HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-14-108 - Boulevard Parking Program Staff Report
I rTC'.�► t .R Community Services Department wmkitcheneaa
REPORT TO: Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: December 8, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Shayne Turner, Director of By-law Enforcement, (519-741-
2200, ext. 7753)
PREPARED BY: Shayne Turner, Director of By-law Enforcement, (519-741-
2200, ext. 7753)
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: November 25, 2014
REPORT NO.: CSD-14-108
SUBJECT: PARKING REGULATIONS— BOULEVARD PARKING
RECOMMENDATION:
That parking on the boulevard (paved area of a driveway between the sidewalk
and the curb/road edge) be permitted from December 1St to March 31St, each year,
subject to the conditions outlined in Community Services Department report
CSD-14-108.
BACKGROUND:
At the April 15, 2013, Council meeting, the following resolution was passed:
"That parking on the boulevard (paved area of a driveway between the sidewalk
and the curb/road edge) be permitted from December 1St to March 31St as part of a
one year pilot project limited to the residential roadways within the geographic
area defined as Ward 5, subject to the conditions outlined in Infrastructure
Services Department report INS-13-028; and
That a change in on-street parking enforcement practices (no enforcement of the
three (3) hour parking limit from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., May 1St to November 30th)
be endorsed as part of a one year pilot project; and further,
That staff be directed to report back on the feasibility of a formalized parking
exemption process including on-line reporting."
This report will address the first component of the above noted resolution, relating to
boulevard parking during the winter months since staff have already reported back to
Council on the pilot project relating to the enforcement of the 3 hour parking time limit.
On April 7, 2014, Council adopted the resolution to continue the practice of not
8 - 1
enforcing the 3 hour parking time limit between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.,
from April 1St to November 30th, each year (reference Report No. CSD-14-017).
REPORT:
Report No. INS-13-028 (copy attached) was a review relating to potential strategies to
address identified parking supply issues on streets within residential neighbourhoods.
This report is being presented on December 8th in order to allow the newly delegated
Council to be the decision making body for this and future winter seasons. As such, By-
law Enforcement staff are currently continuing with the enforcement protocol that was in
place last winter, until such time as Council decides on any future enforcement
protocols.
Staff report that the process of allowing vehicles to be parked on the paved boulevard
(i.e. apron) portion of the residential driveways in Ward 5 has been viewed as a positive
action to help address the concerns with limited parking in neighbourhoods. It should
be noted that the reason for the boulevard pilot project being focused on Ward 5 is that
this ward has a somewhat higher percentage of smaller residential lot frontages than
the other wards. This can impact the number of temporary on-street parking spaces
that may be available in neighbourhoods.
For clarification, vehicles were only permitted to park on the paved boulevard (i.e.
apron) where they were able to comply with the following criteria, relating to safety and
operational concerns-
- Vehicles, if parked parallel to the road, must face the direction of travel;
- Vehicles must not park on the landscaped or hardscaped portion of the
boulevard or access the paved portion of the boulevard by driving over
landscaped or hardscaped portions of the boulevard;
- The vehicle must be fully encompassed on the paved portion of the boulevard
such that:
All tires must be fully on the hard surface
No part of the vehicle can overhang the sidewalk or the curb/road
edge;
- Residents with abutting driveways must not overhang the projection of the
property line;
- No boulevard parking will be permitted within 15 metres of an intersection. and
- Only driveways providing access to single family, semi-detached and street
fronting townhouses are applicable.
Staff are recommending that the above noted criteria shall apply to any situation, as
may be approved by Council, whereby boulevard parking will be permitted in the future.
As noted, boulevard parking was permitted in the Ward 5 area during the 2013/2014
winter season. While enforcement was permitted in the other wards, staff advise that
such enforcement was only initiated on a complaint basis.
8 - 2
The following is an outline of the enforcement activity relating to boulevard enforcement
last winter (December 1St to March 31s) as compared to the 5 year average for the
same time period.
