Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan Final ReportSALEM COMPREHENSIVE
PARKING PLAN
FINAL REPORT • July 2010
City of Salem
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page i Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Table of Contents
PAGE
1. Overview ............................................................................................................................... 1
2. Approach .............................................................................................................................. 2
3. Existing Parking Standards ................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Zoning Ordinance Parking Requirements ...................................................................... 5
3.2 Comparison to Best Practice .......................................................................................... 8
4. Parking Inventory and Utilization ..................................................................................... 16
4.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 16
4.2 Summary Findings ........................................................................................................ 21
4.3 Detailed Findings .......................................................................................................... 23
4.4 Key Observations ......................................................................................................... 44
5. Public Workshop ............................................................................................................... 46
5.1 Priorities Poster Activity ................................................................................................ 46
5.2 Areas of Need ............................................................................................................... 47
5.3 Opportunities for Improvement ..................................................................................... 49
5.4 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 50
6. Parking Survey ................................................................................................................... 52
6.1 Survey Questions ......................................................................................................... 52
6.2 Survey Results ............................................................................................................. 52
7. Review of Innovative Parking Technologies ................................................................... 56
7.1 Parking Payment Technology ....................................................................................... 56
7.2 Parking Enforcement Technology ................................................................................ 63
7.3 Parking Information Technology ................................................................................... 64
8. Key Findings ...................................................................................................................... 65
8.1 Regulatory Confusion ................................................................................................... 65
8.2 Unbalanced Availability ................................................................................................ 67
8.3 Sufficient Parking Information ....................................................................................... 68
8.4 Unfair Pricing ................................................................................................................ 69
8.5 Improving Connectivity ................................................................................................. 71
8.6 Under-Utilization of Private Parking .............................................................................. 72
9. Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 74
9.1 Rationalizing the Parking System ................................................................................. 74
9.2 Short-Term Recommendations .................................................................................... 78
10.3 Additional Recommendations ......................................................................................... 85
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page ii Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Table of Figures
PAGE
Figure 1 Zoning Regulations Within Downtown ................................................................... 4
Figure 2 General Parking Requirements – Salem Zoning Ordinance ................................. 5
Figure 3 Central Development District Parking Requirements -
Salem Zoning Ordinance ....................................................................................... 7
Figure 4 North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District Parking
Requirements ........................................................................................................ 8
Figure 5 Parking Minimum and Maximum Requirements – Salem Zoning Ordinance ........ 9
Figure 6 Shared Parking Provision – Salem Zoning Ordinance ........................................ 10
Figure 7 Change of Use Exemptions – Salem Zoning Ordinance ..................................... 11
Figure 8 Dimensional Requirements – Salem Zoning Ordinance ...................................... 11
Figure 9 Curb Cut Guidance – Salem Zoning Ordinance .................................................. 12
Figure 10 Unbundling of Parking Cost Regulations – Salem Zoning Ordinance ................ 13
Figure 11 Parking In-Lieu Fee Regulations ......................................................................... 14
Figure 12 Car Sharing Regulations ..................................................................................... 14
Figure 13 Bicycle Parking Regulations ................................................................................ 14
Figure 14 Transportation Demand Management Measures ................................................ 15
Figure 15 Map of Expanded Study Area .............................................................................. 17
Figure 16 Existing Parking Inventory ................................................................................... 19
Figure 17 Data Collection Zones ......................................................................................... 21
Figure 18 Summary of Parking Supply ................................................................................ 21
Figure 19 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile ..................................................................... 22
Figure 20 Weekend Parking Utilization Profile .................................................................... 22
Figure 21 Summer Weekday Parking Utilization Profile ...................................................... 23
Figure 22 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Public Spaces .......................................... 24
Figure 23 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Private Spaces ........................................ 24
Figure 24 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – On-Street Spaces .................................... 25
Figure 25 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – 2 Hour Metered On-Street Spaces ......... 26
Figure 26 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – 2 Hour Unmetered On-Street Spaces .... 27
Figure 27 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Unregulated On-Street Spaces .............. 27
Figure 28 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Off-Street Spaces .................................... 28
Figure 29 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Off-Street by Ownership ......................... 29
Figure 30 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile - Public Surface Lots .................................. 30
Figure 31 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile - Public Garages ......................................... 30
Figure 32 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – 2 Hour Metered Surface Lots ................. 31
Figure 33 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – 2 Hour Unmetered Surface Lots ............. 32
Figure 34 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Unregulated Surface Lots ....................... 33
Figure 35 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Customer Only Surface Lots .................. 33
Figure 36 Weekday Morning Parking Utilization .................................................................. 35
Figure 37 Weekday Midday Parking Utilization ................................................................... 36
Figure 38 Weekday Evening Parking Utilization .................................................................. 37
Figure 39 Saturday Morning Parking Utilization .................................................................. 38
Figure 40 Saturday Midday Parking Utilization .................................................................... 39
Figure 41 Saturday Afternoon Parking Utilization ................................................................ 40
Figure 42 August Vacation Weekday Morning Parking Utilization ....................................... 41
Figure 43 August Vacation Weekday Midday Parking Utilization ........................................ 42
Figure 44 August Vacation Weekday Evening Parking Utilization ....................................... 43
Figure 45 Results of Priorities Poster Activity ...................................................................... 47
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page iii Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 46 Map Summary of Workshop Comments ............................................................. 50
Figure 47 Summary of Key Issues and Opportunities ......................................................... 51
Figure 48 Survey Respondents by User Group ................................................................... 53
Figure 49 Salem Parking Survey Form ............................................................................... 54
Figure 50 Survey Responses .............................................................................................. 55
Figure 51 Salem Parking Regulations ................................................................................. 65
Figure 52 Regulations Along Select Block Faces in Downtown .......................................... 66
Figure 53 Parking Availability in Downtown Salem ............................................................. 67
Figure 54 Salem Web-Based Parking Map ......................................................................... 68
Figure 55 Existing Pricing Structure in Downtown Salem ................................................... 69
Figure 56 Roadway Barriers to Parking Access .................................................................. 71
Figure 57 Policy Goals for the Comprehensive Parking Plan .............................................. 75
Figure 58 Downtown “Parking Operations Areas” & Land Use Map ................................... 76
Figure 59 Recommended Parking Operations Areas in Downtown Salem ........................ 77
Figure 60 Revised Meter Rates ........................................................................................... 78
Figure 61 Revised Garage and Lot Rates ........................................................................... 80
Figure 62 Revised Permit Rates .......................................................................................... 81
Figure 63 Residential Permit Rates ..................................................................................... 82
Figure 64 Parking Reconfiguration and Expansion at Riley Plaza ...................................... 86
CITY OF SALEM
Salem Comprehensive Parking Study
1. Overview
The city of Salem is a coastal community that serves as a regional destination for many
purposes. The city’s downtown boasts numerous tourist attractions, historical sites, and
commercial and educational institutions. Over 6,000 daily workers, 41,000 year-round residents,
and a million annual visitors enjoy Salem’s diverse destinations. Salem is home to world class
museums, Salem State College, the North Shore Medical Center, and the Essex County District
Superior and Probate Courts. The downtown – comprised of fairly dense two to six story buildings
– is home to a combination of historical and cultural destinations, restaurants, shops, residences,
and office space. The existing Salem landmarks, including Museum Place Mall, Salem Common,
the Salem Witch Museum, and Peabody Essex Museum, are now welcoming new downtown
growth. The J. Michael Ruane Judicial Center will create a new anchor at one end of the
downtown; over 400 housing units have been created in the downtown in the past few years; and
mixed use developments are underway, including the adaptive reuse of the former Essex County
jail building.
With this new growth, daily resident and employee demands, and monthly challenges such as a
heavy visitor season and New England winters, Salem’s parking infrastructure can often be
burdened, confusing many who try to park in downtown. The City of Salem decided to conduct a
comprehensive downtown parking study based on the recommendation of an Urban Land
Institute technical assistance panel in the fall of 2008. The panel made two primary
recommendations to the City: first, the most feasible redevelopment scenario for the Church
Street lot was multi-family residential, and second, develop a downtown parking management
plan. The panel found a parking management plan to be a necessary tool to help promote the
vision of the City and to use resources most effectively. Recommendations included basing the
plan around major parking facilities, including Riley Plaza, Museum Garage, and the Sewell
Street Lot, as well as utilizing the MBTA commuter rail station. The City recognized that a
comprehensive downtown parking program would allow the community to maximize the potential
of the downtown for civic, residential, commercial, and tourism growth.
The City selected Nelson\Nygaard (the consultant) to conduct a detailed analysis of the existing
parking facilities, including public and private surface lots, structures, and on-street parking, to
help determine the sufficient supply of parking in Salem. Supplies that are – or are perceived to
be – insufficient reduce accessibility for motorists. However, supplies that are overly sufficient,
discourage use of alternative travel modes, promote increased traffic congestion, and frequently
impose upon the walkability of historic downtowns like Salem’s. The City sought an appropriate
balance of well-managed parking that can greatly improve the attractiveness of a community
while preventing the negatives of auto-oriented design.
Salem has great existing resources in its existing transportation network, and if efficiently
managed in a coordinated and multi-modal fashion, these resources can become an untapped
resource for improving mobility and convenience in downtown. The city is directly connected to
Boston through commuter rail, bus service, and seasonal ferry service, and it is close Route 128
and Route 95. Investments in the infrastructure, such as the new Bridge Street bypass road
leading into downtown Salem, have made for a center with great connectivity. Downtown Salem
has eleven public off-street lots, two public parking garages, hundreds of on-street spaces, and
thousands of off-street private parking spaces. While the multitude of parking facilities and
parking operators poses a challenge, new approaches to coordinating these assets can bring
much greater efficiencies while benefiting all parties.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 2 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
2. Approach
To coordinate the input of various stakeholders, the City of Salem organized a working group of
key stakeholders, including City of Salem staff, the Salem Redevelopment Authority, the chamber
of commerce, Salem Main Streets, the Salem Partnership, and other members of the City Parking
Committee. This group met six times throughout the course of the study to guide the consultant’s
work, review materials, and guide the outcome of the analysis. The working group confirmed the
final study area and all work tasks, which are described below.
This consultant’s approach focused on collecting as much existing use information as possible to
come up with a profile of parking activity in Salem. Key questions the data was intended to
answer included:
How much parking is available for different user groups, including residents, employees,
commuters, visitors and shoppers?
How is existing parking being utilized in the downtown?
How are motorists directed to parking?
Who gets the best spaces?
How much spillover is occurring in surrounding residential neighborhoods?
How is the unique parking demand during events, weekends, near Halloween, and during
snow storms managed?
To answer these questions, the consultant collected and reviewed all existing studies related to
parking as well as all zoning code and regulatory language influencing the operation and
provision of parking in the downtown. The consultant also analyzed the City’s existing zoning
regulations and compared them to industry standards and best practices in other similar-sized
cities in the United States. (Section 3)
Several data collection tasks were conducted, including:
Parking Inventory. In August and September, 2009, the consultant conducted a detailed
field inventory of all public and private spaces within the downtown, creating a detailed
map and database of all regulations, time-limits, hours of operation, ownership, etc. built
on the City’s existing Geographic Information System (GIS). (see Section 4)
Parking Utilization. During the months of August and October, 2009, the consultant
conducted field surveys of all spaces in the inventory to establish their peak daily parking
accumulation and daily utilization. With the assistance of Salem interns, observations
were conducted every two hours for 12-hour periods on average weekdays and
Saturdays. (Section 4)
Parking Turnover. Detailed counts of the duration of occupancy of every space in fifteen-
minute increments were conducted on several key downtown block faces on Washington
and Essex Streets. (Section 4)
Public Workshops. In November, 2009, the consultant facilitated a community workshop
to record input on problems in the downtown parking system, as well as recommended
changes. Over thirty concerned citizens turned out to record their concerns through a
voting exercise, on notecards, and directly on maps of the study area (Section 5). A
second workshop in February, 2010, was held to discuss and revise the preliminary
recommendations of the parking study.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 3 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Parking User Surveys. The consultant prepared a paper and on-line survey instrument
that sought basic parking preference information from respondents. It was distributed and
advertised among downtown stakeholders by City staff. Over 600 responses were
recorded. (Section 6)
Interviews. To supplement the feedback from the working group and surveys, detailed
phone interviews were conducted with other downtown business owners in order to
capture the perspective of major retailers and employers. (Section 6)
Parking Technology and Procedure Review. This review assessed applicable
advanced parking technologies, such as pay stations, electronic occupancy signs, and
cell-phone enabled occupancy and payment information systems that could be operated
in Salem to manage on- and off-street parking, focusing on case studies of the parking
procedures in cities around the country with conditions similar to Salem. (Section 7)
Working in close coordination with the working group, the consultant summarized key findings
and developed the recommended parking program that is detailed below. (Sections 8 & 9)
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 4 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
3. Existing Parking Standards
The primary area of focus for the Comprehensive Parking Program study is downtown Salem,
which is almost entirely zoned Central Development (B5), with Residential Two Family (R2) on
the edges, and pockets of Residential Multi-Family (R3) as well (see Figure 1). An Entrance
Corridor Overlay covers several main roads in the study area. Just outside of the study area are
the North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District (NRCC) and a Business Park
Development District (BPD).
Figure 1 Zoning Regulations Within Downtown
Key Findings
General parking requirements in Salem exceed the most conservative national
standards from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), which bases its standards
on stand-alone buildings in areas without transit or the ability to walk to other uses.
Outside downtown, Salem’s codes require an excessive amount of parking.
Within the downtown, Salem has appropriately eliminated parking requirements for all
uses except residential. However, the current residential requirement exceeds even ITE
standards.
Shared parking is allowed city-wide. However, off-site parking must be within a confined
400-foot radius, which is much lower than an easy 5-minute walk distance of 1,200-feet.
No front-yard parking is allowed in the downtown, helping to maintain a strong
pedestrian and streetscape environment which facilitates vehicle trip reduction.
The City already maintains clear curb cut guidance to reduce excessive breaks in the
sidewalk. Further detailed guidance on the design of curb cuts should be included that
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 5 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
specifies an elevation equal to the sidewalk elevation in order to preserve a safe and
level walking path across driveways
The City has no provisions in zoning for bicycle parking, car-sharing, transportation
demand management (TDM), or revealing the cost of parking (pricing, unbundling, or
cash-out).
3.1 Zoning Ordinance Parking Requirements
While the general parking requirements shown in Figure 2 below apply to the B5, R2, and R3
zones, the certain types of development in the BPD and NRCC have a different set of parking
requirements, as shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4.
