SH1 Cycle Lanes Parking Study

Transcription

1 SH1 Cycle Lanes Parking Study 1

2 Introduction Following several cyclist fatalities on SH1, the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) and Dunedin City Council (DCC) were asked to provide a long term option to improve cycle safety in the Central City. Following an assessment of various route options, the Working Group consulted on two options for a separated cycleway. Option 1 proposed a uni-directional separated cycle lane on each of the oneway streets between Queens Gardens and Pine Hill Road (SH1), with cyclists travelling in the same direction of traffic. This option was considered the safest option for cyclists (as motorists don t have to look in both directions when crossing the cycleway), but would result in the loss of 391 parking spaces. Option 2 proposed a bidirectional separated cycle lane on Cumberland Street, linked via Emily Siederberg Place. This option was considered less safe for cyclists but would result in the loss of 185 parking spaces. The NZTA and DCC consulted on the cycleway proposals during November and December The cycleway proposal received extraordinary media coverage and community interest, with over 2000 submissions generated through the consultation process. While there was generally significant support for the project, the most contentious issues raised by the community were related to parking losses. The Working Group s view is that Option 1 is the preferred technical option for the cycleway, as the catalyst for this proposal is to improve cyclist safety. However, the Working Group acknowledges the concern that affected business owners have relating to parking losses. As such, staff have been working to identify opportunities to reduce parking losses. In addition to potential parking gains in the adjacent side streets in North Dunedin, the Working Group has explored an option that retains parking on some blocks, adjacent to the proposed cycleway. This has been facilitated by reducing footpath on some sections of SH1 in North Dunedin, and removing the third southbound traffic lane on High Street (opposite Tōitu Otago Settlers Museum). This Option (known as Option 1A) ensures that some businesses concerns are alleviated, while providing the safest option for the cycleway. The parking benefits of this option are discussed in this report. The following report provides a summary of the work that has been undertaken to better understand parking demand and supply, and identifies and explores those measures that are being considered to mitigate parking losses. Background Existing Parking Occupancy on SH1 A parking occupancy survey of the on-street car parks on SH1 was conducted in February 2014, with the results tabled below. The optimum peak parking occupancy is generally 80-85%. This ensures that even at peak times there are still spaces available to meet the needs of motorists and ensure businesses are supported, but excessive amounts of land resources are not unnecessarily allocated to parking. In areas of high demand, parking occupancy can be effectively managed by changes to parking restrictions, implementing parking meters and/or increasing the cost of parking. 2

3 Details of peak parking occupancy on SH1, and the corresponding times that the peak occurred (9am, 11am, 1pm, 3pm, 5pm), available spaces and predominant parking types are recorded in table 1 below. Block Occup ancy% Time of day West (LHS) No. of spaces Main park type Northbound East (RHS) Spaces potentially replaced by cycleway Main Peak Occup Time of No. of park spaces ancy% day spaces type available Peak spaces available Leviathan - Stuart St P ,1,3,5 19 P240 9 Stuart - St Andrew P ,1,3,5 21 P240 6 St Andrew - Hanover No parking available P240 2 Hanover - Frederick ,1,5 18 P ,1 17 P240 1 Frederick - Albany P ,3 23 P240 7 Albany - Union 40-59* 11,3* 14 P ,3 27 P240 2 Union - St David * 11,1* 12 P ,3 27 unres 2 St David - Dundas 60-79* 11,1, 3* 17 unres ,11,1 23 unres 2 Dundas - Titan/Ellis Titan/Ellis - Howe 40-59* 3* 5 P P30 1 Howe - Duke 60-79* 11* 18 unres ,3 19 unres 2 Total spaces *Data taken from 2012 Abley Parking Study Block Southbound West (RHS) Spaces potentially replaced by cycleway Main Peak Occupa Time of No. of Occup park spaces ncy% day spaces ancy% type available Time of day East No. of spaces Main park type Peak spaces available Duke - Howe ,3,5 16 unres ,3 18 unres 2 Howe - Dundas ,1,3 19 unres ,3,5 12 unres 1 Dundas - St David ,11,1 16 P ,3 27 P120 2 St David - Union ,1,3 9 All day ,3 24 P240 2 Union - Albany ,3 19 P P240 1 Albany - Frederick All day ,11,1,3 27 All day (paid) 2 Frederick - Hanover ,3,5 17 P P240 1 Hanover - St Andrew P All day (paid) 1 St Andrew - Stuart ,5 29 P P5 5 Stuart St - Leviathan P P240 1 Total spaces Tables 1 & 2: Peak parking occupancy (%), and the corresponding times, available spaces and predominant parking types measured in February (Note: Red text denotes locations with greater than 80% occupancy at certain times of the day.) 3