Ticket and complaint activity 2013-2014 5 year average
# of complaints 23 43
total # of tickets issued for the 42 277
time period
The total decrease in the number of tickets issued last winter as compared to the 5 year
average is 235. It must be noted that this decrease cannot be attributed to the Ward 5
exemption only, as it is clear that the reactive approach to enforcement in the other
wards also played a significant role.
Staff advise that the majority of feedback received from the public was positive for both
the approach to enforcement in Ward 5 and the reactive approach in the other wards.
Staff had a discussion with the Ward 5 Councillor, Kelly Galloway-Sealock, who also
advised that the majority of feedback she received, relating to the exemption provided
for her ward, was positive in nature.
Having said this, staff did field a few calls from residents of Ward 5 who expressed
concerns about boulevard parking being permitted in that ward. Staff advise that the
concerns raised did not appear to result in significant concerns or occurrences. Overall
the feedback remained positive, in that residents were provided with an additional
option in attempting to get their vehicles off the street to facilitate snow removal,
especially given the harsh conditions experienced last winter.
Staff also report that there does not appear to have been any operational issues or
occurrences reported during snow plow and snow removal operations that can be
attributed to the parking of vehicles on boulevard areas. Provided the boulevard
parking conforms to the criteria discussed earlier, operational concerns should be
mitigated. However, enforcement can be initiated where such concerns arise.
Additionally, there does not appear to be any claims for damages, attributable to
vehicles parked on boulevards during last winter, having been received by the City's
insurance pool.
Going forward, staff advise that permitting vehicles to park on the boulevard during
winter months, subject to the conditions noted earlier in this report, remains a feasible
option to residents to assist them, and by extension the City operations, in attempting to
reduce the number of vehicles parked on roadways.
As such, there would appear to be 2 options available to Council, should it wish to
continue to provide boulevard parking exemptions-
8 - 3
1. Continue with the process as exercised last year, in that the exemption would
only apply to Ward 5, (with the associated practice of only responding to
complaints in the other 9 wards); or
2. Provide the exemption process, subject to the conditions outlined in this report,
across all City wards.
Based on the feedback received from all sources during last winter and the factors
discussed in this report, staff are recommending Option 2. It must be noted that, even
with this exemption in place across the entire City, there will be some areas where
boulevard parking will not be feasible as the paved boulevards will not be of sufficient
size or configuration to allow for the parking of a vehicle that conforms to the conditions
outlined previously.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The aforementioned amendments support the Community Priority of Quality of Life, as
contained in the City's Strategic Plan.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The potential financial impact of each option is indicated below:
Option 1: If boulevard parking is permitted in Ward 5 only, with the
corresponding reactive approach to enforcement in the other wards, the resulting
reduction in potential parking fine revenue, as compared to enforcement
practices in previous years, is being estimated at $5,900.
Option 2: If the boulevard parking exemption is extended city wide, the
resulting reduction in potential parking fine revenue, as compared to enforcement
practices in previous years, is being estimated at $7,000.
Staff would encourage Council not to make any potential decrease in fine revenue a
significant factor in their decision making process. As staff have indicated on several
past occasions, the focus of by-law enforcement must remain on supporting
neighbourhoods and providing options to facilitate community needs while not hindering
safety or municipal operations.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
The public feedback received during the past 4 month winter period helped inform staff
during the consideration of this report. Going forward, information relating to Council's
direction in this matter will be communicated to the public in a variety of formats,
including social media.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, Deputy CAO, Community Services
Department
Encl.
8 - 4
staff R
R Infrastructure Services Department wwwv kitchener ca
REPORT TO: Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: April 8, 2013
SUBMITTED BY: Ken Carmichael, Interim Director of Transportation Services
PREPARED BY: Barry Cronkite, Transportation Planning Project Manager
(519-741-2200 ext. 7738)
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All Wards
DATE OF REPORT: March 20, 2013
REPORT NO.: INS-13-028
SUBJECT: GENERAL PARKING REGULATIONS REVIEW
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That parking on the boulevard (paved area of a driveway between the sidewalk and the
curb/road edge) be permitted for a period of one year as a pilot project subject to the
conditions contained herein, and further;
That Council endorse a change in on-street parking enforcement practices (no
enforcement of the three (3) hour parking limit from 11pm to 6am, April 1St to November
30th), and further;
That staff be directed to investigate the feasibility of a formalized parking exemption
process that may include on-line reporting, and report back to Council.