General Parking Requirements
Based on a review of the most up-to-date Zoning Ordinance (September 2009), Salem’s general
parking requirements are higher than the peak parking demand rates found in Parking
Generation 3rd Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004), as illustrated in Figure 2.
The peak parking demand rates found in the ITE guide are primarily derived from studies
conducted in auto-dependent suburban settings. These rates are generally considered to be very
conservative and when applied as minimum land development requirements in a dense setting –
such as the current study area – they are likely to produce more parking than is required for a mix
of uses where events such as lunch, running errands, and shopping can occur on foot with the
use of only one parking space. The current parking requirements exceed the ITE rates for every
described land use that can be compared.
Figure 2 General Parking Requirements – Salem Zoning Ordinance
Principal Use Existing Regulation ITE Peak Parking Demand
Rates
Salem vs.
ITE
One Family (R1)
1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, with a minimum
of 2 spaces, plus 1 space for each home
occupation.
1.83 spaces per dwelling unit Above
Two Family (R2),
Tourist Homes
1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, with a minimum
of 2 spaces1, plus 1 space for each home
occupation.
Rental Townhouse: 1.73
spaces per dwelling unit Above2
Apartment Dwelling
1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, with a minimum
of 2 spaces, plus 1 space for each home
occupation.
1.20 spaces per dwelling unit Above
Hotel, Motel, and
Inn
1 space for each guest room, plus 1 space for
each two employees. 0.91 space per room Above
1 Two units require 3 spaces, the 2 space minimum is unclear unless intended to apply to each unit, thus making it 2
spaces per dwelling unit
2 Above the ITE if the 2 space minimum is on a per unit basis
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 6 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Principal Use Existing Regulation ITE Peak Parking Demand
Rates
Salem vs.
ITE
Hospital and
Sanitarium, Nursing
and Convalescent
Home
1 space for each doctor accredited to practice
therein, plus 1 space for each two employees,
plus 1 space for each four beds.
0.39 spaces per bed N/A3
Retail Business and
Service
Establishment
1 space for each 150 square feet of gross floor
area of the building, excluding storage area.
Retail: 2 to 4 spaces per 1000
square feet (depending on
type)
Above
Business Office 1 space for each employee. Office: 0.83 spaces per
employee Above
Professional Office,
Medical and Dental
Clinic
1 space for each professional person, plus 1
space for each two other employees, plus 2
additional spaces for each professional person
in the case of medical or dental clinics
Office: 0.83 spaces per
employee
Medical/Dental: 3.9 spaces
per 1000 square feet
Prof.
Office:
Above
Med/Dent:
N/A4
Townhouse and
Townhouse Dev5
1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, with a minimum
of 2 spaces6,, plus 1 space for each home
occupation.
1.73 spaces per dwelling unit Above7
Restaurant
1 space for each four seats, plus 1 space for
each two employees. For drive-in restaurants,
1 space for each two employees, plus 15
spaces.
0.5 spaces per seat for sit-
down restaurants, 9.9 spaces
per 1000 square feet of gross
floor area for restaurants with
a drive-through window.
N/A8
Central Development District Parking Requirements
The Central Development District has different parking regulations than other zones throughout
Salem. The requirements for commercial/office and retail uses are significantly below the ITE
demand rates, as they are not required to provide off-street parking. Existing residential uses in
the Central Development District have slightly lower regulations than other zones, while new
construction residential uses are in-line with other zones, which are above the standard ITE rates.
3 Not comparable as the rates are based on unrelated factors
4 Not comparable as the rates are based on unrelated factors
5 Not explicitly in Salem parking guidelines. Requires special permit to develop and is referenced as multifamily in Use
section of zoning ordinance
6 Two units require 3 spaces, the 2 space minimum is unclear unless intended to apply to each unit, thus making it 2
spaces per dwelling unit
7 Above the ITE if the 2 space minimum is on a per unit basis
8 Not comparable as the rates are based on unrelated factors
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 7 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 3 Central Development District Parking Requirements -
Salem Zoning Ordinance
Principal Use Existing Regulation ITE Peak Parking Demand Rates Salem vs.
ITE
Residential Uses
Not less than 1 space
per dwelling unit for
existing buildings.
1.5 spaces per dwelling
unit for new construction.
Single-family detached: 1.83 spaces per dwelling unit
Low/mid rise apartment 3+ units/1-4 floors (urban):1
space per dwelling unit
Low/mid rise apartment (suburban): 1.2 spaces per
dwelling unit
In-
line/Above
Commercial/Office
Not required to provide
off street parking since
the community will
accept the responsibility
for the nonresidential
parking in the district.
Office (urban): 2.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Office (suburban): 2.84 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Medical/dental office: 3.53 spaces per 1,000 square
feet
Government office: 4.15 spaces per 1,000 square
feet
No off-
street
parking
required
Retail
Not required to provide
off street parking since
the community will
accept the responsibility
for the nonresidential
parking in the district.
2 to 5 spaces per 1000 square feet (depending on
type of retail)
No off-
street
parking
required
Business Park Development District Parking
Requirements
The Business Park Development District generally abides by the above regulations. However, a
development that is more than 10,000 square feet of gross building area will have its parking
requirements determined by the Planning Board. As such, it is impossible to compare the existing
regulation to the ITE Peak Parking Demand Rates in that situation.
North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use
District Parking Requirements
As mentioned above, the North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use District utilizes a
different set of parking requirements for residential land uses, as shown in Figure 4 below. The
requirements set out in the mixed use district regulations closely mirror the rates reported in the
ITE guide.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 8 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 4 North River Canal Corridor Neighborhood Mixed Use
District Parking Requirements
Principal Use Existing Regulation ITE Peak Parking Demand Rates Salem vs.
ITE
Residential Uses
2 spaces per dwelling
unit, with a minimum of 2
spaces, plus 1 space for
each home occupation.
1 space per dwelling
unit, plus 1 space for
patrons for artist space
with a studio where items
are sold.
Single-family detached: 1.83 spaces per dwelling unit
Low/mid rise apartment 3+ units/1-4 floors (urban):1
space per dwelling unit
Low/mid rise apartment (suburban): 1.2 spaces per
dwelling unit
Above
3.2 Comparison to Best Practice
Parking Minimums and Maximums
Most minimum parking requirements take into account only two variables, namely land use and
the size of development. As with Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4 above, they are typically
expressed in terms of number of spaces required per 1,000 square feet of a particular land use,
per residential unit or (for restaurants and stadiums) number of seats. However, in reality, parking
demand is affected by many more variables, such as the geographic context, demographic
characteristics of the community, availability of transit or other alternatives to the car, traffic
demand management programs, vehicle ownership rates, housing unit size, share of affordable
housing units, etc.
As currently configured, the Salem Zoning Ordinance establishes minimum parking requirements
for a variety of land uses but does not provide a cap or limit on the maximum number of spaces
(see Figure 5). In contrast to minimum parking requirements, parking maximums restrict the total
number of spaces that can be constructed. Reasons for setting maximum requirements may
include a desire to restrict traffic from new development, promote alternatives to the private
automobile, or limit the amount of land that is devoted to parking. Parking maximums can be
introduced anywhere where there are or could be measures in place to combat excessive parking
demand. While the policy is most likely to be appropriate in transit corridors, downtowns, and
areas with high levels of traffic congestion, it can be useful in any district that wants to limit traffic
or the amount of land devoted to parking.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 9 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 5 Parking Minimum and Maximum Requirements –
Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing
Regulation Best Practices
Parking Minimums
Reduced Parking Minimums:
In a number of municipalities parking minimum requirements can be reduced when certain
conditions are met, such as central business districts, or with a specific percentage of affordable
housing. This is reflected in Salem’s downtown zoning.
Removed Parking Minimums:
Some communities in Massachusetts and elsewhere have done away with minimum parking
requirements for the entire municipality while others have targeted specific zoning districts.
Parking Maximums:
In a growing number of municipalities, parking minimums have been replaced with parking
maximums. In some cases, the amount required as a minimum is directly converted to a
maximum. In others, the current standards are rejected altogether and a new analysis is carried
out based on local auto ownership rates and commuting patterns.
Shared Parking
Mixed-use developments offer the opportunity to share parking spaces between various uses,
thereby reducing the total number of spaces required compared to the same uses in stand-alone
developments. This is a primary benefit in mixed-use development contexts of moderate-to-high
density. Shared parking operations offer many localized benefits to the surrounding community,
including a more efficient use of land resources and reduced traffic congestion.
The City’s parking code addresses shared parking directly in Section 5.1.7, which is included
below in the Existing Regulation column (see Figure 6). Only through the granting of a special
permit – and by meeting other relevant criteria – can several buildings share parking facilities.
However, the parking requirements for the Central Development District, while not explicitly
referencing shared parking, indicate recognition that the existing parking supply can meet diverse
needs. Additionally, the City’s parking code for drive-through facilities illustrates awareness of the
benefits of a shared parking arrangement by encouraging shared parking.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 10 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 6 Shared Parking Provision – Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing Regulation Best Practices
“No part of an off-street parking area required by this Ordinance for any building or
use shall be included as part of an off-street parking area similarly required for
another building or use unless the type of buildings or uses indicates that the
usage of such parking area would not occur simultaneously, as determined by the
Board of Appeals via the grant of a special permit” (5.1.7).
“Except as provided herein, all parking spaced required by this Ordinance shall be
on the same lot as the building or use which they are intended to serve, except that
the Board of Appeals may permit the parking spaces to be provided within 400 feet
of the building or use intended to be served, if the Board determines that it is
impractical to provide parking on the same lot with the building. If a separate lot is
used for parking, the ownership of the lot must, for all times, be held by the same
ownership as the lot on which the building is erected. If the parking lot ownership is
separated from the ownership of the building, this shall be deemed a violation, and
the Building Commissioner shall void the certificate of occupancy” (5.1.2).
Shared parking can be provided
as of right at least a 5 minute
walk from the associated use
(1,000 feet).
Required parking spaces for all
uses in all districts need not be
limited to use by residents,
employees, occupants, guests,
visitors, or customers of such
uses and may be used for
general public parking. This
enhances the inherent “park-
once” efficiency of a downtown
area.
Exception
The exception is for Drive-Through Facilities, where “developments that provide
service drives between properties may be permitted a 10% reduction in the
required number of parking spaces. If information can be provided to show that
peak demand periods of development with shared parking or a service drive
connection are not simultaneous, the number of required parking spaces may be
reduced by 20%” (6.7.6.6).
Change of Use Exemptions
Situations arise where the minimum parking requirements interfere with the ability of the
owner/occupant to change the use of their property. As discussed above, often the minimum
parking requirements set out in the zoning code require more off street parking than is feasible
within the constraints of the property. In mid- to high density downtowns where lots are small and
available space is limited, this can become a serious obstruction to redevelopment.
Salem does allow for a change in use of land to dictate a change in the amount of parking that
must be provided. Additionally, in the Central Development District, there are options for
rehabilitated buildings to meet parking requirements in several ways, by either providing parking
onsite or through the usage of municipal or other facilities, as long as the relevant parking facility
is within 1,000 feet of the building and the owner purchases a parking pass (for municipal
facilities).
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 11 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 7 Change of Use Exemptions – Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing Regulation Best Practices
“Required parking spaces shall not be reduced or
encroached upon in any manner unless a change in
use occurs which permits a change in the amount of
parking area required” (5.1.4).
When buildings and parcels are converted to new uses,
exemptions from parking requirements may be granted
when providing the required amount of parking on-site is
infeasible.
Dimensional Requirements
Requiring buildings to provide a minimum setback encourages greater dispersal of development
and decreases the likelihood that one will walk between various uses. Allowing or requiring
parking between the building and the street increases the incentive for drivers to use their vehicle
to travel between nearby destinations.
The Zoning Ordinance has eliminated minimum setback requirements for the Central Business
District, which creates a more pedestrian friendly environment. The NRCC District also
encourages pedestrian oriented development practices that have connections to smart parking
dimensional requirements. Buildings on the main corridors in the District should have entrances
facing that road and should be located “to create a presence…on street edges.” Developments
in the Transitional Overlay District, which is located at the edge of the NRCC District and adjacent
residential zones, must also meet a similar standard of pedestrian oriented design and must
avoid creating parking lots with “large expanses that are unbroken by buildings or substantial
landscaped areas” (8.4.16).
Planned Unit Developments have dimensional requirements that are somewhat different than
those governing the rest of Salem. Proposed PUDs that are adjacent to or across the street from
existing residential uses must provide the same minimum lot frontage of those residences, but
must not exceed the minimum Ordinance requirements for that zone. Additionally, lot sizes in
such a zone can be reduced below minimum Ordinance requirements.
Figure 8 Dimensional Requirements – Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing Regulation Best Practices
Most zones have minimum front yard setbacks.
No front yard parking in
downtown area.
Reduced or eliminated
minimum setback
requirements in downtown
area.
Exceptions
Both the Central Business District and the NCRR do not have minimum front yard
setback requirements (4.1.1).
In both the NRCC District and the Transitional Overlay District, which covers the
boundary between the NRCC District and residential zones, developments must be
oriented to the main corridors so as to create a pedestrian friendly environment and
should provide parking to the side or rear of the development (8.4.2 and 8.4.16).
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 12 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Driveway Curb Cuts
Driveway curb cuts accessing off-street parking are a major source of vehicle-pedestrian-bicycle
conflicts as well as introducing more congestion on busy thoroughfares due to left turns in and out
of the driveway. When alternatives are available and feasible, limiting or prohibiting driveway curb
cuts along key vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle routes reduces or eliminates these conflicts,
providing safer, more efficient, and less congested public rights-of-way.
The Zoning Ordinance provides guidance on the location of curb cuts to reduce these conflicts,
including – for instance – the proximity of the curb cut to an intersection. They also establish a
general maximum of two driveways per parcel.
Figure 9 Curb Cut Guidance – Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing Regulation Best Practices
Motor Vehicle Light Service Stations Section (6.3.3)
The width of driveway entrances shall be not more than 24 feet and the angle of
intersection of the driveway with the street shall be not more than 60 degrees.
The distance from any driveway to any side property line shall not be less than 20
feet.
The distance between curb cuts shall not be less than 40 feet.
Drive-Through Facilities Section (6.7.6)
There must be a minimum of 200 feet between curb cuts, unless reduced by the
SPGA in those instances when the reduction may be granted without detriment to
the public good in keeping with the other standards set in this section.
The width of the curb cut shall not exceed 25 feet, unless the traffic impact study
identifies the need for a larger curb cut and the requirement is increased by SPGA.