4 The results from these tables show that on some sections of the one-way pair and at certain times of the day, there is room for extra capacity should parking be removed for the proposed cycleway. In other areas, particularly around the University and Hospital, there is strong demand for parking. Some of these spaces, particularly in the vicinity of North Ground are being used by commuters as they are unrestricted and free. This indicates that these spaces are not being managed efficiently; parking restrictions or paid parking may improve the management of these spaces. However, estimates from this table show that even in peak times, there are approximately 65 parking spaces available on the one-way pair on the opposite sides of the proposed cycleway. Residents Opinion Survey A Residents Opinion Survey is carried out every year to measure residents' satisfaction with the Council's performance and with Council owned facilities. The output of these surveys enables the Council to assess the extent to which the Council has met its performance objectives. In 2013, 1212 people participated in the randomly-selected part of the Survey. Figure 1 below shows residents satisfaction relating to parking and cycling issues over the past seven years. The graph reveals that in general there has been a slight increase in satisfaction in regards to parking availability. Conversely, there has been a slight decrease in satisfaction relating to the suitability of the road network for cyclists. However, regardless of these slight changes over time, the overall residents satisfaction of some of these measures is especially low. Over the seven year period, satisfaction relating to the suitability of the road network for cyclists has not been greater than 30% Minimise inconvenience and disruption caused to the public, when work is done on roads, footpaths and drains The availability of car parking in the central city The number of parking spaces available in DCC car parking buildings The number of parking spaces available in DCC off-street car parks The ease of use of Pay and Display car parking 20 The availability of on-street parking in the central city 0 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 The suitability of the road network for cyclists throughout the city Figure 1: Parking and Network for Cyclists - Satisfaction Trend 4

5 SH1 Cycleway Proposal Survey Results An online survey was conducted as part of the SH1 cycleway consultation in late 2013 seeking to gauge community support for proposal. The survey was completed by 883 people. The results show that there is significant support for the cycleway, with 86% of respondents indicating that they support or strongly support separated facilities for cyclists through the central city (see figure 2). Figure 2: Extent of support for the introduction of a separated cycleway through the central city The survey also asked whether there was support for the removal of parking to provide safe cycling lanes. Almost 77% of respondents indicated that they supported or strongly supported parking removal to provide safe cycle lanes (see figure 3). Figure 3: Extent of support for the removal of parking to provide safe cycle lanes The Working Group identified a number of ways that the impacts of changes to parking could be addressed. The results below (figure 4) show high support for promoting vacant parking in existing car parks and providing additional angle parking in North Dunedin; and some support for moving parking meters and short term parking, and providing more commercial parking. 5

