Eve Park Townhouse Development, London Parking Study · Eve Park London LP . London,Ontario . Dear Ms. Hammerbacher: RE: PARKING STUDY – EVE PARK TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LONDON Paradigm

Eve Park Townhouse Development, London

Parking Study

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited

June 2019

5A-150 Pinebush Road Cambridge, ON N1R 8L2

p: 519.896.3163 905.381.2229 416.479.9684

f: 1.855.764.7349

www.ptsl.com 28 June 2019 Project: 190299 Ashley Hammerbacher Eve Park London LP London, Ontario Dear Ms. Hammerbacher: RE: PARKING STUDY – EVE PARK TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LONDON

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited (Paradigm) was retained by Eve Park London LP to carry out a Parking Study for a townhouse development located at the corner of Westdel Bourne and Shore Road in London, Ontario.

The subject lands are located at the corner of Westdel Bourne and Shore Road (Figure 1, attached), and are part of a larger development area bounded by Riverbend Road, Oxford Street West, Westdel Bourne and Shore Road.

The proposed development, as illustrated in the attached (Figure 2) Site Plan, will include 80 townhouse units in the southeast corner of Westdel Bourne and Shore Road, with access connections through an internal road system to Linkway Road. The development will consist of four buildings of 20 units each, arranged in a ring formation.

Parking will be provided by a mechanical system accommodating 18 vehicles in Building 2 and 22 vehicles in each of the remaining buildings, for a total of 84 spaces for the development.

Under the City’s Zoning By-law (ZBL), the development will require 120 parking spaces (at 1.5 per townhouse unit), including five (5) accessible parking spaces and eight (8) visitor parking spaces.

The City of London has asked for a Parking Study to address the following requirements:

Justification for the proposed reduction in regular parking spaces; Address visitor and accessible parking requirements; and Provide details of the proposed mechanical parking system, including stacking space,

queuing, time it takes to stack and retrieve vehicles, and its operation during power outage or mechanical failure.

The above-noted requirements are addressed in this study based on the following:

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited | Page 2

Provide justification for parking reduction based on a) comparison with parking requirements in comparable municipalities; c) using auto-ownership levels as a surrogate for parking demand; and d) assessing achievable parking reductions through TDM and parking demand management measures.

Provide visitor parking spaces through parking on internal roads. Provide onsite accessible parking spaces. Provide details of the proposed mechanical parking system and its operation, including

stacking space, queuing, time it takes to stack and retrieve vehicles, and dealing with power outage or mechanical failure.

Parking Justification

The justification for reduced parking supply is based on a) alternative parking supply rates for similar developments; b) potential for parking demand reduction; and c) policy considerations.

Alternative Parking Rates

For alternative parking supply rates, parking rates developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and Zoning By-law parking rates used in comparable Ontario municipalities were examined.

ITE Parking Rate

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation (5th Edition1) provides data on surveys across the USA and Canada of peak parking demand for different land uses. It is noted that the surveys involve situations of the traditional use of the auto-mode and not the non-auto alternative modes of travel.

The applicable ITE parking rate for the subject site corresponds to land use code (LUC) 221 (Multifamily Housing: Mid-Rise), and range between 1.22-1.31 spaces per unit, both limits less than the City’s ZBL rate of 1.5 per unit.

Other Municipalities

A comparison to the ZBL requirements for similar residential development in other municipalities in Ontario indicates that the parking rates used in London are comparatively high. Parking rates for similar land use for the Cities of Kitchener2, Waterloo3, Brantford4 and Ottawa5 are summarized in Table 2.

1 Institute of Transportation Engineers – Parking Generation, 5th Edition 2 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law, December 2018 3 City of Waterloo Zoning By-Law, September 2018 4 City of Brantford Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw, October 1990. 5 City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, 2008


TABLE 2: PARKING RATES IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES

It is noted that an average rate of 1.0 space per dwelling unit seems to be consistent in comparable municipalities. Based on a parking rate of 1.0 space per unit, the proposed development will require 80 parking spaces.

Parking Demand Reduction

The traditional ZBL requirement for parking is predicated on ensuring minimum parking supply to accommodate the maximum use of the automobile for different travel purposes. In most instances, except in commercial developments during peak shopping seasons, the parking supply exceeds the parking demand. The lower parking demand is attributable to a number of reasons. A few of them are outlined below.

Auto-Ownership

In the 2010 London Travel Survey Report6, auto ownership on a city-wide basis is identified as just under 1.50 vehicles per household, with 1.82 vehicles per household for detached dwellings and 1.02 vehicles per household for apartments. A lower auto-occupancy rate for apartment buildings is observed in many municipalities and is consistent with parking survey results that show lower parking demands than the available parking supply in apartment developments.

