlcet study area was analyzed separately for the two Lots closest to the market the unpaved lot on the northwest coiner of Prospect & 3~d, and the Municipal lot on the southeast corner of Prospect & 3rd}, as well as for several streets in the immediate vicinity of the Farmer's Market. As with the Old Town core area survey, each street segment is analyzed separately for each side of the street. The duration of stay was generally about ~ hour for the unpaved lot, and about 4 hours for the .Municipal lot. Street segments generally had a duration of stay of about ~.1 hours per space for El Camino Real and about 2.6 hours fox 2r'd Street, There was greater variation on 3rd Street, from ~.3 hours east of El Camino Real to over 3 hours west of El Camino Real. This may be due to the commercial businesses located west of El Camino Real and the vacant land east of El Camino Real. ~KOA CORPORATION cry o fT~~s~« ~4' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 37 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m Third St. W. Main St. Not to Scale ~.~~. C~1~P~~~~1"IC~N~ City of Tustin Figure 3.~ ~~ ~Gnr~~fir~c ~ ~~~-~,~~~;~N~ Qld Town Tustin Parking Study Old Town Weekend Lengtf~ of Stay P~rki~g 7~~1r~QUer Af~~lysis The high occupancy rate on some street segments surrounding the Farmer's M.arl<et, together with a duration approaching Z hours indicates that a shorter time limit may be appropriate here while the Market is open. A time limit of 90 minutes is recommended to increase the availability of these spaces to shozt-team users. Table 3.2 -Weekend Parking Duration, 41d Town Core Area Average Average Parking Area Parking Space Average , Duration Turnover inventory occupancy hours} fuse per day} El Camino Real 67 48°/° 1.7 Z.5 C Street 50 28% 2.3 Z.Z 2nd Street ~ 9 15°/° ~ .3 3.9 3Xd Street ZZ 15°/° ~.7 0.6 Main Street ~ ~ 3 ~ % 4.0 0.7 amestown Flea Market - Street Parking 65 44°/° ~ .8 5. ~ -- C Street Structure 81 Z Z7°/° Z,~ Z.7 - Jamestown Lot' 109 N/A 1 1.3 3.0 -- Armstrong Lot 41 Z3°/° 1.4 1.1 Note ~: Lot occupied by vendors; Note ~: ~'ubic spaces. Figure 3.3 illustrates the average duration of stay for each of the street segments and lots that were included in the parking lot license plate surveys for the Farmer's .Market. 3.4 Jamestown Flea 1Vlarket Area The parking duration/turnover survey for the Jamestown Flea Market was conducted on a Sunday morning and afternoon to include all parking activity attributable to the Jamestown Flea Market. Off-Street parking for the Jamestown FIea market is available adjacent to the market site, however its effect on on-street parking is significant, as previously shown in Table 3.2. For the purpose of the study the Jamestown Flea market study area was analyzed separately for the three lots closest to the market (the Jamestown lot, the Armstrong lot across the street, and the C Street lot), as well as for several streets in the immediate vicinity of the Jamestown Flea Market. As with the Old Town core area survey, each street segment is analyzed separately for each side of the street. As shown in Table 3.2, the duration of stay was generally about 1.3 hours for the Jamestown Iot, about 1.4 hours For the Armstrong lot, and about Z.~ hours for the C Street structure. zt should be KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fTUS"~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 39 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m Second St. 1.04 Third St. 3.67 NA W. Main St. Nat to Scale ,~ ~~~ ~~RP~~AT~ON City of Tustin Figure 3.3 ~~ ~~~N~~~~ ~ ,-*~c~r,~~~€~#~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Farmers Market Length of Stay P~rrking ~`~~rnav~rAn~tlysis noted that the parking turnovez/duration survey was only done foz spaces in the C Street stzuctuze that aze available for public use. Street segments genezally had a tuznovez of about 5 vehicles pez space and a duration of stay of about ~,S hours, although there is significant vaziation between El Camino Real and C Street. The cuzb parking along El Camino Real and C Street is highly desizable foz flea mazl<et patzons, resulting in high pazl<ing occupancy levels on these streets dozing the flea market, There aze cuzrently no parking time limit zestzictions in this azea. This curb area was included in the duration/tuznovez survey due to the possibility of imposing time zestrictions in the futuze. The average duration of stay foz this azea was ~,S hours, indicating that a ~-houz Limit would have na effect on restzaining parking conditions. The nearly 2-hour duration on El Camino Real along with the high occupancy rate dozing the flea market indicates that a shorter time limit may be appropriate while the flea market is undezway, A time limit of 90 minutes on this segment of El Camino Real is therefoze zecommended foz Sunday between 9 AM and 3 PM. This should also improve utilization of the nearby C Street parking structuze at this time, Figure 3.4 illustrates the average duration of stay in each of the lots and street segments that were included in the parking lot license plate surveys for the Jamestown Flea Market. 3.5 Parking Duration/T ~urnover Summary The average weekday duration of stay for old Town cuzb parking vazies fzam about 1 ~/2 hours on El Camino Real and Main Street up to 4~/~ hours on Zna Street. Weekend length of stay has about the same variation, fzom ~ 1/z hours on El Camino Real and Zn~ Street to 4 hours on Main Street. This applies during the 9AM to 11 PM survey period. Pazking duration is genezally shozter in the immediate vicinity of the Farmer's Mazl<et, Avezage length of stay is only about ~ houz on El Camino Real and in the 3r`~/Pzospect unpaved lot, Duration was longez on Z"a and 3r~ Stzeets, at about 2~/a hours each howevez, Jamestown Flea Mazket pazl<ing duration was somewhat longez than foz the Fazmez's Mazket, Cuzb parking duration was about ~ ~/Z hours to 2'/2 hours, depending on Location, while available parking in the ramestown lot and in the Armstzong lot across the street averaged about ~,3 hours each in length of stay. ~~,~.. KOA CORPORATION Crty o f Tusirn ~' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 41 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m Second St. Third St. W. Main St. l__/ Not to Scale ~~~ ~~RP~~~.TX~N City of Tustin Figure 3.4 ~~~~~,~E~G ~ ~~c;ir,~Erzi~~c, Qld Town Tustin Parking Study Jamestown Flea Market Length of Stay P~yki~g ~'urnoveYA~alysis The occupancy and turnover surveys determined that there is generally sufficient available parking in old Town to satisfy the existing demand during times of normal demand ~a typical weekday or weekend days. The existing parking lots open to the general public are generally lightly used during most business hours. Curb parking demand during some regularly scheduled special event times, such as the Farmer's Market and Jamestown Flea Market is at or near capacity for short periods of time in the immediate vicinity of those events, however, The duration/turnover survey determined that shorter tinne limits may be required in some areas, particularly along El Camino Real. weekday parking demand is higher than weekend. Parking demand is relatively light on most streets in nld Town, except for short periods of time during special events. Pari<ing demand for spaces near some of the existing restaurants and retail establishments is higher than in other areas of aId Town. Specifically., on-street parking demand along El Camino Real, C Street, and 3`~ Street is more than So% of capacity during the peak lunchtime hour on weekdays. This may generate limited concerns for additional parking in localized areas during the peak demand periods, however even on those streets in the ald Town area parking demand is relatively light at rr~ost times, generally about ~5°/° to 50% of capacity depending on location. KOA CORPORATION cry o f 7'~~5r« ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 43 Old Town Tustin Parking Study 1~.~ Introduction The evaluation o~ existing parking conditions for old Town Tustin showed that there is normally su~~icient available parking in Old Town to satiny existing demand on a typical weekday or weekend day. The existing parking Lots open to the general public aze generally not heavily used during most business hours. but o~ 154 public o~~-street parking spaces, typically only about 18°/0 aze occupied ~1Z6 are available for additional used. Demand for on-street parking is at or near capacity during some special event times, such as the Farmer's Market and Jamestown Flea Marl<et on streets near these event areas, but overall demand for on-street parking is generally much lower, averaging about 3Z% occupancy on weekdays and ~3°/Q on weekends. Average parking demand in private lots in old Town is about 33°/° o~ available supply on weekdays and 24°/° on weekends. Based upon a current assessment o~ parking conditions, two key findings are apparent: • There is currently a surplus o~ parking supply in the Old Town Area that is not being e~~ectively utilized. Zt may be possible for the City to take advantage o~ the general parl<ing surplus by allowing additional uses into the area without providing additional parking at the rates generally applied to individual uses outside o~ the Old Town Area. • Parking in most desirable time-limit areas is becoming a "hot-spot" problem. The City may have to reevaluate parking nnanagement strategies in these areas to maintain an attractive overall parl<ing supply. This may include imposing additional time limits, establishing shorter time limits, and more regular enforcement o~ time limits. l~.z .fey Issues - Parking ~`rer~ds, Problems, and De f icieucies This section documents some current trends in land use and parking in Tustin and in similar or comparable areas o~ grange County. Land Use Trends There is a trend in central and north grange County toward mixed-use projects that can maximize utilization o~ scarce available land while providing a~~ordable residential units and/or commercial suites and maximizing parking utilization. These units are generally provided with a carefully designed and managed parking supply that takes advantage o~ existing parking surpluses, while malting sure that additional parking is provided to meet the special needs o~ the development, /KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"5"'~ 1' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 44 Old Town Tustin Parking Study PaYking IVee~s Analysis Prospect Village, a recently approved project currently under construction on the northwest corner of Prospect ~ Main, is an example of this trend. This project combines retail, professional office, and live-work residential units in a 40,200 square-foot development. A shared joint use parking analysis was conducted in review of the parking demands for the commercial retail, restaurant and office portions of the project. This analysts defined the actual parking needs for these uses in the project. The parking for some of these uses will be provided adjacent to the site in of f-street public parking lots. An innovative parking agreement has been arranged between the City and the builder to allow for non-exclusive use of up to S9 public parking spaces for this project within the Main Street waterworl<s Lot and 3r~/Prospect public parking lot. This agreement provides for designated non-exclusive use of public parlEing spaces for the commercial and office components of the mixed-use project. The Prospect Village project has been the only recent mixed-use project to be proposed, approved, and constructed in the area, however. while the Prospect Village project was successfully steered through the process, many developers could be discouraged by the City's standard parking requirements, the relatively high cost of off-site parking spaces, and other requirements. There is also a limited finite} supply of sharable public parking spaces available for future projects of this type Future Mixed Use Projects A shared joint use parking approach similar to what was considered in the Prospect Village project can be considered for additional mixed use projects in old Town, as is currently authorized by the City's parking requirements. Resident parking should be fully accommodated and exclusively for the use of residents in any mixed use projects that include residential uses. The Tustin General Pian calls for the integration of residential uses into the land-use mix in Old Town to provide market support for retail and commercial uses while improving the vitality of the district. An increased residential component, perhaps in mixed-use projects similar to Prospect Village, can also provide for more affordable housing and maximize use of available parking. The General Plan also calls for shared parking among the various Land uses in Old Town. For shared parking to be successful there must be a mix of several land use types with compatible parking demands within close proximity to a common parking area. The parking facilities to be shared should be within a reasonable walking distance of each land use. Generally 300 feet is considered the maximum desired distance to walk to/from a retail or commercial business to parking for that business. Planning for shared parking should therefore assume the parking supply within about 300 feet of the parking generator. This can mean either a public lot or structure within one block of the generator, lightly-used curb parking areas, or a mixed-use development with integrated part<ing or shared use with a nearby lot or structure. KOA CORPORATION cry o f Tustin ~' ~i.aNNi~~c a ENGINEERING 45 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~r~~i~g ~~edsA~alysrs ~'arking opportunities for mixed-use projects to share public parking may exist in the upper level o~ the C street parking structure, The C Street structure is ideally suited for shared-use arrangements with either mixed-use or stand-alone developments. The parking occupancy survey revealed significant capacity at this facility to accommodate parking demand from new developments. The structure's use and application to meet parking demands for development in Old Town is currently limited by the City's practice of licensing parking stalls to specific users on a 1:~ basis. 81 stalls are currently licensed and not technically available, although they are not heavily used. Even given the existence o~ Agency o~~-site licenses for the S~ public parking spaces in the C Street Structure, there may be future parking opportunities for shared parking to accommodate the parking demand from new private developments that might occur within the immediate vicinity o~ this parking structure given the significant capacity at. this facility that is being unused. However, it needs to be recognized that since this structure was privately constructed and is technically owned by the Steven's Square Association, no alteration o~ the structure can occur without approval o~ the Association. Zn addition, structural issues that occurred during early use o~ the structure which forced retrofit o~ the structure may linnit the ability o~ the structure to be significantly altered to add floors or additional spaces. Even though the structure is nearing its licensed stall capacity, assignment has been based on one space assigned to one business. Shared parking concepts can be applied to public parking garage/lots to allow multiple requited parking spaces to be assigned to the same public space, Under the terms o~ a development agreement with the Prospect Village project, there are also constraints on the City's ability to construct additional parking on the public lots at Main/Prospect and 3`d/Prospect without complying with the provisions o~ the Parking Designation ordinance and also provisions o~ the Development Agreement without a long time frame. The parking occupancy survey and land use data provided by the City determined that for each 3 additional parking spaces added approximately x,000 square feet o~ new mixed use development could be allowed. This would apply in areas with high levels o~ existing parking demand, such as El Camino Real and Main Street. Other areas could utilize existing curb spaces for new development. The City o~ Fullerton is currently processing, developing, or experiencing a number o~ mixed-use developments in its downtown. Overall parking demand is generally higher there than in Tustin Did Town at this time. Private projects are now building multi-story earl<ing structures in areas ~. KOA CORPORATION cry o fTUSr« i~I.ANNWG & ENGINEERING 46 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~~king ~ee~'s A~~lysis formerly used as City-owned public parking lots. The parking supply in the new structures are being designed to preserve the quantity of today's public parking opportunities normally on the ground floor, while providing additional private parking needed to serve the increment of growth on upper levels of the parking structures. The potential for shared parking is being used to optimize the size of the pazking structures. The net effect is that public parking opportunities are being preserved or enhanced, and private developments are providing less pail<ing than might be necessary under non-shared arrangements. Restaurant Parking Considerations The special nature of restaurant pazking requires further discussion. Restaurants generally have much heavier part<ing demands than office or other retail land uses. Their demand rate is typically ~0 stalls per ~0~0 square feet, 2.5 times higher than the comparable rate for offices ar retail shops. However, restaurant earl<ing occurs during three divergent peak periods when most dining occurs, Parking demand for~restaurants during non-dining hours is generally comparable to or less than other commercial uses. Zn a mixed-use environment, it is thus normal to consider how the demand for restaurants and food service uses are met. Breakfast uses including coffee bars and donut/pastry shops experience peak demands prior to $ am, when demand f oz other retail services is low, .Many trips are very short duration, suggesting consideration of very short time limits of appropriate supply. Most customers cannot be expected to walk very far if they have no other destination in the area, however some customers may walk to the site if they are employees of nearby uses. Lunch uses experience peak demands between noon and 1 PM, when demands for other commercial uses are also high, however lunch uses often cater directly to nearby businesses and can experience a high volume of walk-in trips. Also, the peak demand during lunch hours is generally lower than during dinner hours far many types of restaurants, because most customers are on tune limits and cannot wait long for service. The net parking demand increase for lunch uses can often be comparable to other commercial uses. Dinner uses (including high quality and fast turnover restaurants) experience high parking demands at dinnertime. However, many other businesses are closed when dinner demands peak (including most offices and some retail uses). When strategically located within areas with a supply of pooled or shared public parking, restaurant demands can often be met without great problem because many other uses are closed. Valet parking also provides opportunities for restaurants to tale advantage of more remote parking, by providing extremely convenient parking for patrons while using more remote parking areas,. ~s KOA CORPORATION City o f Tustin t PLANNING & ENGINEERING 47 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ,P~Yk~~g ~eedsAn~lysrs Restauzants can thus be taken into account with less considezation foz theiz own peak pazking demands in azeas wheze theiz pazking can be shazed with other uses. Bzeakfast and dinner traffic can take advantage of parking when other uses aze closed, while lunch traffic is lowez than dinner traffic at some locations and can take advantage of walk-in tzaffic fzom othez uses in the area. Prefezence shauld thezefore be given to zestauzant pzojects within 3~D feet of complementary shazed uses, particularly offices and sezvice/commercial uses. 1,000 squaze feet of zestauzant spaces can be considered far every ~~ available parl<ing spaces within 30~ feet. Future Growth Areas The traditional parking requizements foz stand-alone uses aze not well suited to Old Town, as there is substantial oppoztunity for shared use within this azea. Zt is appzopriate thezefare to look at new tzends in land use and parking that are mare applicable to Old Town, as discussed below. Established old town and downtown areas of vazious cities in Southern California are beginning to expezience substantial gzowth in mixed-use developments and in upscale zetail shops, zestaurants, and cafes. These is also a tzend toward both condominium/townhouse pzojects and upscale apaztments in olden downtown areas. Jew mixed-use pzojects have been completed, approved, oz aze under construction in Tustin, Anaheim, Brea, Fullerton, Santa Ana, Ozange, Pasadena, and other cities in Southern California. Brews Bizch Stzeet Pzomenade and South Brea Lofts include live-work lofts as well as upscale shops and zestauzants. Anaheim's A-Town and Stadium. Lofts, Santa Ana's Santiago Lofts, Fullezton's Soco wall<, Ozange's Depot balk, and Tustin's Pzospect Village have been recently completed oz are under construction. Fullerton has built