6 Figure 4: Extent of support for various measures to address impacts on parking Other options suggested by respondents included: Don t do anything to address the changes to parking people will adapt Encourage people to walk and ride and use public transport Provide more parking around the hospital Promote park and ride using free shuttles Do not make any changes to parking or cycle lanes / cycle lanes should not be on SH1 Shopper Survey A shopper survey was conducted in December 2013 and February 2014 to understand shoppers travel behaviour, and to gauge retailer s perceptions about shopper travel behaviour. The survey also sought to understand what elements of a shopping precinct (relating to the urban environment and transport access) were important to shoppers and retailers. Responses were received from 109 shoppers and 52 retailers in Wall Street mall and George Street. Shopper Travel Mode Retailer perceptions of shopper travel mode Walk 21% Cycle 8% Walk 14% Cycle 7% Car/Motor bike 53% Bus 14% Car/ motorbike 65% Bus 18% Figures 5 and 6: How shoppers travel to the central city and how retailers perceive shoppers travel to the central city 6

7 The survey results show that retailers perceive more people drive to do their shopping than actually do. In reality, just over half of the interviewed shoppers drive to the central city to shop. This indicates that retailers are likely to overstate their parking needs and the impact of parking on their business, as they underestimate the number of people who walk, cycle or travel by bus. Shoppers that drove to the central city were asked about their parking behaviour (see figure 7). One third stated that they parked in the shopping centre car park, while another third stated that they parked on-street (less than 5 minutes walk away). Where did you park? Dropped off 9% On street >5 mins 14% Shopping centre car park 33% On street <5 mins 33% Other car park 11% Figure 7: Shoppers responses to the question Where did you park today? Figure 8 below shows that if there is no parking available near the shopping destination then almost all will keep driving around looking for a space, park in an off-street car park or park further away. A small number (7%) stated that they would go elsewhere or go home. What do you do if there's no parking nearby? Go elsewhere / go home 7% Keep driving around looking for a space 35% Park further away & walk 22% Park in offstreet car park/ building 36% Figure 8: Shoppers responses to the question What do you do if there are no parking spaces close to the shop you want to go to? 7

8 Shoppers and retailers were asked what elements of a shopping precinct were important to them. The following elements were considered important or very important by >75% respondents: Shoppers Retailers Pedestrian crossings 86% Customer parking 88% Public seating 82% Pedestrian crossings 84% Wide footpaths 79% Bus stops 84% Customer parking 79% Public seating 82% Lack of speeding traffic -77% Park as long as want 78% Not paying for parking 77% On-street parking available 78% On-street parking available 75% Wide footpaths 76% Not paying for parking 75% Bus service 75% Table 3: Elements of a shopping precinct that are important to shoppers and retailers The results show that parking and urban landscape elements such as public seating, pedestrian crossings and wide footpaths are important to both shoppers and retailers. Elements relating to parking were more slightly favoured by retailers, whilst shoppers favour better pedestrian provision. Retailers also understood the business benefits of providing good access by public transport. Parking Mitigation A. Parking changes identified during consultation The most common concern raised during the cycleway consultation was the impact of the potential loss of parking. As discussed earlier, the Working Group identified a number of options that could be considered to address changes to parking. These options were: 1. Move affected parking meters, P5 and other time restricted parking to neighbouring streets 2. Promote vacant parks in existing car parking areas and buildings 3. Provide additional angle parking in Union, St David, Dundas, Howe and Duke Streets 4. Provide more commercial parking such as a new parking building Each of these options has been developed explored further to identify issues, opportunities and costings. These are detailed below. 1. Move affected parking meters, P5 and other time restricted parking to neighbouring streets: Estimated cost - $55,000 - $70,000 Changes to parking currently located on SH1 would be required if the cycleway were to be installed With Option 1, it is expected that 41 parking meters would need to be relocated. These could be relocated to areas close to the central city that experience high parking demand from commuters due to free and unrestricted parking availability. This would reduce the potential for loss of parking revenue as a result of the project. Potential locations for new parking meters are identified in the table below. These locations are outside the existing boundary of the paid parking zone identified in the Parking Strategy adopted in 2009, hence a new paid parking zone would need to be developed and considered by Council prior to any changes being implemented. 8