Curb cuts must be sufficiently set back from intersections and directional
restrictions must be provided as required by the Board.
Joint use driveways and cross access easements are allowed and encouraged by
the ordinance, and should incorporate: a service driver or cross access corridor,
sufficient width to accommodate two-way travel lanes, and design features the
highlight the shared nature of the facility.
Shared facilities can take advantage of a 10% reduction in minimum parking
spaces, with up to a 20% reduction if peak usage for facilities sharing spaces
occurs at different times.
Entrances to stacking lane(s) shall be clearly marked and a minimum of 20 feet
from the curb cut measured at the property line.
Entrance Corridor Overlay District (8.2.3)
Only one curb cut of no greater than 24 feet shall be permitted for all residential
uses. A maximum of two curb cuts no greater than 24 feet shall be permitted for all
commercial uses.
In transit-oriented zoning
districts, reviews emphasize
a prohibition of curb cuts
and driveway openings
along key transit, bicycle,
and/or pedestrian routes
whenever possible. Where
curb cuts are present,
standards expect a level
crossing for pedestrians
(raised driveway) and clear
sightlines for exiting
motorists to see pedestrians
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 13 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Unbundling Parking Costs
Unbundling parking costs changes parking from a required purchase to an optional amenity, so
that households and employers can freely choose how many spaces they wish to lease.
Especially among households with below average vehicle ownership rates (e.g., low income
people, singles and single parents, seniors on fixed incomes, and college students), allowing this
choice can provide a substantial financial benefit. Unbundling parking costs means that these
households no longer have to pay for parking spaces that they may not be able to use or afford.
Charging separately for parking is the single most effective strategy to encourage households to
own fewer cars, and rely more on walking, cycling and transit. According to a study by Todd
Litman9, unbundling residential parking can significantly reduce household vehicle ownership and
parking demand.
The Zoning Ordinance does not explicitly address the bundling of parking cost. Owners of
rehabilitated residential buildings can either provide on-site parking or can utilize municipal or
other such parking facilities nearby – by buying an annual parking pass – to meet parking
minimum requirements. However, the Ordinance does not identify how the parking spaces are
associated with residences, i.e., whether they are offered unbundled or as a unit.
There is a reduction in the parking requirement for housing for older adults or persons with
disabilities. Residences provided by the Salem Housing Authority for these populations require
one-third of a parking space for each unit. Again, this requirement does not unbundle the cost of
parking, but does illustrate recognition of reduced need, which is associated with unbundled
parking costs.
Figure 10 Unbundling of Parking Cost Regulations –
Salem Zoning Ordinance
Existing Regulation Best Practices
None. While the unbundling of parking costs is not directly
addressed in the Ordinance, reductions in parking
minimums for residential units serving populations with less
need and the option for rehabilitated buildings to utilize
municipal and other facilities to meet the requirements
indicates initial steps towards unbundling parking costs.
Any parking spaces offered to tenants of a new
development must be offered as a fee-based option
distinct from charges established for renting, leasing,
or purchasing primary-use space within the
development. These fees shall reflect market realities
(i.e., the actual value of parking).
Parking In-Lieu Fees
In some communities new developments can waive their minimum parking requirements by
making an annual payment (in-lieu of providing parking) to the municipality. The fee is usually
utilized for transportation improvements, particularly shared public parking facilities. This allows
the redevelopment of constrained sites and provides a revenue stream to support the
construction/maintenance of shared public parking facilities such as a central lot or garage.
In the case of Salem’s Business Park Development District, the Planning Board has discretion in
setting the parking requirements for developments greater than 10,000 square feet, this flexibility
could be an opportunity to explore parking in-lieu fees.
9 Todd Litman, Parking Management Best Practices (Planners Press, 2006)
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 14 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 11 Parking In-Lieu Fee Regulations
Existing Regulation Best Practices
None
Where zoning requirements for minimum numbers of parking spaces exist, a parking in-lieu
fee or payment has found great success in the U.S. at reducing parking supply for dense
mixed-use areas that have lower parking demand or high potential for sharing. Fees vary
widely.
Car Sharing
Car-sharing provides individuals with access to a fleet of shared vehicles, allowing them to avoid
owning a car, or a second or third car. Car-sharing can also be a tool for businesses and
government organizations, which can use it to replace their fleet vehicles. At the same time, car-
sharing at the workplace allows employees to take transit, walk or cycle to work, since a car will
be available for business meetings or errands during the day.
Figure 12 Car Sharing Regulations
Existing Regulation Best Practices
None. A minimum number of car share spaces are required to be provided free of charge to car share
services, in relation to the amount of parking provided.
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking is an essential part of encouraging bicycling and typically serves two important
markets. Long-term parking is needed for bicycle storage for residents and employees. This
parking is located in secure, weather-protected, restricted access facilities. Short-term parking
serves shoppers, recreational users and other. As well as security, convenient locations are a
priority – otherwise, bicyclists will tend to lock their bicycles to poles or fences close to their final
destination. Bicycle improvements increase mobility, reduce auto dependency, congestion and air
pollution, and can be a very important mode of transportation for lower-income families.
Figure 13 Bicycle Parking Regulations
Existing Regulation Best Practices
None
Minimum bike parking facilities are provided in relation to the scale of development, and
minimum design standards for such parking facilities are specified, including rack design,
spacing, lighting, shelter, and security provisions.
For certain sized employers, some communities require on-site showering and changing
facilities to encourage bicycle commuting.
Transportation Demand Management Measures
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) refers to a package of strategies to encourage
residents and employees to drive less in favor of transit, carpooling, walking, bicycling and
teleworking. It encompasses financial incentives such as parking charges, parking cash-out, or
subsidized transit passes; Guaranteed Ride Home programs to give employees the security to
carpool or ride transit; compressed work schedules; and information and marketing efforts. TDM
programs have been shown to reduce commuting by single-occupant vehicle by up to 40-percent,
particularly when financial incentives are provided.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 15 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 14 Transportation Demand Management Measures
Existing Regulation Best Practices
None
Pre-Tax transit benefits – Employees are provided with access to “transit checks”,
vouchers, or debit card systems that allow the use of pre-tax income for purchase of
transit fares.
Preferential parking for carpooling, for instance 10% of all parking spaces are set aside
for carpool vehicles prior to 9:00 AM on weekdays, or carpool parking is provided in prime
locations.
Provide ride-sharing services, such as a carpool and vanpool incentives, customized ride-
matching services, a transportation information package for new employees and
residents, a Guaranteed Ride Home program (offering a limited number of emergency
taxi rides home per employee), and an active marketing program to advertise the services
to employees and residents.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 16 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
4. Parking Inventory and Utilization
The consultant, City staff, and City of Salem interns completed a parking inventory and conducted
parking utilization and turnover counts in the downtown Salem study area on three separate
dates: Tuesday August 18th, Thursday October 8th, and Saturday October 17th.
Key Findings
Of the over 5,500 parking spaces in the downtown, no more than 4,000 are utilized at
the busiest time of a normal week (a utilization rate of 69-percent). This includes private
spaces. For the publicly-available supply of 3,500 spaces, nearly 800 remain vacant at
the busiest period (a utilization rate of 78-percent).
Utilization of prime curbside spaces on Washington, Essex, and other streets near the
courthouse often approaches available capacity.
Turnover of prime curbside spaces on Washington and Essex is sufficient, but demand
outstrips availability, as open spaces filled quickly.
The MBTA commuter lot and spaces along Bridge Street are heavily utilized all day on
weekdays.
Many spaces south of Derby Street remain underutilized throughout the day. The Harbor
Garage is poorly utilized at all hours.
Residential streets east of the downtown are heavily utilized in the evening. Streets west
of the downtown are not well utilized during the daytime and the evening.
Overall utilization patterns are less intensive during August vacation.
4.1 Methodology
A baseline existing conditions parking inventory and map was provided to the consultant by the
Town’s GIS coordinator. The consultant added block faces and private parking lots to capture all
parking within the downtown study area. As part of the August data collection effort, staff from the
consulting team and the City of Salem conducted an in-field inventory to ensure the data was an
accurate record of Salem’s parking. The consultant also elected to expand the scope of the
inventory beyond the downtown core to accommodate abutting residential areas where parking
utilization counts could assess spillover parking impacts (see Figure 15). The baseline parking
inventory is displayed in Figure 16.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 17 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 15 Map of Expanded Study Area
Parking utilization data was collected on three separate days in dry fair weather conditions in
order to capture snapshots of three different typical parking use patterns, a summer vacation/
tourism weekday, a normal work weekday, and a normal Saturday. Beginning in the morning,
staff counted the number of parked cars and vacant spaces in all on-street parking areas and in
all off-street parking lots with a capacity of greater than 5 cars. On a Tuesday in mid-August the
inventory and utilization counts were conducted between the hours of 8AM and 6PM, in three
distinct intervals: morning (8am to 11:30am), midday (11:30am to 2:30pm), and afternoon
(2:30pm to 6:00pm).
Following the August count, the study area was expanded to cover some surrounding residential
streets in order to incorporate areas of potential spillover. On a typical Thursday in early October
a twelve hour utilization count was conducted between the hours of 8am and 8pm in five time
periods: morning (8am to 11am), midday (11am to 1pm), early afternoon (1pm to 3 pm), late
afternoon (4pm to 6pm), and evening (6pm to 8pm). Downtown Salem was divided into three
general data collection areas: the western downtown area bound approximately by Washington,
Bridge, Summer and Mill Streets; the Museum Place area bound the river, the Salem Common,
Front , and Washington Streets; and the Pickering Wharf area bound approximately by
Washington, Front, Orange, Congress and Harbor Streets. These are depicted in Figure 17.
Downtown
Bordering
Neighborhoods
Bordering
Neighborhoods
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 18 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
This page intentionally left blank.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 19 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 16 Existing Parking Inventory
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 21 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 17 Data Collection Zones
4.2 Summary Findings
Within Salem’s downtown there are approximately 5,500 combined on- and off-street parking
spaces under private and municipal control (see Figure 18). Nearly 1,400 on-street public spaces
are conveniently located in front of most retail destinations. Several municipal lots, two municipal
garages, and the MBTA lot within the downtown provide an additional 1,933 spaces of public
parking. The remaining spaces are under private control for use by employees, customers and
residents.
Figure 18 Summary of Parking Supply
Figure 19 summarizes the combined utilization of these spaces throughout the course of an
average weekday. As shown, no more than 69-percent of these spaces are utilized at the busiest
period of the day.
Public Private Total
On-street 1,393 18 1,411
Off-street 1,933 2,143 4,076
Total 3,326 2,161 5,487
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 22 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 19 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile
The peak utilization on Saturday is roughly 69-percent occupied. This is roughly the same as the
weekday utilization but rather than occurring in the morning, it occurs in the afternoon, as shown
in Figure 20.
Figure 20 Weekend Parking Utilization Profile
During late August the peak parking utilization is quite a bit lower than during other times of year,
even compared to the normal Saturday. Around the lunch hour, utilization is only 65-percent in
the downtown, as seen in Figure 21 below.
3,720 3,842 3,790 3,793 3,597
2,875
1,853 1,731 1,784 1,780 1,976
2,698
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
8AM 10AM 12PM 2PM 4PM 6PM
Vacant
Occupied
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 23 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 21 Summer Weekday Parking Utilization Profile
4.3 Detailed Findings
Figure 22 and Figure 23 break-out the overall parking utilization results (Figure 19) into all public
and all private parking. Figure 24 and Figure 28 split the overall parking utilization results into all
on-street and all off-street spaces. Figure 25, Figure 26, and Figure 27 break out the on-street
parking (Figure 24) into several sub-categories. Figure 29 splits the off-street parking into public
and private. Figure 30, Figure 31, Figure 32, Figure 33, Figure 34, and Figure 35 focus on sub-
categories of off-street parking (Figure 28).
Public and Private Spaces
While the peak utilization for all of Salem’s parking downtown doesn’t exceed 70-percent, the
public supply (consisting of on-street spaces, surface lots, and garages) experiences a peak
utilization just under 80-percent, as seen in below. Taken as a whole, the private parking supply
is under 60-percent utilized throughout the day, as seen in Figure 23 below.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 24 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 22 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Public Spaces
Figure 23 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Private Spaces
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 25 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
On-Street Spaces
Virtually all of the on-street spaces fall under the public domain, with the exception of fewer than
20 spaces reserved for a few business customers. As can be seen in Figure 24 below, the on-
street spaces in downtown Salem experience a consistent utilization of just about 70-percent
occupancy throughout the day with the exception of just before and after work hours. Before work
the utilization of on-street spaces is at its lowest with around 430 spaces available. After work on-
street parking experiences its peak with roughly 75-percent occupancy.
Figure 24 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – On-Street Spaces10
Select On-Street Spaces
As can be seen on the existing parking inventory map in Figure 16 above, the 320 two-hour
metered spaces are found primarily along the main streets, generally called front-door parking,
where customers and clients prefer to park. The nearly 50 two-hour unmetered spaces are found
just beyond the most convenient parking but still within reasonable walking distance for
customers wishing to save money by avoiding the meters. The nearly 450 unregulated on-street
spaces included in the study area are found outside the most convenient locations, not
necessarily places where visitors to downtown are likely to park.
10 Virtually all of the on-street spaces fall under the public domain, with the exception of fewer than 20 spaces reserved
for a few business customers. These on-street customer spaces are included in this Figure.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 26 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
As Figure 25 shows, more than 30-percent of the two hour metered on-street spaces are
available for the first half of the day. The second half of the day utilization is above 70-percent
occupied with a peak at the end of the work day. The two-hour unmetered spaces show a
different profile across the day with the peak utilization in the middle of the day and falling off after
work with more than 40-percent of the spaces available at 4pm, as seen in Figure 26 below. The
unregulated on-street parking demonstrates a profile that appears to be a hybrid of the two
different two-hour parking types with demand peaks in the middle of the day and at the end of the
work day, as seen in Figure 27.
Figure 25 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
2 Hour Metered On-Street Spaces
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 27 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 26 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
2 Hour Unmetered On-Street Spaces
Figure 27 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
Unregulated On-Street Spaces
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 28 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Off-Street Spaces
Daytime off-street parking is virtually steady beginning before and continuing throughout the
workday, with under 70-percent of the potential parking supply utilized. At peak utilization, 1,380
spaces remain available, as seen in Figure 28. At the end of the workday the utilization falls off
with roughly 60-percent of the parking utilized. By dinner time the off-street utilization is below 50-
percent.