sevezal mixed- use pzojects near its downtown area which have utilized innovation shazed pazking azzangements with available public pazking nearby. The tzend in many olden downtown areas in Southern California is toward mixed-use projects, particulazly those with a zesidential use on the upper level~s~ and retail, restaurant, office, and/oz commercial uses on the lower levels. Mixed-use pzojects such as these should have a mix of uses that tal<e maximum advantage of shazed use parking potential, such as residential on the 3"~ Ievel, office on the Z"a level, and zestaurant or other commercial/retail uses on the 1St level. Creative use of pazking code zequizements, zegulations, management practices, and incentives are needed to maximize utilization of pazl<ing far these mixed-use projects. These new codes and practices can also apply to stand-alone pzojects that aze within a reasonable walking distances of other pzojects that they can share pazking with. This has generally been established as about a 300-foot walking distance oz 5-minute walk, generally within the same block oz with no maze than a single crossing of a Z-lane street. Parl<ing sub-azeas have been established far Old Town following these guidelines, wheze new uses can share pazking even if they are not within the same development. KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT~'S"~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 48 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rki~g ~Veec~sAn~lysis Theze are several locations in Old Town that aze well suited ~oz new developments that aze keeping in chazacter with Old Town and with the trends in Land use development in established downtown azeas. The vacant lots neat El Camino Real at Z~`' Street and neat El Camino Real at 3ra Stzeet aze well-suited for the same type o~ development as Pzospect Village. Mixed-use pzojects at these locations can provide ~oz zesidential parking an-site, while parking demand ~oz o~~ice, retail, zestaurant, and/or commezcial components can be provided by a mixture o~ curb pazking and by the municipal Iot at Prospect ~ 3r`~Stzeet. It is pze~erzed that future mixed use developments conduct a compzehensive parking supply and demand analysis ~oz each development component. This analysis should include: • An assessment of the net parking demand inczeases associated with the mixed uses; • A d.etezmination of where and how the demand will be met; • Pzovision o~ additional publicly available o~~-site pazking where capacity exists in such lots, oz other off-site private lots, oz exclusive pail<ing to meet the inczeased demand through new or existing facilities; • Considezation o~ pazking management compliance with the intended parking plan. strategies and pzactices needed to obtain Zt is the City's policy that resident parking in new mixed-use developments will be accommodated thzaugh provision o~ additional on-site parking spaces within the development. Most o~ these spaces are rewired to be committed to exclusive use by zesidents. Guest spaces are also ze~uired to be accommodated and aze not considered to be available for commezcial uses, while pazking demand for office, retail, restaurant and or other commercial retail uses can be evaluated and accommodated by available curb pazking or by on-site or off-site public or private lots where parking capacity exists. New employee parking can be accommodated via new or existing parking areas that are appropriate for long-term parking. Generally, this means a parking lot or structure within about 300 feet of the business. Employee parking does not need to be provided on site, but it should be provided within a reasonable walling distance (300 feet). Public parking that is not appropriate for employee or long-term use should be restricted via time limits or other measures to insure that employee parking occurs in its intended location. Permit parking may be required in nearby residential areas such as C Street. Retail customer parking can be met by a combination of on-site, nearby on-street, or remote off street pazking, as appzopriate foz the specific commezcial uses, with consideration foz the walking distances rewired, generally suggested to be within 300 feet of the business. KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tustin P~ANNiN~ & EN~i,vi ~RiNC 49 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Paving I~ee~s Analysis Restaurant parking demand must be analyzed carefully to determine haw it can be met. Breakfast parking can often be met in nearby short term parking areas, if there is no demand for other uses at this time. Dinner parking can of ten be met through a combination o£ evening use of daytime-restricted time limit zones and areas appropriate for ennployee pazking. Lunch parking has a new parking demand that may not be much higher than other commercial uses, if origins of walk-in traffic are nearby. Many communities routinely allow far a shared pazking analysis to dine tune the parking requirements for mixed use developments. Normally a focused study is required that includes all of the elements recommended above. Far most communities, the modified parking requirements are specifically approved through a use permit. A few communities will allow for a reduction for shared parlung or mixed use without a special planning action for example, the City of San Diego and the County of San Bernardino. Tustin may wish to continue to review and approve shared paxl<ing analyses for mixed use projects similar to mixed use standards. established for Neighborhood D of the Tustin Legacy project, or it may consider modifying its code to allow for adjustments to parking in the nld Town area based upon administrative action, requiring only an approved part<ing analysis for justification. Permitting of New Uses for Existing Developments Zt has been noted that existing parl<ing demands are generally well below parking capacity in many areas of Old Town. There are existing areas where new retail, office, or restaurant uses can potentially be established within existing building shells. These uses must now comply with restaurant parking demands which potentially render the proposals uneconomical, Zn view of the time-sensitive nature of restaurant parking, the noontime parking demand is probably the nnost critical to overall parking supply in Old Town. Restaurant parking at noon is typically about 5 stalls per X000 sf for customers and ~-2 stalls per X000 sf for employees, The customer demand is not substantially greater than the demand of any traditional retail or office tenant ~4 stalls per FOOD sf and less ifwalk-in traffic is heavy. Zf employees are induced to park in appropriate long term parking areas, the demand for customer parking is similar to the demand for most other commercial uses. if parking is provided for the site at close to 4 stalls per ~OOO and there is appropriate on street parking, the overall increase in demand for valuable parking may be very law, Zt would be thus feasible to allow for an increase in demand for some of the surplus parking spaces by allowing mote parking intensive uses within existing building areas or within future multi- tenant developments as long as the overall parking supply is adequate and properly managed. This means that there should be some nearby parking available to meet increased custamer traffic, and employees should be discouraged from using the nearby parking through time limits. Zt is ~; KOA CORPORATION City o f Tusun ti.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 5~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rki~g ~ee~sAn~lysis probable that ~5-25°/a of existing multi-tenant building area could be permitted for food service uses without creating a severe overall earl<ing shortage in the vicinity. Zt may be necessary, however, to implement parking restrictions to reduce impacts of diversion of parking into residential neighborhoods. 4.3 Future Land Use Projections The City's General Plan build-out would permit up to x,255,000 square feet of "Old Town Commercial" land use within the 72-acre study azea boundaries. This includes retail, professional offices, restaurant, entertainment, and service-oriented businesses. High-density residential as well as mixed-use projects may be included in this total, The City Planning Division and Redevelopment Agency anticipates considerably less development than this within the next ten years, however, and has provided near-term ~~ - 5 years and mid-term ~5 --~0 years future land use projections for the Old Town area based upon current development activity and interest . Expected Near Term -New Developments The City's current five-year implementation plan for the Old Town area focuses on economic development, community facilities, and public infrastructure improvement. Economic development prograrns to provide assistance to development projects in Old Town include: • Property Owner Assistance Program • Owner Assistance /Commercial Rehabilitation Program • Business Assistance and Outreach Program Specific near-term projects which provide additional parking capacity or demand in the Old Town area are identified in the five-year plan and include the following: • Prospect Village -- A rn.ixed-use development providing 27 parking spaces on-site primarily for the residential component and approved to use 59 stalls within the nearby city lots for of f-site commercial parking, • Tustin Library -Expansion & renovation. Includes X52 new parking spaces. These spaces are outside the study area but are mentioned because they are public spaces adjacent to Old Town and could be available for shared use. Other near-term planned projects for the Old Town infrastructure include: • Steven's Square Parking Structure -- provision of additional parking access. • East Alley Project - streetscape and pedestrian improvements. • Prospect ,Avenue Enhancement Project -roadway & pedestrian improvements. KOA CORPORATION City o f Tustin Pi.~NNiN~ & FN~i,vEERir~~ 51 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .Par,~ing ~ee~s An~lysrs In addition, there are several sub- areas in OId Town that have development potential in the near term (1 to 5 years). As shown in Table 4.1 and vacant and development sites in sub-areas 3,4,5 and 6 may result in development of up to 90,90C1ft of non-residential uses and up to 112 dwelling units (with application of any density bonuses on incentives under the Tustin City Code). Table 4.1 Near Term Land Use Growth Projection By Sub Area 0-5 year Build- Dut Net New Residential Possible DU's Net New Gommercial/SF Sub-Area 3 30 4,500 Sub-Area 4 .39 ~ 7,500 Sub-Area 5 0 X0,900 Sub-Area 6 43 10, 000 Subtotal ~ ~ ~Z DU 90,900 Table 4.210-year Land Use Growth Projection By Sub Area 5-10 year Build-out Net New Residential Possible DU's Net New Commercial/SF Sub-Area 2 0 4,250 Sub-Area 5 20 44,205 Subtotal ~0 DU 48,455 Grand Total 13Z DU X39,355 Expected Mid-Term -Future Development Within the 5-10 year time frame it is estimated that approximately 48,455 square feet of non- residential development will occur in Old Town as shown in Table 4.2, in addition to the 90,900 square feet of non-residential development occurring in years 1 to 5. Mid-term development (5 to 10 years) will likely focus on areas with development potential, such as vacant or underutilized sites such as the Prescott site. These underutilized properties with potential opportunity for increased intensity of use in the mid-term (5 to 10 year) time frame are shown by sub area in Table 4.2. The City expects that these potential mid-term projects (5 to 10 years) will account for approximately 48,455 square feet of additional commercial space and approximately 20 additional dwelling units in Old Town. ~;KOA CORPORATION City o f Tustin ~' PLANNING & FNGINE[RING 52 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rki~g ~ee~'s Analysis 4.4 Expected Parking Demand Expected parking demand is based on the baseline existing pail<ing demand with expected parl<ing demand from new developments, utilizing expected parking demand rates which assume greater intensity of land use and parking demand than at present. Future Parking Demand There are several ways to forecast future parking demand for the Ol.d Town area. One method is to base future parking demand upon an observed existing parking demand rate (per square foot of building area) and future land use as described above. The City's estimate of near-term (1 to 5 years) and mid-term (5 to 10 years) development projects is used as a guide for future land use and expected parking demand. Although the City's General Plan build- out would permit up to 1,255,000 square feet of "Old Town Commercial" land use within the study area, only a portion of this is likely to be developed in the near-term (1 to 5 years) and mid-term (5 to 10 year) periods. The current average weekday parl<ing demand rate is Z,3 spaces/x,000 square feet based upon total building square footage. However the rate varies considerably by subarea, as previously Listed in Section 2, Table 2.4. To be conservative, the average parking demand rate for the old Town core area ~Z.3 parking spaces per x,000 square feet was increased to 3.0 spaces per x,000 sf for planning purposes to allow for the assumption of more intense use of parking and building area in the future.. This rate was applied to both existing land use and land use growth. Zt is estimated that the potential increase in non-residential building square footage is 90,900 square feet in 5 years and an additional 48,455 square feet in ~0 years'. Using the parking demand rate of 3.0 spaces per x,000 square feet, and this near-term growth potential for vacant and underutilized properties, this translates into a potential increase in commercial parking demand of approximately 30i parking spaces in 5 years ~~73 commercial spaces plus Z8 visitor spaces, and an additional 15a parking spaces in ~0 years (~45 commercial spaces plus 5 visitor spaces. There is also an increase of 505 parlcing spaces needed to serve existing land uses based upon the future rate assumed. This is due to an assumed increase in general business activity in old Town as new projects are built, resulting in more intense use of existing properties and associated parking facilities, The current peak parking demand is x,005 spaces on a weekday. The estimate of total future peak parking demand is therefore i,81 i spaces in 5 years ~~,005 spaces + 301 spaces + 505 spaces, and ~,9~1 spaces in ~0 years ~~,005 spaces + 45~ spaces + 505 spaces}, Again, these numbers do not include any new residential parking and residential guest parking that would be required for new residential projects that would need to be accommodated on-site. ~~~,. KOA CORPORATION cry ofT~rsr« `° pI.ANNING & ENGINEERING 53 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking .l~ee~ls Analysis Table 4.3 summarizes the overall expected parking demand increase in Old Town within the ~-5 year and 5-10 year time frames, including expected increases for existing uses due to inczeased business activity, and required pazi<ing spaces for new developments. Currently there axe about 2,100 parking spaces in Qld Town. There are therefore sufficient available non-residential parking spaces to support the near-term ~1- 5 years and mid-term ~5 --10 year) non-residential growth pzojections if all stalls are suitable and available for use. However, if Qld Town land use achieves the build- out projection in the General Plan ~1,Z55,000 squaze feet, it is likely that a substantial portion of the new parking foz the build-out scenario will be required in structures or less land consuming configurations. Also innovative shazed-use parking azrangements will likely be helpful in zeducing the required nurn~ber of new parking spaces zequired by approxirr~ately 10%, as desczibed in the following section on parking demand. Table 4.4 summarizes the projected 5-year parking demand by subarea based on existing land use patterns, the projected growth in building square footage and the recommended parking demand rate. Table 4.5 summarizes the projected 5-year parking demand by land use for each subarea. Note ~: Land Use projections provided by the City of Tustin PIanning Department. Table 4.3 - ~Id Town Peak Parking Demand Projection1 Projected Existing Pealc Existing Use New Use Protected Projected Growth Protectxan Parlc~ng Parking Parking Parking Parlcxng Parking Demand 1 Supply ~ Demand Demand Demand Demand Surplus increase Xncrease 1 Shortfall} Near-Term ~ ~ -5 Yr} Z,103 ~, 005 505 30 ~ ~, 311 292 Mid-T'erm ~5-10 Yr} x,103 1,005 505 451 1,91 142 Note ~: Includes both public and private parking supply/demand ,,~ KOA CORPORATION cry o f TGIStiK '\: PLANNING & ENGINEERING 54 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ~~crking .~eQ~s AMr~lysis Table 4.4 -Near-Term Future Peak Parking Demand by Subarea 1 ubarea . Descri txon P Projected Near-Term Parkin g Su 1 Existin Pealc g Parkin g Demand Existing Use P rl ' a cxng Demand Increase New Use Parkin g errand D Increase Projected Near-Term Parkin g Demand Projected Parkin Deman g d Sur lus p Shortfall ~. Northwest Area ~ 66 93 47 ~ 8 ~ 58 8 2 Northeast Area ~ 43 69 35 30 ~ 34 9 3 Northwest Core 230 160 $0 0 240 X10} 4 Northeast Core 246 ~ 0 ~ 5 ~ 93 245 ~ 5 Southwest Core 304 62 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ 204 100 d Southeast Core 218 98 49 49 196 22 7 East Central Area 97 10 5 0 15 82 S Southwest Area 579 359 180 0 539 40 9 Southeast Area 120 53 27 0 80 40 Total 2,103 1,005 505 301 1,811 292 Note 1: ~ - 5 year projection; Note 2. Growth estimates by subarea based on information provided by the City a~ Tustin Planning Department and a field survey o~ vacant parcels conducted on May 15, 2~~7. Table 4.5 -Near-Term Future Peak Parking Demand by Land Use 1 Land Use Subarea ~ 2 3 4 5 d 7 8 9 Total Residential 2 3 11 25 6 19 0 0 0 66 Commercial/Retail 23 38 73 180 12 120 0 513 33 992 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 47 82 Dffice 121 67 136 17 32 57 0 26 0 456 Dther 12 26 20 23 119 0 15 0 0 215 TOTAL 158 134 240 245 204 196 15 539 80 1,811 Note 1;1-~ 5 year projection; Note 2; Growth estimates by subarea based on information provided by the City of Tustin Planning Department and a field survey of vacant parcels conducted on May ~5, ZOQ7. Table 4.6 summarizes the projected 10-year parking demand by subarea. Table 4.7 summarizes the projected future parking demand by land use. ~,~.~; KOA CORPORATION City o f Tustin ~' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 55 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ,P~rking ~ee~ls Analysis Table 4.d - ~0 Year Forecast Peak Parking Demand by Subarea ~ ubarea escript~an Projected ' -T rm Mid e Parlc~ng l Supp y Existing Peal< Parking Demand Existing Use Parking Demand Increase New Use ~ Parlc~ng Demand Increase Projected ar ~0-Ye , Parlcsng nd Dema Projected Parl ' c~ng Demand Surplus (Short~all~ 1 Northwest Area 166 93 47 18 158 8 Z Northeast Area 143 69 35 30 134 9 3 Northwest Core 230 ~ 60 80 0 240 ~ ~ 0~ 4 Northeast Core 246 ~ 0 ~ 5 ~ 94 246 0 5 Southwest Core 304 62 31 209 302 2 d Southeast Core 218 98 49 70 217 1 7 East Central Area 97 10 5 ~0 15 $2 8 Southwest Area 579 359 180 30 569 10 9 Southeast Area 1 ZO 53 27 0 80 40 Total 2,103 1, 005 505 451 1, 961 142 Note ~: 10-year projection; Note 2: Growth estimates by subarea based on information provided by the City of Tustin Planning Department and a field survey of vacant parcels conducted on May 15, 2007. Table 4.7 - ~ o Year Forecast Parking Demand by Land Use 1 Land Use Subarea ~. 2 3 4 5 d 7 8 9 Total Residential 2 3 11 27 1D 19 0 D D 72 Cvnamercial/Retail 23 38 73 180 105 141 0 539 33 1,132 Restaurant 0 0 0 D 36 0 0 0 47 $3 Df.~ice 121 67 136 17 32 57 0 30 0 460 Other 12 26 20 22 119 0 15 0 0 214 TDTAL 158 134 240 246 302 217 15 569 80 1,961 Note 1; ~ - ~0-year projection; Note 2: Growth estimates by subarea based on information provided by the City of Tustin Planning Department and a field survey oEvacant parcels conducted on May ~5, Z007. ~/. KOA CORPORATION \: PLANNING & ENGINEERING 56 City o f Tustin Old Town Tustin Parking Study .P~r,~ing .deeds AE~~~ysis 4.5 Parking Feeds b~ Subarea Existing Short-Duration Parlang Needs by Subarea Table 4.8 summarizes the existing short-duration peak parking demand by subarea, For the purpose o~ this report short-duration is defined as less than 4 hours, As shown, there is currently a surplus o~ short-duration parking spaces in all zones. Table 4.8 -Existing Short-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Subarea Total Short- Duration Parking Znvento Existing Short- Duration Peak Parkin Den~.and 1 Short-Duration Parking Space Sur lus 1 Northwest Area 33 22 11 2 Northeast Area 20 10 10 3 Northwest Core 70 45 25 4 Northeast Core 98 42 56 5 Southwest Core 40 25 15 d Southeast Core 56 18 38 7 East Central Area ~ 6 0 ~ 6 S Southwest Area 57 9 48 9 Southeast Area ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ Total 401 171 230 Note 1: ~'arking demand counts in parking areas posted as 4-hour parking or less Projected Short-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Table 4.9 summarizes the projected near-term short-duration bless than 4 hours parking demand by subarea, Table 4.10 summarizes the projected 10-year forecast short-duration parking demand by subarea. The base scenarios depicted in Tables 4.9 and 4.10 show expected near-term part<ing demand according to the ratio o~ 50°/a growth in short-term. demand for existing uses, and 25°/0 0~ new-use parking demand as short-term. As shown, there is a projected surplus o~ short-duration parking spaces in both the near-term and mid-term, although some zones are showing modest shortages. These shortages are caused by expected growth in curb parking demand and other short-term demand due to expected new retail, restaurant, commercial, and mixed-use projects within individual zones o~ the study area, ~KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ `' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 57 Old Town Tustin Parking Study harking .