9 Potential new locations for relocated parking meters Number of meters Tennyson Street between York Place and Smith Street (both sides) 5 York Place between Smith Street and Rattray Street (east side) 8 St David Street between Cumberland Street and George Street (north 11 side) George Street between Union Street and St David Street (both sides) 6 Water Street between Crawford Street and Cumberland Street (both 4 sides) Vogel Street - between Queens Gardens and Jetty Street 5 Queens Gardens - between Crawford Street and Cumberland Street (north 2 side) Total meters 41 Table 4: Potential new locations for relocated parking meters Some changes to short term and mobility parking will also be required to accommodate the proposed cycleway. The following table identifies those spaces that are likely to be removed or relocated. Location Parking loss Proposed solution Cumberland Street (Queens 1 x P5 Relocate to High Street Gardens Stuart Street) 2 x P5 Relocate to opposite side of the street Cumberland Street (Stuart St Andrews Street) 2 x P5 Relocate to opposite side of road if necessary Castle Street (Stuart St Andrews Street) 1 x P5 Relocate to Anzac Ave or Lower Stuart Street Castle Street (St Andrews 2 x P5 Remove off street parking available Hanover Street) Gowland Street (Frederick Albany Street) 2 x P5 Remove 2 x P5 parking available opposite and ample customer parking at rear Cumberland Street (Howe 2 x P5 Relocate to Howe Street Duke Street) Great King Street (Dundas 3 x P10 Relocate to opposite side of the street Howe Street) 3 x P30 Relocate to opposite side of the street Cumberland Street (Union - St David Street) 1 x P10 & 3 x P30 Relocate to opposite side of the street and St David Street Cumberland Street (Albany Union Street) 1 x mobility Signage to existing spaces in Museum forecourt Cumberland Street (Hanover Frederick Street) 2 x mobility Relocate to Great King Street frontage Table 5: Potential sites for relocated short term and mobility parking spaces The costs for these options include relocating parking meters, new signage and relocating existing signage. 2. Promote vacant parks in existing car parking areas and buildings: Estimated cost - $15,000 - $20,000 Council s Great King Street car park, with 344 parking spaces was identified as having spare capacity. Recent counts indicate that peak occupancy is 85% at 12pm, when approximately 50 spaces are free at peak times (see figure 9). 9

10 Currently access to this car park is limited to northbound traffic only. Additionally, motorists are often reluctant to use multi-storey off-street parking as they are unable to see if spaces are available. Council has identified that opening up the central median to allow access from both directions, and installing real time information (RTI) signage showing the number of spaces available may further encourage motorists to use this car park. St Andrews Street car park, with capacity for 235 vehicles provides all day parking for $3. Its peak occupancy was measured as 81% at 12pm (March 2014) see figure 9. This translates to approximately 45 parking spaces available at peak times. By providing static signage detailing the number of spaces available and the cost of parking at this car park, we may be able to increase the occupancy of this car park. 100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 10am 12pm 2pm 4pm Great King Street (344 spaces) St Andrews Street (234 spaces) Figure 9: Parking occupancy of Great King Street and St Andrews Street off-street car parks (March 2014) Costs for these options include changes to centre island and barrier on Great King Street, real time information signage (Great King Street only) and static parking signage for both car parks. 3. Provide additional angle parking in Union, St David, Dundas, Howe and Duke Streets: Estimated cost - $200,000 - $260,000 Maximising parking on side streets adjacent to the one-way pair has been investigated, and opportunities for angle parking have been calculated and costed. The table below identifies how an estimated spaces can be gained in these five streets, and a further spaces in Walsh, Grange Streets and Great King Street (between Dundas and Howe Streets). There may also be further opportunities for changes on other streets in the vicinity of the one-way pair that have not yet been considered. Please note that operational checks are needed to ensure changes to do not impact on service provision and traffic operations, hence an estimated range has been given. 10