Alternative Modes

According to the City of London’s latest Household Travel Survey7, the City’s overall daily transit mode share is approximately 8%, the overall daily walk mode share is 11%, and the overall daily bike mode share is 1%. While a transit mode share of 8% for the subject site could be considered high, there is potential for some transit usage especially considering Route 17: Argyle Mall – Byron/Riverbend is located within 500 metres to the site.

The site also has potential for auto trip reductions based on walking mode share. Typically, walking distance is considered anywhere between 400 metres to 800 metres. Current and future land uses located within 800 metres of the site provide the potential for achieving a significant walking mode share based on the following:

6 Aecom, Working Paper: Household Travel Survey, November 2010. 7 IBI Group, 2016 Household Travel Survey Summary Report, July 2018.

Municipality Land Use RateKitchener Multiple Dwelling 1.5 per dwelling unitWaterloo Stacked Townhouse Building 1.0 per dwelling unitOttawa Stacked Dwelling 0.5 - 1.2 per dwelling unitBrantford Block Townhouse 1 per dwelling unit


The adjacent office, retail and community uses within the proposed West Five Community create the potential for people walking to/from the subject development for a variety of different land uses; and

The nearby school and parks create the potential for people walking to/from the subject development for institutional and recreational purposes.

The potential for using alternative modes also contributes to reducing the reliance on auto-ownership and the resulting demand for parking in residential developments.

Transportation Demand Management

The goal of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) in a development is to reduce the overall traffic and parking impacts through the implementation of strategies that are aimed at reducing the number of single occupancy vehicles (SOV) travelling to the site. TDM measures that reduce auto-trips to developments invariably contribute to reductions in parking demand. The Regional Municipality of Waterloo has developed a checklist8 that indicates that reductions in parking supply up to 22% can be achieved through the implementation of appropriate TDM measures.

The City of London encourages implementing TDM measures in new developments for reducing single occupancy vehicle (SOV) use, and for promoting transit, cycling and walking trips. Measures identified for the proposed development for SOV trip reduction include the following:

8 bicycle racks per building which can store approximately 5-10 bicycles each, and 2 bike repair stations for the whole development.

5 Electric carshare vehicles/spaces.

Other possible measures include electric scooters, bike share and moped share to encourage a variety of different active transportation modes. In addition, the development will have an application for the integration of all the transportation services listed above.

Carsharing & Carpooling

Carsharing provides for the shared use of a vehicle by different users for different trip purposes at different times. In a carshare program, a specific number of vehicles are made available for use by program members who do not have to own a car. Carpooling involves two or more people sharing a vehicle for a trip. The cost of the journey can be split between the driver and passengers, resulting in savings. This also reduces the number of vehicle trips and parking demands. The EVE Park development will provide for a carshare/carpooling program, through which residents will be able to share electric vehicles for short round-trip commutes ultimately reducing vehicle ownership and the number of SOV. Residents will have the option of reserving the electric vehicles using an application on their personal devices. The vehicles will

8 Region of Waterloo, Travel Demand Management (TDM) Implementation Checklist, September 2013.


be parked in the mechanical parking system and will charge while parked. Carpooling/carsharing vehicles will also be available on the adjacent property in the future.

In summary, the adjacent land uses and active transportation available within the development provide opportunities for auto-trip reduction, as well as the implementation of TDM measures including carsharing/carpooling, all of which contribute to reducing the demand for vehicular parking at the subject development.

Policy Changes and Parking

The existing zoning requirements for parking in Ontario municipalities were developed to ensure minimum parking supply to accommodate the maximum use of the automobile for different travel purposes. There have been many policy changes in recent decades at the municipal level that prioritize reducing automobile use and increasing transit use and active transportation (walking and cycling). Existing parking standards are, therefore, incompatible with ongoing policy changes. Making parking easily available will continue to enable high SOV usage. Conversely, reducing the required supply of parking in new developments without risking any significant parking short supply is more compatible with recent policy changes in Ontario municipalities including the City of London.

The City of London’s Official Plan and Transportation Master Plan (TMP) policies promote the use of non-auto travel modes and the implementation of TDM measures. These policies are also aimed at reducing traditional parking supply requirements in major developments.

The Official Plan

Official Plan (OP)9 policies applicable to parking supply in the subject development include:

The proportion of building and street frontages used for garages and driveways should be minimized to allow for street trees, provide for on-street parking and support pedestrian and cycling-oriented streetscapes.

On-street parking will be permitted on Neighbourhood Connectors and Neighbourhood Streets, unless there are specific limitations imposed by City Council.