Figure 29 below splits the off-street spaces out by ownership showing that throughout the work
day both the public and private parking utilization remain virtually flat. The drop off after work
occurs entirely within the public off-street parking as the private parking utilization remains the
same until dinner time.
Figure 28 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile – Off-Street Spaces
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 29 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 29 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
Off-Street by Ownership
Public Off-Street
Figure 30 and Figure 31 summarize the weekday parking utilization profile for public surface lots
and public garages. As can be seen below, the surface lots are functionally full with over 90-
percent of the parking occupied after the work day begins, while at the same time, the public
garages’ peak utilization never exceeds 75-percent. At the peak hour of utilization for public
spaces, there remain nearly 400 spaces available, the majority of which are within the public
garages.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 30 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 30 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile - Public Surface Lots
Figure 31 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile - Public Garages
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 31 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Select Off-Street Spaces
As can be seen in the existing parking inventory map in Figure 16 above, the nearly 350 two-hour
metered off-street spaces in Salem are found in Klopp Alley, Sewall Street, Crombie Street, East
Riley Plaza, and Church Street lots. The nearly 60 two-hour unmetered spaces are found in lots
at the Pickering Wharf shops and the West Riley Plaza. The 150 unregulated surface lot spaces
are primarily located in the West Riley Plaza and along Bridge Street. The roughly 800 customer
only spaces are located in lots across the entire downtown. Customer parking is not specifically
isolated on the regulations map, instead it is grouped with a number of other private parking
categories such as employee only parking, reserved parking, etc.
While the two-hour metered on-street spaces showed relatively low utilization (Figure 25), two-
hour metered off-street spaces are highly utilized throughout the entire day. As Figure 32
illustrates, aside from the dinner hour, two-hour metered off-street parking is over 80-percent
occupied throughout the day. This parking experiences two peaks, both before and after work.
Two-hour unmetered off-street parking sees a very high utilization during the work day with a
peak of 100-percent occupancy, as seen in Figure 33. The unregulated off-street parking is
parked beyond capacity, more cars than spaces, during the work day. At the peak hour for
unregulated parking, there are nearly 10 more cars than there are spaces as shown in Figure 34.
Customer only parking is largely available across the entire data collection period. As seen in
Figure 35, customer parking utilization never exceeds 50-percent occupancy. Even at the peak
hour there are just over 430 spaces available.
Figure 32 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
2 Hour Metered Surface Lots
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 32 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 33 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
2 Hour Unmetered Surface Lots
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 33 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 34 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
Unregulated Surface Lots
Figure 35 Weekday Parking Utilization Profile –
Customer Only Surface Lots
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 34 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Geographic Utilization
Figure 36 through Figure 44 graphically summarize the average weekday, average Saturday, and
August vacation weekday parking utilization for the entire study area. It should be noted that
utilization in several specific locations occasionally hits 100-percent or even surpasses it during
the day. However, nearby locations remain under-utilized.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 35 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 36 Weekday Morning Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 36 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 37 Weekday Midday Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 37 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 38 Weekday Evening Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 38 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 39 Saturday Morning Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 39 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 40 Saturday Midday Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 40 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 41 Saturday Afternoon Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 41 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 42 August Vacation Weekday Morning Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 42 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 43 August Vacation Weekday Midday Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report CITY OF SALEM Page 43 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure 44 August Vacation Weekday Evening Parking Utilization
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 44 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
4.4 Key Observations
Based on a review of the detailed utilization information, the following observation highlights can
be made.
Average Weekday:
Full-Day Public Pay Lots – Commuters & Employees
The city owned commuter pay lot at the train station is full by 8 AM; and the MBTA owned
lot is full or nearly full shortly after 8 AM and they remain at that level until the end of the
workday.
The Church Street lot is full or nearly full shortly after 8 AM but the occupancy changes
throughout the day.
Full-Day Public Garages – Employees, Customers, & Visitors
The Museum Garage is never more than 85-percent occupied.
The South Harbor Garage is never more than 26-percent occupied.
Two-Hour Metered Public Lots – Customers, Visitors, & Some Employees
Two-hour metered spaces in public lots are largely occupied, above 80-percent,
throughout the day with the exception of dinner time.
The public lots at Klopp Alley, Crombie Street, and Sewall Street are near full shortly after
8 AM but present varying availability over the day.
The Sewall Street lot is full or nearly full throughout the workday.
Less than half of the parking in the East Riley Plaza lot is used during the day and less
than three-quarters full after the workday.
Unregulated Public Lots – Everyone
The free parking along Bridge Street is over capacity by 8 AM and remains full until after
work.
The unregulated public parking in West Riley Plaza is 76-percent full at 8 AM and full until
after work.
Two-Hour Metered On-Street – Customers, Visitors, & Some Employees
Two-hour metered on-street parking as a whole is nearly 40-percent vacant during the day
and then drops to only 25-percent vacancy through late afternoon and evening.
The spaces closest to the courthouse, on Federal Street, Lynde Street and northern
Washington Street, are full or nearly full by 8 AM.
The spaces along southern Washington become full or nearly full by 10 AM and remain so
into the evening.
Parking in the south east quadrant, specifically on Derby Street and Lafayette Street is
very highly utilized in the evenings with some stretches of road over capacity.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 45 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Average Saturday:
Commuter parking (city pay lot, MBTA lot, and Bridge Street) is less than half full
throughout Saturday.
All public parking is well utilized, specifically the two-hour metered parking (both on-street
and in surface lots) is highly utilized throughout Saturday.
The public surface lots (Church Street, Sewall Street, West Riley Plaza, Pickering Wharf,
and Klopp Alley) are especially favored throughout the day.
The Museum Garage is less than half-full throughout the day while the South Harbor
Garage sees relatively high utilization.
August Vacation Weekday:
Parking utilization is generally lower throughout Salem during the August vacation.
The city commuter pay lot and Bridge Street parking are highly utilized throughout the
summer weekday while the MBTA lot remains less than three-quarters full.
The Church Street lots, Sewall Street lot, East Riley Plaza lot, Museum Garage, and
South Harbor Garage do not see utilization above 85-percent occupied throughout the
day.
The Klopp Alley, Pickering Wharf, and West Riley Plaza lots see points throughout the
day where they are full or nearly full.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 46 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
5. Public Workshop
This Section presents the information gathered from attendees of a public parking workshop, held
in Salem’s Old Town Hall on Monday, November 16, 2009 from 6:00 to 8:30 PM. Approximately
thirty participants offered their thoughts on areas of needs and opportunities as they relate to
parking in downtown Salem.
Key Findings
Participants were concerned about the lack of available front-door parking for their
errands and for the accommodation of visitors and shoppers in the downtown.
Many participants were willing to park once and walk to multiple downtown destinations
if they could be assured of finding a space easily, even if it meant a slightly longer walk.
Some frustration with the 2-hour time limits was noted, with many noting that meter
feeding took place.
A fair number of participants were willing to pay to ensure an available parking space.
Frustration was expressed with the management of the Sewall Street and Church Street
lots which had limited availability. The Museum Garage was also noted to have rates too
high for customers.
Many desired better information about parking locations and rates.
5.1 Priorities Poster Activity
The initial activity at the meeting provided insight into the parking priorities of the attendees.
Responding to a variety of statements, participants were able to indicate the strength of their
preferences. As indicated by the pie chart in Figure 45, several priorities emerged with the most
support. The highest priority for attendees, with one-quarter of all potential votes, went to a
preference for parking once and walking between multiple destinations when downtown. The
second highest priority, with 20-percent of the vote, indicated that attendees would park a greater
distance from their destination if it meant that they would not have to search for parking.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 47 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 45 Results of Priorities Poster Activity
5.2 Areas of Need
Following the voting exercise and an
introductory presentation, participants were
invited to sit around tables with large maps of
the study area and indicate in writing and with
colored marker the locations they park and
what issues the find in downtown Salem. In
discussing parking areas of need, some
concerns were echoed by several groups,
while others were only raised by an individual
group. Their comments can be organized into
several broad categories: pricing, parking
supply, parking management, and information.
25%
20%
14%
13%
10%
9%
5%
2%2% 0%
I would like to park only one time and walk
to all my destinations when I come
downtown
I don't mind parking a little further away
from my destination if it means I don't
have to search for parking
I find myself wasting time moving my car
because of the 2 hour parking restrictions
I would be willing to pay more to park if I
knew I was going to get a convenient space
for as long as I wanted to stay
I would run more errands in downtown
Salem if I knew there would be convenient
parking available at my destination
I would like to have a greater selection of
options for getting downtown than using
my car
I avoid public lots and/or public garages
because I can't afford to park in them
I avoid using parking garages because they
seem unsafe
I would give up driving to work if my
employer offered me a monthly cash
benefit to give up parking
I avoid downtown at night because some
of the back streets feel unsafe due to a lack
of lighting
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 48 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Pricing
Parking pricing was a popular topic that was discussed in a variety of ways. One group felt that
there is a need to make the Museum Place Garage more affordable than metered parking to
encourage garage parking rather than on-street. Additionally, some downtown employees park on
neighborhood streets, where parking is free, rather than in areas designed for workers that
typically require some form of payment. Other attendees noted that not all residents in the
downtown obtain parking passes, which can cause downtown residents to park in more short
term spots.
On-Street Management
Linked to the price of parking, on-street parking management was another issue that participants
brought up in their discussions. Several groups voiced concern about practices, such as “meter
feeding,” by some employees of downtown businesses that take up on-street spaces designated
to be for short-term use. Without strict enforcement and with an hourly rate lower than the
garages, it was felt that the supply of spaces designed for high turnover and available to visitors
and customers is limited by downtown employees. Visitors’ resulting hunt for available spaces
requires extra time or the greater cost of using the garages. Participants worried that this form of
on-street management results in the displacement of customers, and the loss of revenue for
downtown. In the same vein, some attendees voiced a concern that a short-term lot is not
proximate to shopping.
One group voiced a concern about the Essex Street Pedestrian Mall and its closure to cars,
wanting to see it reopened, adding to the supply of parking. Essex Street was also mentioned in
the context of on-street parking management. One group discussed the lack of parking turnover
at on-street spaces, citing the part of Essex Street currently open to cars as an example.
Off-Street Management
Attendees also discussed the supply of parking, especially as it relates to reserved spaces and
weather. Parking space shortages were noted in several places including the YMCA lot, along
with the lack of adequate 12-hour parking at Riley Plaza, and the desire for a larger parking area
near Front Street. Two groups identified that some spaces reserved for certain workers, such as
spaces for the District Court House and fire protection and electrical workers, are underutilized or
are used only during certain hours of the day and lie empty the rest of the day. The impact of
winter weather on parking in reducing the supply was also mentioned as an area of concern for
attendees. Garages, in particular, fill very quickly when snowstorms approach and on-street
parking is less available.
The Church Street lot was the issue of concern that was cited by the most groups. Three groups
addressed a different problem they had encountered with this lot: one mentioned that the Church
Street lot fills too quickly, while a second addressed overlapping demands from employees and
courthouse visitors that caused peak demand early in the day. The third group mentioned that the
Church Street lot does not accept monthly passes.
Parking Information
Two groups addressed the issue of parking information, saying that more signage and guidance
is needed. For one group, signage was addressed in the context of being able to find a parking
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 49 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
meter long enough for one’s particular needs that day. The other group noted that parking in
Salem is perceived as confusing, and that perception and confusion confronts different users.
5.3 Opportunities for Improvement
Following the needs exercise, participants were asked for their ideas on how to improve parking
in the downtown. In considering parking opportunities in Salem, participants not only addressed
some of the issues raises in the areas of the needs discussion, but also explored innovative ways
to improve parking so that it serves a high quality of life in the downtown. The recommendations
participants offered can be organized into several broad categories: pricing, on-street parking
management, parking supply and new development, demand management, regulations, and
information.
Pricing
The pricing of parking was a topic that participants raised when considering Salem’s needs, and
was one of the areas in which they saw an opportunity for improvement. Two groups, in
suggesting a greater utilization of private parking lots, addressed the issue that some reserved
spaces are used only at certain times during the day. One group advocated for discounted
parking for employees. Another proposed the implementation of more price tiers at the Museum
Place garage, returning to the need expressed earlier to make this garage more affordable than
metered parking.
Parking Management
The connection between pricing and on-street management was again seen in some of the
recommendations made by participants. One group suggested instituting more regulation to
discourage “meter feeding,” while another urged metering the parking along the Common.
Several recommendations for new off-street regulations were also made. One group said that
new residential and commercial construction in the downtown, or renovated development for the
same uses, should be required to provide parking for its anticipated residents or clients. This
group also suggested that city employee parking be restricted to the top of the Museum Place
garage.
Parking Supply
Increasing the supply of parking was another means of improving parking that participants
recommended. One group advocated for the construction of a parking garage at either the Riley
Plaza or Church Street lots. Returning to the issue of the Essex Street Pedestrian Mall, two
groups suggested that the street be open to cars and that drivers should be allowed to park there.
It was also suggested that parking and street construction work should be phased in a manner to
minimize displacement.
Demand Management
Methods which involve instituting measures that discourage users from driving into a downtown
area while at the same time encouraging other modes of transportation was discussed. One
group wanted to encourage the use of bicycles by installing bicycle lockers at the T commuter
station. Another group suggested that employers create incentives to encourage employees out
of on-street spaces or to use alternative modes of transportation.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 50 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Parking Information
There were a variety of proposals for information improvements made by the participants. The
same group that asked for improved signage for meters made a general suggestion of better
lighting and signage. They also suggested the employment of GPS technology to identify real
time parking availability and time-limits as they search for spaces, while another similarly
expressed a desire to find a means of promoting availability of space in garages. Another group
recommended that education and enforcement were areas of opportunity. Finally, one group said
that people need to change their perception of the distance from a parking space to a destination.
5.4 Summary
Figure 46 summarizes all geographically located comments made by participants at the
workshop, which are paraphrased in Figure 47 (with issues indicated in black and
opportunities in green).