BACKGROUND:
Staff was directed by Council to investigate solutions to identified parking supply issues both on
and off street that typically exist within residential neighbourhoods and the Laurentian West
community in particular. According to concerns raised by constituents throughout the
community, the current on and off street parking regulations are too restrictive to adequately
meet the needs of their neighbourhoods.
The demand for additional parking, particularly from December 1 st to March 31 st, is continuing to
increase. Accordingly, staff were asked to investigate possible exemptions or changes to
existing parking regulations and enforcement practices and to present options that may mitigate
these parking issues.
REPORT:
The parking supply issues that exist in residential neighbourhoods have been the result, in part,
of the incorporation in 1994 of more permissive residential zones, which resulted in a significant
increase in the number of small lots in Kitchener, including those within the Laurentian West
Community. This neighbourhood was designed at a time when the Municipality had adopted a
8 - 5
more compact subdivision development policy which allowed for single-detached dwellings on
minimum 7.5 metre lot frontages. The combination of reduced lot frontages, the need for visitor
parking; the concentration of street-fronting townhouse units, personal behaviour and choices
such as increase in vehicle ownership and garage usage for something other than the parking
of vehicles has affected the amount of area available to park in driveways. These factors, in
conjunction with current on-street parking by-law regulations, also limit the number of parking
spaces on the street between driveways. These conditions have resulted in a situation where
residents are having difficulty in finding sufficient parking and cannot comply with bylaw
regulations. These issues generally result in the following:
- an increase in the amount and duration of on-street parking over the specified time limits
- the blocking of driveways, and vehicles parked within the 1.5 metre driveway clearance
regulation
- parking within visibility triangles
- parking over the sidewalk
- parking on-street overnight
- widening of drvieways, both legally and illegally
- other by-law and zoning compliance issues.
Parking in this fashion can impact the operation of the road and compromise both driver and
pedestrian safety in the following manner:
- restricted two-way traffic flow
- delays and congestion for emergency vehicles
- impeded access to driveways
- obstruction of site lines between drivers on the street and the roadway as well as sitelines of
pedestrians
- pedestrians safety using the sidewalks or road edge in areas lacking a sidewalk
- potential for damage to vehicles resulting from snow clearing and maintenance,
- delayed maintenance operations.
From a planning perspective, these issues were investigated and discussed at length in 2000
and resulted in a report to Council (BPS2000-44) regarding Residential Streetscapes. Council
approved new zoning for residential areas that increased the minimum lot width for single
detached dwellings, addressed garage width, garage projection and driveway width all with the
intent to resolve parking issues in small lot subdivisions while maintaining the quality of the
streetscape. As a result of these changes that Council approved in 2000, new subdivisions have
been approved since that time do have more opportunity for parking that the situation that led to
the initial concerns.
Further, in 2004 Council endorsed the action plan for the Neighbourhood Design Initiative (DTS-
04-165). In this staff report the issue of parking availability was again addressed. At that time,
Council supported the General Design Principle: "that City streets be recognized as an
extension of the open space system, and that the City encourage streetscape designs that
respect the surrounding context and improve the quality of the public realm." (DTS-04-164). One
challenge identified in this report is the impact of the automobile to the land use pattern and
urban fabric. The report recommends that greater attention be paid to creating environments for
people, and not just cars.
8 - 6
Through a comprehensive review of Municipalities across Ontario, it was evident that all
municipalities deal with similar concerns regarding parking, and more specifically on-street
parking. And while the approach to on-street parking is generally similar throughout all
Municipalities reviewed, there are varied approaches to potential solutions.