~ee~s Analysis Table 4.9 ~- Projected Near-Term' Short-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Subarea Projected Short Duration Parking Xnventory a Projected Short Duration Parking Demand Short Duratian Parking Space Surplus ~Short£a11} 1 Northwest Area 33 38 ~5~ 2 Northeast Area 20 23 ~3~ 3 Northwest Core 70 68 2 4 Northeast Core 101 87 14 5 Southwest Core 40 66 ~26~ d Southeast Core 56 39 17 7 East Central Area ~ 6 0 ~ 6 $ Southwest Area 57 14 43 9 Southeast Area ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ Total 404 335 69 Note ~: 5-Year; Note Z: Parking demand counts + planned growth in parking areas posted as 4-hour parking or less Existing Long-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Table 4.11 summarizes the existing long-duration ~4 + hours peak pazking demand by subazea. Long-duration parking spaces can also be genezally defined as non-time limit spaces, typically in o~~-street lots and structures. As shown, tl~eze is cuzrently a surplus o~ Iong-duration pazking spaces in all zones. Table 4.10 -10-Year Forecast Short-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea 1 Subarea Projected Short Duration Parking Xnventory ~ Projected Short Duration Parking Demand Short Duration Parking Space Surplus ~Short£all} 1 Northwest 33 38 ~5~ Z Northeast 20 23 ~3~ 3 Northwest 70 68 2 4 Northeast 101 87 14 5 Southwest 40 91 X51 ~ d Southeast 56 45 11 7 East Central 16 0 16 8 Southwest 57 22 35 9 Southeast 11 0 11 Total 404 374 30 Note ~: ~0-Year; Note ~: l'arl<ing demand counts + planned growth in parking areas posted as 4-hour parking or less KOA CORPORATION e PLANNING & ENGINEERING 58 Clty o f Tustin ~Id Town Tustin Pazl<ing Study .Parking .~ee~s Analysis Table 4. ~ ~ -Existing Long-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea ,Subarea Total Lang- Duration Parlung inventory 1 Existing Long- Duration Parking Demand Long-Duration Parking Space Surplus 1 Northwest Area ~ 33 71 62 2 Northeast Area 123 59 64 3 Northwest Core 160 X15 45 4 Northeast Core 145 59 86 5 Southwest Core 264 37 ZZ7 6 Southeast Core 16Z 80 $Z 7 East Central Area 8 ~ ~ 0 7 ~ S Southwest Area 5~~ 350 172 9 Southeast Area X09 53 56 Total ~, 699 834 865 Note ~;Parking demand counts in parking areas not posted with time restrictions Projected Long-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Table 4.12 summarizes the projected near-term long-duration parking demand by subarea. The base scenario depicted in Table 4.12 depicts expected parking demand according to the ratio o~ 50°/° growth in long-term demand for existing uses and the assumption o~ 75°/° o~ new-use growth as long-term. As shown, there is a projected surplus o~ long-duration parking spaces overall, but shortages in some zones, particularly zones 3 and 4 in the commercial core. The indicated shortages show the number of parking spaces that wiii be required i~ land use is built out in the neax term ~1- 5 yearsy according to City planning estimates. Table 4.13 summarizes the 10-year forecast Long-duration parking demand by subarea. As shown, there is a projected surplus of long--duration parking spaces overall, but shortages in some zones, including zones 3, 4, 6, and 8. The indicated shortages show the number o~ parking spaces that will be required i~ land use is built out over the next 10 years according to City planning estimates. Some o~ this demand can be net through shared-use parking arrangements as discussed in the following section. ,~ KOA CORPORATION cry ofT~~srr~ ~' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 59 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .P~cyki~tg deeds A~~rlysis Table 4.1Z -Projected Near-Term Long-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea 1 Subarea Projected Long- Duration Parking Znventory~ Projected Long- Duration Parking Demand Lang-Duration Parking Space Surplus/Shortfall ~ Northwest Area ~ 33 ~ 2 ~ 12 2 Northeast Area ~ 23 ~. ~ 2 ~ ~ 3 Northwest Core 160 173 ~ 13} 4 Northeast Core 145 160 X15} 5 Southwest Core 264 140 124 6 Southeast Care 16Z 157 5 7 East Central Area 81 15 66 S Southwest Area 522 525 3 ~ } 9 Southeast Area 109 $0 29 Total 1,699 1,480 219 Nate ~: 5-Year; Note 2: Parking demand counts + planned growth in parking areas not posted with time restrictions Table 4. ~ 3 -10-Year Forecast Long-Duration Parking Needs by Subarea Subarea Projected Long- Duration Parking inventory Projected Long- Duration Parking Demand Long-Duration Parking Space Surplus/Shortf all ~. Northwest Area 133 121 12 2 Northeast Area 123 112 11 3 Northwest Core 160 173 ~ 13} 4 Northeast Core 145 160 X15} 5 Southwest Core 264 214 50 d Southeast Core 162 173 X11} 7 East Central Area 81 15 66 $ Southwest Area 522 54$ X26} 9 Southeast Area 109 80 29 Total 1,699 1,593 106 Note 1: 10-Year; Note 2: ~'arking demand counts + planned growth in parking areas not posted with time restrictions jKOA CORPORATION cry o fT~lst« ~' PI.ANNIIUG & ENGINEERING 60 Old Town Tustin Parking Study 5.1 .1V~~xed-Use ~De~elo~me~ts Mixed-Use Developments Mixed-use and live-wozk developments in Old Tawn may include such combinations of land uses as artist studios, pzofessional offices, cafes, zetail businesses, and others. Some of these may be live-wozk loft apaztment developments which have become inczeasingly popular in old town and downtown areas. Others may be a combination of zetail and commezcial space on the ground flooz and office space above, as is planned with the Prospect Village protect at Prospect & Main. Patrons of any live-work loft community businesses will also require off-site parking. Most of these businesses are expected to generate relatively low parking demand by customers (for example, artist/photography studios are only expected to generate about 1 visitor trip per hour). It is therefore estimated that any potential on-site businesses would generate a parking demand of approximately 1 stall. The expected average duration of .stay is 1 hour each, based on available data for similar projects. A limited amount of curb parking adjacent to the development will be typically be available for this purpose. The parking demand that can be expected from mixed-use developments is discussed in the following section on shared use and in Section 5.6 of this report. Mixed-use developments should considez shared-use opportunities in estimating parking demand. Same land use types, such as upscale zestaurants/nightclubs are ideally suited to share pazl<ing with office space. Residential uses on upper floors are also good matches with zetail and zestaurant uses on the ground floor. The number of parking spaces required foz these developments can be estimated based on the square footage of each land use included in the pzoject. From a pazl<ing demand perspective an ideal match of land uses can be made which minimizes the pari<ing demand for the pzoject as a whale, For Old Town, the ideal match typically would include higher levels of zesidential use since parking demand foz zesidential uses is lower than foz other uses.. The shared use study discussed below suggests that this ideal share of mixed-use projects devoted to residential use is about 35°/° to 40% of the development sQuaze footage. Commercial and retail uses would occupy ZO°/p to 30°/°, zestauzant ~0°/a to ~5°/a, and o~~ice space the remainder, This data is derived fzom the existing pazl<ing demand rates for Old Town determined in this study along with other mixed-use studies and ULZ shazed use rates. Other ratios of land use zesult in somewhat less efficient use of available pazl<ing spaces, genezating a parl<ing demand based on s~uaze footage o~ each portion o~ the development, and a shared use ratio, as desczibed in the following section on shazed use. KOA CORPORAT~4N c"y ° fT"S"K PLANNING & ENGINEERING 61 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Pcrrkcng Alternc~tcves end ~~~artcrnities Parking demand associated with these projects can be expected to be spread out relatively evenly throughout the day, rather than being concentrated as they are for individual land uses. 5.,~ Shared Parking In old Town there are many existing land uses with different parking requirements by time of day and by day of the week. There may also be new projects pzoposed with multiple land uses on the same site, or pzoposed projects near existing land uses where shared parking may be a practical option. Zn these cases the net parking requirement for the site for each hour of the day should be calculated by utilizing the code requirement for each component use and adjusting the result based upon the proportion of peak parking activity occurring per hour. This approach for analyzing parking demand is known as shared parl<ing. A shared parking analysis can be used to determine net parking demand during various hours of the day in which parking demand for a certain land use is high while another land use parking demand is low. This type of analysis shows that a fixed amount of parking spaces may be shared by more than one land use during different times of the day. The current residential uses single-family residential in the Old Town area are not close enough or appropriate for shared parking with retail, restaurant, office, or other uses in the area. Also, the existing residential uses already utilize their respective on-site parking spaces ~i.e. driveways and garages. However, any new multi-family residential ~apartment~ projects, condominium townhouse projects, or live-work Io~t projects may be able to share parking with other uses in the same project or with nearby land uses. Parking demand for these residential uses normally decreases during the day when most people are not at home. Parking accumulation fails to near ~~% of peak demand from ~ ~ am to 2 pm. This is also the time period when other uses, such as retail, art studio, professianal office, and cafe restaurants experience their peak demand. Shared parking is therefore ideal for amixed-use development during the mid-day peak period. The Qid Town parking survey indicates that although resident demand for curbside spaces is light during the mid-day peak, resident demand for curbside spaces in the early evening hours is heavy. This is also likely to be the case with any apartment or condominium development, or with a mixed-use project that includes a residential component. This is due to resident and visitor demand for "convenient" curbside spaces, when designated off-street spaces are provided. Zn these cases there is no conflict if the shared use has Little or no evening parking demand, such as a professional office, art studio, or boutique shop. However, if the shared use with residential is restaurant or general retail the demand for available curbside parking spaces can exceed the supply in the evening hours. For this reason, conditional use permits should be required for any restaurant to be opened in the same development with residential use, or adjacent to residential ~,,,,/, KOA CORPORATION Cicy o f Tustin ~.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 62 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~Yking AlteYn~rives ~rrcd Op~oYtu~i~ies use, to ensure that adequate measuzes are taken to direct patrons to available pazlcing, oz to determine that sufficient parking already exists neat the project. Residents of developments with shared parking can help to alleviate any curbside parking shoztages by parking theiz vehicles in theiz assigned pzivate spaces dozing the early evening houzs. zf a zesident's vehicle is parked in a curbside space intended foz general use, while his/her assigned space is empty, demand for general parking will increase, and maze pazking may be required in the general use area. Time limits foz curbside parking which apply during the evening hours can help to encourage residents to use assigned pzivate spaces at this time. Shred P~rrking, published by the Urban Land Institute ~ULZ}, reports on houzly parking accumulation by percentage of peak hour parking demand. The Sl~are~ Perking handbook includes restaurant, zetail, residential, and office uses that generally apply to ~1d Tawn. ether uses which may be specific to 01d Town can. generally be grouped into .one of these categories based eithez on known hours of operation oz on obsezvation or curb pazlcing demand adjacent to the specific land use. For example, a boutique shop with posted houzs of 9 AM to ~ P.M~ would experience peak demand somewhat similaz to office, although it would likely have a pzonounced peak during the Lunch hour. Any cafe-style zestaurants proposed foz old Town would experience theiz peak demand during the lunch period fzom local zesidents, nearby employers, and patzons of other nearby businesses. Curbside parking demand by residents of any nearby apartments, condominium, or mixed-use developments would be law at this time. Zt should be noted, however, that if the cafe remained open in the evening houzs that thew could be a conflict with zesidential parking demand, and other arzangementssuch asoff-site parking would need to be made. Table 5. ~ shows the percentage accumulation for curbside and off-site parking demand of each general type of land use component likely to be proposed for Old Town ~zesidential, zetail/commercial, restaurant, and office. These earl<ing demand accumulation rates are used foz the shared parking tables in this section. As shown in Table 5. ~, demand peaks at ~ 0:00 PM to 6:00 AM foz residential uses, at x:00 PM for retail commercial uses, at 7:00 PM for restaurant uses, and from 9:00 AM to 3:00 P.M for office uses such general office, medical office, and government off ice. The peak parking demand zate for each use applies to the houz when parking accumulation foz that use is at X00%. Parking at other times is less foz that use. Because the four majoz land use categories have parking demand peaks that occur at different times, it is possible foz these uses to shaze parking supply that is less than the sum of the individual parking code requirements. ~.• KOA CORPORATION city o f Tusrrn ~ PLANtJING & ENGINEERING 63 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rkingAlter~atives and D~aportcrnities Tables 5.Z and 5.3 summarizes the shared parking peak period demand forecast for the old Town study area assuming the near-term 5-year and mid-term 1D-year forecast o~ Old Town commercial land uses, respectively. As shown in tables 5.Z and 5.3, the shared parking scenarios result in a parking demand approximately 5% less than the stand-alone requirement. This suggests that intensive use o~ shared parl<ing may reduce parking requirements by about 5°/o generally. As shown in tables 5.2 and 5.3, certain land uses have di~~erent peak hour demands and on a site- by-site development basis, joint and shared parking analysis can be conducted and utilized to produce a more efficient parking plan for any development project in the downtown area. Table 5. ~ ~- Representative Weekday Hourly Paxking Accumulation Hour of Day z Reszdent~ai z Commercial Restaurant Customer Restaurant Employee 3 Office 6:00 am 100% ~.% 0% 0% 3% 7:00 am 9D°lo 5°l° 0% 20% 30°/0 8:00 am 80°/0 15% 0% 50°/0 75°/0 9:00 am 80°/0 35°/o D°I° 75°I° 95°/0 10:00 am 70°/0 65% 15°/0 90°/0 10D% 11:00 am 70% 85°/0 40°/0 9D°/o ~ 00% 12:00 noon 65°/0 95°/0 75°/0 90% 90°/0 1:00 pm 70% 10D°/o 75°/0 90% 90°/0 2:00 pm 70% 95°/0 65% 90°/0 100°/0 3:00 pm 70°/0 90°/0 40% 75°/0 100°/0 4:00 pm 75°/0 90°/0 50% 75°/0 9D°lo 5:00 pm 85°/0 95°/0 75% 1.00°/0 50°/0 d:00 pm 90°/0 95°/0 95°/0 100°/o Z5% 7:00 pm 97% 95°l0 100°/0 100% 10°/0 8:00 pm 9$°/0 80°/0 100°/0 100°/0 7°/0 9:00 pm 99°l0 50°/0 100% 100% 3°/0 10:0o p:m 100°/0 30°l0 95°l0 100°l0 1 °l0 11:00 pm 100°/0 1 D°/o 75% $5°/0 0% 12:00 Midnight 10D% 0% Z5% 35% D% Note 1: Includes Single-.family Kesidence, Gondominium/Townhouse, Apartments Note 2: Includes Retail, Service Commercial, Commercial Note 3: Includes General Office, Medical Office, Government Office KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ PLANNING & ENGINCERING 64 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~crking Alternatives and opportunities Table 5.2 -- Near~Term Peak Period Shared Parking Requirement Land Use Subarea 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Residential 1 2 8 18 4 13 0 0 0 46 CommerciallRetail ~ 35 64 93 Z03 131 ~ 1~0 15 513 33 1,07 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 Z5 0 0 0 3Z 57 ~iffice 109 60 1Z~ 15 Z9 51 0 23 0 409 TOTAL X45 X26 223 236 189 184 ~5 536 65 1,79 Tonal w/o Shared Use 158 134 240 Z45 204 196 15 539 80 1,811 Note ~: 1- 5 year Projection Table 5.3 -14-Year Forecast Peak Period' Shared Parking Requirement Land Use Subarea 1 2 3 4 5 d 7 8 9 Total Residential 1 Z 8 19 7 13 0 0 0 50 Commercial/Retail 35 64 93 20Z Z~4 141 15 539 33 1,346 Restaurant 0 0 0 0 Z8 0 0 0 36 64 ~~~ice 109 60 1ZZ 15 29 51 0 27 0 413 TOTAL ~ 45 ~ 26 223 236 288 245 ~ 5 566 d9 x,873 Total wlo Shared Use 158 134 240 246 302 217 15 569 80 1,961 Nate ~: ~ - ~~-year ~'rojectian 5.3 Public ~ f f-Street Parking dots Increased reliance upon public o~~-street parking lots nay be an appropriate long-terra and continuing strategy for old Town. There are limited o~~ street parking opportunities at this time, including .N~ain/Prospect, Prospect/3rd, and C Street, and their utilization is not currently high due to inconvenient location and lack o~ excessive demand for more convenient parking facilities. KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINCERING 65 Crty o f Tustin old Town Tustin Parking Study P~r~i~gAlteY~~tives ~~~ ~pportlr~~ities old Town business areas that have shown the gzeatest vitality in Southern California have generally seen a significant supply of ofd-street parking provided in municipal parking lots. In many cases, a large pzoportion of the parking is in structuzes. Old Town Ozange is perhaps the most successful neazby old Town that has provided pazl<ing primazily in public and private surface facilities, These are large municipal lots within all four quadrants of the ~zange Circle and maze facilities within neasby blocks. Also, the dominant antiques emphasis of the area probably results in a parking demand that is lower than for many other commercial activities. ~thez ~zange County cities with old downtowns that rely upon surface public parking include Yorba Linda, and San Clemente. Many successful old-town downtowns in orange County have moved to parking structures to provide for adequate parking foz downtown. These include Santa Ana, Fullerton, and Huntington Beach. Two of the most successful old town downtowns in Southern California, Santa .Monica and Pasadena, have also used this strategy to provide adequate pazl~ing for the downtown areas. Zn both of these cities, the downtowns function very similar to subuzban regional shopping malls, with national franchise stones, numerous sestauzants, theaters, extensive employment, zecreational and cultural oppoztunities. Remote/off-site parking is pazticularly appropziate foz special events. Special Events in the old Town area that can affect parking demand include the Tustin Street Fais and Chili Cook-Off, the Concert in the Pask, the Tillez Days Pazade, and the 4t" of ruly holiday, and others. These special events can have a majoz impact on parking, and the need for "overflow" oz "event" parking is great during these events. There are about 10 -1Z days a year when holidays, special events, and other special days can generate unusually high parking demand. This demand is currently met by the surface lots at Main and Prospect, 3r~ and Prospect, and the C Street Stzuctuse, in addition to curb parking, Off-site parking for these events oz other uses should be within 300 feet of the destination, without crossing any major ~4 lanes street. A disproportionate amount of the parking demand for many existing uses is being met by a limited supply of on-street parking. Due to a fixed and limited amount of curb space, it is not possible to provide a substantial supply of parking need using on-street parking. Typically, on street parallel parking can razely be provided at a rate mote than 1 stall pen 1000 squaze feet. Where diagonal parking is provided and building depths are shallow, a rate appzoaching 2 stalls per 1000 sf is possible. zf long-term parking is fully eliminated, this on-street supply can barely meet the customer requirements of businesses that can live off of the lightest of customer tzaffic. one alternative would be for the City to seek oppoztunities on an individual project-by-pzoject basis where it maybe possible to develop some public parking spaces privately foz public use, KOA CORPCIRATION c"y of T"Sr~K ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 66 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking Alternatives aid Opportunities 5.4 Parking Codes in other Cities Research to determine the accepted range of parking codes for land uses similar to the "Old Town Commercial" types described in the City General Flan was conducted and is presented in this section. The range of codes shown in Table 5.4 below is a summary of information gathered from other cities in Orange County and elsewhere in Southern California. As shown in Table 5.4 the median zesidential rate is 2 spaces foz 2-bedroom residential, for restaurant it is 10 spaces/1,000 square feet, for retail 4 spaces/1,000 square feet, and far office 4 spaces/1,000 square feet. Tease see Appendix D for land use rates by city. Table 5.4 -Parking Rates in Other Cities Land Use Low Rate Median Rate High Rate Tustin Rate Townhome/Condo, 2 BR ~ Space 2 Spaces 2.25 Spaces 2 Spaces 1 Apartment, 2 BR 1 Space 2 Spaces 2.25 Spaces 2 Spaces 1 Banks, Financial institutions 311000 sf 511000 sf 5.511000 sf 411000 sf Service/Cammercial 411000 sf 411000 sf 411000 sf 411000 sf Nursery/Home Improvement 111000 sf 411000 sf 5.511000 sf 511000 sf2 ~ 211000 sf Nightclub/Bar 1011000 sf 2911000 sf 112$ sf 1 Sp/3 Seats Restaurant 1011000 sf 1011000 sf 1511000 sf 13.311000 sf Retail, Neighbored Shopping 3.511000 sf 4/1000 sf 5.511000 sf 411000 sf Retail Stores 311000 sf 411000 sf 5.511000 sf 511000 sf Office, General 311000 sf 411000 sf 411000 sf 411000 sf Office, Medical 311000 sf 511000 sf 611000 sf 611000 sf Office, Professional 311000 sf 411000 sf 411000 sf 4/1000 sf Note ~: ~'lus one guest space kor every 4 units; Note Z: Ketail dales Area; Note 3: storage Area Generally parking studies conducted for similar land uses have shown actual demand for these uses to be somewhat lowez than the code-requited rate, as shown in Table 5.5. Table 5.5 lists actual parking demand rates for land uses similar to the Old Town Commercial uses. Additional rates from other studies are provided in Appendix D of this report. ,~ 1a~~vVi!