Figure 46 Map Summary of Workshop Comments
C
P
J
Q
K
X
R
L
V
U
I
B
G
A
H
S
W
E
T
O
D
F
Y
Z
N
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 51 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 47 Summary of Key Issues and Opportunities
A. Somedriverspark in theNorthfieldsneighborhoodandcarpool todowntown
B. Parkingon BridgeStreet is dangerous
C. MBTA Lot: Is not well maintained, needs garage because people use downtown spaces, and
needssecurebikeparking
D. Createparkinglot from iron junkyard
E. New courthouseshouldhaveparkingforlawyers,juryduty, judges,etc.
F. Parking in frontof District Courtafter hours
G. Areaneedstourist andshopperinstructionsandsignage
H. YMCAlotfillsupquickly
I. Essex Street: Employees park in metered street spaces, People longer than the 30-minute limit,
andUpperCrustdelivery peopleusemeters all day
J. Signageon EssexStreet is confusing/Reopen EssexStreet to cars
K. One-headedmeterwith twospaces
L. Church Street lot: Churchgoers have to pay for parking on Sundays, lot fills very quickly, is used by
Lifelong Learners with 2 hour courses who receive tickets because of the timing, always full, and
doesnot accept monthlypasses
M. Museum Place Garage: Not well-lit and poor pedestrian access, needs space for covered bike
parking, fills up too quickly during snowstorms, is too far to walk from work, is too expensive ($20)
on Halloween
N. Limitof 30 minutesin frontof Museum Placemall ormeters
O. Meter parkingaroundtheCommon
P. Residentparkingissue
Q. Botts Courtresidents cannotobtain parkingstickers
R. 15minuteparkingoppositeabarber shop
S. Notenough 12-hourparkingatRileyPlaza/Need 3-story parkinggarage
T. Tavern in the Square/RCG should pay for parking stickers for other businesses that have no
parkingnow
U. Two loadingspacesat 40 Front Street no longerneededbecauserestaurantisnolongerthere
V. Delfino’sparkinglotovertaxed with residential parking
W. Front Street Lot: Larger parking area needed and there are unused reserved spaces behind Fire
Station
X. Central Street meter feedingisa problem
Y. ShetlandPropertyemployeesparkin neighborhoods
Z. NosignagealongDerbyStreet in front of Custom Housetorestrict longterm parking
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 52 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
6. Parking Survey
Beginning in October 2009, a one-page parking survey was distributed to potential users of the
downtown Salem parking system. Several hundred printed surveys were distributed at key
downtown businesses and municipal destinations. The survey also was posted online through a
link on the City’s webpage, and City staff emailed existing contact lists to encourage participation.
By January 2010, over 600 responses had been logged.
Key Findings
Nearly two-thirds of respondents must search for parking every time they come to
downtown.
With two-thirds of the respondents being visitors or customers to the downtown, the fact
that over 40-percent had to park illegally on occasion and nearly two-thirds would simply
leave downtown because they could not find a space sometimes is alarming.
Even though nearly half of the respondents had to pay for parking – mostly out of their
own pocket – price was a concern of only 10-percent of respondents.
Over three-quarters of respondents had the availability or location of parking as their
primary concern.
The average perceived time to find parking in downtown Salem was very long at over
five minutes.
6.1 Survey Questions
The parking survey was designed to help illuminate potential parking problems in the downtown
that had not been identified by the working group or at the public workshop. It also was intended
to help gauge parking performance by demonstrating percentages of respondents who behaved
in one manner or another. Figure 49 shows the paper survey form, which was replicated on the
City’s website.
6.2 Survey Results
Respondents to the survey covered a wide range of users, with no less than 20 respondents in
any user category, except tourists. Figure 48 summarizes the survey respondents.
Figure 50 summarizes key results of the survey through a number of graphics. These responses
directly informed the final recommendations of this study.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 53 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 48 Survey Respondents by User Group
I live downtown
11%
Work
28%
Shopping
7%Dining
11%
Errands/appointments
14%Commuter rail
2%
Tourism/attractions
2%
Other (please explain)
25%
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 54 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 49 Salem Parking Survey Form
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 55 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 50 Survey Responses
Same
place,
38.8%
I search,
61.2%
Do you always park in the same place or do
you search?
Yes
43%
No
58%
Are you ever forced to park or
stand illegally?
Yes
58%
No
42%
Have you ever failed to find parking
and just left?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
...today? ...usually? ...worst day?
How long did/does it take you to find a space?
Yes
55%
No
45%
Do you typically pay to park in Salem?
30%
54%
5%
4%1%
6%
Is the cost of your parking today paid for, in part or
in full, by anyone else?
No cost, free parking
I pay all cost
Employer pays partial
Employer pays full
Parking included in lease
Other (please specify)
39%
37%
10%
5%
3%
6%
What is the most important consideration for you
in choosing where to park in Salem?
Ease of finding a space
Location
Price
Safety/security
Type of parking (i.e., street,
lot, garage)
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 56 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
7. Review of Innovative Parking Technologies
Parking management technology has come a long way since parking became a consideration on
the minds of city leaders. Many of these innovations dramatically change the operations and
management of parking as well as alter the way a city looks. Sidewalks no longer need to be
littered with hundreds of parking meters; there are advancements in parking payment
technologies that greatly reduce this clutter. Cities no longer need to rely on an infantry of parking
enforcement and revenue collection officers; there are innovative technologies that streamline
both enforcement and revenue collections. Drivers no longer need to wonder if or where parking
is available; new signing systems are able to provide dynamic and live information to drivers. This
section will review a number of technologies in use around the country that address these
different areas of parking management that may be applicable to Salem’s downtown.
Key Findings
Increased payment convenience can be provided to customers through the incorporation
of cell-phone payment. Certain vendors can provide this on top of existing meter and pay
station technology throughout downtown.
Given the advantages of pay-by-space, Salem could convert meter posts to space
numbers similar to those in Lowell and allow customers to refresh and update payments
from any pay station in the downtown without returning to the car.
In-car meters can allow the City to begin to share underutilized residential streets during
the daytime with employees that have in-car meters.
Real-time availability displays have great convenience for all types of users. Reduced
technology costs can help make these available to the City cost-effectively, especially
given the desire to present this information in multiple locations beyond the garage
entrance.
7.1 Parking Payment Technology
Innovations in meter technology are rapidly changing the way cities across the United States
manage parking. The market of parking payment technology has seen the most rapid change by
taking full advantage of the age of information. Below is a description of a wide variety of unique
parking payment applications across the country.
Single-Space Pay-By-Phone Meters
Several cities utilize cell phone technology to aid in the
collection of parking fees from drivers at existing meters.
Typically, parking management programs with this system
require users to register their cell phones and credit card
numbers online. Once registered, a driver finds a parking
space, dials the parking phone number, and then enters his
space number to start his legal parking time. This program
is in use in Coral Gables and West Palm Beach, Florida. In
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 57 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
West Palm Beach, the program vastly exceeded expectations, reaching the first month goal of
400 transactions in the first week of implementation, and attaining 1,300 transactions by the end
of the first month. For enforcement, parking officials utilize PDAs that have web-browsing
capability to see which cars are compliant and which have
exceeded their time.
Multi-Space Meters
Likely the most broad reaching innovation is wirelessly
networked, solar-powered “pay stations” or “multi-space
meters” that accept a wide variety of payment forms. They are
in use throughout the Boston area today, including the
communities of Lowell, Wilmington, Northampton, Boston,
Cambridge, and others. Others are installing pay stations soon,
including Brookline and Somerville. Pay stations come in two
primary varieties, pay-and-display or pay-by-space. Salem has
explored this area before and is investing in new pay-and-
display systems to replace some existing single- and double-
space meters. The differences are simple: pay-and-display
meters give motorists a permit they then place on their
dashboard; with pay-by-space, motorists enter their parking stall number into the meter before
paying and they do not need to return to their vehicle.
Both types of pay stations have several advantages over traditional single-space meters:
Customer Convenience: Pay stations provide more payment options, including bills and
credit/debit cards. This makes payment more convenient for parkers, as they do not need
to carry around excessive amounts of coins and don’t park illegally when they don’t have
a quarter. A recent installation in Cambridge MA has seen over 75-percent transactions by
credit.
Better Information: Pay stations can provide a higher
level of customer information using electronic screens.
Some stations are able to provide dynamic messaging
controlled through a central computer.
Street Design: Pay stations eliminate the need for a post
and meter head at every parking space, promoting more
open, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and possibly reducing
visual blight. This is particularly true on block faces with
angled parking, where single-space meters are placed
closely together. However, pay stations do require visible
signs notifying motorists that they must pay for parking,
which point in the direction of the pay station. Fortunately,
these signs generally need only be placed as frequently as
existing streetlights and other sign poles are placed, so the
net result is a reduction in sidewalk clutter. This has been
the experience of Seattle and Portland, which have
replaced all of their conventional meters with pay-and-
display machines.
Revenue: Almost universally, cities that have implemented
pay stations have found that parking revenues increase
Pay stations take credit cards, debit cards,
cash and coins.
Pay station signage in Berkeley, CA.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 58 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
over conventional meters. During the transition period as Seattle shifted from conventional
meters to 100-percent pay-and-display, it saw significantly more revenue per space with
multi-space meters:
– Single-Space Meters: $3.70 per space per day
– Pay Stations: $6.80 per space per day
Portland, OR, has seen a 40-percent increase in meter revenue per space since shifting
to 100-percent pay-and-display meters in 2002. Savannah, GA, has also seen an overall
increase in meter revenue every year since implementing pay-and-display meters.
Parking managers believe part of this increase is due to parkers now paying their full
share. Previously, parkers could use remaining minutes on a meter from the previous
parker; now a parker must pay for parking right from the start, even if the previous parker
stayed less time than they paid for. According to Karen Moore, parking manager for the
City of Berkeley, the City has experienced a 300-percent increase in meter revenues with
its new pay-and-display machines, in part due to the severe vandalism problem its
previous conventional meters faced.
Data Collection: Pay stations produce detailed records of use that can be analyzed using
computer software. This allows parking managers to respond much more quickly and
accurately to parking issues caused by ineffective pricing or regulations.
Capital Costs: Although individual pay stations are substantially more expensive than
individual single-space meters, the overall long-term savings made by covering 6 to 12
spaces with a single multi-space meter may make this technology cheaper overall. Typical
capital costs are included below.
Traditional
Single-Space Meters Multi-Space Meters
Cost per meter $500 $7,000 - $9,000
Number of spaces covered 1-2 6 - 12
Total capital cost per parking space $250-$500 $580-$1,500
Operating & Maintenance Costs: Some pay stations are designed with the capability to
contact parking managers, Parking Control Officers (PCOs) or maintenance staff if the
meter fails for some reason. This reduces maintenance costs since each meter doesn’t
have to be physically inspected and minimizes downtime which in turn increases revenue.
Also, an automated payment system results in more cost-effective revenue collection and
auditing, enabling meter collection staff to be re-assigned to other street maintenance
tasks.
According to the cities surveyed, pay stations have lower maintenance costs per space
largely because there are fewer meters. In other words, if a city once had 5,000 parking
meters, they had to maintain 5,000 devices, while with multi-space meters they may only
have 500 devices which require the same or less maintenance due to their design
advantages over single-space meters.
Pay stations are much more resistant to vandalism and theft through their physical design.
Traditional single-space meters sometimes have their heads knocked off for theft, or their
coin slots jammed to prevent them from functioning so a driver can park for free. Because
multi-space meters use multiple payment options, cities have seen fewer attempts at
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 59 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
vandalism and efforts to jam machines. The multiple payment options discourage coin slot
jamming, and theft is less common because many of the payments are by credit card so
less cash is available inside if a thief were ever to successfully break into the meter.
Berkeley, which had a severe vandalism problem with its conventional meters, has seen a
dramatic drop in vandalism since installing pay-and-display machines; moreover, when
their new meters experience a problem, their control center receives an immediate e-mail
and can fix the problem or replace the meter within an hour.
Pay stations are connected wirelessly, which allows meters to communicate with the
parking department. If the meter runs out of paper for receipts, it sends an e-mail
indicating it needs refilling. If the meter has a technical problem, it is reported via e-mail so
repair crews can target only those meters that have problems. The e-mail sent from the
meter indicates exactly what the repair crew needs to bring in order to fix the meter.
Power Supply: Pay stations are often run using solar power from a photovoltaic panel
installed on top of the station, eliminating the need for electric power supply and the
associated capital costs of providing overhead or underground connections to the power
grid. Many models also offer a battery back-up option ensuring that meters do not go out
of service should the photovoltaic array fail for some reason. Concerns about sufficient
solar exposure in northern cities have been disproven, especially in New York City where
winter sun angles are low, skyscraper shadows are long, yet pay stations continue to
replace traditional meters.
Ease of enforcement: Costs of maintaining and deploying enforcement teams for pay-
and-display remain constant compared to conventional meters, according to Bill Timmer,
a consultant for the City of Seattle. The city maintained its force of 63 enforcement officers
before and after installation of the multi-space meters.
After switching to pay-and-display, West Hollywood saw a reduction in enforcement
revenue of $900 per month per space (~$30 per day per space), due to higher compliance
with the meters, but this was generally matched by an increase in meter revenue.
Savannah, on the other hand, saw an increase in enforcement revenue of 11.5-percent
from citations due to increased efficiency in issuing citations. Seattle has not been able to
identify any changes in either enforcement costs or revenues when it changed to pay-and-
display.
Pay-by-Space Versus Pay-and-Display Meters
In general, pay-and-display machines are more common in on-
street environments, whereas pay-by-space machines are to a
larger extent used in parking lots and garages, as further
described below. Urban Transportation Monitor, a national
transportation research organization, published an article in 2004
summarizing multi-space meter installations in on-street
environments in selected North American cities. Most of the
cities mentioned in the article are using (or testing) pay-and-
display machines, instead of pay-by-space machines. This
includes most of the cities that have done large-scale
installations (Baltimore, Denver, New York City, Portland, and
Seattle). Salem has recently implemented pay-by-space
machines in two locations in the downtown. New pay-by-space machines in the
Church Street lot.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 60 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Pay-and-display advantages for on-street parking include:
More parking spaces per block: Previous parking studies have shown that when
individual stalls are not striped, parallel parking along a street (with few driveways) can
typically accommodate 15- to 20-percent more cars per block because drivers tend to
park more efficiently. Since pay and display machines only require the motorist to place a
receipt on the car’s dashboard, there is no need to stripe or designate individual stalls (as
is required with individual meters, or pay-by-space machines where individual stalls must
be marked and numbered). Striping would still be required for diagonal stalls, to help
people align their cars, but not for parallel or perpendicular parking.
No need to stripe stalls: Not needing to stripe stalls also reduces maintenance
expenses, and can improve the beauty of the street (especially in historic areas, such as,
for example, cobblestone streets).
Receipt provided: For business travelers, pay-and-display machines automatically
provide a receipt for their expense reports. This function can be built into pay-by-space
machines.
Increased revenue: When motorists leave, they typically drive away with the receipt that
indicates the amount of time they have paid for; so that the next motorist to arrive will
have to pay from the minute they park (individual motorists may see this as a
disadvantage of pay-and-display).