Parking strategies may be prepared to plan for shared central parking facilities and plan for initiatives to reduce parking demand.

Parking requirements may be reduced for developments that provide associated carshare and bikeshare services.

The proposed parking supply for the subject development is consistent with the OP policies for parking reduction given the site design facilitates to/from pedestrian trips and onsite pedestrian movement, along with bicycle parking, carshare and electric scooters, that will accommodate the use of active transportation to and from the development.

9 City of London, The London Plan, December 2016.


Urban Design Guidelines

The site design for the subject development including the proposed parking supply, is also consistent with the Urban Design Guidelines10 for the West Five community, including:

Vehicular Network, Parking, Servicing and Loading: Traffic calming solutions have been incorporated to include on-street parallel parking along Street One and Riverbend Road.

Movement Plan: An important point is to reduce the need for cars within the community and establish a walkable city. All streets will have sidewalks on either side and transit stops will have covered seating for pedestrian connections within the network.

Street One and Riverbend Road Concept Plan: A two-way, fully separated cycle lane is proposed the length of Street One to promote safety and separation between cyclists, vehicles and pedestrians. Riverbend Road will not have separated bike lanes however “North-South Trail” will connect pedestrians and cyclists travelling north-south from Riverbend Road to Central Plaza.

The Transportation Master Plan

The City’s Transportation Master Plan (TMP)11 recognizes that the supply and pricing of parking can influence both travel mode choice and business’ location choice. A guiding principle outlined in the TMP is to “develop parking strategies that reduce single-occupant vehicle travel” and “recognizing the importance of good health to citizens, enhance opportunities to walk and bike in London, which in return will reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips”. The proposed parking supply in the subject development, given its community context and active transportation opportunities, is consistent with the TMP principle.

Visitor Parking

The City of London Site Plan Control By-law12 indicates that 1 visitor space is required for every 10 units, i.e. eight (8) visitor parking spaces for the subject development. The required eight (8) visitor parking spaces will be provided as on-street parking, internal to the site along Street One.

Accessible Parking

The City of London Zoning By-law13 requires 4% of the total number of spaces to be designated for accessible parking. The development proposes five (5) accessible parking spaces within the mechanical parking system, where all parking spaces are compatible with accessible parking requirements.

10 Sifton Properties Limited, West Five Urban Design Guidelines, May 2015. 11 City of London, A New Mobility Transportation Master Plan for London, 2030 Transportation Master Plan: SmartMoves, May 2013. 12 City of London, Site Plan Control By-law, October 2017. 13 City of London, By-Law No. Z.-1, October 2011.


Mechanical Parking System

The development will provide a mechanical parking system instead of onsite surface parking. The proposed system will provide two automatic parking towers for each townhouse cluster. A total of 84 parking spaces will be provided.

Parking stackers are used as a means of providing space-efficient vehicle storage and are ideally suited to residential and office developments, where the majority of parking demands are for long-term parking. Car stackers enable void spaces in traditional car parks, basements and buildings to be used effectively to increase the supply of parking. They also allow for a more visually pleasing environment and place more visual emphasis on active transportation modes reducing the visibility of SOV’s without reducing their availability.

The operation of the Automated and Semi-Automated car parking systems, including the proposed system, includes the following procedure:

• Training in the operation of the system will be provided to each resident requiring parking, including those requiring accessible parking.

• The driver leaves the car inside an entrance area and the system parks the vehicle at a designated area.

• Hydraulic or mechanical motors moves the vehicle upwards to another level for proper storing.

• When the vehicle is needed, the process is reversed, and the system transports the vehicle back to the same area where the driver left it.

Queue Analysis

An important part of the parking stacker operation is to identify if any queueing issues will occur given the time required to park or retrieve a vehicle from the parking stacker system. To determine queueing implications of the proposed system, a first principles queuing model has been utilized. This queueing model assumes that arrivals follow a Poisson probability distribution and that service times are exponentially distributed with all parking stackers performing at the same rate. The number of stackers, average arrival rate and average service rate have been assumed for the calculation. A total of two stackers per townhouse cluster will operate independent of each other. The average arrival rate has been calculated based on a trip generation calculation using the ITE Trip Generation Manual14 Land Use Code 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise). The average arrival rate for each driveway is noted to be 11 vehicles during the PM peak hour which is half of the total generated inbound trips during this hour. The average service rate for

14 ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, September 2017.


each stacker per hour is noted to be 60 operations/hour. This has been calculated based on the estimated time the stacker will take to make one operation (1 minute per operation). Table 3 outlines the operating characteristics. The queuing analysis is provided in Appendix A.

