Transit- Meeting Agenda (12/18/1997)

Home Browse Search

Other considerations affecting~easibility: - -_,._... . _ - - Parkiag: The project, as presented, includes 258 parldng spaces. It is the opinion of the Task Force that this number is inadequate, given established criteria for commercial development Using the benchmark of three stalis per 1,000 square feet of building improvements (and assuming net leasablc area of 141,382 sf., rather than gross floor areas), the minimum number of stalls available should be 426 as reflected in the following formula: Minimum spaces needed 426 Credit spaces gained from elimination ~ (44) of bus matl in front of Courthouse \ --- - Spaces `~eserved" for private sector ~~ 90 building on the north side of the block, assuming 30,000 sf. of building ~ Credit number of spaces planned ~S~ Total additional spaces needed 214 Thus, the Courthouse Square project should make available an additiona1214 parking spa~ces to achieve a minimum standard for the floor areas it will be adding to the downtown ~area: To achieve this goal we recommend that 66 stalls be added to the initial developmeat of the underground pazking area (under the footprint for the private development space on the north third of the block,) The County should consider obtaining the balance of approximately 148 stalls by participating financially with the City of Salem to construct additional parldng or by piusuing sQme acceptable altern,ative in the area. The City of Salem could then use the Courthouse Square conl~ibution toward the construction of an additional parking structur~ for the east downtown business/retail distric~ The Task Force is aware of the argument presented by the pmject team that increased use ap transit will reduce the need for parking. _ However, the assumption that the current plan has adeQuate parldng is based on what we believe to be an ideal scenario and not on the reality of our society. Aclueving the "ideal scenario" of getting people out of their cais is not a short term P%1~ ~~quently, we cannot let the County put an undue burden on the business owners and professio~,als downtown who depeiid on adequate available parking. Whi1e downtown businesses not g~roviding the needed number of pazking spaces are required to contribute to a Paz'~ ~ct, Marion County is exempt from sueh participation, Thus, the project could add to an existing iack of parking, without any obligation to contribute to a solution. The County must take full responsibility for the parking needs that the Courthouse Square proje~t will generate. - . 44