Some pay-by-space advantages are:
More convenient payment: Motorists do not need to walk back to their car to place a
receipt on the dashboard. Motorists can also pay for additional time on their space from
any pay-by-space machine in the system, or even by cell phone, without having to return
to their car to place another receipt on the dashboard. One vendor’s system allows the
driver to register their cell phone number, credit card, and license plate online or by
phone. Users can simply place a call to pay for parking without visiting the pay station, or
they can have the pay station print out a proof of payment receipt remotely. The parking is
charged to the registered credit card.
Pay only for time used: If motorists use the “pay maximum” option with their credit card,
they can also pay for the maximum length of stay allowed, and then get a refund on their
unused time if they return early, simply by reentering their space number in the machine.
While this seems like a disadvantage to cities from a revenue perspective, any new
parkers in the refunded space must pay to park versus “stealing” time from the previous
parker.
Easier enforcement: Pay-by-space machines can indicate which spaces on a block have
not been paid for, either when an officer queries the machine, or by wireless
communication with handheld enforcement devices. This is considerably easier than
checking dashboards to see which receipts indicate that time has expired, therefore
reducing enforcement costs substantially.
No receipt printing required: This can cut down on litter on the street, and can reduce
the downtime and operating and maintenance expenses created by the printer jams and
paper replacement needs associated with pay and display machines.
Among cities that have implemented multi-space meters in on-street environments, pay-and-
display is the most common, with fewer cities implementing successful pay-by-space programs:
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 61 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Pay-and-Display Pay-by-Space
Boston, MA
Portland, OR (100-percent of meters)
Lowell, MA
Redwood City, CA
Seattle, WA (100-percent of meters) Whiterock, BC, Canada
Park City, UT San Francisco, CA (motorcycle parking only)
Cherry Creek North, Denver, CO Charlotte, NC (pilot test)
Savannah, GA Glendale, CA (vendor selected, 50 meters will be bought)
Cambridge, MA (lots only)
West Hollywood, CA
Berkeley, CA
Oakland, CA
Baltimore, MD
Chicago, IL
In-Car Parking Meters
In-car parking meters (also known as in-vehicle parking meters or
IVPM) allow individual motorists to pay for parking by utilizing a
personal metering device displayed in their vehicle (either set on the
dashboard or hung from the rear view mirror). The palm size unit is
usually provided to motorists who pay a refundable deposit and
possibly also a nominal monthly fee. It provides the motorist with
convenience by eliminating the need to carry coins and pay for
parking at curbside meters or pay stations in lots/garages.
Motorists prepay, either by using a smart card that they purchase in
advance and then insert into the device, by telephone, or by
connecting their device to a computer and purchasing parking credits
over the internet. The device displays the number of minutes available based on the amount of
money on the smart card and the current hourly price for that parking zone (which the parker
enters). The meter alternately flashes between the minutes remaining and the parking zone for
verification by enforcement. When time has run out, the monitor shuts off, and a blank screen
shows enforcement personnel that the parker is in violation.
Enforcement is done in a similar fashion to traditional parking meters
except that they must look inside the windshield of cars rather than
parking meter displays. Meters can work with cards that either have preset
amounts ($20, $50, $100, etc.) or that users can “reload” with additional
value. Whichever card is used, a motorist only pays for how many minutes
they parked.
A typical solution is for a city to outsource the operation to the in-car
parking meter vendor. The vendor then handles all aspects of running the
system, including distribution of in-car meters to residents and commuters,
maintenance of meters, and hosting a customized website for each city
where customers can purchase credit for their parking meter. The in-car meters are pre-
programmed with all parking regulations specific to the city, which means that the meter could
both be used for parking in a monthly permit zone and for short-term retail parking.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 62 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
A typical pricing structure is as follows:
$30 deposit and $4.95 monthly fee per unit
Vendor charges 20-percent of revenue for service
The advantage of this arrangement is that there is no upfront investment by the City. It is
recommended that the unit is not free to customers, as a nominal charge tends to encourage
greater utilization of the system than a free in-car meter. This is at the discretion of the City, and
the cost to the customer could, for example, be included as part of a monthly parking permit.
Some benefits of the in-car parking meter are:
Greater user convenience:
– No coins or exact change necessary.
– Pay only actual time parked – Park for 5 minutes, pay for 5 minutes.
– No walking to parking meter – Just park your car, insert your card, and go.
– Geographic transferability – Use at any parking meter or public lot/garage that accepts
the device.
Reduced costs, better revenue management:
– Simplify accounts - No need to manage petty cash for parking or reconciling dozens of
'Pay & Display' tickets.
– Reduced operational costs - Traditional parking meters require periodic coin
collection.
– Reduced capital costs - In-car parking meters cost $30, whereas traditional single-
space meters cost approximately $500 each.
Better parking management decisions:
– Track data – In-car meters can track parking occupancy history to help better
understand demand patterns. You can analyze all the information on where, when,
and how long the user has parked, making fiscal audits easier and smarter parking
management decisions possible.
– Pricing flexibility – Can use demand-responsive (variable) pricing or flat-rate pricing
depending on needs; can eliminate time limits or preserve them as appropriate.
Better urban design - Eliminates the need for traditional parking meters that take space
on the sidewalk.
The following is a typical operation scenario from the user’s perspective:
Purchase Smart Card with dollar value on card in advance for multiple use, or load parking
credit online
Park car
Insert Smart Card in to device (if necessary)
Set the parking meter rate by choosing the parking zone
Press green button to start timing of meter
Display will alternatively display time remaining and meter zone
Remove the smart card from the device
Display meter so parking officers can see it through the windshield for enforcement
Turn off the device when you return to the car.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 63 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
In-car meters work well where people routinely park in the same place, such as motorists parking
for work, routine visitors to government buildings, or transit park-and-ride parking lots. Motorists
who park repeatedly at the same place have an incentive to buy a $20-$80 smart card. They also
work well for trips where convenience and saving time is highly valued. Many motorists find that
needing exact change to pay for parking every day, walking to the meter, and/or returning
regularly to “feed the meter” is time consuming and annoying. (These benefits accrue in situations
where parking is moderately priced or relatively expensive and time limits are liberal or have been
removed entirely).
The system is not practical for those who infrequently park and likely wouldn’t pay $20 for a card
that they wouldn’t use.
Places where in-car meters are used today:
Cities University Campuses
Ft. Lauderdale, FL – Smart Park (Ganis) University of California Santa Barbara
Aspen, CO
(devices outnumber population- very popular)
Wisconsin University, Madison Campus
Grand Rapids, MI
Wellington, New Zealand
Israel (across country)
7.2 Parking Enforcement Technology
Many years ago, parking technology innovations in the United States were targeted exclusively at
improving parking enforcement – primarily through revenue-tracking back office systems and
integrating handheld enforcement devices. In recent years, new innovations have begun to see
greater efficiencies emerge.
Automated License Plate Reading Technology
Many cities are now adopting automated license plate reading technology. Cameras linked to a
computer running special license plate recognition technology are mounted to the parking control
officer’s vehicle (or any other municipal vehicle that circulates regularly in a downtown). The
system can register plates even while moving and can alert PCOs when a vehicle appears to be
parked illegally. This can greatly increase the productivity of each PCO. An investment in this
technology could allow the City to efficiently enforce parking regulations without needing to hire
additional personnel.
Benefits of automated license plate reading technology include:
Typically allows officers to scan 1,000 plates per hour on the street, around 2-4 times
faster than reading manually. 1,500-2,000 plates per hour can be read in a parking lot.
Can be tied to a database of parking permits.
Can be tied to a database of stolen vehicles.
Can flag repeat parking offenders.
There is additional software that can track turnover and occupancy data.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 64 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Fewer contested tickets, because there is an image of the license plate.
Fewer problems with officers developing carpal tunnel syndrome from the manual
chalking process for time-limited parking.
Places where license plate recognition technology is used today:
Cities
Petaluma, CA
Napa, CA
Sacramento, CA
Tampa, FL
7.3 Parking Information Technology
Some of the best-received advances in parking technology have come from approaches that
make drivers more aware about what parking is available before they park.
Real-time space availability displays
Real-time space availability displays provide information to drivers about current parking
conditions. Generally, these displays can take the form of electronic signs that show the current
amount of available parking in a particular lot.
San Jose, California has implemented a Parking Guidance System in
its downtown. The system utilizes electronic signs that provide
motorists with current information about how many spaces are
available in several lots. Signs at major intersections can encourage
drivers to avoid congested routes and use lots with greater current
availability. The system currently has 13 such signs. Many are
integrated with web displays that enable drivers to plan their parking
destination before leaving the front door (for instance, see
http://parkingspacenow.smgov.net/). Cities throughout Europe utilize
Parking Guidance Systems, as well as several places in the U.S.,
including San Francisco, Rockville Town Center in Maryland, the
garages at Natick’s Natick Commons mall, and the Baltimore-
Washington International, Boston Logan, Jacksonville, and
Savannah-Hilton Head Airports. Benefits of this system include:
Directing flow of traffic away from full lots. Signs at major intersections displaying lot
information can encourage drivers to move away from full lots, preventing traffic jams
outside of full lots and cutting down on pollution from slow or idling cars.
Maximizing efficiency of parking facilities and time for users. With information on
usage, drivers can move directly to lots with availability, ensuring that facilities are used
most efficiently.
Aiding motorists unfamiliar with the parking system and locations. Signs can direct
tourists to parking lots with available space, even if they are in Salem for the first time and
not familiar with parking locations in the city.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 65 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
8. Key Findings
The consultant identified the following key findings that represented areas where the Salem
parking system was not operating well. These findings contribute directly to the final
recommendations.
Summary
Regulations are confusing.
Availability is very unbalanced with congested parking areas near vacant areas.
Parking information in Salem is among the best in the state, which means that other
problems contribute to the unbalanced availability.
Pricing is unbalanced and unfair to some user groups while others receive noticeable
discounts.
Certain downtown connectivity barriers may limit the utilization of more remote spaces.
Private parking spaces are noticeably underutilized.
8.1 Regulatory Confusion
During the course of data collection, the consultant observed that a great deal of effort had been
spent by the City over the years tailoring street regulations to satisfy parking needs in the
downtown. Unfortunately, it was also clear that the amount of different regulations was significant
and that the variation in regulations – sometimes along just one block face – contributed to a
great deal of confusion, delay, and possible driver frustration when seeking parking. In the
downtown, there are thirteen separate on-street regulations and five different regulations in public
off-street lots (see Figure 51). This is a lot of regulatory variation in a one-half-mile area.
Furthermore, variation along single block faces was excessive – as high as seven regulations in a
stretch along Hawthorne Boulevard (Figure 52).
Figure 51 Salem Parking Regulations
On-Street Off-Street
Unregulated Unregulated
15-minute 30-minute
30-minute 2-hour
30-minute (metered) 2-hour (metered)
1-hour Public daily pay
1-hour (metered) MBTA Commuter
2-hour Private
2-hour (metered) Loading zone
2-hour / resident permit (metered)
Resident permit
Reserved parking
Tour bus parking
Emergency vehicle parking
Handicap parking
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 66 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 52 Regulations Along Select Block Faces in Downtown
While tailored parking regulations might satisfy the needs of one user or user group, they are
often at odds with the needs of another user or user group. This is clear from the variety of
regulations occurring on single block faces in the downtown, where a mix of users exist in close
proximity to each other. The mix of users is a positive aspect of downtowns, however the mix of
parking regulations is not conducive to customer attraction and represents a number of problems,
including:
Unclear expectations for new visitors or customers
A higher incidence of unintended user violations
Decreased rates of enforcement
Increased traffic circling for parking
Increased sign maintenance cost and complexity
Sign clutter
Key Conclusion: The downtown regulatory environment is overworked, contributing directly to many
perceived and real parking problems in Salem. A significant reduction in the complexity
of this system would improve the customer environment, improve enforcement capacity,
reduce sign clutter, and potentially reduce downtown traffic. In particular, customer
confusion and the potential for unexpected tickets may be creating a negative experience
for downtown’s customer base.
Lynde:
4 regulations
Washington:
4 regulations
Front:
3 regulations
Norman:
3 regulations
Hawthorne:
7 regulations
Derby:
4 regulations
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 67 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
8.2 Unbalanced Availability
Input from the general public and initial observations of the downtown both indicate that it is very
difficult to find parking in Salem. The prime commercial streets of Washington and Essex are
heavily utilized much of the day. Similarly, prime lots such as the City lot at the MBTA station, the
Sewall Street lot, and the Church Street lot were difficult to find spaces in. However, mapping the
parking utilization data (Section 4.0) revealed that there are many streets and lots that remain
underutilized throughout the day in the downtown – some simply around the corner from heavily
utilized locations (see Figure 53).
Figure 53 Parking Availability in Downtown Salem
Weekday morning time period
This characteristic of the downtown is not related to posted regulations. On blocks with varying
regulations, the availability may be consistent. Similarly, on blocks with consistent regulations, the
availability may vary widely from street to street – or simply across the street.
Key Conclusion: Existing regulations throughout the downtown core are not resolving real and perceived
availability problems in areas of high demand, even where available parking exists
nearby. Given the failure of many forms of regulation and time-limits, it is evident that
enforcement and time-limits are not creating adequate turn-over in areas where it is
needed. An alternative approach to producing more parking availability is needed.
LowHigh
HighLow
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 68 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
8.3 Sufficient Parking Information
In many communities, the poor utilization of some parking resources is attributed to inadequate
signing and other information about downtown parking resources. However, Salem has a strong
parking information program, incorporating a website (see Figure 54), parking signs throughout
downtown, and parking information incorporated as part of its downtown wayfinding program.
Figure 54 Salem Web-Based Parking Map
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 69 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
While some opportunities exist to improve parking information, existing systems in Salem are
among the best in the state. City staff continue to assess the need for additional signing, and an
expanded wayfinding program will place more signs in the coming year.
Key Conclusion The parking information in Salem is among the best in the state, with clear signing to
direct patrons to reserve parking locations. This system includes identification of short-
term parking (time-limited) and long-term parking (hourly garages). Therefore, the
unbalanced availability observed throughout the downtown is not likely a result of
inadequate information but rather a result of insufficient short-term parking for
customers in high-demand areas. One possible explanation is that there are insufficient
incentives to clear long-term parkers.
8.4 Unfair Pricing
Today, the majority of downtown Salem’s parking spaces are priced in one way or another.
Figure 55 summarizes the prices at facilities in the downtown if each had no regulatory
restrictions. This exercise helps evaluate pricing structures.