~111~1C ~' ; R 3i'1'~" ~ ~'~~` Clty 01 .[ us~~f~ ~~~ ~~~b~~~~~~~. 67 Old Town Tustin Parking Study harking Alternatives and Opportunities Table 5.5 -Parking Demand Rates from Other Parking Studies Land Use Rate Parking Ratio Weekday Weekend Apartment.2 Median Rate 1.00 vehicles/unit 1,OZ vehicles/unit Condominiumz Median Rate 1,46 vehicles/unit - Mixed Use 1 Median Rate 1.40 spaces/I~SF 1,07 spaces/KSF Day Care Center Z Median Rate3 3.16 vehicles/KSF - .M.useum z Median Rate 0, 71 vehicles/KSF 2.1 vehicles/KSF Nursing Home ~ Median Rate 0.39 vehicles/bed O.Z5 vehicleslbed Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic z Median Rate 1.60 vehicles/KSF - General Office ~ Median Rate x.40 vehicles/KSF - Medical-Dental Office ~ Median Rate 3.53 vehicles/KSF - Building Materials and Lumber Store 2 Median Rate 1,10 vehicles/KSF - Hardware/Paint Store z Median Rate3 1.90 vehicles/KSF Z.$7 vehicles/KSF Shopping Center ~ Median Rate x.65 vehicles/KSF x,97 vehicles/KSF Apparel Store z Median Rate 1.13 vehicles/KSF 2,13 vehicles/KSF Pharmacy/Drugstore w/o drive-thru~ Median Rate 1,$3 vehicles/KSF - Furniture Store ~ Median Rate3 1.53 vehicles/KSF 1,43 vehicles/KSF Video Rental Store ~ .Median Rate x,41 vehicles/KSF 3.04 vehicles/KSF Wall< in Bank a Median Rate Z.30 vehicles/KSF - Quality Restaurant2 Median Rate 15.4 vehicles/KSF 17,Z vehicles/I~SF Restaurant .Median Rate 5.3 spaces/KSF 5.8 spaces/KSF Dry Cleaners Median Rate 1.40 vehicles/KSF - Note 1;Commercial/~f~ice Mixed Use Note 2: From ITE Parking Generation 3`a edition Note 3: The average parking demand rate compiled from other parking studies KOA CORPORATION C PLANNING & ENGINEERING 68 Ctry o f Tustin Old Town Tustin 1'a~king Study Parking management strategies are techniques and programs that maximize the benefit and utility o~ parking areas. These strategies determine the best and highest use o~ each parl`ing area oz sub area and manage the space in a manner that is optimal. Zn order to take advantage o~ parking opportunities, it will be necessary to address hot spot parking deficiencies which have been identified and discussed in Section 2 0~ this report, A parking shortage in only a dew key areas can create an image that there are overall parl<ing deficiencies; however these can often be prevented by insuring that the hot spots are properly managed and used in the most appropriate manner. 6.1 ~'ime Limit Perking Time limit parking is traditionally the most valuable tool in insuring proper distribution o~ parking, Areas such as El Camino Real and Main Street that are needed for customers and short- term turnover are identified and posted properly. The intent is to make sure that the most desirable parking spaces are readily available to as many potential users as possible. A parking stall with atwo-hour time limit can be used by at least dour customers within an eight-hour time period. however, i~ the same time limit stall is occupied by a single vehicle all day in violation o~ its time limit, the vehicle is likely not a customer, and parking for at least dour potential customers has been denied. The proper overall strategy is thus to alternate areas that are most appropriate for longer duration parking such as the C Street Structure, post and enforce appropriate time limits and to direct long- term parking to municipal and private lots, and administer or enforce time limit restrictions in more desirable customer areas in a manner that discourages their use for long term parl<ing. Areas more desirable for long-term employee} parking are generally in peripheral parking areas, especially where their underutilization has been documented. Parking use has been optirnized when overall utilization o~ all areas are generally in balance. Customers can generally find parking that is su~~iciently convenient to not discourage the trip, while long term parl<ers are able to find long term parking that is within reasonable walking distance, generally about 300 feet, while providing adequate security for the parked vehicle and the wall<ing trip. In some cases, optimization o~ parking may require microscopic application o~ parking regulations. For example, a few stalls on each desirable block may be established as loading zones, valet zones, very short-term parking stalls ~~-~Z minutes}, or other specialized uses, provided there is a ~;KOA CORPORATION c"y of T"Sr`~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 69 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .Parking .lU~arrageme~t Strategies reasonable demand for this type o~ parl~ing. Zt is not appropriate to designate stalls for parking in a manner such that there is no demand for the time limit or usage identified. When pazking problems are only observed in shart term parking areas and in hot spots, the problem can often be solved by measures that encourage some o~ the part<ing to relocate to longer term parking areas, in order to achieve better utilization balance. Measures to achieve this include time limits, pay parking, and permit parking. When parking use has been optimized and parking shortages are found in both short term and long term areas, expansion o~ parking supply is the next logical consideration. Expansion o~ supply can mean building structures on lots, or creative solutions such as restricting side streets to one-way and installing angled parking Zn old Town, .implementation and/or .enforcement o~ time limits can be an impart~nt management tool to apply to the most desirable parking spaces in order to assure that spaces most suitable for short-term. use, primarily curb spaces in front o~ retail and commercial businesses, are available for that use. Long-term parking should be directed to lots and structures intended for that purpose, such as the C Street Structure. Also, time limits on curb pazking in residential areas encourage residents to park in their own designated spaces, The intention of parking time limits in old Town would be to maximize the availability o~ these spaces to customers, visitors, and . short-term resident parking. A parking space occupied by an employee or long-term user could limit use o~ the stall to only one vehicle per day. A stall restricted to a reasonable time limit can be used over and over again by new customers, visitors,and residents as the day progresses. The Old Town parking survey indicated that a parking shortage o~ curb spaces exists near the Farmer's Market and Jamestown Flea Market on days when those events occur. The survey also indicated that the average duration o~ stay within on-street parking stalls far bath o~ those events is about X3/4 hours within the existing two-hour zones. Time limits o~ 90 minutes for curb parking would likely reduce curb parking demand to allow parking for other uses, while increasing utilization a~ nearby parking lots and structures at these times. Any time limits imposed would perhaps need to be implemented in conjunction with an enhanced guide sign program designed to direct long-term users to available parking in the nearby parking structure and lots. Time Limits may also be appropriate for curb parking when there is a mix o~ Land use types such as residential and retail/restaurant, particularly for any mixed-use developments with residential and retail/restaurant components that have night-time operating hours. The residential component o~ these developments will have on-site parking for residents, and a reasonable time limit for curb parking will encourage residents to use their assigned o~~-street spaces. This may also apply to /KOA CORPORATION Cicy o f T~~sun L' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 7~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rkr~g .l~~n~geme~t Strate~res spaces in municipal lots where demand for short-term spaces is high, as may be the case when the Prospect Village project is completed, A 2-hour time Iimit for street parking and municipal lots in the evening is the minimum time limit that should be considered for general application in Old Town. Any shorter limit would generally be too short for dining, particularly in the evening, but small portions o~ desirable blocks can have a limited number of stalls designated for shorter time zones such as ~Z-minutes, loading, or valet stands. A 3-hour limit may be more appropriate for blocl<s with restaurants, cafes, nightclubs and bars. This would apply to existing uses as well as near any street cafes that maybe established in mixed-use developments in Old Town. A 3-hour limit would still be short enough to discourage residents from using curb parking at these times. Restaurant owners and merchants generally consider 3-hour evening parking time limits to be a minimum for customer parking. This time period allows visitors to patronize studios, shops and dine without being affected by the time limit. Na hourly time limits are needed for the public and commercial earl<ing lots in Old Town at thzs time, such as the municipal lots at Prospect & 3rd Street and Prospect & Main Street, or the parl<ing structure o~~ o~ C Street. The parking survey indicated that there is currently an adequate supply of available parking in these lots at all times. Long-term and all-day parking without any time restrictions can therefore be concentrated in the parking structure and lots. This condition may change with the completion of new mixed-use developments that share parking in existing lass, however, such as Prospect Village. A signage program as described in Section 6.4 can direct long-term users to available parking in these lots. Zn areas of mixed residential, retail, and restaurant use, a 3-hour time limit is proposed to be in effect from 5 PM to 10 PM. Although restaurant/cafe seating could continue after ~0 pm, particularly for nightclubs ar bars, there is no need to continue the limit after this time, as there can be expected to be a balance between arriving and departing traffic after 6 PM. Also, residential demand should already have been diverted to an-site parking spaces by ~0 PM.. Zt is recommended,. however, that overnight parking be prohibited in public lots and on street. A prohibition of parking between ZA.M and 6AM is recommended. Figure 6. ~ presents recommended parking regulations. Zn conclusion, the need for time limits for limited areas and for different days in Old Town is suggested by the parking survey. Experience has shown that shorter limits ~Z to 3 hours are more appropriate for side-street curb parking near restaurants, studios, shops, and professional offices, and therefore are generally the recommended limits for commercial streets in Old Town. Shorter limits such as 9D minutes to 2 hours maybe needed in areas with the greatest parking deficiencies, including near the Farmer's .Market and ~amestawn Swap Meet. KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ ~ PLANNING & Ef~GINEERING 71 Old Town Tustin Parking Study First St. U m ,, ~~ ~:~ :; ,, Second St. ~~ - o o ~~ o ,; 0 o o ~~ o a 0 , 00000000 0000 000 00 00 00 00 00 00 ~ 0 0 ~ 00 - . ~-, ~ ~.~ -- LEGEND Unrestricted Parking 0 0 0 0 90 Min Prk Wed 10am-2pm 2HR M-F Sam-6pm 2 HR Parking Anytime ~i ' ~ 2 HR Parking Gam-6pm Q ~ 2 HR Parking gam-6pm a o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 2 HR Parking Sam-5pm a 3 HR 5pm-10pmMon-Fri +~~ ~ ~ ~ 2 H R Parking Sam-5pm exc Sat, Sun, and Holidays ~ ~ ~ Sam-noon Thurs Street Sweep ^^^~ Na Parking 10pm-yam ~ No Parking Any Time ® Residential Permit Parking Area 24 Min Parking Study Boundary W, IVlain St. Not to Scale ~~l ,~,A ~~RP[~RAT~~N City of Tustin Figure 6,1 ~~~~~~}~~~~~ ~~ F,~GfPr. -~~,~~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Recommended Parking Regulations P~rki~g 1V~~r~ragement SrY~tegles A greater need for time limits is likely to arise with the completion of new mixed-use projects, however. Implementation of time limits may push parking demand into surrounding residential neighborhoods unless appropriate restrictions are in place. d.z Parking En forcemeat Time limit parking strategies do not work in areas of high parking demand unless there is parking enforcement to insure that the time limits are honored and respected. Enforcement of time limits can be found through evidence of overtime parking and through absence of pari<ing citations. Zt was noted within the existing conditions analysis that there is some evidence of overtime parking in some of the time limit areas. An analysis of parking and vehicle code citations issued in Old Town showed that there were only 15 citations issued within the study area within the past 5 years. This may be due to City policy or to the relative lack of parking congestion in Old Town. Of the 15 citations issued, 9 were in violation of the 2-hour limit in effect in many curb parking areas. All but one of these were issued on Main Street. The remaining 6 were issued in areas without parking restrictions (all but one of these were vehicle code violations issued on Prospect). Zt is fairly common to see minimal enforcement of time limit parking in areas where there is not a strong demand for time limit parking, when business is weak, there is fear that frequent parking citations will deter further business. Complaints for enforcement are thus infrequent, and. long term parl<ing in desirable areas goes unregulated, The mini~.al approach to parking enforcement is consistent with the current Level of business; however it is highly unlikely that the area's activity level, development goals, and vitalization can continue under existing enforcement policies. Zt is not necessary to begin aggressive enforcement today, however programs to reduce the amount of violation, increase the overall level of enforcement, and to better administer regulations in the most popular parking areas will likely occur. Enforcement of time limit parking can be either by marking vehicle tires or through the use of conventional parking meters or centrally located pay-and-display parl<ing permit vending machines. .Marl<ing of vehicles requires two visits by a parking enforcement officer, often discouraging enforcement. Parking meters or hourly permits would only require one visit by an enforcement officer, though it has been shown that vehicles will avoid parking in metered areas in order to avoid payment. zf time limits were imposed on streets surrounding mixed-use developments it would likely also be necessary to impose limits on nearby streets within a black of the development, to prevent "spillover" parl<ing to these areas. KOA CORPORATION City of 1'c~srin ~ PLANNING & ENGIN[ERING 73 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rr,~i~g~U~~n~rg~rnent Strategies Zn smaller cities, parking en~orcernent is often done by uniformed police o~~icers, but can be achieved by pazl<ing en~ozcement o~~icezs to administez and en~ozce parking regulations. Thzs results in more consistent enforcement and often can. allow for better understanding o~ unique situations. 6.3 Permit ~arki~g Permit parking includes any parking program in which vehicles with special permits are subject to different parking regulations than vehicles without permits. A wide variety of pernr~it programs have been established in downtown areas and in other areas, In most cases permit programs are established to better allocate existing parking by issuing permits to either the most appropriate users, or by rationing permits to distribute parking demands in a managed approach. 6.3.1 Resident Permit Parking Resident permit parking programs are most frequently implemented in areas where parking demand is high and residents may have difficulty finding parking places. This may include residential areas near parks, the beach, commercial and retail businesses, and schools. In Old Town neighborhoods adjacent to retail and commercial businesses parking permit pragrams that favor residents could restrict on street parking to "Residents" and "Visitors". For example, the residents in the affected neighborhood would receive a residential perrrait parking sticker to affix to their vehicle~s~, renewable on an annual basis. Zn addition to the residential parking sticker, a number of visitor passes would be available for residents to give to visitors this includes workers. The permit program. would be complimented by signage that defines the "Residential Parking Zone". Residential permit parking zones may apply either to existing residential areas such as on Prospect Avenue and C Street, or to new residential or mixed-use developments, Permits in existing neighborhoods may beconr~e necessary if new commercial developments in Old Town substantially increase parking demand. This may apply particularly to C Street between Main and 6t'~ 5treet, as it is adjacent to areas of potential development. A permit parking zone would require residents who wish to park on their street to obtain parking permits from the City. These are normally permanently affixed to the rear bumper of the vehicle. Permits are not needed if residents do not park on the street, however most residents will likely choose to obtain permits. Additional temporary permits may be obtained and displayed on vehicles parked by resident guests. These are normally paper permits; however some zones use plastic hangtag permits that are displayed below the rear view mirror. d.3.2 Commercial Time Limit Exemption Permit Parking Time limit exemption pezmits are also frequently found in old town or downtown areas, These may be an effective tool in Old Town to achieve a shut From on street parking to off street KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tustrn ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 74 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~Ykr~g .1~~~~age~~enr Str~tegres parking. Permits can be sold to persons who desire to be exempt from time limit parking regulations. The permits can be valid in specific zones oz tinne limit areas, or they can be valid within all time limits. A potential program approach could be to offer foz sale an appropriate number of permits to business owners, to allow for some use of time limit pail<ing for long tezm use at this time, until the demand for on street parking increases with the vitality of the area. As parking demands rise, especially in prime parking areas, permits are redesignated to be valid in fringe areas, such as side streets or small time limit parking lots. The number of permits used under this type of approach is carefully managed through quotas, cost, or bath, so that vehicles with pezmits do not represent a significant share of parked vehicles in areas where parking demands are becoming significant. d.3.3 Operation of Permit Pari<ing Systems Establishment and maintenance of a permit parking zone has associated costs. The affected street must be posted with the applicable parking regulation, pezmits must be obtained, and a system to distribute permits to residents must be developed. This is nazmally done by mail upon establishment of the zone, but ongoing permit requests are often handled by public counter inquiries. A cost of approximately ~iD per permit has been imposed in some permit parking districts, however many cities have been unwilling to charge for residential parking permits under new programs with conditions similar to the existing situation. Permit costs are typically much higher in areas where parking is in short supply, Once a pernn.it parking zone is set up, it will not require major effort to maintain the zone. However occasionally additional permits will be requested. Also residents may forget to display permits and unintentionally get parking tickets if enforcement is heavy. Eventually permits tend to get into the hands of unintended persons, and it is sometimes necessary to void all pezmits and issue a new style of permit. ~n some cases, the permits are initially issued with an expiration date, so that the number of permits is generally held constant. d .L~ Par~i~g Sigr~age The parking occupancy survey determined that several of the off~street parking lots in Old Town as well as the C Street parking structure are underutilized during most days and times, particularly during special event times such as the Farmer's Market and Jamestown Flea Market. The City has recently posted a set of trailblazer signs on principal arterials, important roadways that approach the downtown area, and on downtown streets, The signs are distinctive and may assist motorists in remembering Old Town and helping them to find it. However these signs are also being used to direct motorists to of f street parking facilities. 