OPPORTUNITIES TO MITIGATE PARKING ISSUES
Through the "Neighbourhood Design Initiative", conducted in 2005, additional research into
methods for addressing on-street parking issues were considered. In report DTS-05-025, staff
highlighted best practices from other municipalities in Ontario. Based on input from a
neighbourhood design survey and consultation with the development industry, the report tabled
numerous options for managing parking and the automobile in new plans of subdivision.
The culmination of the Neighbourhood Design Initiative was the creation of a new On-Street
Parking Policy and an Urban Design Brief for Suburban Development and Neighbourhood
Mixed Use Centres. Both documents were approved by Council in 2007 (DTS-07-065) and are
used today to guide decision making for new subdivisions.
That being said, parking both on and off street is still an area of concern for many residential
neighbourhoods throughout the City of Kitchener.
Parking permitted on the boulevard
Parking on the boulevard (considered to be the ramp portion of the driveway between the
sidewalk and curb/road edge) is currently prohibited in the City of Kitchener as it has historically
been viewed to pose various concerns related to visibility, maintenance and property damage.
It has long been acknowledged that parking in this area can create a sight obstruction for traffic
on the street and for residents reversing out of driveways, it can limit the visibility of pedestrians
on the sidewalk and can also lead to damage to street furniture and landscaped boulevards.
These concerns are further acknowledged through enforcement activity. Records indicated that
there were 84 complaints received in 2012 with respect to boulevard parking resulting in a total
of 930 tickets being issued for this offence.
Other municipalities that have permitted boulevard parking indicate that visibility, though a
concern, is similar to typical existing legalized conditions related to backing out of driveways
between parked vehicles, a relatively common occurrence. With proper care and caution,
drivers should easily negate most potential visibility concerns in either instance.
Furthermore, Operations has indicated that from a roadway maintenance perspective, parking
on the boulevard presents less challenges and limits potential damage to public and privately
owned vehicles. Additionally, vehicles parked on-street can result in plows needing to revisit
previously plowed roadways to address snow missed as a result of the parked vehicle, thereby
increasing maintenance costs.
Other potentially affected departments and agencies were contacted (Engineering, Utilities,
Planning, Fire Services). Planning has significant concern with boulevard parking, citing the
following:
City streets are recognized as an extension of the open space system, and the City encourages
streetscape designs that respect the surrounding context and improve the quality of the public
8 — 7
realm (DTS-04-164). Through design, the boulevard is intended to contribute to the character of
a street, district, neighbourhood or community, which in turn instills a sense of civic pride. Great
efforts have been made to change the way we approach subdivision design to reduce the
dominance of cars along residential streetscapes. Permitting vehicles to park in the boulevard
could undermine these efforts and potentially compromise the character of residential streets. It
is also possible that parking in the boulevard would have negative effects on the quality of
boulevard treatments (such as damage to landscaping) which would have maintenance
implications over the longer term. These considerations should be addressed in an ongoing
monitoring program. Monitoring of this matter should also take into account the related issues
with accommodating additional parking in residential neighbourhoods, such as minor variance
applications to widen driveways, reduce setbacks to parking spaces, permit tandem parking and
reduce visibility triangles.
While Transportation Services understands Planning's concerns, we recognize that available
parking is a critical issue for residents within our Community and therefore recommends that
parking on the boulevard be endorsed by Council for a period of one year as a pilot. This will
afford staff the opportunity to monitor the conditions that result from boulevard parking, and
determine if this is a suitable, long term solution to address the ongoing parking issues
throughout residential neighbourhoods. Transportation Services will work with Planning,
Operations and Enforcement Services to develop an acceptable monitoring program.
It should be noted that not all boulevards provide adequate space for vehicles to park, and
therefore, minimum standards should be required to facilitate parking accordingly. The following
outlines where parking on the boulevard could occur:
• Vehicles, if parked parallel to the road, must be facing the direction of travel.