Figure 55 Existing Pricing Structure in Downtown Salem
Location Hourly Rate or
Equivalent
Daily Rate or
Equivalent
Monthly Rate or
Equivalent
Church St. Lot & Public
Garages – published rate
$1.50 $12.00 (daily max) $252 (equivalent)
On-Street Meters & other
Public Lots
$0.50 $4.00 (8-hr. equivalent) $84 (equivalent)
MBTA Commuter Lot
$0.50 (8-hr. equivalent) $4.00 $84 (equivalent)
Public Garages –
monthly pass
$0.37 (8-hr. equivalent) $2.86 (equivalent) $60
City Lot at MBTA Station $0.25 (equivalent) $2.00 $42 (equivalent)
Public Garages –
yearly pass
$0.25 (8-hr. equivalent) $1.98 (equivalent) $42 ($500 per year)
On-Street Resident Pass ½ cent (8-hr.
equivalent)
$0.05 (equivalent) $2 ($25 per 2 years)
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 70 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
The hourly-paying general public pays the highest parking rates in Salem. Employees and
residents with monthly or annual passes pay the lowest rates. This is not an unusual situation in
downtowns, and it appears fairly equitable given that employees and residents are around daily
and individual visitors are infrequent on average. However, this structure has some notable
negative impacts:
The most valuable spaces to customers – on-street meters in front of their destination –
are one-third the price of the garages. If a customer cannot find a space easily (as is
reported in Section 5.0 and evidenced above), they are severely penalized by going to the
public garage, which motivates repeat customers to hunt for on-street parking,
contributing to the lack of availability and downtown congestion.
The Bridge Street lot is severely underpriced, making it the best deal in town for non-
residents – as good as buying a $500 yearly pass.
Low-wage part-time employees that typically need to park for only a few hours a day or
week pay at least twice as much to park at meters or in the garage as those who can
afford monthly or annual passes. This is a clear inequity that may impact the ability of
Salem to attract and retain retail workers. However, it has the benefit of encouraging
some workers to park further from the core of downtown in unregulated spaces.
Key Conclusions: Parking pricing as currently structured in Salem is contributing to the lack of availability
on prime streets by pricing garages higher than streets. Simultaneously, the discounts
for monthly and annual pass holders encourages employees to fill prime Museum Garage
spaces early in the day, forcing inconvenienced visitors who cannot find on-street
spaces to have to park on upper decks, inconveniencing them further. These discounts
are no greater at the Harbor Garage, resulting in the underutilization of that facility at all
hours of the day.
02468101214
Public Lots & Garages – published rate
On‐Street Meters
MBTA Commuter Lot
Public Lots & Garages –monthly pass
Bridge Street Lot
Public Lots & Garages –yearly pass
On‐Street Resident Pass
Daily Rate or Equivalent
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 71 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
8.5 Improving Connectivity
Salem is a wonderful place to walk, with most downtown destinations under a five-minute walk
from each other. The City has continued to improve the walking environment through improved
sidewalks, crosswalks, benches, lighting, and wayfinding. These improvements are critical for
motorists seeking to park in Salem, because every motorist becomes a pedestrian upon exiting
the car. In places where the pedestrian environment is lacking or connections to other downtown
destinations are difficult, parking is less desirable.
While walking conditions are generally excellent in the core of downtown, there tends to be a
walking barrier of sorts surrounding the core as defined generally by Bridge, North,
Norman/Derby, and Hawthorne Boulevard (see Figure 56). All of these streets carry higher
volumes of traffic than any of the streets interior to this square, with the exception of Washington.
All of these streets are wide and represent longer crossing distances for pedestrians, with the
exception of North. The combined effect of traffic volume and longer crossing distance has a
great impact on the perception of parking availability “across the street.” This is very evident in
many spots. For example, Derby Street experiences dramatic utilization changes from one side of
the street to another. At over 60-feet in width with three travel lanes and parking lanes, accessing
a free space on the other side of the street can be less desirable than circling the block for a
preferred space.
Figure 56 Roadway Barriers to Parking Access
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 72 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Derby Street Washington & Derby North Street
Key Conclusion: Larger size and volume roadways surrounding the downtown core represent a barrier to
motorists accessing parking outside the core. These barriers may contribute to lower
utilization rates outside the core and likely contribute to unbalanced utilization on
opposite sides of key streets, such as Derby, lower Washington, and Hawthorne.
Continued improvements in walkability will help improve access to underutilized parking
resources, including the Harbor Garage.
8.6 Under-Utilization of Private Parking
While the City is mostly interested in improvements to the public parking system in Salem, a large
number of private parking lots go underutilized every day in Salem. In aggregate, the private off-
street parking system is never more than 50-percent utilized, representing hundreds of vacant
spaces at the busiest hours of parking demand. Private owners seem to covet and protect this
capacity, as evidenced by the preponderance of “No Parking” and “Violators Will Be Towed” signs
in downtown.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 73 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Key Conclusion: While it is clear that private parking lot operators are very protective of their parking –
likely in response to a history of violators – there is very poor utilization of these parking
assets. Clear opportunities exist to provide more customer parking – especially during
hours when the landowner’s business(es) is closed. Many communities have
successfully incorporated these lots into the public supply through a number of
mechanisms that are beneficial to the private owner and the municipality.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 74 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
9. Recommendations
The recommendations that follow were developed through an effort by the consultant to
rationalize the downtown parking system. That process is described below, followed by
recommended actions for the short-term and then several additional recommendations for
consideration.
Summary
Short-Term Recommendations
1. Salem should implement demand-responsive pricing on- and off-street to help create
availability and better balance parking demand in the downtown.
2. Designated employee parking areas should be established that are price and
convenience competitive with customer spaces to help ease user conflicts at prime front-
door spaces.
3. Residential parking in nearby neighborhoods should continue to be protected with
Salem’s resident permit system, and a new area-wide permit for certain impacted
downtown residents should be established.
4. A new permitting program for tour buses and jitneys can help rationalize curb regulations
and reduce under-utilized tow-zone space in Salem.
5. The City should establish a parking & transportation fund that spends surplus parking
revenues on downtown improvements and connections to remote parking. Decisions
should be made in close coordination with Salem’s downtown business community.
6. On-going monitoring of parking utilization is necessary in order to adjust programs in
response to performance on the ground.
7. The City should move to develop an implementation program for pricing, regulatory,
signing, and technology changes as soon as possible, including a robust outreach and
education program.
Additional Recommendations
8. The City should consider creating and offering a municipal management program for
private parking facilities to improve utilization of these assets and generate new public
and private revenues.
9. Several low-cost supply increases in existing lots and on wider streets should be
considered after better management practices have been operating successfully and
before additional parking lots or garages are contemplated.
10. Smart parking technologies should be considered to enhance customer convenience,
information, revenue collection, enforcement, and overall efficiency.
9.1 Rationalizing the Parking System
Empowered by the data collected during the fall of 2009, the consultant attempted to identify clear
parking patterns in the downtown that could be extracted reliably from the data. The goal was to
help restructure parking regulations and pricing. Based on strong complaints from downtown
customers, a key objective of this effort was to improve customer parking availability and
convenience in the downtown. This was closely followed by the objective of ensuring a clear
supply of parking for downtown employees that discouraged long-term parking in key customer
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 75 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
locations, such as on-street, in attractive lots, and on the lowest levels of garages. Finally, it was
clear that a strategy to protect surrounding residential neighborhoods from spill-over parking
should be reinforced. These policy goals were summarized spatially for the working group (see
Figure 57).
Figure 57 Policy Goals for the Comprehensive Parking Plan
Through an iterative process of reviewing the utilization data presented in Section 4 along with
land use data provided by the City, the consultant identified eight distinct “parking operations
areas.” Each area had a unique characteristic based on its utilization pattern and typical set of
users. These are summarized below and show in Figure 58.
Policy Goal:
Employee Parking
Policy Goal:
Protect Residents
Policy Goal:
Customer Parking
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 76 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 58 Downtown “Parking Operations Areas” & Land Use Map
C1: The Commercial Core, North – Surrounding the courthouse area, this zone was
dominated by early parking activity and a mix of long and short-term stays, mostly
associated with courthouse activity.
C2: The Commercial Core, South – Encompassing most of the downtown’s retail areas,
this zone was clearly oriented to customer parking throughout the day, though longer-term
stays were observed. It includes both municipal garages, which mostly parked employees.
T1: Commuter Parking – Mostly located in the MBTA lot, Bridge Street lot, and along
Bridge Street itself, all-day parking and high utilization was observed in this area –
reflective of commuter parking and, to some extent, longer courthouse stays.
E1: Employee Parking – In locations that had more unregulated on- and off-street parking
than any other location in the downtown, this area was clearly a place for employees to
park free of charge throughout the day – other than some customer parking for the Post
Office.
L1: Low Utilization – Immediately east of E1, this area of time-limited parking is proximate
to core customer areas and desirable employee parking areas, but it exhibited low
utilization throughout the day.
U1: Unregulated Parking – On the south side of the river, this area of unregulated parking
within a short walk of Derby Street was not well utilized.
R1: Residential, East – The neighborhood to the east of downtown showed heavy on-
street utilization on streets which are nearly 100-percent residential.
R2: Residential, West – The neighborhood to the west of downtown showed unusually low
utilization on streets that are nearly 100-percent residential.
C1
C2
E1
L1
U1
T1 R1
R2
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 77 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
While these operations areas helped to describe downtown operations somewhat, there
continued to be a level of complexity that was unusual for downtowns. The consultant then
sought to move beyond the classification of users by specific categories such as commuter,
employee, courthouse visitor, downtown resident, neighborhood resident, and customer, to
instead identify the core operational desire of each user group. In general, customers and visitors
each desire short-term parking that is convenient to downtown destinations; employees and
commuters generally return to the downtown daily and often seek monthly parking privileges; and
residents in the core or nearby seek to have a parking space near their home that is not
encumbered by other users.
With these simple assumptions in mind, the consultant redrew the “parking operations areas”
map and identified parking areas by short-term (or “public”) parking, long-term (or “monthly”)
parking, and protected residential parking. The result, shown in Figure 59, is the basis for the
following recommendations.
Figure 59 Recommended Parking Operations Areas
in Downtown Salem
P
R
M
R
M
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 78 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
9.2 Short-Term Recommendations
Recommendation 1: Implement Demand-Responsive Pricing
Within the core “public parking” area, implement strategies that ensure availability for short-term
visitors. The following strategies should be implemented simultaneously:
Adjust On-Street Pricing by Block Face to Maintain 15-Percent Vacancy
The goal of the comprehensive parking plan is to efficiently manage demand for downtown
parking while accommodating customer, employee, resident, and commuter parking needs.
Demand-responsive pricing helps to put customers first in the “public parking” area by creating
vacancies and turnover of the most convenient “front door” curb parking spaces to ensure
availability for customers and visitors. Existing parking rates should be revised to rates that will
create a 15% vacancy rate on each block – or roughly one space free for every 7 parked cars –
rather than relying on arbitrary time-limits. Rates in some places may be zero. Rates in other
areas may be subsequently raised or lowered based on future occupancy counts.
Based on our understanding of parking in Salem today, a preliminary set of parking rates might
be as indicated in Figure 60.
Figure 60 Revised Meter Rates
Location Hourly Rate Hours of
Operation
Federal, Church, Washington (north of
Essex)
$1.50 8 AM – 4 PM
Essex (btwn. North & Washington), Front,
Central, Lafayette (north of Derby), Derby,
Hawthorne, Washington (south of Essex)
$0.75 10 AM – 8 PM
Congress, Lafayette (south of Derby) $0.50 10 AM – 4 PM
After an initial trial period, occupancy rates for each block should be reviewed and then adjusted
down or up to achieve the 85% occupancy goal, as described earlier. To ensure that this happens
on a regular schedule, promptly, and with clear assurance to policymakers, citizens and the
downtown community that the goal of parking prices is to achieve the desired vacancy rate, the
following procedure for adjusting parking meter rates and hours is recommended:
1. Set Policy: By ordinance, City Council should establish that the primary goal in setting
parking meter rates and hours for each block and each lot is to achieve an 85%
occupancy rate. Additionally, the ordinance should both require and authorize City staff to
raise or lower parking prices to meet this goal, without requiring further action by the City
Council. The Parking Director should be charged with the responsibility of running the
district, including monitoring occupancy rates and adjusting rates.
2. Monitor occupancy: Utilization should be evaluated at least quarterly with a full-day sweep
of prime parking areas. The goal is to ensure that there is about one free parking space
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 79 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
on each block face. If installed, wirelessly-networked multi-space parking meters (as
described in Section 8) are capable of instantly transmitting current information on the
number of spaces in use on each block where the meters are installed, giving the Parking
Director the ability to constantly monitor parking usage in the system. Reports can also be
generated to track occupancy by the hour over the course of a day, weeks, or months.
3. Adjust rates: Armed with good information on recent parking occupancy rates, the Parking
Director should adjust the rates (and hours of operation) up or down on each block, to
achieve the policy goal (an 85% occupancy rate) set by City Council. Typically, rates
should be adjusted quarterly (four times per year), but in the case of major changes in
downtown, such as the opening of a new development, it may be advisable to adjust rates
in response to particular events. To provide additional input to the process, an advisory
board should review the proposed rate changes and provide feedback to the Parking
Director.
Extend All Time-Limits to At Least 4-Hours
Once a policy of market rate pricing is adopted with the goal of achieving an 85% occupancy rate,
then time-limits need not be instituted. With no time limits, much of the worry and "ticket anxiety"
for downtown customers disappears. In Redwood City California, where this policy was recently
adopted, Dan Zack describes the thinking behind the City's decision in this way:
Market-rate prices are the only known way to consistently create available parking spaces
in popular areas. If we institute market-rate prices, and adequate spaces are made
available, then what purpose do time limits serve? None, other than to inconvenience
customers. If there is a space or two available on all blocks, then who cares how long
each individual car is there? The reality is that it doesn't matter.
Given the concerns about some employees and commuters being capable of paying for a full day
at prime spots, an interim time-limit of at least 4-hours can be implemented, though the City
should experiment with complete removal of time-limits in some areas to help demonstrate the
turnover effect of pricing alone. The only place in downtown that should retain time-limits and not
implement pricing would be the streets surrounding Salem Common where open community
access has always been available regardless of utilization.