7t is recommended that the trailblazer signs' of fectiveness in assisting motorists to locate parking facilities should monitored. KOA CORPORATION cry of TG[StiK p~ANNING & ENGINEERING 75 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~cYkin~ ~~cc~~geme~rr Srrcrregies Motorists in downtown areas aze generally conditioned to look for standard public parl<ing signs. These signs aze distinguished by the green border, reflective white background, prominent and bold letter "P", and large readable arrow pointing toward public parking facilities. Zt may be appropriate to post these signs in addition to the trail blazer signs, especially at locations within Old Town where the signs aze clearly pointing toward parking facilities. Improved signage along streets with existing or proposed time limits would impzove utilization of the off-street lots and the C Street structure, reducing demand for limited street parking. Improved signage is recommended to direct Farmer's Market patrons to the Prospect/Third Street municipal parking lot. This lot is very lightly used at most times, particularly when the Farmer's Market is open. Improved signage to the Prospect/3`a Street lot can help balance parking supply and demand during the Farmer's M.arl<et. The City should continue to monitor whether the newly installed directional signs to the C Street Structure are assisting motorists in locating this facility, Some focus surveying of shoppers may also assist in determining their future effectiveness. One additional opportunity to encourage use of the public lass would be to eliminate the temporary parking on the Farmers Market site and direct all shoppers to the public Lots. signage and the adjacency of the Prospect/3r~ Street site and Main/Prospect site to the temporary Farmer's Market event between El Camino Real and Prospect Street make it a resource that shoppers to the Farmer's Market should be aware of. While each of these lots has prominent public signage, in any renewal of the Farmer's Market, the property owner of the site and the Farmer's .Mail<et operation should be required to post on-site signage directing shoppers to park in the public lat. The parking occupancy survey also revealed that the C Street structure is very lightly used while the ramestown flea Market is in progress. Typically about 50 - 60 public spaces are available in the structure at this time. Improved signage directing flea market patrons to the structure along with time limits on segments of El Camino Real, C Street, Main Street, and 6th Street during the flea market can help balance parl<ing supply and demand in this area on Sundays. Curb parking spaces on streets surrounding mixed-use projects such as Prospect Village should have maximum time limits of 2 - 3 hours, which would be designated by signage. Parking meters or central pay machines could be installed on streets near mixed-use projects if time limits are not effective in reducing curb parking demand. Metered parking would anly be in effect during the times of peak demand, or variable time limits could be used ~Z -- 3 hours far peak periods, 4 hours for off-peal<~. signage directing patrons and employees to the parking structure and off-street lots should be installed curbside near any proposed mixed-use project. This would reduce the problem of business employees parking in curbside spaces intended for short-term resident, visitor, and customer parking. ~,~. KOA CORPORATION cry o fTLtsr« `' PLANNING & ENGINCCRING 76 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .~~crking lf~~nc~gemerr~ Str~regies Once policy decisions about any time restrictions on use of the public parking lot at Main/Prospect and at 3"~/Prospect have been determined by the City, it would be recommended that additional signage at the entrance and within the lots be installed with information regarding any restrictions adopted by the City and pursuant to the public parking lot designation ordinance (Ordinance 1323). Standard Public Parking facility signs could be prominently displayed at the Prospect/3r~ Street and Prospect/Main Street lots, and at the entrance to the parking structure, designating these facilities for visitors, employees, and other long-term users, The signs should be installed at the entrance oz in advance o~ the earl<ing structures, and lot. Fixed-location Changeable .M.essage Signs ~CMS~ could be installed at the entrance or in advance o~ the parking structure and/or lot during special events. The CMS's would provide facility parking occupancy information to motorists, and would suggest an alternative facility in the event the desired facility is dull. 6.5 Conditions o f the C Street Parking Structure The C Street earl<ing structure is not heavily used at this time, except during the lunchtime peak hour. nld Town Trailblazer signs indicate that the top floor o~ the structure is a public parking area, however surveys indicated that the parking area is lightly used, even when curb parking is relatively full. Better signage may be needed, as the structure is difficult to find, particularly for visitors unfamiliar to the area. The general appearance o~ the upper level a~ the structure is not conducive to public use, and the area does not appear to be well maintained. Striping of parking stalls is fading. The paving on the public level o~ the structure needs to be re~.abilitated, wheel stops are in poor condition. signage needs to have a public appearance that is characteristic o~ public earl<ing lots. The area does not have satisfactory night lighting, and new lighting needs to be installed to improve the appearance o~ the facility and the perception o~ safety and security for its users. Although these 8~ spaces are for public use, the maintenance obligation is required to be conducted by the Stevens Square Association and no alternation a~ the structure can occur without permission o~ the Association. The City should pursue active code enforcement and litigation, i~ necessary, to force maintenance o~ these facilities by the Association. This structure, and all public parking areas should be well designed and maintained far attractive and secure parking, day and night. Improvements to the G Street structure should improve utilization significantly, lessening demand for nearby curb parking. The Third Street and the waterworks parl<ing lots are good examples o~ properly designed and maintained public parking facilities. Figure G.2 shows the upper level o~ the C Street parking structure. !KOA CORPORATION City o f Tusr~n ~: PLANNING & ENGINEERING 77 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~Y~iMg 1f~~cn~tge~re~tt Strategies FIGURE 6.2 - C STREET ~'ARKING STRUCTURE you- -. ~V . g. ~°~~ t r ~+, j . i i .,: 'iY ~. li d ' P .~ 9 +N _ ~'y .~ , 6.~ Pecommended Parking Code Requirements Recommended base zate parking codes for Old Town have beep. developed based on zeseazch into parking codes commonly in use in othez cities in Ozange County as well as other cities in Southezn Cali~oznia with similar old town oz downtown environments. Actual pazking demand zates For land uses similaz to the Old Town Commezcial uses have also been considered in establishing the zecommended rates ~oz Old Town. Zn addition, the shared use analysis has pzovided a basis for adjusting the City's existing codes both ~oz stand-alone pzojects and ~oz individual uses in mixed-use projects. These revised codes aze desczibed below for the majoz land use categozies. 6.d.1 Reta~~ The City's existing Ovezlay District pazl<ing codes specify ~ pazking space ~oz evezy 200 squaze feet o~ retail flooz space, plus ~ loading space per X0,000 square feet o~ retail door space. It is proposed that for the Old Town Parking District the City zevise this ze~uirement to 1 space pez 250 square feet o~ ~loaz space ~4 pez x,000}, without the loading space requirement. This is in line with the pazking requirements o~ other cities in Ozange County that have similar urban environments, such as Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, and Orange. The shared use study also showed that the City can zelax this zequirement by ~0°/a ~~ space/275 square feet} for retail KOA CORPORATION CGty o f T~~strn ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 78 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Parking .IU~~cn~gemef~t Str~rtegies uses within mixed-use projects and still have an adequate number of spaces to satisfy parking demand from the retail project at all times. d.d.2 Restaurant The existing parking code specifies spaces per seat for restaurants ~~ space/3 seats. Zt is proposed that for the old Town Parking District the City revise this requirement to ~ space per X00 square feet o~ ~loar space ~~0 per ~,000~. This is in line with the parking requirements o~ other cities in grange County that have similar old town or urban environments, such as Fullerton, grange, Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, and Laguna Beach. Pasadena also has the ~0 space1~,000 square-foot requirement. The ~ space/~00 square-foot rate is also in line with other studies o~ parking demand for restaurants. This proposed base rate can be relaxed by ~0°/° ~1 space/1~0 square feet, or ~0 per x,100} for restaurant uses within mixed-use projects and still have an adequate number o~ spaces to satiny parking demand from the restaurant at all times. G.6.3 office The City's existing parking code specifies ~ parking space per Z50 square feet for general o~~ice space. This is in Line with the code requirements o~ most othez cities in Orange County that have similar urban ar downtown environments. Some cities such as Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, and Pasadena have lower requirements however ~3 spaces per 1,000 square ~eet~. Some studies have shown a demand rate even lower, 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. rt is therefore proposed that for the old Town Parl<ing District the City revise its parking requirement for o~~ice space to 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet o~ floor space. This proposed base rate can be relaxed by 10°/° (2.7 spaces/1,000 square ~eet~ for o~~ice uses within mixed-use projects and still have an adequate number o~ spaces to satisfy o~~ice parking demand at all times, Surveys of medical o~~ices have consistently shown that medical a~~ices experience parking demands higher than other o~~ices. The parking requirement for a medical o~~ice building should continue to be higher than for a general a~~ice building. A value o~ 5 stalls per ~ 000 s~ is suggested for proposed new medical o~~ice buildings. Medical uses can be allowed within existing o~~ice buildings on a limited basis. walk-in clinics, dentists, optometrists, and other medical specialties often desire to locate within general office environments. An individual medical o~~ice suite can increase the pari<ing demand by ~-Z stalls; however this amount is normally negligible when located within non-medical uses. A limitation of no more that 20°/° of a multiuse building for medical uses is normally satisfactory. Banks have historically had a higher parking rate than other uses. A few strong national banks (such as Banl< of America) experience parking demands that are higher than other office or commercial uses, but these banks normally will employ their own parking standards when KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 79 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Pc~rkrng 1~`anc~~ement Sfr~te$tes locating new branches, Most local banks, savings & loan, and financial institutions can fit within traditional o~~ice parking requirements. Special parking rates are not recommended. G.d.4 Residential The City's existing parking codes speci.~r ~ parking space per bedroom for i and Z bedroom apartments and condominiums, plus visitor spaces. This is in line with many other cities in grange County. Parking studies have shown actual demand requirements are not closely related to the number or bedrooms and are more closely related to the type or emphasis o~ development. The parking demand for many 1-bedroom units is closer to two-stalls per unit. Zt is proposed that for the old Town Parking District the City establish a parking requirement o~ 2 stalls per each i or Z-bedroom unit for apartments and condominiums, where one or more stalls per unit are to be designated or restricted for use by specific units. Normally a guest parking requirement o~ 0.~5 stalls per unit would be suggested in excess o~ the amounts above within a traditional suburban apartment or condominium environment. However, it is strongly suggested that parking planning for ~Jld Town integrate guest parking at night within nearby shared parking facilities. Research has shown that the requirement for visitor spaces in residential projects occurs primarily at night, Z~ there is a commercial or o~~ice component o~ the project the residential component can share visitor spaces with the o~~ice or commercial component o~ the project. Shared use can also apply to residential projects sharing visitor spaces with nearby o~~ice or commercial projects or existing uses. The shared use study also showed that the City can relax its code requirement by ~0% for residential uses within mixed-use projects and still have an adequate number of spaces to satisfy parking demand from the residential project at all times. This reduction is roughly equivalent to the number o~ visitor spaces that would be provided. zt should be noted however that this is purely modeling data that is not supported by actual parking uses and number o~ cars that the City sees generated in its multi-family residential projects. 6.d.5 Live-V~ork Residential Live/work units allow for the operation o~ small incubator businesses within residential Land uses. These units are normally operated by owner/proprietors and often do not have employees. However some o~ theses businesses utilize employees and they frequently experience deliveries, visitors, and other activities that can increase residential parking. Zt is recon~.mended that for the Old Town i'arl<ing District the City require the same residential parking requirement for live-work developments, with no requirement for visitor or employee ~,. KOA CORPORATION c"y°fT"5"~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 80 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~r,~~ng~.~Vl~~agemen~ Str~rtegtes spaces if the live/work use is integzated into amixed-use development that includes office and/or comrriercial components, Any visitor parking zeauizement can be satisfied by shazing visitor spaces with the office oz commercial component of the pzoject. ~1lhere live-work is integrated into a fully residential project, it is suggested that a parking re~uizement of 0.5 stalls be added to the residential parking zeauizement to allow foz employee parking within the site. 6.6.6 Mixed Use Residential/Retail/Restaurant/4~~ice} In addition to the shared parking analysis approach previously discussed in this report, the City may wish to modify its Municipal Code to provide for alternative parking codes for Old Town stand along vs. mixed use projects. Table G. ~ sum.marizes these alteznative parking codes for Old Town for stand alone projects and projects within mixed-use developments, including the proposed mixed-use parking reductions by land use foz old Town, 6. ~ Impacts o f Parking Management Plan An effective parking management plan can probably allow foz a significant amount of revitalization of the old Town area, There are underutilized of f street pazl<ing facilities and there are many measures that can be taken to more carefully regulate an street parking activity in desirable azeas. Through careful m.anagem.ent, the overall activity level .can probably zise to comfoztably fill the parking opportunities that currently exist. Without parking management, the parking demand foz on-street parking adjacent to retail businesses will largely detezmine theiz vitality and strength, This is lazgely the status auo. There is currently some on street parking available to meet the needs of newly introduced uses; however the on street parl<ing will likely dill up very quickly, especially i~ high parl<ing demand uses such as restaurants are approved without implementation of management tools. 6.8 Financing and Implementation o f Public Parking While consideration of construction of additional public parking facilities is not being recommended at this time, general information zegazding financing and implementation of public parking facilities is provided for information and as a future resource to the City in the event such a futuze need arises. ~^KOA CORPORATION cty o fT~~sr~~ '~~ PLANNING c~ ENGINEERING 81 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .Parktng~V~~n~gemerr~ Strategies Table d.~ - old Town Alternative Parking Codes Land Use Stand Alone Mixed Use Principal Use Spaces Visitor Spaces Principal Use Spaces Visitor Spaces Residential, Z Bedroom 2 0.25 2 0 Retail Store 1/250 sf N/A 1/275 sf N/A Restaurant/Cafe 10/100D s~ N{A 9{000 s~ N/A Restaurant, Sir-Down 1011000 s~ 1~/A 9/1000 s~ NIA NightclublBar 1D/100D sf NIA 911000 sf N/A Commercial x/250 s~ NIA 1/300 sf NIA Service/Commercial x/250 s~ N/A 1/275 s~ N{A office, General 311000 s~ l~/A 2.7511000 N/A Dffice, Medical 1{25D s~ N{A 1/275 s~ N/A Dffice, Professional 1/250 s~ N{A 11275 sf N/A d.8. ~. Yn-Lieu Fees In lieu fees can be collected by a municipality or a Parking District in lieu of providing privately constructed Facilities in conjunction with development projects. Provisions of Tustin City Code Section 9252 2.(d) (3) c. already permits .a deposit of such fees. However, the current in-lieu contributions permitted through this section of the Tustin City Code are not adequate to reflect the actual costs of any future land acquisition or construction of parking facilities. Depending on whether a future parking facility will be structured parking oz at-grade, the costs per stall to be paid to the City or a Parking District in-lieu of provision of parking facilities on-site should be in the range of $3,000 - $20,000 for the construction costs plus any cost of land (with the actual per square foot land cost to be determined based on the size of a standard parking space with all required access and turn around/back-up driveway aisles). The fee amount needs to be adequate to fund the land and construction of.a parking stall and flexibility enough to be adjusted as needed so that costs can escalate, as necessary, to reflect changing construction data, real estate values in the market place and other adjustments related to inflation. Fees can also be adjusted where it is normal to charge for parking and recapture of construction costs through parking charges and user Fees. Zn lieu fees perhaps wank best when applied to basic retail and office uses that have normal parking requirements, such as 1 stall per 250 square feet o~ development. The approach can allow KOA CORPORATION cry o fTL~st« PLANNING & ENGINCERING 82 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~rrking ~V~~nagement St~~tegies for a more compact land use pattern by reducing the amount of land per parcel that is dedicated to parking, while locating larger, multi-purpose parking facilities in the periphery. Some examples of in-lieu fee programs include the City of Pasadena, which currently assesses ~~46.53 per space per year as a "parl<ing credit" for developers, to satisfy their o~~-street parking requirements. Newport Beach assesses X150 per year in a similar program. Some other cities have fixed fees, such as X3,500 in Seal Beach, while other pragrarns calculate the fee based on project square feet, Developers pay the fee when parking is not practical on-site. The money from the fee is deposited into a fund used to develop or acquire off-site parking. Development earl<ing is then located in a municipal lot or other off-site location near the project. 