TABLE 3: PARKING STACKER OPERATIONAL SUMMARY

It is estimated that during the weekday PM peak hour (worst case scenario), less than a single vehicle on average will be queued to access the parking stacker. The probability of more than one vehicle queued is less than 2% of the time. The operation of the parking stacker system is therefore not expected to cause any significant queueing on the site driveways.

Power Failure

It is noted that the power supply to the parking system will be connected to two separate power lines, both with the potential of supplying power to the structure individually. However, only one feeder will provide power to the system at a time except in the event of power failure. During a power failure, the power supply will be checked and automatically be switched from one supply line to the other before relying on alternative methods. Power from these feeders is provided to the West Five Community, by London Hydro following a review of the proposed system and its operation, including the backup plans during power failures, as outlined below:

In the case where operation due to grid power fails, the system will operate off of an installed 1-megawatt microgrid power storage system within the West Five community. The microgrid stores solar power in local batteries as backup power for the community which is designated to specific emergency uses only including the mechanical parking systems.

Operating Characteristic Weekday PM Peak Hour Results

Average Stacker Utilization (ρ) 0.08

Average number of vehicles in the queue (Lq) 0 vehicles

Average number of vehicles in the system (L) 0.17 vehicles

Average time spent in the queue (Wq) 0 sec

Average time in the system (W) 60 sec

Probability (% of time) stacker system is empty (P0) 0.85

Queue Number Probability

0 83%

1 15%

2 2%


In the event that both feeders and microgrid fail at the same time, a trained technician will provide a portable generator which can temporarily connect to the parking towers and operate the parking systems until power is restored. The generator used will produce 15kW of power and will be portable to allow for ease of transportation and storage when not in use.

As a final fail safe, contingent upon the failure of all of the above systems, a trained technician will be dispatched and will operate the lift using its gravity operation backup feature which is only available when the system is not being powered under normal operation. The operation of the parking tower relies on a braking system that secures the position of the vehicles. The brakes are connected to a manual emergency release handle located on the tower structure. A qualified operator can release the brake manually to slowly lower the vehicles to the ground using gravity only. The emergency release handle will release the brakes and allow the vehicles to safely cycle (due to gravity) to lower the vehicles on the lift. Once fully released, the handle will only release the brakes enough to allow for regular operation speed when cycling. The movement of the system once the brake is released relies upon the weight of the vehicles in the tower. Using this operation, the trained technician will be able to safely index the tower and unload vehicles as required.

If the mechanical parking system is not operational, the development will provide a 100% credit to use an Uber vehicle until the vehicles are available again.

Summary and Conclusions

The parking justification review undertaken in this study has assessed the adequacy of the proposed parking supply in the subject development, based on:

The City of London’s current Zoning By-law requirements; Alternative assessments based on the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers)

parking rates and zoning requirements in other Ontario municipalities; Opportunities for achieving parking demand reduction in the subject development

through shared parking, auto-trip reduction, and TDM measures; and A review of the proposed parking supply in the subject development in the context of the

City’s current Official Plan and Transportation Master Plan policies, as well as the Urban Design Guidelines for the West Five Community where the subject development is located.

As discussed under each of the above-noted considerations, the proposed parking supply in the subject development is adequate to accommodate the parking demand that will be generated given the site’s community context, and the opportunities for encouraging the use of alternative travel modes.

The EVE Park development is designed to encourage active transportation and reduce vehicle use. In addition, the provision of a mechanical parking system provides the dual benefits of


eliminating the extensive use of land and drainage requirements for surface parking and encouraging the use of car-share and other TDM measures.

We trust that this report fulfills the City’s requirements for parking justification for the subject development. Please contact us if there are questions or need for clarification arising from this report.

Yours very truly,

PARADIGM TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS LIMITED

Rajan Philips Jim Mallett M.Sc., P.Eng. M.A.Sc., P.Eng., PTOE Senior Transportation Consultant President


Figure 1

Subj

ect S

ite L

ocat

ion

Figu

re 1

1395

Riv

erb

end

Rd

PS

1902

99

NTS

Imag

e S

ourc

e: G

oogl

e E

arth

Sub

ject

Site


Figure 2

Prop

osed

Site

Pla

nFi

gure

213

95 R

iver

ben

d R

d P

S19

0299

NTS

Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited | Appendices

Appendix A

Stacker Operational Calculation

Data Operating Characteristic Weekday PM Peak Hour ResultsArrival rate () 11 Average Stacker Utilization () 0.09Service rate () 60 Average number of vehicles in the queue (Lq) 0.00Number of entrances (M) 2 Average number of vehicles in the system (L) 0.18