11 Street Between Existing parks North side South side Proposed parks North side South side Total Gained AADT Notes Union Cumberland Great King Union Great King George Remove turn lane and create new angled parking near Gt King St (north and south side) Turn into a one way street (westbound) and create angled parking on both sides of street. Remove LH turn lane at George St St David Cumberland Great King No changes St David Great King George Turn into a one way street (east bound) and create angled parking on both sides of street. Remove LH turn lane at Great King St and some no stopping outside 19 St David St. Dundas Cumberland Great King No changes Dundas Great King George Create angled parking on north side of street Howe Cumberland Great King Create angled parking on north side of street Howe Great King George Create angled parking on north side of street Duke Cumberland Great King Create angle parking on north side of the street; consolidate two lanes at Great King St, and provide parallel parking adjacent to book store Duke Great King George Remove LH turn lane at Great King St end and create angle parks on north side of street Walsh Malcolm Albany Create 5 new bays on east side near Albany St Grange Frederick Albany Great King Street Dundas Howe Total Increase parallel parking near Albany St by removing turn pocket Reinstate short term parking on left hand side of street and relocate bus stop to outside KFC. Table 6: Proposed changes to side streets near the SH1 to create additional on-street car parks. These changes involve extending the existing one-way sections on Union and St David Streets through to George Street. This will enable angle parking to be installed on both sides of these streets, as currently exists between Cumberland and Great King Street. Angle parking would also been constructed on one side of Howe and Duke Streets (between Cumberland and George Streets), and on Dundas Street from Great King to George Street only. These streets have been chosen based on low volumes and low turnover of parking. On Walsh Street, five additional parking spaces can be accommodated on the east side near Albany Street; and a turn lane can be removed from Grange Street at Albany Street to accommodate another 3 car parks. On Great King Street, some short term parking can be reinstated on the left hand side once should the existing cycle lane be replaced by a separated cycleway on the right hand side. Costs for these changes include constructing kerb build outs, changes to linemarking, signage for one-way streets and relocating parking signs. 4. Provide more commercial parking such as a new parking building 11

12 The existing Council-owned car park at the intersection of Frederick Street and Malcolm Street has the potential to be considered for a mixed-use development that could include a significant amount of car parking as well as other land uses. The land is currently used as an off-street car park with 111 car parking spaces. Council could consider developing the land itself or selling the land to an alternative developer with conditions on how it should be developed and leased. A concept design for the site shows that a 4 storey mixed-use development could be developed, with 228 car parking spaces. This would result in a number of positive outcomes for the city such as additional car parking availability in the vicinity of the hospital, university and Otago Museum; intensification of land use; and improved urban amenity. However, there are several risks with developing a new parking building including: Providing more parking may mean less mode shift to active and public transport Users may migrate from existing parking facilities, such as the Great King Street car park, and from on-street parking. Drivers in Dunedin tend to prefer surface level car parks and on-street parking, and appear reluctant to use parking buildings there are no guarantees that a new parking building will be fully utilised. Providing too much parking in the area may not be profitable for Council or the developer, and discourages people from using other transport modes. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Frederick Street car park occupancy 9am 11am 1pm 3pm 5pm Figure 10: Car parking occupancy at the Frederick Street car park (March 2014) B. Option 1A It became clear from the results of consultation that cyclists tended to favour Option 1, while the general community expressed concerns about parking losses, and tended to favour Option 2. As a result, the Working Group considered whether some additional parking could be accommodated in the Option 1 proposal. 12