300 feet is the recommended minimum distance for off-site parking. Additional information on other cities fee programs is provided in Appendix C of this report. Zn lieu fees may not work well whin applied to conditional uses within existing or new facilities, especially restaurants and other uses that require very high parking requirements. Atypical restaurant parking requirement is 2.5 tinges the parking requirement for office or retail uses. Application of the full in lieu fee to this type of use will generally not be frequent. A small 3000 square foot proposed restaurant would require 30 stalls or in Lieu fee of X90,000 at the low rate or X600,000 at the high range. This fee would likely be economically not viable at either level. 6.$.2 Bonds Bands are frequently used for financing and construction of off street parking facilities, where it is advantageous to construct the facility but full funding is not available from existing sources. Bonds are especially appropriate if a revenue stream can be directly connected to the facility. They can be assured as a general obligation of the community, but more frequently the bonds are guaranteed by revenue from special tax districts, parking user/meter fees and fines, in lieu fees, and othez funds that can be assured through the provision of parking built by the bands. The stronger and more reliable the revenue source, the better the bond rating. Bonds are thus an appropriate source for planning of construction revenue, if a parking program is built around generating revenue to pay the bonds. 6.$.3 impact Fees Impact fees have traditionally been used over the past 20 years to provide for mitigation measures for impacts identified through the CEQA process. Aside from the CEQA origins, they are relatively similar to in lieu fees in terms of fee amount and duty transferred to the parking authority. KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"S"~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 83 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ~~rki~g 1~`~~~gemeMc Strategies Impact fees could be established for an area through the use of a .M.astez Environmental Assessment ~MEA~, in which uses could pay the fees rathez than provide parking facilities. In this manner, uses would pay impact fees in lieu o~ providing parking in order to be approved under the master assessment, However uses that did not apply for development approvals under the MEA would potentially be exempt ~zom generating impact fees. This means that for parking, impact fees are probably not a reliable Funding source. Specific land uses within Tustin old Town will not likely result in specific environmental actions. Theze would be dew opportunities to assess impact fees systematically, without a master area- wide assessment. Also the program provided under the .MEA would likely have to be attractive enough to generate strong pazticipation. 6.8.4 ]~oint Development Projects Joint Development projects include a wide variety of public/private partnerships used to develop parking facilities. Applications can include: • Private construction o~ parl~ing Facilities, followed by dedication o~ facilities to the authozity for operation and maintenance as a multi use racility; • Co-financing o~ parking structures to provide more parking than required for the private development through supplemental public financing. Much o~ the parking for the Los Angeles County Light Rail systems has been constructed through joint development. The County paid private developments proposed near the rail lines to build more parking in their facilities, and a11ow users to use these parking stalls. This approach is normally done on a case-by-case basis through negotiation between the private development and the community. However the community normally has designated a parking plan and goals that indicate when and how this approach should be applied. It is quite appropriate in redevelopment zones, where the community is already a partner and is able to guide the rate o~ development through its own plans. 6.8.5 Use o~ Tax Increment and Saes Tax Increment where specific redevelopment tax increment revenues can be identified and which would be directly correlated to a particular development project within a redevelopment project area, a community may designate any incremental increases in tax increment to financially assist a development project including in the costs associated with provision o~ private and public parking facilities, Increases in the proportion of sales tax collections have also been used by some communities for funding of parking facilities. If a downtown generally provides 10% of a communities sales taxes ~KOA CORPORATION cry o f 7'ust~n `' PLANNING 8~ ENGINEERING 84 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P~ykl~g l~c~~~geme~t StY~ttegces pre-plan, and the tax collections anise to 15°/° through revitalization, the 5°/° increment can be informally or formally pledged to parking or other downtown needs, This form of revenue may be unstable when based upon sales tax increments, especially since the authority may not be legally obliged to continue the commitment, especially in di~~icult financial times. we are nor aware of many communities in California that have used this funding approach with sales tax, however many communities have used tax increment from redevelopment districts to partially or wholly f and or finance parking facilities. d.8.6 User Fees User fees are fees paid by individuals who park and pay for the use of the parking space. These include on-street meter charges and hourly or daily charges paid for off street public parking facilities. In some communities, fines for meter violations are included in this funding source. This form of financing is very common in strong and vital parking districts where the imposition of a parking charge is not deemed to be a threat to the vitality of the district, but where parking is clearly identified as a vital need for the district. Communities that do not currently have paid parking are often nervous about introducing it. Many communities eliminated pay parking in the ~950s and ~960's in their "'dying" downtown areas, due to competition from shopping centers that offered free off street earl<ing. Others simply view parking charges as a new tax to be viewed with skepticism or resentment. As the role of downtown has evolved compared to the suburban shopping center, many communities have found that paid parking can be reintroduced with many benefits. Ingenious and complex programs can be developed to price parking according to its desirability and best use, and offer discounts to discretionary users through parking validations, limited periods for free pazking, and other approaches. Pasadena recently reintroduced pay parking in the Old Pasadena district at on-street sites, The revenue received from. the meters was partially pledged for designation by the merchant's association. Zt was used for upgrading of street furniture, decorative tree lighting, and other purposes to improve the ambiance of the district. An inventory of other cities throughout the state with strong and vital downtown areas will reveal that paid parking generally comes hand in hand with vitality. A surprising amount of revenue can be generated from systematic assessment of fees to parking in areas that are now free. A $1 per hour charge can potentially result in revenues of $1 million per year for a downtown not much larger than Tustin Old Town. A recent study by KOA for the City of South Pasadena determined that this level of charge For its small downtown area and its ~KOA CORPORATION cry o fT~~srrn ~.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING 85 OId Town Tustin Parking Study ,~~rking.lf~~nageme~r Strategies off street parking facilities would generate much more than $1 million per year. One merchant in South Pasadena had advocated the study based upon his observations of the Pasadena program above, however the program was not adopted by the City due to wider merchant concerns over loss of sales from parking charges. d.8.7 ether instruments A significant number of parking facilities have been pzovided or improved thzough the use of Fedezal Community Development Block Giant ~CDBGy funds, This funding souzce has cleanly been found to be an attzactive souzce of "outside" funding. Its appropziateness for usage depends upon the ability to attract funds, competing uses, and the need to follow federal zules for usage, including environmental procedures that apply to clearing of land, etc. A few communities have established Vehicle Parking Districts as separate taxing entities to fund parking impzovements. They are somewhat similar to other special taxing districts, such ~as assessment districts. The District is legally formed by mostly-willing participants who pledge an annual tax increment to the distzict. The increment is used to fund and construct parking facilities. The districts often have interesting boundaries, drawn to include as many supporting participants as possible. Costa .Mesa has several small parking districts behind olden buildings in its downtown area that weze formed in the ~950s. The Districts finances weze formally absorbed into the City's General fund when the bonds were paid off, ~o years after formation. An alternative would be to temporarily waive parking ze~uirements completely. /~KOA CORPORATION c"y °fT"5"~ \: PLANNING & ENGINEERING 86 Old Town Tustin Parking Study During the course o~ the analysis, this report has made numerous general and specific suggestions for planning and management a~ parking in Old Town Tustin. Zn this section, a summary of recommendations is provided for review and consideration by the City. ~.1 Summary o f Recommendations Prior to listing all general study recommendations, the following I<ey findings are noted. • Activity levels in Old Tustin aze generally low based upon the amount of parking now utilized in relation to the existing floor area and land use types. A. comparable downtown community could have a higher part<ing demand, i~ activity levels were higher. • Parking is generally available and underutilized in most o~ the study area at most times, however there are hot spots. These are generally within time limit zones in front of businesses that have limited a~~ street parking, and they occur more frequently during special events such as Farmers Market and Jamestown Flea Market. • Parl~ing enforcement in time Izmir zones should be increased, as there is evidence o~ violation o~ time limits in parking hot spot areas. • Given trends in development o~ older downtown areas, the City should expect that mixed-use and higher-density developments will likely be the preferred approach taken by developers on their development projects in these areas in the future. A • Options exist to either modify standard parking requirements or in~.plement innovative parking solutions to create an attractive area for businesses to locate, Following is a list o~ key recommendations that respond to issues and topics discussed in previous sections o~ this report. Further discussion can be found in previous report sections. The recommendations are summarized here for prioritization and action plan development. Land Use/Tust~n Cit Code Modx~icat~ons • Continue to encourage mixed-use developments in order to make better use o~ available parking for present and future uses. • Review and revise the Tustin City Code to permit limited restaurant uses within existing multi-tenant buildings under special permit without the need for an increase in on-site parking requirements for such uses. The amendment process might also look at identifying specific criteria that can assess existing parking opportunities on such sites and available parking management strategies. KOA CORPORATION c"y o fT"Sr`~ C PLANNING & ENGINE[RING 87 Old Town Tustin Parking Study .Recom~nenc~~rtrons • Modify the Tustin City Code to enact new or relaxed parking requirements for Old Town. This includes specific rates for certain mote common land uses as identified in the report, allowances for joint and shared parking without the need for special Planning Commission or City Council discretionary approvals. The amendment process might also identify certain minimum criteria which could assist in the staff approval process. • Review and revise any currently permitted in-lieu fees for parl<ing to zeflect the current casts of acquiring and constructing parking facilities. This may be necessary in both the Parking Overlay District and Historical Overlay District. The modifications should also acknowledge that if pay parking is utilized as funding and/or implementation technique, any recommended in-lieu fee structure should reflect this as an off-set against any established fee structure. • ~1Vhen .commercial and professional properties are developed or converted to permitted uses, on-site parking requirements maybe modified under any one or a combination of the following provisions: o Property that lies within a Vehicle Parl<ing Assessment District or Business Improvement Area should be exempt from the on-site parking requirement, subject to the provisions of the Parking or Improvement Distzict Ordinance. An in-lieu fee maybe required, o On-site parking requirements may be waived upon presentation to the City of a long-term lease, running with and as a condition of the business license, for private off-site parking accommodations within 300 feet of the development. o All or a portion of the required number of parking spaces may be satisfied by depositing with the City an amount, to be used for public parking accommodations within the area, equal to at least the value of Z00 square feet of property within the project area, for each required parl<ing space not otherwise provided by the project. Public Parkx~.~ Lat s • Work with the Stevens Square Association including the use of code enforcement and legal remedies, as necessary, to improve parking lot surface conditions, security and lighting within those portions of the C Street Parking Structure available Ear public parking. • Continue to monitor whether new Old Town public parking directional signage is effective in directing motorists particularly to the C Street structure public parl<ing area, Consider undertaking focused interviews of shoppers to determine whether they know the KOA CORPORATION C PLANNING & ENGINEERING Crty o f Tustin $8 Old Town Tustin Parking Study ~ecar~~~nen~~trans location of public parking lots in Old Town. zf determined necessary in the future, consider incremental installation of additional public parking directional signage. • Evaluate situations where existing public parking lots may have adequate available parl<ing spaces to provide parking opportunities for non-residential uses proposed in future mixed use projects inclose proximity to the lots in order to enhance overall parking supply. • Evaluate an aproject-by-project basis, and in conjunction with future development activity in the Old Town area, the need far additional future parking facilities based on part<ing demand including evaluation and selection of appropriate private oz public funding mechanisms. • No additional public earl<ing lots or structures aze required in the ~ to 10 year time frame, based on current development projections. Parkin Mana ement Strate ies • Zn general, employ parking management strategies to better regulate and optimize the use of public and private parl<ing facilities in Old Town. • Review and revise, where necessary, tune limits for curb-side and public parking in Old Town to achieve the optimum utilization of parl<ing areas for business and non-residential users, with the shortest time limits applied to the most valuable parking areas. Langer time periods should also be considered in secondary areas where such restrictions may induce long-term packers to relocate into off-street parking facilities. Recommended time limits are shown in Figure 6.~. • Adjust parking enforcement to achieve compliance with time limits and to insure parking opportunities for customers, • Review and develop policies for consideration of limited parking permits to allow continued use of some on-street parking for long-term use under special circumstances, provided that the number of permits can be managed with objective criteria. Consider a charge for such permits as means to control the management, enforcement and also to limit the number of permits issued. • Working with property owners, advise them to consider time limits in any private off- street parking facilities only at a point where utilization seems to be approaching capacity and problems are evident, except of overnight parking restrictions necessary for security and public health and safety considerations. KOA CORPCIRATION airy o f Tustin ~ PLANNfNG & ENGINEERING 89 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Recammendatrons 7„~ Action .Plan The following action plan fox parking improvements is recommended for Old Town. Priority 1 lists improvements or action items that are recommended for the short term (within the next year). Priority 2 lists improvements or action items that are recommended for the medium term (1 to 5 years). Priority 3 lists improvements or action items that are recommended for the long • terns (5+ years). The priority ranking of parking recommendations considers that certain recommendations can be implemented in the near term at relatively low cost. For example, new guide signing to direct motorists to available off-street parking. Other solutions such as improving the C Street structure are more costly but still timely. And changing the municipal code to encourage shared parking solutions is a relatively low cost solution to improve parking utilization in the long term. Pr~nr~t 1.: • Allow Li.nnited Restaurant Uses Within Existing Multi-Tenant Buildings. Zt is recommended that restaurant size be limited to Z5°/° of the total block face fzontage due to the reliance on curb parking within 300 feet of the business locations. • Encourage Mixed Use Developments • Review And Revise Time Limits see Figure 6. ~ for recommended limits} • Introduce Conventional Parking Guide Signing • Modify Municipal Code To Enact 0z Relax Parking Requirements Priorit 2: • Employ Parking Management ~Tirn.e Limits, Permits, Pay Parking • Adjust Enforcement • Limited Time Limit Exemption Permits • Long Term Parking In off Street Parking Facilities • Improve C Street Pazking Structure Pr~or~t 3: • Review And Revise In-Lieu Fees • Integrate Public Parking Facilities Into Future Mixed Use Developments • Consider Pay Parking Iza The Future A variety o~ solutions is therefore available to address the parking needs of old Town. Short-term solutions such as improved signage, time zestrictions, permit parl<ing, and improving the C Street structure can address the current imbalance o~ short-duration and long-duration parking supply KOA CORPORATION city of 1'usci~~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 9~ Old Town Tustin Parking Study Recommen~a~io~s and demand. Long-tezm solutions such as innovative mixed-use and shazed pazl<ing azzangements can help the City meet its long-tezzn goals ~oz old Town. Although not anticipated to be needed in the neat oz mid-tezm, the city should also considez evaluating any appzopziate funding mechanisms ~oz public pazl~ing i~ and when needed in the ~utuze. KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 91 City o f Tustin old Town Tustin ~'azl<ing Study APPENDICES KOA CORPORATION Ciry o f Tc~scrn ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 92 Old Town Tustin Parking Study APPENDIX A Parking Lot Inventory and Occupancy Counts KOA CORPORATION * PLANNING & ENGINEERING Ctty o f Tcrstin 93 old Town Tustin Pazk~ng Stud Tabie A-1. -Old Town Tustin existing Pubiic Parking Supply Parking Space Inventory M~tnici al Parkin Lots M1 Prospect/Third Street Municipal Lot 26 M2 Prospect/Main Street Lot 47 M3 C Street Parking Structure Upper Level 81 otal S aces, Public Lots (not includin tem ora lots) 154 Street Parkin C11 C St./ 1S` - 2"d 12 C12 Second St./ C St. - El Camino Real (N) 9 C13 El Camino Real/ First -Second (W) 12 SUBTOTAL 33 C21 El Camino Real/ First -Second (E) 5 C22 Second St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (N) 7 C23 Prospect/ First -Second 8 SUBTOTAL 20 C32 hird St./ C St. - El Camino Real (N) 9 C33 El Camino Real/ Second -Third (W) 13 C34 Second St./ C St. - El Camino Real (S) 7 C35 C St./ 3`d -Main 8 C36 Main St./ C St. - El Camino Real (N) 8 C37 El Camino Real/ Third -Main (W) 5 C38 hird St./ C St. - EI Camino Real (S) 11 SUBTOTAL 70 C41 El Camino Real/ Second -Third (E) 4 C42 hind St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (N) 9 C43 Prospect/ Second -Third 10 C44 Second St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (S) 11 C45 El Camino Real/ Third -Main (E) 9 C46 Main St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (N) 10 C46 Main St./ Prospect - Preble (N) 12 C47 Prospect/ Third -Main (W) 13 C48 hird St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (S) 16 C49 Prospect/ Third -Main (E) 4 SUBTOTAL 98 ~;KOA CORPORATION c"y ofT"Sr`n •: PLANNING & ENGINEERING 94 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Street Parkin . (coot) C51 C St./South of Main 2 C52 C St./ North of Sixth 10 C53 Sixth St./ C St. - El Camino Real 8 C54 El Camino Real/ Main -Sixth (W) 10 C55 Main St./ C St. - El Camino Real (S) 10 SUBTOTAL 40 C61 El Camino Real/ Main -Sixth (E) 19 C62 Sixth B/ El Camino to Newport 30 C63 Main St./ El Camino Real -Prospect (S) 7 SUBTOTAL 56 C71 Main St./ El Camino Real -Newport (S) 16 SUBTOTAL 16 C82 B St./ South of Sixth 17 C83 El Camino Real/ (W) El Camino Real (S) Sixth (W) 24 C84 Sixth St B/ B St - El Camino Real (S) 16 SUBTOTAL 57 C92 El Camino Real/ (E) El Camino Real (S) Sixth (E) 11 SUBTOTAL 11 otal Street Parking Spaces 401 Note ~: Does not include residential spaces KOA CORPORATION c"y of T"Sr`" ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 95 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Table A-2 ~ old Town Tustin Existing Private Parking Supply Parking Area Parking Space Inventory Prcivate Parkin Lots P11 B.G. Byrd, DDS (Dentist) 10 P12 Office 150 El Camino Real 71 P13 William B. Stanford, OD (Optometry) 6 P14 Office 195 C St 31 P15 Office 175 C St 15 SUBTOTAL 133 P21 Webb #67 9 P22 Douglas E. Moran, Inc 12 P23 Prospect Plaza Offices 40 P24 Sinno Construction 3 P25 Acucare Holistic Health Center 2 P26 Riteway 7 P27 El Paseo Plaza 15 P28 Acorn Naturals 35 SUBTOTAL 123 P31 Offices 250 El Camino onl 92 P32 (Vacant Commercial) Antiques/Collectibles 26 P33 Kelly's Hobby shop 7 P34 Mrs. B's #38 5 P35 (Vacant Commercial) 9 P36 Offices 145 W. Main 17 P37 Kelly's Hair Design 4 SUBTOTAL 160 P41 CPA (s aces were located in 2°d/El Camino Real un aved lot) 20 P42 Bigler 17 P43 Swinging Door (behind building) 11 P44 Flying Geese (parking in Old Town Plaza) 14 P45 Blacl< Sheep (parking in Old Town Plaza) 10 _ SUBTOTAL 72 P51 Rutabe orz 7 P52 Cass Hare Hall 18 P53 HomeFront Mortgage 13 P54 Jamestown Lot 109 P55 Steven's Sq./C St. Parking Structure/Private 36 SUBTOTAL 183 KO~l CORPORATION PLANNING & ENGINECRING 96 City o f Tustin Old Town Tustin Parking Study Private Par~un Lott coat, P6~ Law Carb Restauzant 7 P6Z Old Town Flooring 6 P~3 The Atrium 63 PG4 Armstzong Gazden Centex 4~ P65 Assistance League ~4 P6~ Oid Town Gzill 32 SUBTOTAL ~ 6Z P71 Saddleback Cha el 8~ SUBTOTAL S ~ P8~ Pet Gzoomin 30 P8Z Large Commercial Lot X57 P83 Smali Commezcial Lot 3 P84 El Camino Plaza 33Z SUBTOTAL 5ZZ P9~ Saddleback Flower Sho Z P9~ Tustin Glass and Mirzor 2 P93 Roma D Italia ~Pizza~ 39 P94 Galaxy Automotive Auto Repairs ~3 P95 utor whiz 9 P96 Motel Tustin Motor Lodge & Suite 44 SUBTaTAL X09 Total S aces, Private Lots ' x,545 Note ~ :Does not include residential spaces KOA CORPORATION * PLANNING & ENGINEERING 97 Cfty of Tustin old Town Tustin Parking Study Table A-3- old Town Tustin weekday Parking Demand, Public Lats & Streets Parking Lot Parking ~enaand ~,z PKG. SUP 9 AM ~ ~ AM ~ PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM PEAK ~CCUP. AVG. Public Parking L+~t~ Ma Prospect/3rd St. Lot 26 4 2 2 ~ 0 0 0 0 15°/° 5°/° M2 Prospect/Main St. Lot 47 4 5 4 3 4 ~ 1 0 11°/° 6°/° M3 C St. Parking Structure 2nd Ievel} $~ 5 17 52 24 20 25 12 0 64°/° 24°/° 3rd/Prospect Unpaved Lot 0 ~ 2 3 3 $ 5 3 3 27°l° 14°I° 2nd/ECR Unpaved Lot 0 0 2 3 3 2 0 0 0 5°/° 2% Total, Public Parking 154 14 28 64 34 34 31 16 3 42°/° 18% Percent Occupied, Public Lots 9°/° 18°/° 42°/° 22°I° 22°I° 20°/° 10°/° 4% Street Paxking C1~ C St./ 1St _ 2nd ~E} 12 4 8 4 3 2 D D 0 67°/° ~ 22°/° C12 2nd St./C St.