Average time spent in the queue (Wq) 0.00 0.01 minAverage time in the system (W) 0.02 1.01 minProbability (% of time) stacker system is empty (P0) 0.83 83.21%

ProbabilitiesNumber Probability Cumulative Probability

0 83% 83.2% 16.793893%1 15% 98.5% 1.539440%2 1% 99.9% 0.141115%3 0% 100.0% 0.012936%4 0% 100.0% 0.001186%5 0% 100.0% 0.000109%6 0% 100.0% 0.000010%7 0% 100.0% 0.000001%8 0% 100.0% 0.000000%9 0% 100.0% 0.000000%

10 0% 100.0% 0.000000%11 0% 100.0% 0.000000%12 0% 100.0% 0.000000%13 0% 100.0% 0.000000%14 0% 100.0% 0.000000%15 0% 100.0% 0.000000%16 0% 100.0% 0.000000%17 0% 100.0% 0.000000%18 0% 100.0% 0.000000%19 0% 100.0% 0.000000%20 0% 100.0% 0.000000%

Computationsn or s (lam/mu)^n/n! Cumsum(n-1) term2 P0(s) Rho(s) Lq(s) L(s) Wq(s) W(S)

0 11 0.18333333 1 0.224489796 0.816667 0.183333 0.041156463 0.22449 0.003741497 0.0204082 0.01680556 1.183333333 0.018501529 0.832061 0.091667 0.001553564 0.184887 0.000141233 0.0168083 0.00102701 1.200138889 0.001093853 0.832478 0.061111 5.92704E-05 0.183393 5.38822E-06 0.0166724 4.7071E-05 1.201165895 4.93322E-05 0.83249 0.045833 1.97273E-06 0.183335 1.79339E-07 0.0166675 1.7259E-06 1.201212966 1.79163E-06 0.832491 0.036667 5.67706E-08 0.183333 5.16096E-09 0.0166676 5.2737E-08 1.201214692 5.43993E-08 0.832491 0.030556 1.42738E-09 0.183333 1.29762E-10 0.0166677 1.3812E-09 1.201214745 1.41836E-09 0.832491 0.02619 3.17566E-11 0.183333 2.88697E-12 0.0166678 3.1653E-11 1.201214746 3.23951E-11 0.832491 0.022917 6.32526E-13 0.183333 5.75024E-14 0.0166679 6.4478E-13 1.201214746 6.58185E-13 0.832491 0.02037 1.13937E-14 0.183333 1.03579E-15 0.016667

10 1.1821E-14 1.201214746 1.20417E-14 0.832491 0.018333 1.87216E-16 0.183333 1.70197E-17 0.01666711 1.9702E-16 1.201214746 2.00355E-16 0.832491 0.016667 2.82701E-18 0.183333 2.57E-19 0.01666712 3.01E-18 1.201214746 3.05666E-18 0.832491 0.015278 3.94796E-20 0.183333 3.58905E-21 0.01666713 4.2448E-20 1.201214746 4.30553E-20 0.832491 0.014103 5.12711E-22 0.183333 4.66101E-23 0.01666714 5.5587E-22 1.201214746 5.63244E-22 0.832491 0.013095 6.22177E-24 0.183333 5.65616E-25 0.01666715 6.7939E-24 1.201214746 6.87801E-24 0.832491 0.012222 7.08489E-26 0.183333 6.44081E-27 0.01666716 7.7847E-26 1.201214746 7.87496E-26 0.832491 0.011458 7.59896E-28 0.183333 6.90815E-29 0.01666717 8.3953E-28 1.201214746 8.48682E-28 0.832491 0.010784 7.70239E-30 0.183333 7.00218E-31 0.01666718 8.5508E-30 1.201214746 8.63875E-30 0.832491 0.010185 7.40023E-32 0.183333 6.72748E-33 0.01666719 8.2507E-32 1.201214746 8.33112E-32 0.832491 0.009649 6.75743E-34 0.183333 6.14312E-35 0.01666720 7.5632E-34 1.201214746 7.63314E-34 0.832491 0.009167 5.87887E-36 0.183333 5.34442E-37 0.01666721 6.6028E-36 1.201214746 6.66092E-36 0.832491 0.00873 4.88364E-38 0.183333 4.43968E-39 0.01666722 5.5023E-38 1.201214746 5.54855E-38 0.832491 0.008333 3.88161E-40 0.183333 3.52873E-41 0.016667

Documents

Eve Park Townhouse Development, London Parking Study · Eve Park London LP . London,Ontario . Dear Ms. Hammerbacher: RE: PARKING STUDY – EVE PARK TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LONDON Paradigm