13 Concept designs have been developed which maintain parking on some blocks. In some areas, this has been made possible by reducing footpath, while in others the carriageway will be reduced from three lanes to two. The Working Group still has concerns about some of this parking that could be maintained under Option 1A due to: Ongoing safety concerns about vehicles reverse parking on SH1 Anecdotal feedback from the community about passengers exiting vehicles, particularly near Otago Museum and North Ground, where parking lane s have been reduced Impact of reduced footpath on pedestrians Extra costs involved in relocating the kerb and channel Reduced visibility of cycleway behind lane of parked cars and trucks Potential risk of parked car doors opening in front of cyclists creating hazard Reduced of cycleway Option 1A allows 198 parking spaces to be retained at the locations identified in the following table. Location Achieved by Adjacent businesses Northbound (starting from south end) Cumberland Street, between Queens Gardens and Stuart Street Reduce footpath Cumberland Street (Hanover Reduce footpath Frederick Streets) Malcolm Street (Frederick -Albany Reduce footpath Streets) Great King Street (Albany - Union Reduce footpath Streets) Great King Street (St David - Dundas Reduce footpath Streets) Great King Street (Howe - Duke Reduce footpath Streets) Southbound (starting from north end) No. of spaces retained with Option 1A - 8 Dunedin 13 Physiotherapy Pool Food Department, 18 Allpress Coffee Otago Museum Galaxy Books 3 Cumberland Street (Dundas - St Reduce footpath - 30 David Streets) Cumberland Street (St David - Union Reduce footpath Good Earth Café 14 Streets) Cumberland Street (Union - Albany Reduce footpath Otago Museum 11 Streets) Gowland Street (Albany - Frederick Reduce footpath Ombrellos 25 Streets) Castle Street (St Andrew Stuart Reduce footpath Cadbury 12 Streets) High Street (Stuart Queens Gardens) Reduce traffic lanes from 3 to 2 Law Courts, Leviathan 20 TOTAL SPACES RETAINED WITH OPTION 1A (ESTIMATE) = 198 Table 7: Sections of SH1 where parking can be maintained with Option 1A 13

14 Staff from the Working Group will continue to liaise with the affected businesses whose parking may be impacted as a result of the proposed cycleway. We will continue to discuss ideas and options to minimise parking losses with the aim of developing a Draft Parking Plan for the area, however at this stage, we estimate there may be approximately four businesses/properties who are likely to have outstanding issues in relation to the cycleway(see table below). Issue Properties/businesses affected Number of businesses /properties Those that made a submissions opposed to the cycleway on parking grounds or concerns about accesses Those businesses identified by staff as likely to want parking mitigation Those where parking impacts can be mitigated/somewhat mitigated by Option 1A and other solutions Those likely to still have outstanding issues relating to parking and accesses Leviathan Hotel, Radio Otago House tenants (Keogh McCormack, LaHood Associates, Tojami Properties), Allied Press^, Cadbury^, Dunedin Hospital, Otago Museum, NZ Post, Cutlers Real Estate, Galaxy Books, Good Earth Café, Leviathan Hotel, Radio Otago House tenants, Allied Press^, Cadbury^, Dunedin Hospital, Otago Museum, Rent a Dent*, Hell Pizza*, Cutlers Real Estate, United Video*, Galaxy Books, Good Earth Café, Dunedin Physiotherapy Pool, Dunedin Security*, Bike Otago*, Inge Doesburg Gallery and Studio *, Koru Gallery* Otago Museum, Good Earth café, Galaxy Books, Leviathan Hotel Radio Otago House tenants, Allied Press^, Cadbury^, Cutlers Real Estate * no submissions were received from these businesses ^issues are primarily related to manoeuvring, not parking Table 8: The businesses/properties identified as wanting parking mitigation, and those that can be resolved by Option 1A and other solutions C. Otago Museum The Otago Museum straddles the one-way pair, and provides no off-street parking for museum visitors. Visitors to the museum who arrive by car generally seek on-street parking on either of the museum frontages on SH1. The Option 1 cycleway proposal would see all of this parking removed. Council staff have been working closely with management from the museum to identify a solution to mitigate their potential loss of parking. An off-street car park is located across from the museum on Great King Street, and has 46 car spaces, 15 of which are available as short term, public parking, with the remainder currently leased parking spaces. Council staff have been in discussions with operators and owners of the off street car park regarding opportunities to create more public spaces in this car park, and erect signage to direct museum visitors to this car park. The operator and owner are both receptive to this idea. 14