-El Camino ~N} 9 4 8 4 4 3 D 0 0 89°/° 32°/° C13 El Camino/ 1st - 2nd ~V) 12 1 3 3 6 3 ~ ~ 0 50°/° 19°/° C21 El Camino/ 1st-- 2nd ~E} 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 40% 5% C22 2nd St./EI Canino- Prospect ~N} 7 3 3 ~ 3 ~ 2 2 0 43°/° 27°/° C23 Prospect/1st - 2nd ~w) 8 4 4 5 5 3 ~ 3 3 63°/° 44°/° C31 C St./ 2nd -3rd ~E} 9 8 9 8 9 ~ 4 3 0 100°/° 58°/° C32 3rd St./C St.--EI Camino ~N} 9 8 $ 7 5 4 2 3 2 $9°/° 54°/° C33 El Camino/ 2nd - 3rd ~1V} 13 1 12 13 13 12 9 2 0 100°/° 60°/° C34 2nd St./C St.-EI Camino ~S} 7 2 5 3 6 4 7 0 0 1.00% 48°/° C35 C St./ 3rd -Main ~E} 8 2 3 5 2 ~ ~ 0 0 63°/° 22% C36 Main St.IC St.-El Camino ~N} 8 0 4 4 2 4 4 0 0 50°/° 28°/° C37 El Camino/ 3rd -Main ~w} 5 2 2 4 5 5 3 1 4 100°/° 65% C38 3rd St./C St.-El Camino ~S} 1l 6 10 7 8 5 4 3 0 91% 4g% C41 El Camino/ 2nd - 3rd ~E} 4 0 4 4 4 4 2 0 0 100% 56°/° C42 3rd St,/EI Camino- Prospect ~N} 9 4 7 7 8 8 4 2 2 89°/° 58°/° C43 Prospect/ 2nd - 3rd ~w`} 10 5 4 5 4 5 6 7 7 70°/° 54°/° C44 2nd St./EI Camina- Prospect ~S} 11 2 4 4 5 5 2 2 0 45°I° 27°I° C45 EI Camino/ 3rd -Main ~E} 9 3 6 9 8 9 9 8 6 10D% $1% C46 Main St,/ E~ Camino- Prospect ~N} 1D 6 7 5 4 1 5 2 1 70°/° 39°/° C46 Main St./Prospect- Preb~e ~N} 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° D°/° C47 Prospect/ 3rd--Main ~w} 13 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0°/° C48 3rd St./EI Camino- Prospect ~S} 16 3 4 4 3 2 3 2 2 25°/° 18% C49 Prospect/ 3rd -Main ~E} 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0°/° C51 C St./ South ol= Main ~E} 2 0 0 2 1 2 2 1 0 100% 5D% C52 C St./ North of 6th ~!} 10 2 4 3 0 2 3 1 2 40 21% C53 6th St./ C St.-- EI Camino $ 2 2 2 3 2 2 D 0 38% 2D% C54 E~ Camino/ Main- G`" ~w} 1D 1 5 7 3 3 $ 4 4 SO% 44°/° C55 Main St./C St.-E~ Camino ~S} 10 2 6 8 6 8 7 2 0 80°/° 49°/° KOA CORPORATION PLANNING & ENGINE[RINC: 98 City o f Tustin old Town Tustin Parking Study C6~ El Camino) N~ain - 6`h ~E} ~9 ~ 5 13 0 5 ~ ~ ~3 5 68°/° 35% C62 6th B/ El Camino to Newpozt 30 ~0 ~0 13 ~ ~ ~3 ~9 ~4 9 63°/° 41°/° C63 Main St./ El Camino-Newpozt ~S} 7 2 2 5 ~ 5 5 ~ 0 71°/° 3S% C71. Main St.l El Camino- Newport ~S} ~6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0% C82 B St./ South of 6`h E} ~7 6 9 9 8 4 3 2 2 53°/° 32% C83 El Camino/ ~w} El Camino ~S} 6th 24 5 7 8 7 7 ~2 6 3 50% 29% C84 Sixth Stl B St-EI Camino ~S} ~6 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 6% 2% C92 EI Camino/ ~E} El Camino ~S} 6th 1 ~ ~ 3 2 2 2 5 1. 0 45°/° ~ 8% Percent Occupied, Street Parlczng 25°I° 42°I° 44°/° 37% 34°/° 37°/° 2~°/° ~3°/° 44°/° 32°/° KOA CORPORATION c"y o fT`~Sr'~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 99 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Table A-4- old Town Tustin V~eekday Parking Demand, Private Lots Parking Lot Parking Demand ''Z Pkg. Sup. 9 AM 11 AM 1 PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM ~ ~ PM Peal< Occu. Avg. °/° Private P~ri~ing Lots P1~ B.G. Byrd, DDS Dentist} 10 ~ 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 40% 15% P12 Offices 150 El Camino Real 71 23 39 36 40 27 2 2 2 56°/0 3D°/° P13 William B. Stanford, OD 6 0 2 0 ~ 2 0 0 0 33% 10°/0 P14 Offices 195 C 31 ~~ 18 15 18 16 ~ 2 ~ 58°/° 33% P15 Offices 175 C 15 ~ 7 5 3 2 0 0 0 47°/° 15°/° SUBTOTAL 133 3S 67 60 66 48 3 4 3 50°/o Z7°/° P2 ~ Webb 9 7 4 3 5 4 ~ 0 D 78% 33°/° P22 Douglas E. Moran, Inc 12 2 3 5 6 2 0 0 0 5D% 1 g% P23 Prospect Plaza Offices 40 28 32 24 28 19 5 4 4 80°/0 45% P24 Sir~no Construction 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 33°/° 4% P25 Acucare Holistic Health Center 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 10D% 19% P26 Riteway 7 2 ~ 2 ~ ~ 2 0 ~ 29% 14°/° P27 El Paseo Plaza 15 0 ~ 4 2 3 0 1 ~ ~]% 10% P28 Acorn Naturals 35 5 5 6 7 ~ 0 0 0 20% 9% SUBTOTAL 123 44 48 44 50 33 9 5 6 41 °/° 24°/° P3~ Offices 250 El Camino 92 36 80 75 68 67 17 6 6 87°/° 48°/° P32 Vacant/Collectibles 26 2 6 3 8 10 7 6 1 3$°/° 21% P33 Hobby shop 7 Z 3 2 3 2 ~ 2 2 43°/° 3D°/° P34 Mrs. B's 5 0 3 2 3 3 0 0 0 6D°/° 28°/° P35 Vacant Commercial 9 6 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 67°/0 10°/° P36 Offices 17 6 11 9 ~ ~ 9 0 0 0 65°/° 34°/° P37 Kelly's Hair Design 4 2 2 ~ ~ 2 2 2 2 50% 44°/° SUBTOTAL 160 54 105 92 95 93 Z7 16 ~ 1 66°/° 39°/° P41 CPA ~2"d/E1 Cain. Real Lot} 20 2 5 5 4 6 2 0 0 30% 15% P42 Bigler 17 3 4 6 3 3 1 1 1 35°/° 16°/° P43 Swinging Door behind bldg} 11 5 6 9 9 8 8 6 10 91% 69% P44 ~Iying Geese Old Town Plaza} 14 6 14 14 14 11 8 13 ~ 1 100% $ ~ °/° P45 Black Sheep Old Town Plaza} 10 1 3 6 5 0 5 7 2 70°/° 36°/° SUBTOTAL 72 ~7 32 40 35 28 24 27 24 56% 39% KDA CORPORATION ~ PI.ANN~NG & ENGINEERING Ctty o f Tustin 100 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P53 Home~ront Mortgage 13 13 13 13 12 ~ 1 0 0 0 100% 60°/° P54 Jamestown Lot 109 18 39 51 46 42 68 59 42 62°I° 42% P55 Steven's Sq./C St. Parking 127 20 22 26 31 25 6 0 0 33°/° 13°/° P56 Rutabegorz 7 3 4 5 4 5 2 2 0 71 % 45% P57 Cass Hare Hall 19 10 8 10 12 9 19 10 3 100°/° 53°/° SUBTOTAL 275 64 86 105 105 92 95 71 45 3S% 30% P61 Low Carb Restaurant 7 1 4 2 ~ 1 5 ~ 2 71% 30% P62 old Town Flooring 7 5 5 6 3 5 3 2 2 86% 55% P63 The Atrium 63 32 38 36 32 30 15 5 4 60°/° 3S% P64 Armstrong Garden Center 41 5 5 10 6 4 0 0 0 24°/° 9% P65 Assistance League 14 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 7% 2% X66 old Town Grill 32 5 10 22 7 4 20 22 7 69% 38°/° SUBTOTAL 164 48 62 76 50 45 43 30 15 46°/0 ~$% P71 Saddleback Chapel 81 9 10 8 8 2 ~ 2 2 12°/° 6% P81 Pet Grooming 30 8 6 5 5 1 1 ~ 1 27°/° 12% P82 Large Commercial Lot, Rear 157 9 23 27 27 38 63 30 24 40°/° 19% P83 Small Commercial Lot - El 3 2 2 2 3 2 1 0 0 100°/° 50% P84 El Camino Plaza 332 127 134 185 135 206 301 15$ 52 91°/° 49°/° SUBTOTAL 522 146 165 219 170 247 366 189 77 70% 38% P91 Saddleback Flower Shop 2 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 100°/° 38% P92 Tustin Glass and Mirror 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 0 100°/° 75% P93 Roma D ztalia Pizza} 39 3 5 25 15 15 31 24 4 79°/° 39°/° P94 Galaxy Automotive 14 13 14 14 14 14 11 14 14 100% 96% P95 Tutor VLlhiz 9 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 44°/° 1.0% P96 Motel Tustin Motor Lodge 44 24 18 18 13 18 23 23 29 66°/° 47% SUBTOTAL 110 42 38 61 47 52 70 64 47 64°/° 48°/° Total Spaces, Private 1545 462 613 705 626 640 638 408 230 43°I° 33°/° Percent occupied, Private 2$°/° 37°/° 43°/° 38°/° 39°/° 39% 25°/° 14°/° 33°I° ~,. KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING City of Tustin 101 old Town Tustin Parking Study Table A-5- 41d Town Tustin Weekend Parking ~]emand, Public Lots & Streets Parking Lot Parlting Demand 1,2 Pkg. Supp. 9 AM i 1 AM 1 PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM 11 PM Pear ~ccu, Avg. Public Parking Lots M1 Prospect/3rd St. Lot ~6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4% ,5% M2 Prospect/Main St. Lot 47 1 2 3 5 5 5 5 1 11°/° 7% M3 C 5t. Parking Structure 2nd level} $1 Z 3 Z7 6 2 8 2 0 33°/° 8°/° 3`d/Prospect Unpaved Lot 0 2 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 10°/° 10% 2nd/ECR Unpaved Lot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% D% Tonal, Public Parking Lots 154 5 8 31 13 10 1 ~ 10 4 20% 8% Percent occupied, Public Parking 3°/° 5°/° ZO°/° 8°/° 6°/° 10°/° 6% 3°/° 8% Street Parking C1 C St. B/ 1st to 2nd ~E} 12 1 0 D 3 0 0 0 0 Z5°/° 4% C1 2nd B/ C St, to El Camino ~N} 9 Z Z D 0 0 0 0 0 22°/° 5% C1 El Camino B/ 1st to 2nd ~w} 12 0 1 Z 1 0 0 0 0 17°/° 4% C2 EI Camino B/ 1st to 2nd ~E} 5 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0% C2 2nd B/ El Camino to Prospect ~N} 7 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 57% 46°/° CZ Prospect B/ 1st to 2nd ~W} 8 Z Z 5 4 4 4 3 4 63% 44°/° C3 C St. B/ 2nd to 3`d ~E} 9 2 2 3 2 5 0 0 0 56°/° 1g% C3 3rd B/ C St, to El Camino ~N} 9 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 33°/° 1 g% C3 El Camino B/Znd to 3`d ~W} 13 13 13 ~3 10 D 0 1 2 100°/° 50% C3 2nd BI C St. to El Camino ~S} 7 1 5 3 4 1 0 0 0 71°/° 25% C3 C St, B/ 3rd to Main St. ~E} 8 1 2 Z 1 0 Z 0 0 25°/° 13% C3 Main St. B/ C St. to EI Camino ~N} 8 0 Z 4 Z 1 3 0 0 50°/° 19% C3 El Camino B/ 3rd to Main St, ~w} 5 0 2 5 5 2 Z 4 4 100% 60% C3 3rd B/ C St, to El Camino ~S} 11 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 2 36°/° 18% C4 El Camino B/ 2nd to 3`d ~E} 4 3 3 4 4 4 0 0 0 100°/° 5~% C4 3rd B/ EI Camino to Prospect ~N} 9 2 2 Z 2 4 Z 2 2 44% 25% C4 Prospect B/ Znd to 3`d ~W} 10 6 5 6 4 6 G 8 9 90°/° 63% C4 2nd B/ El Camino to Prospect ~S} 11 Z 2 1 1 1 4 2 1 36% 16°/° C4 El Camino B13rd to .Main St. ~E} 9 0 1 3 8 0 9 7 $ 100% 50% C4 Main St. B/El Camino to Prospect 1D 2 4 3 4 3 1 0 0 40°/° 21% C4 Main St. $/ Prospect to Preble ~N} 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0% KOA CORPORATION ~ PIA~lNING & ENGINEERING 1O2 City o f Tustin old Town Tustin Parking Studer C4 Prospect B/ 3rd to Main St. ~VV} 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0°/° C4 3zd B/ E~ Camino to Prospect ~N} 1b ~ ~ 2 2 3 4 3 2 25°/° N% C4 Prospect B/ 3zd to Main St. ~E} 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0% 0% C5 C St. South of Main St. ~E} 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 100°/° 63% C5 C St. N/ 6th St. ~E} 10 3 3 3 4 6 4 4 4 bo°/° 3g°/° C5 6th St. B/ C St. to El Camino 8 0 0 0 1 ~ 4 4 2 50°/° 1g°/° C5 EI Camino B/ Main to 6`" ~w} 10 ~ 1 7 5 2 8 b 3 80°/° 41 °/° C5 Main St. B/ C St. to E~ Camino 10 2 5 10 7 6 4 0 0 100°/° 43°/° C6 El Camino B/ Main to 6`" ~E} 19 0 b 10 4 2 14 10 3 74% 32% Cb 6th B/ EI Camino to Newport Nozth 3D 12 13 12 12 1b 24 16 13 80°/° 49% C6 Main St. B/El Camino-Nwpt ~S} 7 0 4 1 0 3 1 1 1 57°/° 20°/° C7 Main St. BIEI Camino-Nwpt ~S} 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0% C8 B St. SJ 6`'' 17 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 1$°/0 13°/° C8 El Camino) ~w} El Camino S/ 6`'' 24 1 2 5 b 3 2 3 1 25°/° 12% CS Sixth St BI B St - El Camino ~S} 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7% .8°/° C9 El Camino /~E} EI Camino S/ b`" i1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1$°/° 2°/° Percent Occupied, Street Parking 17°/° 23°/° 30°/° 27°/° 23°/° 28°/° 22°/° 17°/° 30°/° 23°/° ~KOA CoRPO~.ATioN f.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin X03 old Town Tustzn Pazk~ng Study Table A-d-~ Old Town Tustin weekend Parking Demand, Private Lots Parking Lot Parlting Demand ~,Z Pkg. Su PP 9 AM 11 AM ~ PM 3 PM 5 PM 7 PM 9 PM ~ 1 PM Peak Occu. Avg, /o Private Parking Lots P1 ~ B.G. Byrd, DDS ~Dentist~ 10 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 10°/° ~°/° P12 O~~ices 150 El Camino Real 71 2 3 5 6 2 ~ 1 ~ 8°/° 4°/° P13 William B. Stanford, OD 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0°/° P14 O~~ices 195 C 31 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 16°/° 4°/° P15 O~~ices~175 C 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°/° 0°/° SUBTOTAL 133 5 8 6 6 2 2 1 1 5% 3°/° P21 Webb 9 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 33°/° ~4°/° P22 Douglas E. Moran, Znc 12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8% S% P23 Prospect Plaza O~~ice 40 9 11 9 8 7 4 0 0 28°/° ~5°/° P24 Sinno Construction 3 0 0 1 ~ 1 0 0 0 33% ~3°/° P25 Acucare Holistic Health 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0% P26 Riteway 7' 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 29°l° 4°I° P27 El Paseo Plaza 15 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 7°/° 3°/° P2S Acorn Naturals 35 2 3 2 5 2 0 0 0 14°/° 5°/° SUBTOTAL 123 15 1S 16 18 12 8 1 1 15°/° 9°/° P31 O~~ices 250 EI Camino only 92 32 56 43 37 15 6 5 5 61% 27°/° P32 Vacant Commercial 26 2 3 3 2 4 2 2 1 15°/° 9°/° P33 Hobby shop 7' 3 3 2 4 2 ~ 1 1 57°/° 30°/° P34 .M.rs. B's 5 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 60% ~5°/° P35 Vacant Commercial 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0°/° P36 O~~ices 145 W Main 17 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 12°/° 2% P37 Z~elly's Hair Design 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50°/° 50°/° SUBTOTAL 160 39 67 52 46 25 11 11 9 42°/° 20°/° P41 CPA 20 3 4 7 5 5 1 2 ~ 2 35°/° ~ 8°/° P42 Bigler 17 4 4 1 2 0 0 4 0 24°/° 1~°/° P43 Swinging Door behind bldg} 11 0 4 4 3 7 5 0 0 64°/° 26°/° P44 Flying Geese~Old Town 14 14 12 14 12 3 7 6 1 100 62°I° P45 Black Sheep Old Town 10 8 6 6 6 1 3 2 1 80°/° 41°/° SUBTOTAL 72 29 30 32 28 16 16 14 4 44°/° 29°/° KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 104 Old Town Tustin Parking Study P51 Rutabegorz 7 3 4 6 3 2 3 1 0 86% 39°/° P52 Cass Haze Hall 19 5 5 6 5 2 0 1 1 6°/° ~6% P53 Homefront Mortgage 13 3 5 8 3 1 0 0 0 42°/° ~9% P54 Jamestown 109 38 47 51 47 64 55 54 12 59°/° 42°/° P55 Steven"s S~,/C St. Parking 127 7 7 6 2 0 0 0 0 54°/° 2% SUBTOTAL 275 56 68 77 60 69 58 56 13 2$°/° 2~°/° P61 Low Carb Restaurant 7 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 0 43°/° 25°/° P62 OId Town Flooring 7 1 7 6 4 3 5 3 0 100 52% P63 The Atrium 63 5 11 14 7 9 3 1 1 22°/° ~0°/° P64 Armstrong Garden Center 41 11 22 15 13 13 0 0 0 49°/° 23°/° P65 Assistance League 14 2 11 11 7 9 3 1 1 79% 40°/° P66 Old Town Grill 32 2 7 14 12 15 30 23 5 94°/° 42°/° SUBTOTAL 164 23 59 62 44 52 43 31 7 38°/° 24°/° 71 Saddleback Chapel 81 6 7 ,6 4 4 3 1 1 9% 5°/° PS 1 Pet Grooming 30 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 1 17°/° 8°/° P82 Large Commercial Lot 157 26 30 24 19 40 50 8 32°/° ~8°/° P83 Small Commercial Lot 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 0 0 100 54°/° P84 El Camino Plaza 332 173 199 196 175 145 115 149 41 60°/° 45°/° SUBTOTAL 522 206 236 227 198 188 168 158 42 45°/° 34°/° P91 Saddleback Flower Shop 2 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 D 100 50°/° P92 Tustin Glass and Mirror 2 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 0 100 56°/° P93 Roma D Italia ~Pizza~ 39 5 8 19 12 16 34 21 1 87°/° 37°/° P94 Galaxy Automotive 14 13 14 8 12 11 12 11 9 100 80°/° P95 Tutor ~1Vhiz 9 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 33°/° 7°/° P96 .Motel Tustin Motor Lodge 44 24 19 19 17 22 19 25 27 61°/° 49°/° SUBTOTAL 110 44 44 49 45 53 67 61 37 61°/° 45°/° Total, Private Parking Lots 1545 423 537 527 449 421 376 334 115 33°/° 24°/° Percent Occupied, Private 26°/° 33°/° 32°/° 27°/° 26°/° 23°/° 20°/° 7°/° 24°/° {r,~. KOA CORPCIRATION ~1,' PLANNING & [NGINEERING Crty o f Tustin 105 Old Town Tustin Parking Study Table A-7 Existing Parking Demand by Land Use Land Use Subarea -Parking Demand Spaces} 1 2 3 4 5 d 7 S 9 Total Residential - 2 5 ~ 3 4 - - - - ~4 Mixed Use - - - - - ~ - - - ~ Retirement Home - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ Service-Commercial - 2 2 - - - -- - 14 ~ 8 Commercial - - - - - - - - 4 4 .Dance Studio - - $ - - - - - - 8 Shopping Center - - - 17 8 38 - 342 4 409 Nursery - - - - - 10 ~ - - 10 Retail - 7 ~ 0 - - ~ ~ - - - 28 Restaurant - - - - Z4 - - - 31 55 General ~~~ice 73 3$ 91 ~~ Z1 38 - 17 - 289 Medical Office 12 4 - - - - - - - 16 Mortuary - - - - - _ ~ 0 - - ~ 0 Public Utlllty - - - 5 - - - - - 5 Recreational - - 14 - - - - - - 14 Entertainment - - - 14 - -. - - - 14 .Museum - - - 10 - - - -- - 10 Religious Center - - - - - _ - - - - Hotel/Motel - - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ Industrial - -- 9 - - - - - - 9 Storage - - - - - - - - - - ~ther 8 16 Z ~ 3 ~ 5 - - - - 8 ~ TQTAL 93 69 160 ~ 0 ~ 6~ 98 ~ 0 359 53 ~ 005 KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING City of Tcrstfn 106 Old Town Tustin Parking Study APPENDIX B Parking Duration/Turnover Data rKOA CORPORATION 'l NI.ANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tusrrn X07 old Town Tustin Park<ing Study Table B-1 El Camino Real Documented Length o~ Stay Weekday , El Camino Real Street Segment Parking Space inventory Average Occupancy Average , Duration hours} Average Turnover fuse per day} Between Zpa & 3ra St., West Side ~3 60% ~.6 5.0 Between 2r'a & 3ra St., East Side 8 56% ~.5 4.0 Between 3`a & Main St., West Side 5 65% ~.4 4.6 Between 3ra & Main St., East Side 10 8i °/° ~ .6 4.8 Between .Main St. & 6th St., West Side ~2 44% i.7 2.2 Between Main St. & 6th St., East Side i9 35% i.3 i.7 Total d7 57°~° 1..d 4.0 Table B-2 El Camino Real Documented Length of Stay Weekend El Camino Real Street Segment Parking Space Ynventory Average Occupancy Average , Duration hours} Average Turnover fuse per day} Between 2na & 3ra St, West Side 13 50°/° ~.9 3.5 Between Zr'a & 3ra St., East Side 8 56°/° ~ 9 ~ 9 Between 3ra & Main St., West Side 5 60°/° 2. ~ 2.6 Between 3ra & Main St., East Side ~0 50% i.6 ~.7 Between Main St. & 6th St., West Side 12 4~°I° i.6 2.4 Between Main St. & 6th St., East Side 19 32°/° 1.3 1.5 Total d7 48% 1.7 Z.5 ~KOA CORPCIRATION `.` PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin i08 old Town Tustin Parking Study Table B-3 C Street Documented Length of Stay Weekend C Street Street Segment Parking Space Inventory Average occupancy Average , Duration hours} Average Turnover fuse per day} Between Z"a & 3r~ St., West Side 14 19% 4.0 0.4 Between Z"`~ & 3ra St., East Side 12 19% 3.9 0.7 Between 3r`~ & Main St., West Side 9 13% 1.2 0.7 Between 3r~ & Main St., East Side $ 13°/° 2.1 0.9 Between Main St. & 6t'' St., West Side 4 63°/° 2.0 4.7 Between Main St. & 6t~ St., East Side 3 39°/° 1.3 3.0 Total 50 2$°/° 2.3 2.Z Table B-4 Znd° 3rd, & Main Street Documented Length of Stay Weekend Parking Average Average 2nd Street Space Average , Duration Turnover Street Segment inventory occupancy hours} fuse per day} Between C ~ El Camino Real, North Side ~ 1 5% 1.4 2.4 Between C & El Camino Real, South Side 8 25°/° 1.3 4,6 otal 19 15°/° 1.3 3.9 3r~ Street Street Segment Between C & El Camino Real, North Side 10 19°/° 4.3 0.4 Between C & El Camino Real, South Side 12 18°/° 1.9 0.7 otal 22 1$% 2.7 0.6 Main Street Stzeet Segment Between C & EI Camino Real, North Side 10 19% 1.7 0.3 Between C ~ El Camino Real, South Side 1 ~ 43°/° 5.0 0.8 oral 2 ~ 3 ~ °/° 4.0 0.7 KO~ CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 109 Old Town Tustin ~'arl~ing Study Table B-5 Farmer's Market Parlang Documented Length o~ Stay Parlung Average Average El Camino Real Space Average , Duratio Turnover Street Segment inventory occupancy hours} fuse per day} Between 2nd & 3rd St., west Side ~3 60°/° 1.2 4.0 Between 2r`d & 3rd St ,East Side 9 56% ~.0 3.6 Between 3ra & Main St., West Side 5 65% ~.3 2.4 Between 3rd 8~ Main St., East Side ~ 0 $1 % ~ , ~ 2.9 Total 37 d5°/° 1.1 3.5 2nd Street Street Segment Between C & El Camino Real, South Side 8 48% ~.9 2.0 Between El Camino Real & Prospect, 5. Side 8 27°/° 3.7 ~ .3 Total 16 3S°/° 2.d 1.7 3ra Street Street Segment Between C & El Camino Real, North Side ~0 54% ~.S ~.3 Between C & El Camino Real, South Side ~0 49°/° 4.3 ~.0 Between El Camino Real & Prospect, N. Side 9 58°/° 3.3 ~ .4 Between El Camino Real & ~'rospect, S. Side 8 18°/° ~.3 2.0 Total 37 45°/° Z.5 1.5 3rd Street/Prospect Unpaved Lot 25 ° ~4/° ~.