Adjust Garage Pricing to Maximize Utilization
Similar to the pricing goal of on-street meters, parking garages are not considered to be optimally
utilized until they reach 90-percent of their capacity. Today, neither public garage meets this goal,
and their spaces represent lost capacity that is more valuable on-street. To encourage greater
use of the garages, demand-responsive pricing is again in order. This should also encompass
many off-street lots (the only exceptions to this policy would be the Riley Plazas, which are
described below, and the City lot at the MBTA station, which should charge rates identical to the
station lot). A possible pricing structure is suggested in Figure 61.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 80 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Figure 61 Revised Garage and Lot Rates
Location Hourly Rate Hours of
Operation
Church St. & Salem Green Lots $1.00 8 AM – 4 PM
Museum Garage & Sewall St. Lot $0.75 8 AM – 4 PM
Crombie, Front, & Riley Plaza East Lots $0.50 10 AM – 6 PM
Harbor Garage $0.25 10 AM – 4 PM
Implement a Clear Information Program
Throughout the “public parking” operations area on streets where meters exist today, all existing
parking regulatory signing can be removed (besides those reserved for special uses or safety
clearance). Meters alone are an indication of public parking availability, and the four-hour time-
limit will be evident on the meters themselves. If desired, “Public Parking” signing can reinforce
the operations area at the entrance to key streets, and clearer notation about pricing and hours of
operation can be put on supplemental signs at the head of each block. Further signing is not
necessary as all relevant information is posted on each meter.
In addition to signing, the City should develop a strong outreach campaign to advise businesses
and residents of the changes. Important parts of this campaign include:
Outreach brochures
Informational meetings
A comment line, email, and blog
A special notice webpage
The City also should consider having PCO’s hand out brochures and help answer questions,
even if enforcement activity is significantly reduced for a month.
Recommendation 2: Provide Employee Parking Areas
A significant amount of employee parking occurs today in the “public parking” downtown core.
Many employees feed meters. Others move their cars every hour or two. Some Salem residents
park in surrounding residential areas to go walk to work in the downtown. A large amount of the
capacity of the Museum Garage – especially on the lower decks – is taken by employees while
the Harbor Garage remains underutilized. To incentivize the use of underutilized parking assets,
the following strategies are recommended.
Establish a Monthly Permit Zone
In areas that are utilized today mostly by employees, the City should formalize this operation for
the benefit of employees, which will help to attract employees to these areas. Through a system
of simple signs enforceable by normal ticketing, several existing parking areas should become
“Monthly Permit” parking only, including:
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 81 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Riley Plaza West
Lower Riley Plaza East
Margin Street (except in front of the Post
Office, where 30-minute spaces can
remain)
Norman Street
Congress Street near the river bridge
Dodge Street
Holyoke Square
Gedney Street
Permit parking should be active at least between 8AM and 5PM weekdays. Some areas should
also be active on Saturdays, particularly on-street zones closest to retail stores. Permit parking
does not need to be enforced in the evenings and overnights when overall demand drops,
allowing these areas to become free employee parking for hourly restaurant workers.
In addition, the City should consider implementing daytime monthly permit parking on the
underutilized stretches of Federal, Essex, Chestnut, and Broad in the R2 residential operations
area. A key strategy to consider for implementing this program in combination with a permit is the
use of in-car meters (see Section 7).
Revise the Monthly Permit Program
The current monthly permit prices do not motivate the use of the Harbor Garage. Meanwhile,
many potential purchasers of monthly permits cannot afford the cost or the time it takes to obtain
a permit. Therefore, a new pricing structure should be implemented as suggested in Figure 62
which works to encourage the use of underutilized facilities. Annual passes may continue to be
available but at a small (under 10-percent) discount from the monthly rate. Permits should be
made available for purchase through the web to speed transaction time and ease. Finally, the
City should seek to leave at least 25-percent of the capacity of any of these locations available to
short-term parkers at the rates listed above in Figure 61. Therefore, pass sales should be limited
to the facility’s capacity (assuming peak use typically will not exceed 75-percent of all passes
sold). If short-term demand is high, the number of monthly pass sales should be further reduced.
Figure 62 Revised Permit Rates
Location Monthly Rate
Church St. Lot $75
Museum Garage, top three decks $65
Harbor Garage $40
Riley Plaza & on-street spaces $25
The City also should immediately investigate the use of in-car meters. For the employee parking
program, an in-car meter can be a huge benefit by enabling part-time employees to park cost-
effectively in the employee parking areas as well as on underutilized residential streets
(specifically those immediately west of North Street) during the day for a low rate ($0.25 per
hour). With payment only processed while an employee is at work, the in-car system would be
very attractive to part-time employees while freeing up customer and other monthly employee
spaces.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 82 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Recommendation 3: Ensure and Protect Residential Parking
Salem already employs an effective residential permit program that protects residential streets
from parking by out of town commuters and employees. This program should continue to be
enforced outside of the downtown. However, within the downtown, residential permit-only zones
exist on Federal, Lynde, Ash, and Crombie Streets where there is also high demand for on-street
parking – especially when residents have left for work, leaving spaces vacant but unusable by
other non-permitted users. To overcome this underutilization while protecting residents, the
following strategies are recommended.
Convert Residential Parking to Public Parking
On Federal, Lynde, Ash, and Crombie Streets, convert the existing residential permit zones to
public parking and install meters or pay stations, with the “resident only” restriction limited to the
hours of 5 PM – 8 AM and weekends. This affects approximately 100 existing residential units on
these streets where about 60 residential spaces are signed today for permit parking.
The residents of these streets would have access to a new district-wide permit allowing them to
park on-street at any meter (or time-limited space if not yet metered) in the “public parking” area
on weekdays from 8 AM to 5 PM. These permits will be limited to the approximately 100
households on Federal, Lynde, Ash, and Crombie Streets in a quantity not to exceed the existing
amount of vehicles owned by these residences as registered with the Massachusetts Registry of
Motor Vehicles. The permit would cost the same as the standard residential permit. The
associated visitor pass would be limited to resident only zones.
Initiate a District-Wide Parking Permit Program
After other changes to the parking system have been implemented, the City may choose to offer
district-wide permit parking to other downtown residents. Two variants of this permit may be
offered: a 24-hour permit and an overnight permit. The 24-hour permit allows parking at any time
for any duration. The overnight permit would allow parking between the hours of 5 PM and 8 AM
weekdays and all-day on weekends, except in the “resident only” spaces.
These district-wide permits should be limited in quantity and offered only to those who live in the
downtown area – approximately 1,500 units today. Initially, a set quantity should be offered, not to
exceed 200. Over time, quantities can be changed depending on the performance of the
downtown parking system. Suggested rates are listed in Figure 63.
Figure 63 Residential Permit Rates
Permit First Year
24-Hours $5,000/year
Overnight $1,500/year
Recommendation 4: Implement a Tour & Jitney Bus Parking Registration
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 83 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Salem’s successful tourist economy is dependent on access by large tour buses and local trolley
buses throughout the year. Tour bus activity is higher in the summer and during October, but the
number of operators and their number of visits to Salem frequently varies year to year. This
unpredictability often results in an over- or under-supply of curbside tour bus parking, depending
on the desired location, the equipment used, and the time of year.
A successful solution that has been used frequently in the United States and locally in Cambridge
is to have all tour operators seeking to reserve on-street curb space apply for a registration of
their operations in the community and receive a permit for their tour bus parking zone. While
provisions of the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities ensure all providers have access
to a community, there are no laws forcing communities to revise curb regulations to
accommodate buses – many simply do so in response to a few requests and an overall
assessment of demand. A far more effective alternative is to require that operators purchase a
permit that covers the cost of the municipality posting and maintaining custom signs for private
tour operators (cities may charge as little as $250 annually or as much as $2,500 to cover the
material and labor costs of making and posting signs). With the permit application, operators can
be required to provide information about the stop location(s), days and hours of operation, and
amount of curb length required, helping to clarify when tow-zones need to be active and freeing
up spaces for customers when they are inactive. The process helps operators rationalize their
tour operations by talking directly with the Parking Department – typically in the off-season when
annual permits are renewed and there is time to make adjustments – while allowing the Parking
Department to suggest better locations or operations if mutually beneficial.
From the perspective of this study, the recommendation would eliminate complaints about
unused tour bus areas while ensuring areas that do get posted are valuable to both the tour
operators and the City.
Recommendation 5: Establish a Parking & Transportation Fund
Surplus revenues from the employee permit program and other additional revenue sources, such
as additional meter revenue, should fund public improvements that benefit the downtown. If
downtown parking revenues seem to disappear into the General Fund, where they may appear to
produce no direct benefit for downtown businesses, there will be little support for parking policies
that may ultimately benefit business, such as increased permit fees, installing parking meters, or
adjusting regulations. When Salem’s merchants and residents can clearly see that the monies
collected are being spent for the benefit of their downtown, on projects that they have helped to
choose, they become willing to support parking policies that generate revenue for the City. If
experience from other cities is any guide, many will become active advocates for the concept.11
To develop support for parking regulation changes, and to build support for charging fair market
rates for permits, it is crucial to give local stakeholders a strong voice in setting policies for the
downtown, deciding how downtown parking revenues should be spent, and overseeing downtown
investments to ensure that the monies collected from employees and customers are spent wisely.
Potential uses for Parking and Transportation Fund revenues include:
Landscaping and streetscape greening
11 Parking Benefit Districts are currently in place in Pasadena, Boulder, San Diego, Austin, Seattle, and Aspen.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 84 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Increased frequency of trash collection
Street cleaning, power-washing of sidewalks, and graffiti removal
Parking, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure and amenities
Additional parking enforcement
Garage improvements
Reconfiguration and restriping of Riley Plaza west lot (see Recommendation 9 below)
Marketing and promotion of Salem’s merchants
Additional programs and projects as recommended by downtown stakeholders and
approved by the Board of Selectmen
A number of different organizational structures can be used to establish and oversee a Parking
and Transportation Fund. The fund can be managed by a quasi-public entity, similar to a
Business Improvement District. Alternatively, the fund can be established as simply a financial
entity (somewhat like an assessment district), which would require by ordinance that parking
revenues raised within the downtown be spent to benefit the downtown. Under this arrangement,
the fund would be managed and housed within an existing City department, such as the Parking
Department.
Recommendation 6: Monitor Parking Utilization
An important part of maintaining the success of any of these recommendations will be monitoring
parking utilization on a regular basis. A recurring annual or biennial monitoring regime can allow
the City to modify its pricing, permitting, zoning requirements, and other key policies. Based on
the detailed utilization information collected for this study, a much smaller and targeted utilization
effort can be conducted (potentially in-house or with the use of students or volunteers) by
focusing on area of high demand and only casually observing other areas to confirm the results of
this effort. Where parking patterns appear to change, a more detailed utilization count would be
warranted.
As noted above, quarterly assessment of availability at priced on-street spaces (and in lots and
garages) should also be performed in accordance with a City Council resolution.
Recommendation 7: Implementation Program
In order to implement these short-term recommendations effectively, it is advised that the City
seek professional assistance to implement the various strategies in coordination with the Parking
Director, the Planning Department, the City Council, and the Mayor’s Office. A variety of tasks are
needed, including:
Development of signs and sign locations
Establishment of final operations area boundaries
Refinement of pricing structures
Recommended on-line permit purchase services
Identification of appropriate parking technologies (i.e. additional pay stations, smart
meters, in-car meters, real-time parking occupancy signs, etc.)
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 85 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Public outreach publications
Facilitation of information meetings
Reconfiguration of existing meter mechanicals
Monitoring
10.3 Additional Recommendations
Recommendation 8: Municipal Management Program for Private Parking
The utilization study revealed that between 900 and one thousand privately held and operated
parking spaces remain vacant at the busiest times of day in downtown Salem – a vacancy rate of
at least 40-percent throughout the entire day. This is a significant amount of underutilized parking
supply – mostly contained in commercial and residential surface lots scattered throughout the
downtown. In the future, as the City experiences growth and increased parking demand, a prime
opportunity for expanding available parking options cost-effectively would be to utilize these
vacant spaces.
Leasing of private parking for public purpose is not uncommon in Massachusetts, but many
landowners resist the idea of giving up their private property, even when they may be paid for the
use of their underutilized parking. A well-structured public program should be established that
clearly outlines a beneficial and consistent arrangement that the City can offer to landowners in
exchange for the ability to utilize their parking. Key elements would include:
Clear removal of private liability concerns;
A lease payment at a valuable rate in excess of current parking revenues but below the
full market potential so as not to discourage more productive redevelopment;
Higher lease payments for parking that is entirely municipally managed; lower for parking
that is retained as exclusive private use;
Clearly stated maintenance, security, and operating terms that keep the facility in good
condition for the public and the landowner; and
Assurance that parking can be returned to the landowner on short notice if a
redevelopment plan is approved and/or permitted.
The City should establish clear conditions by which a private lease arrangement can be entered
into, such as:
Only when vacancy rates in the existing public supply – assuming demand responsive
pricing is in place – dip below 15-percent;
The annual parking revenues must exceed the lease payment to the landowner;
The maintenance of parking should not compromise other City downtown goals; and
The leased facility can be improved to acceptable standards for public parking, including
curb cuts, handicap parking, signing, landscaping, lane width, stall dimensions, etc.
The program can be particularly advantageous where the City can arrange for lease agreements
on abutting lots and remove intervening barriers to restripe the parcels as a combined facility. By
reducing redundant circulation and access, the City can effectively operate many more spaces,
helping to create greater revenues to offset lease payments.
Salem Comprehensive Parking Plan – Final Report
CITY OF SALEM
Page 86 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc.
Recommendation 9: Expand Employee Parking Supply
If pricing is correctly controlled, downtown Salem has sufficient supply on-street and in its
garages for customers at all times of the year (except Halloween). However, as the downtown
grows, demand for employee parking may increase. If supplies in the “monthly permit” areas
begin to be insufficient, expansion of that parking supply may be warranted.
A cost effective approach to parking supply increase is to reconfigure lots and add-on street
parking where travel lane capacity is excessive. Both of these strategies happen to be very
applicable to Riley Plaza and surrounding streets. The image in Figure 63 suggests how this
parking supply could be increased by over 120 spaces.
Figure 64 Parking Reconfiguration and Expansion at Riley Plaza
Recommendation 10: Implement Smart Parking Solutions
After the short-term recommendations are implemented, it is very likely that demand for improved
parking technologies that provide greater customer conveniences will grow. Many vendors offer
very advanced solutions that the City would be wise to consider as part of furthering customer
convenience, increasing revenues, and attracting economic development. Most of the latest
solutions are detailed in Section 8 and include:
Smart meters
Multi-space meters
Cell phone payment
Variable daily pricing
MBTA pass integration
Debit card integration
Real-time space availability sensors
Mobile applications