15 D. Leviathan Hotel Like the Otago Museum, the Leviathan Hotel straddles both streets of the one-way pair. As a consequence they could potentially lose all parking on both frontages should Option 1 proceed. The Working Group have identified some changes to the original design that could reinstate parking on its High Street frontage (opposite Tōitu Otago Settlers Museum). At this location, SH1 south (High Street) widens to accommodate three travel lanes. The Working Group is proposing to reduce the carriageway to two lanes, and retaining parking on this frontage of the Leviathan. E. North Dunedin shops The removal of short term parking in front of a cluster of shops on SH1 in North Dunedin (between Dundas and Howe Streets) may impact on passing trade being able to stop and park. Parking on the west side is also fairly limited due to safety concerns about short term parking adjacent to the existing on-road cycle lane (short term parking results in more car movements and therefore increased chance of intermodal conflict). With the proposed separated cycleway adjacent to the shops, short term parking will be reinstated on the opposite side of the street. The existing bus stop could potentially be relocated adjacent to KFC, which has sufficient parking, to provide additional short term parking spaces. It is estimated that seven short term parking spaces can be reinstated in the vicinity of the shops. F. Dunedin Hospital As a result of the cyclist fatality in front of the hospital in 2012, some short term parking spaces in front of the hospital were replaced with all day parking to reduce the number of parking manoeuvres in this block. The separated cycleway is proposed for the eastern side of Cumberland Street in this location, which would allow us to reinstate the short term and mobility parking along the hospital frontage (western side). Council staff are working closely with the hospital to improve parking management in the vicinity, and may consider changes to Great King Street, as well as developing the existing Frederick Street car park. G. Dunedin Physiotherapy Pool While no submission was received from the Dunedin Physiotherapy Pool, numerous submissions were received from the public concerned about loss of parking near the physiotherapy pool. While there are no on-street car parks along the frontage of the property, paid on-street parking is available in front of Cumberland College, adjacent to the pool. Staff have identified that there are 21 parking spaces available on site at the physiotherapy pool; 16 are allocated for Southern District Health Board (SDHB), two are dedicated for pool staff and three are for the public with mobility parking permits. As there is a public off-street car park located around the corner on Hanover Street (150 metres away), there may be opportunities to discuss on-site parking with the hospital to release some of the allocated parking to mobility card holders and other pool users, and leasing some of the spaces in Hanover Street for SDHB use. The Working Group have also liaised with the manager of Instone Motors (located opposite the pool) regarding a potential shared parking opportunity, as they are closed on weekends. 15

16 Conclusion The Working Group have identified that Option 1 is the preferred technical option for the separated cycleway, as the driver of this project is to improve cyclist safety. Due to the concerns from businesses and the community about parking losses, a modified version of this option has been developed (Option 1A), which maintains parking along some blocks. Original estimates concluded that there was a loss of 391 parking spaces with Option 1. With the following parking mitigation measures put in place, this number could be reduced to an estimated net loss 86 (this excludes the additional spaces created by the potential mixed use/ car park development on the Frederick Street car park site). Please note that operational checks are needed to ensure changes to do not impact on service provision and traffic operations, hence an estimated range has been given. Parking mitigation measure No. of spaces Angle parking installed in side streets 92 spaces Additional spaces in Grange and Walsh Streets 8 spaces Option 1A spaces retained 198 spaces Additional spaces opposite North Dunedin shops 7 Estimated number of spaces gained 305 Table 9: Net gains in parking as a result of parking mitigation measures In addition to these net gains, it has been estimated that at peak times there are on-street spaces available on the one-way pair, on the opposite side of the proposed cycleway, and another spaces available in the Great King/Frederick/St Andrews Street car parks collectively. The next stage for parking, should the project proceed to the Indicative Business Case stage, will be to develop a draft Parking Plan for the area, and undertake further conversations with affected parties as part of this work. 16