• Vehicles must not park on the landscaped or hardscaped portion of the boulevard or
access the paved portion of the boulevard by driving over landscaped or hardscaped
portions of the boulevard.
• The vehicle must be fully encompassed on the paved portion of the boulevard
• All tires must be fully on the hard surface
• No part of the vehicle can overhang the sidewalk or the curb/road edge.
• Residents with abutting driveways must not overhang the projection of the property line.
• No boulevard parking will be permitted within 15 metres of an intersection.
• Only driveways providing access to single family, semi-detached and street fronting
townhouses are applicable.
Parking over the time limit/overnight
Currently, on-street parking is limited to three (3) hours at any time, throughout the year, and is
prohibited from 2:30am — 6:OOam from December 1St to March 31St. The general City-wide three
(3) hour time limit and overnight prohibitions are in place to prevent streets from becoming used
for permanent parking, to ensure the fair and equitable distribution of parking opportunities, and
to allow for street maintenance. Allowing longer-term parking would have a negative impact on
road maintenance, visitor parking, neighbourhood aesthetics, and could lead to resident
disputes. Due to enforcement practices, a longer time limit is also virtually unenforceable.
The complete elimination of the three (3) hour limit regulation would result in an increase in the
duration of on-street parking, thereby reducing turnover which may encourage other illegal
8 _ 8
parking and neighbourhood disputes. From a traffic operations aspect, increased on-street
parking could also negatively affect traffic flow and access to driveways.
In general, the concerns related to on-street parking are lesser in the evening/overnight, as
there is generally less traffic, roadway maintenance (with the exception of snow clearing) and
pedestrian activity. Because parking on street overnight between April 1St and November 30th is
typically not a concern, Transportation Services encourages Council to endorse a change in
enforcement policy for a period of one year. Should enforcement be directed to refrain from
enforcing the three (3) hour limit during late evening and overnight (11:00pm — 6:OOam) time
periods from April 1St to November 30th, it would mean that residents could effectively park from
8:OOpm-9:OOam on-street, due to current enforcement practices. This will also allow staff to
measure the impacts that the change in enforcement practices has in the number of complaints
received, exemptions requested and fine revenue lost.
In 2012 there were 692 complaints relative to the three (3) hour limit resulting in 3,460 tickets
issued during evening and overnight shifts.
Formalized Exemption Process
Currently, By-law Enforcement has an informal exemption process that allows residents to call
into their department and receive exemptions to time limit parking as required for a maximum
duration of up to a week per exemption. Staff report that there were 377 exemption requests
approved in 2012.
By-law Enforcement continues to investigate a number of more formalized exemption
processes, which may include an online component, in an effort to better serve the community.
However, it is recognized that the two pilots being recommended within this report could
substantially decrease the requirement for a formalized process. Therefore, staff are proposing
to monitor the impact of the proposed changes to enforcement in relation to the number of
exemption requests received. This activity will be balanced against the potential resources
required to develop a more formalized exemption process.
Upon completion of this proposed pilot project, staff will report back with recommendations on
the exemption process.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
It is anticipated that the initiatives discussed herein will impact parking ticket revenue. Staff
have reviewed the ticket counts and fine revenue received in relation to the three (3) hour limit
during afternoon and overnight shifts as well as boulevard parking. Based on their analysis, the
potential impact on fine revenue could be approximately $75,000 annually.
It is important to note that parking fine revenue has been identified as a "chronic deficit" situation
through previous operating budget cycles. Although some mitigation to this deficit situation was
provided for within the 2013 Operating Budget, there is still the potential for a deficit to be
realized in 2013. In the event that Council accepts the recommendations contained in this
report, it is likely that this potential deficit will be intensified by year's end.
Overall revenue impacts through the pilot projects will be monitored and included as part of a
report outlining the results of these initiatives.
8 - 9
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
There has been no community engagement at this point. A City wide communications strategy
will be required pending approval of the recommended initiatives.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO
Infrastructure Services Department
8 - 10