~ 2.2 3rd Street/Praspect 40 ° 5 /° 4.0 0. ~ . M.un~c~pal Lot KOA CORPORATION ~ PLANNING & CNGINEERING City o f Tustin ~~0 old Town Tustin Parl<ing Stud Table B-d Jamestown Flea Market Parking Documented Length of Stay s Parking Space inventory verage Occupancy Average Duration ~hours~ Average Turnover fuse per days C Street Structure 8~ 27°/° ~.3 2.7 amestown Lot 1 ~ ~3 N/A' ~.3 3.0 rmstrong Lot 54 23% ~ .4 ~ . ~ El Camino Real Between 6th & Main, W. Side ~ 3 41 % ~ .5 5.8 El Camino Real Between 6th & Main, E. Side ~ 9 32°/° ~ .4 6.2 C Stzeet between 6th & Main, West Side ~6 63% 2.3 3.S C Street between 6th & Main, East Side ~ 7 39%° 2.6 3.8 Total, Street Segments d5 44°/° ~ .S 5.2 Note 1; Jamestown lat occupied by vendors 'KOA CORPORATION t° PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin ~ 11 Old Town Tustin Parking Study APPENDIX C City Parking Codes and Ordinances KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT"5"'2 C PLANNING & ENGINEERING 112 Old Town Tustin Parking Study CI~APTER 9 DESIGNATED PUBLIC PARI~ING AREAS 7900 PURPOSE AND INTENT The purpose of this Chapter is to provide a mechanism by which the City Council may designate available City-owned property as public parking areas in order to increase the availability of parking in certain areas of the City. (Ord. No. 1323, Sec. 1, 1-15-07) 7905 DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC PARKING AREAS Upon making each of the following findings, the City Council may, by resolution, designate any available and suitable City~owned property within the City, or any portion thereof, as a public parking area: ~. That the designation of the subject property as a public parking area will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort; and general welfare of residents or businesses in the area of tl~e designatian; and 2. That such designation will not interfere with the public safety or access to the subject property, or with preexisting traffic patterns, as applicable. In determining whether to make such a designation, the City Council shall take into account the existing parking conditians in the area and the extent of the desire and need of residents and/or commercial proprietors in the area for the public parking area, Ord, No.13Z3, Sec. 1,1-15-07~ 7910 USE OF DESIGNATED PUBLIC PARI~ING AREAS Any property designated as a public parking area pursuant to this Chapter shall be held open to the general public solely for the purpose of temporary parking of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, or other motor-driven forms of transportation not in excess of six thousand ~6,000~ pounds gross weight, subject to those conditions, rules, and regulations established by the City Council. Use of designated public parking areas for public parking shall be non-exclusive, and the City Council shall retain the right to concurrently use the property for whatever additional purposes the City Council or its designee reasonably determines are necessary or convenient and consistent with such parking use. Ord. No.13Z3, Sec. ~, ~-15-07~ 7915 DE-DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC PARI~ING AREAS Upon making each of the following findings, the City Council may, by resolution, de-designate City-owned property previously designated as a public parking area pursuant to Section 7905: 1. That the subject property is needed for a significant public use; 2, That the continued use of the property as a public non-exclusive parking area is inconsistent or incompatible with such other public use; and KOA CORPORATION city o f Tusri~~ ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 113 Old Town Tustin Parking Study 3. That the loss of the public parking area will not have a significant adverse impact on parking in the vicinity of the public parking area. (Ord. No. 1323, Sec. 1, 1-15-07) 7920 NOTICE AND HEARING REQUIREMENTS A. Public Hearing. Pzioz to the adoption o~ a resolution designating or de-designating City-owned property as a public parking area, the City Council shall hold a public heating and shall considez comments received ~zom the public, property owners within dive hundred X500} feet o~ the public parking area, and any other interested persons or pzopezty owners. B, Notice o~ Hearing. ~, Publication and Mailing o~ Notice. The City Clerk shall pzepaze a notice o~ the public hearing and shall publish the notice at least once in a newspaper o~ general circulation within the City of Tustin, no less than ten X10} days prior to the public hearing. Notice o~ the hearing shall also be mailed or delivered at least ten CIO} days prior to the hearing to all owners o~ zeal property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within dive hundred X500} feet o~ the extezioz boundary o~ the zeal property constituting the proposed oz a~~ected public parking area. ~. Failure to Post Notices. Failure to mail or publish notices as specified in subsection "B. ~" hereof shall not invalidate any proceedings. 3. Filing o~ A~~idavit. Upon completion o~ the publication and mailing oI the notices provided for in subsection "B. ~" hereof, the City Clerk shall cause an a~~idavit o~ such mailing oz publication to be filed in the permanent records o~ the particular proceedings to which such notices pertain. ~Ozd. No. ~3~3, Sec. ~, ~-15-07} 7925 ESTABLISHMENT OF CONDITIONS, RULES, AND REGULATIONS The resolution designating a public parking area may provide such special conditions, rules, and regulations, including without limitation, hours o~ opezation and duzation, as the City Council deems necessary or appzopriate in order to assure proper and appropriate use o~ designated public parking areas and to prevent intez~ezence with the orderly and e~~icient conduct o~ the City's business. A written statement or other graphic depiction o~ such special conditions, rules, and regulations shall, upon adoption by the City Council, be filed in the office of the City Clerl<. (Ord. No. 1323, Sec. 1, 1-15-07) 7930 ENFORCEMENT OF REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE DESIGNATED PUBLIC PARI~ING AREAS KOA CORPORATION Crry of Tustin ~ PLANNING & ENGINEERING 114 Old Town Tustin Parking Study A, Pursuant to Vehicle Code Section Z 1 ~ ~ 3, a written statement or other graphic depiction o~ all special conditions, rules, and regulations adopted per Section 79.5 shall, at ali times while the same remain e~~ective, be kept on rile and available at the o~~ice o~ the City Clerk, for examination by all interested persons. B. The City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall execs, place, and maintain appropriate signs and markings at each designated public parking area giving notice o~ all special conditions, rules and regulations applicable thereto, adopted per Section 7925 and imposed under Vehicle Code Section 2 ~ 113. C. Any vehicle operation, parking, stopping, or left standing, and not complying with said special conditions, rules, and regulations, will constitute a violation o~ Vehicle Code Section 21113, except that subsection ~a~ o~ Vehicle Code Section 2507.5 shall apply with respect to unauthorized parking in stalls or spaces designated for physically handicapped persons. ~~rd. No.13~3, Sec. 1,1-15-07~ '~ KOA CORPORATION c"y ° fT~'S"" PLANNING & ENGINEERING 115 Old Town Tustin Parking Study APPENDIX D Land Use Data KOA CORPORATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 1 ~6 Old Town Tustin Pazl<ing Study Table D-1 Land Use inventory by Subarea 1 Land Use Subarea ~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Detached SFR ~ 1 2 2 3 - - - - 9 ownhome/Condo, ~ BR - - - - - .. _ - - - ownhome/Condo, 2 BR - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ ownhome/Condo, 3 BR _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ partment, Studio - - - - - _ - - - - partment,l BR - - - - - - - - - - partment, 2 BR ~ - - - - - - - - - partment, 3 BR - - - ~ - - - - - - partment, Loft - - - - - - - - - - Patio Home - - - - - - - - - - Mixed Use ~ReslComm~ - - - 24393 - - - - - 24393 uto Repair - - - - .. - - - - - uto Sales - - ~ -- - - - - - - uto Service Station - - - - - - - _ 2554 2554 uto Car wash - - - - - - - - - - Banks, Financial Institutions - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ Barbershop, Beauty Salon - - 672. - - _ .. - - 6721 Bowling Alley, Billiard Hall - - - _ .. _ _ _ - _ Commercial - - 11500 - 4268 - - - 1744 17512 Contractors Storage Yard - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ ante Hall - - - - - - - - - - Health Club - - 360CN - - ~ - - - 3600 Hotel/Motel - - - _ - - - - 16321 16321 Laundry - 1109 - - - - - - - 1109 Lodges - - - - 1789 - - - - 1789 Manufacturing - - 3000 - - - - - - 3000 Mortuary - - - - - - $893 - - 8893 Museum - - - 7087 - - - - - 7087 Nursery/Home - - - - - 640D - - - 6400 Nursing Home - - - 171$5 _ - - - - 17185 Nightclub/Bar - - - 1625 - - - - - 1625 ~f~ice, GenerallPro~essional 39096 25857 31131 7250 5579 19546 - 17963 - 146422 Office, Government - - - 7087 - - - - - 70$7 office, Medical 5223 3297 - 2321 - - - - - 10841 Park - - 15000 - - ~ - - - 15000 Religious Center - - - - - - - 7220 - 7220 Restaurant, Sit-Down - - - .. _ _ _ _ _ _ Restaurant, Fast-Food - - - _ _ .. _ _ _ _ KOA CORPORATION PLANNING & CNGINEERING City o f Tustin 117 Old Town Tustin Part<ing Study Restaurant - - 1344 - 10000 - _ _ 952 12296 Retail, Neighborhd Shpg Ctr - - - 7055 23943 17124 2958 X00,547 - 61134 Retail, Public Market - - - - .. _ .. - - - Retail Stores - 10694 5460 - 3607 2923 - - - 22684 ennis & Racquetball Clubs - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ heater - - - - - - _ - - - Vacant Lot 7000 - - 51625 7500 21807 - - - 87932 arehouse - Sel£ Storage - - - - .. - _ - - - holesale - _ _ - - - - - - - 5~,3~9 40,957 77,756 X25,628 56,686 67,800 ~~,85~ X25,730 21,57 579,298 Note 1: Includes vacant land ,~e~ KOA CORPORATION ~.' PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 118 old down Tustin Parl<ing Study Table D-2 Summary of Land Use 1 by Subarea Land Use Subarea ~. Z 3 4 5 d 7 8 9 Total Residential ~ ~ 2 2 3 - - - - $ Mixed Use - - - 24 393 - -- - -- - 24 393 Service-Commercial - 1109 6 721 17 ~ 85 - - 8 893 - 2 554 36 462 Commercial - - 11500 - 4 268 - - - 18 06 33 833 Retail - 10 694 5 60 7 055 27 550 26 447 2 958 100 542 - 180 716 Restaurant - - 1344 1625 10 000 - - - 952 13 921 General Office 39 096 25 857 31131 7 250 5 579 19 546 - 17 968 - 146 427 Government Office - - - 7 087 - - - - - 7 0$7 Medical Office 5 223 3 297 - 2 321 - - - - - 10 841 acant Lot 7 000 - - 51625 7 500 21$07 - - - $7 932 Recreational - - 18 600 7 087 1789 - - - - 27 476 Religious - - - - - - - 7 220 - 7 220 Manufacturing - - 3 000 - - - - - - 3 000 Municipal - - - - - - - - - - Storage - - - - - - - - - - Other - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OTAL 5~,3~9 40,957 77,756 X25,628 56,686 67,800 ~~,85~ 125,730 2,571 579,298 Note 1: Square Feet except residential in units}. Includes vacant land Table D-3 Land Use Vacancy 1 by Subarea Land Use Subarea ~. 2 3 '4 5 d 7 8 9 Total Residential - - - - - - - - - - Mixed Use - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ Service-Commercial - - - .. _ _ _ _ _ - Commercial - - 115D0 - - - - - - 11500 Retail - - - - - - - - - - Restaurant - - - - - - - - - - Of five 2 300 5 564 1650 - 4 268 - - 796 - 14 578 Vacant Lot 7 000 - - 44 250 7 500 21$07 - - - SO 557 Parl~ing - - 3 600 - 2 500 - - - - 6100 Recreational - - - .. _ _ _ _ _ _ Manufacturing - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ Storage - - - - _ _ - _ __ _ Other - - - - - _ _ - - - ToTAL 9 300 5 564 19 550 44 250 14 268 21807 0 796 D 112 735 Note ~: Square Feet ,~ KOA CORPCIRATION ~i PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 119 Oid Town Tustin Parking Study Table D-4 Parking Rates from. Dther Studies Land Use Study Parking Ratio Weekday VLreekend Apt/condo Santa Ana Faizway Villas 0.96 space/SF 0.91 space/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #1 4.20 spaces/SF 7.40 spaces/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #2 6.17 spaces/SF 5.83 spaces/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #3 5.50 spaces/SF 6.17 spaces/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #4 4.91 spaceslSF 5.27 spaces/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #5 4.75 spaces/SF 4,50 spaces/SF Restauzant Anaheim Denny's #6 6.10 spaceslSF 5.59 spaces/SF Restauzant Lal<e Fozest Sizzlez 5.38 spaces/SF - Restaurant Average Rate 5.3 spaceslSF 5.S spaceslSF Playgzound Aliso Viejo Scootez's Jungle 2,84 spaces/SF 4.40 spaceslSF Playgzound Placentia Scootez's Jungle 3.02 spaceslSF 1.70 spaces/SF Playgzound Cozona Artic Fun Zone 3.94 spaces/SF 3.08 spaces/SF Playgzound Average Rate 3.3 spaceslSF 3.1 spaces/SF Mixed Use 1 La Habza Azt Studia 1.40 spaces/SF 1.07 spaces/SF Church Bzookhuzst Chuzch 2.51 spaces/KSF 4.16 spaces/KSF Church La Habza Calvazy Chapel 5,26 spaces/KSF 5.26 spaces/r~SF Chuzch ~ Avezage Rate 3.8 spaces/KSF 4.7 Spaces/iiSF Government Centex westrninstez Civic Centex 15.77 space/~~SF - Note 1.; Commercial/office Mixed Use ~KOA CORPORATION '~i PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin 120 Qld Town Tustin Pazking Study Table D-5 Parking Rates from Other Studies Land Use Study Parking Ratio weei<day '~eel<end Apt/condo Avezage Rate 0.96 space/KSF 0,91 space/KSF Low/Mid-Rise Apt,2 Avezage Rate 1, 00 vehicles unit 1.02 vehicles/unit Condo2 Avezage Rate 1.46 vehicles/unit - .M.i~ed Use ~ Avezage Rate 1.40 spaces/KSF 1.07 spaces/KSF Ivl.otel~ Avezage Rate 0.90 vehicles/zoom - Billiazd Hall Z Avezage Rate 2.9 vehicles/table - Nlovie Theatez w/matinee 2 Avezage Rate 0.26 vehicles/seat 0,19 vehicles/seat Playground Avezage Rate 3.3 spaceslKSF 3,1 spaces/KSF Chuzch Avezage Rate 3.8 spaces/KSF 4,7 Spaces/I~SF Day Care Centex ~ Avezage Rate 3,16 vehicles/KSF - Museum Z Avezage Rate 0.71 vehicles/KSF 2.1 vehicles/I~SF Nuzsing Home ~ Avezage Rate 0.39 vehicles/bed 0.25 vehicles/bed Animal Hospital/Vetezinazy Clinic Z Avezage Rate 1.60 vehicles/KSF - O~~ice Building 2 Avezage Rate 2,40 vehicles/KSF - Medical-Dental 2 Avezage Rate 3,53 vehicles/KSF - Building Matezials and Lumbez Stoze ~ Avezage Rate 1,10 vehicles/KSF - Hazdwaze/Paint Stoze z Avezage Rate 1.90 vehicles/KSF 2.87 vehicles/KSF Shopping Centex 2 Avezage Rate 2.65 vehicles/KSF 2,97 vehicles/KSF Appazel Store a Average Rate 1.13 vehicles/KSF 2.13 vehicles/KSF Phazmacy/Drugstoze w/o dzive-thzu window Avezage Rate 1,83 vehicles/KSF - Fuznituze Stoze z Avezage Rate 1.53 vehicles/KSF 1,43 vehicles/KSF Video Rental Stoze Z Avezage Rate 2.41 vehicles/KSF 3,04 vehicles/KSF walk in Bank 2 Avezage Rate 2.30 vehicles/KSF - Quality Restaurant2 Avezage Rate 15,4 vehicles/KSF 17.2 vehicles/KSF Fast-Food Restauzant w/o dzive-thzu window2 Avezage Rate 8,20 vehicles/KSF - Restauzant Avezage Rate 5.3 spaces/KSF 5,8 spaces/KSF Dzy Cleanezs Avezage Rate 1.40 vehicles/KSF - Goveznznent Centex Avezage Rate 15,77 space/KSF - Note ~ :Commercial/Df~ice Mixed Use Note 2: From 1T~ ~'arking Generation 3rd edition ~,,. KOA CORPORATION PLANNII"kG & ENGINEERING City of Tusrin 121 Old Town Tustin Pazl<ing Study Table ~-d - Paxking Codes by City Tustin Irvine Newport Laguna Carta Santa grange Anaheim ~ullerto Brea ~'asadena Beach Beach Mesa Ana Detached SFR 2 garage 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 Townhome/Conda, l BR 1 carport 1 - 1.5 1 1 1.7 2 1.5 1.75 11650 SF TownhomelCando, 2 $R 2 carports 1.5 2 2 1 1 2 2.25 1.75 2 11650 SF Townk~ome/Cando, 3 BR 2 carports 2 - 2 1 1 2.2 3 2 2.5 1/b50 SF partment, Studio 1 carport 1 - 1.5 1 1 1,2 1.25 1.25 1.5 11650 SF partment, l BR 1 carport 1.4 - 2 1 1 1,7 2 1.5 1.75 1/650 SF partment, 2 BR 2 carports 1.6 2 2 1 1 2 2.25 1.75 2 11650 SF partment, 3 BR 2 carports 2 - 2 1 1 2.2 3 2 2.5 11650 SF partment, Lof t ~ReslCom} - - - - - - - - - - - Patia Hame 2 garage 2 - 2 - - 113 '/~ trailers 115 trailers uto Repair - - - - - - - - - - - utaSales - - - - - - - - ~ - - utoService Station - - - - - - - - - - - uto Car hVash - - - - - - - - - - 1/200 Banks, Financial Institutions 11254 SF 1/250 SF 1!250 SF 11250 SF 5!1000 SF 411000 SF 5/1000 SF 5.5/1000 SF - SF 3/1004 SF Barbersha Beaut Salon p y 2/chair; 2/chair; 11250 SF 111.5 chairs - _ 5.511000 SF _ 11250 , 3/station 3/station or 1!250 SF S.F 3/alley + 4/alley owlin Alle ,Billiard Hall g y 5/alley; 5/alley; 11250 Sl~ 5/alley; 3/alley 3/alley' 3/alley 3lalley - + 4/alley 2/table 2/table other use 1/150 SF 2/table 2/table Contractors Storage Yard - - - - - - - - - - - 1175 sf 1/3 seats or 113 seats or 1/3 seats 1/7SF or 113 seats 1/75F ar ante Hall +1/35sf 1/200 SF 1135 SF 1135 SF ar 1135 SF 1/28 SF 1135 SF or 1135 SF 1/35 SF Health Club 1/150 SF 1/150 SF Use permit 1/100 SF 1011000 SF 112$ SF 5511000 5,511000 SF _ 1/150 SF 511000 SF S~ Hotel:1/2 1/roam; Hotel/Motel .751unit + 2 Approval room. Motel 1/room 1/unit 1/room 0.81 room 0.81 room 1lraom 1/room 1011000 SF far mgr. needed 1lroom (banauet~ 1/3 1/machines 113 11200 Laundry machines - 11250 SF or 11250 SF - b/1000 SF machines - _ SF - Manufacturing - - - - - - - - - - - Mixed Use CarnlRetail/Res - - - - Use permit - - - - - - Mortuary - - - - - - - - - ~ - 1/250 SF+ 11250 SF far 1/250 SF + 411000 2/1000 111000 SF 1000 55 Nursery/Home _ 1/1000 SF 1S` 1000 SF 111000 SF SF+2/100 display+ + 1/1000 + / _ _ 2.5/1000 SF Improvement outdoor 115000 SF. outdoor display 411000 SF outdoor 0.411000 NightclublBar - - Use permit 1/100 SF - 1128 SF - 1711000 SF 1011000 SF See rest 28/1000 51~; ar:10 1000 KOA CORPORATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING City o f Tustin ~ZZ ~~d Town Tustin Parking Study Newport Laguna Costa Santa Tustin Irvine grange Anaheim Fullerto Brea Pasadena Beach Beach Mesa Ana Restaurant, Sit-Down - 1/75 SF Use permit 1/100 SF - - 10/1000SF 1611000 5F 1011000 SF 1175 SF - Restaurant Fast-Food 1/100 SF 11100 SF 1150 SF 11100 SF _ _ 10/1000 1611000 SF 611000 SF - 411000 SF , +1/employee SF Restaurant 1/75 SF 1175 SF Use permit 1/100 SF 10/1000 SF 10/1000 SF 1011000 1611000 SF 1011000 SF 1/75 SF 1011000 SF SF Total of 5.511000 .511000 Retail Nei hborhd Sh Ctr g pg 1/250 SF 11250 SF 11200 SF 11275 SF _ - ind retail SF SF Retail, Public Market - 11250 SF 1/250 SF 11250 SF - - - 5.511400 SF - 411000 SF Retail Stares 1/200 SF 11250 SF 11250 SF 1/254 SF 511000 SF 511000 SF 511000 SF 5.511000 SF - 11200 311000 SF Tennis & Racquetball Clubs 3lcourt 3lcaurt 4lcourt 3Jcaurt 3jcourt 2.5/court 3]caurt 5lcourt - 3/court 4lcourt 113 seats + 1/3 seats or 113 seats ar 115 seats 0 4/seat+ 113 seats 113 Theater 113 seats 115 Use permit 1/35 SF 511000 SF 1/28 SF ar 1135 .$ emplyee ar 1/35 SF seats or - emplayee SF+ 1135 SF arehouse -Self Storage - - - - - - - - - - - holesale - - - - - - - - - - - General Office 11250 SF 11250 SF 11250 SF 1/250 SF 311000 SF 3/1004 SF 411000 SF 411000 SF 411000 SF 11254 311000 SF , SF Office, Government ~ - 1/2a0 SF 1f3aa SF 1130a Sl~ - 3/1040 SF - - 411aoa SF 311000 SF 5511004 311000 Office Medical 611000 SF 1/180 SF 11250 SF 1/250 SF 611000 SF 611000 SF 5/1000 SF _ SF SF 411000 SF 11250 Office, Professional 11250 SF 11250 SF 11250 SF 11250 SF 311000 SF 311000 SF 4/1000 SF - 411000 SF SF 311000 SF Office, Schaal District - - - - - - - - - - - 1/3 118 fixed Churches, Temples, 113 seats 113 seats 113 seats ar 113 seats ar 113 seats 113 seats or 1/4 seats 29/1000 SF 113 seats seats ar seats or Mas ues ~ 1135 SF 1/35 SF or 1135 SF 1/35 SF or 1135 SF ar 1/35 SF 1]35 SF 1411000 SF Clinic 611000 SF Approval 11254 SF + 1/150 SF - 6/1000 SF 3/6ed - 11bed .511004 SF 115 beds needed 1lstaf f Community/Senior Center - 113 seats or 113 seats - 2911400 SF - - - 1/35 SF ar 1/35 SF 11cIass+116 1.51 Elementary School - 2/classroom Use permit 2/ teach - 1.5/class+ 1.8/class students+ - - classroom stat~an 11333 SF 111000 SF +112 staff Req. Pr[cng 11300 Library 11300 SF 11300 SF 1f 300 SF 1/3a0 SF - 11500 SF 4]1000 SF study SF bodges, Clubs, Meeting 1175 SF 113 seats ar 113 seats ar 1/3 seats 1128 SF 1/30 SF _ 113 seats 1175 SF 1011000 SF Halls 1/35 SF 1/35 SF or 1135 SF or 1135 SF Nursin Dame g 1/a beds '/a beds 113 beds 113 beds _ 11BR, ~/- beds 0.8f bed _ 5/1000 na less than 1.5/2BR SF .50 2.51 Parl< - - Use pezmit - - - - - - - 1000 SF Pre-School 1/employee 1/employees 1lchild 1lstaff+ 118 2/staff 1/staff - 11200 2/1400 SF + 115 + 115 115 chldn chid+lstaff +1110 chid SF lI~OA CORPORATION `' PLANNING & ENGINEERING c~cy o{T~~stcn ~Z3 old Town Tustin Pazl«ng Studer Newport Laguna Costa Santa Tustin Irvine grange Anaheim ~ullerto Brea Pasadena Beach Beach Mesa Ana Public Assembly 113 seats or 113 seats or ~ per 300 sq 113 seats or 1/3 seats 1/2$ SF X911000 - - 1/3 t - 1/35 SF 1/35 SF ft 1135 SF or 1/35 SF SF sea s or 1 35 SF Public Utility w/a offices '~z emplyee Approval Use permit 1/emplyee 1 _ x/1000 SF - - 1/500 SF +1 needed +3 Trade School, Business - - - - - - - - - - - KOA CoRPORATioN C PLANNING, & ENGINEERING City of Tustin X24 old Town Tustin Pazking Study