My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:222
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:222
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2005 11:27:29 AM
Creation date
9/1/2005 11:21:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/6/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:222
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regarding the area of land needed for each parking space, there are no "rules of thumb", and the <br />resultant number of parking spaces which can be provided for a given amount of raw land <br />depends on the configuration of the site, the amount of compact and handicap parking spaces <br />provided, and the amount of landscaping provided. These factors influence the "efficiency" of a <br />particular parking lot. Construction and design costs, while somewhat more predictable, are still <br />related to the efficiency of a particular parking lot, as well as the uncertainties of the bidding <br />process. Land costs can be more easily estimated based on appraisals, although these, too, can <br />vary. Certainly, all of these costs vary over time, so the parking in-lieu fee determined would be <br />for the short-term and would be re-calculated annually. <br />The PDA Parking Committee and staff have each independently developed a proposed in-lieu <br />fee amount in order to help ensure that the fee is fair and realistic. Using somewhat different <br />methods, shown below, the calculated fee amount was similar, and each propose that the current <br />in-lieu fee for a surface parking space in the Downtown should be $14,000. <br />COMPARISON OF CITY VS. PDA METHODOLOGY <br /> <br />Area of Parking Space 325 sq. ft./space 420 sq. ft./space <br />Improvement Cost $2,650/space $3,825/space <br />Land Cost $35/sq.ft. $35/sq.ft. <br />Public Parking Reduction (.75/$4,634) <br />Total Est. Cost/Parking Space$14,025 $13,901 <br /> <br />As can be seen from the above table, both computations involve the same land cost, but City <br />staff's estimate includes a smaller land area per parking space and lower construction cost than <br />the PDA's. As explained above, there is a great deal of variability for these costs, and staff <br />assumed an efficient parking lot design, which resulted in lower construction costs and parking <br />lot area needed for each parking space. The PDA's assumptions, while higher for those <br />components, includes a 75% discount for public parking. The PDA's position is that a public <br />parking space supports more than 300 sq. ft. of building space, the City's standard parking <br />requirement. The PDA asserts that a public parking space can support at least 400 sq. ft. of <br />building space due to better sharing of peaks, higher turnover, and overflow availability <br />compared to a parking space located in a privately-owned lot. Staffnotes that the 1 space/400 sq. <br />ft. parking ratio is the same as the parking ordinance requires for joint use parking and is less <br />than the 1 space/500 sq. ft. parking ratio allowed for public parking lots created through parking <br />assessment district. <br />Thus, in reaching similar proposed in-lieu fee amounts, staff used a methodology which <br />"discounted" the improvement costs and the area required for each parking space, whereas the <br />PDA's formula considered the utility ora public parking space versus a private parking space <br />and included a discount based on that approach. Staff believes that both methods were intended <br />to reach the same goal: to create a fee which would defray most, if not all, of the cost of <br />SR:05:222 3 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.