My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2009 11 12
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2009 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2009 11 12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:49:45 AM
Creation date
11/23/2009 10:42:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCPKT 2009 11 12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Downtown Louisville Framework Plan <br />Unfortunately parking structures are a very expen- <br />sive solution for a city of Louisville's size. There- <br />fore, parking structures are not a quick and painless <br />solution to solving a parking shortage. Other solu- <br />tions less costly than parking structures involve ex- <br />panded surface parking lots, alternative modes of <br />transportation and development limitations. Perhaps <br />a development transitional period would allow suf- <br />ficient density to support greater bus service. <br />A remote parting program was suggested as a means <br />to save space in the core area by directing employee <br />parking to outlying areas, freeing close -in parking <br />for customers. One idea was to locate parking at or <br />near downtown gateway points. <br />There are several public policy options to help ad- <br />dress parking in a small town downtown such as <br />Louisville. Encouraging alternative means of trans- <br />portation helps reduce parking demand. Programs <br />that count parking space equivalents for providing <br />bicycle racks are an alternative that can help to a <br />limited, but cumulative, extent. <br />Reducing the permitted density of development <br />would have the most significant impact in reducing <br />total demand for additional parking spaces. Creat- <br />ing parking requirements could serve to limit build- <br />ing square footage. Short -term management solu- <br />tions may involve enforcement of time limits and <br />an Eco -pass program for downtown employees. <br />Long -term solutions may involve defining a parking <br />district, building parking structure(s), developing <br />remote parking lots and /or shuttle(s) for employees <br />and utilizing downtown circulator or shuttle buses. <br />However, in the short -term, steps should be taken to <br />better utilize the existing public and private parking <br />supply. <br />A key strategy would be to develop additional sur- <br />face lots, especially for employees, so long as the tra- <br />ditional downtown character was not compromised. <br />Certain surface parking lots should be planned in <br />such a way that they could become multilevel struc- <br />tures in the future if this becomes necessary and de- <br />sirable. AIong with these options is a requirement <br />that a parking district be established to collect and <br />distribute monies in a fair and equitable manner. <br />Design Standards <br />From an urban design perspective, downtown park- <br />ing should be consolidated into a limited number of <br />lots and /or structures. Multiple parking lots disrupt <br />the pedestrian streetscape and are generally a less <br />efficient use of land. <br />If parking structures are indeed the solution of choice <br />to alleviate future downtown parking problems, the <br />structure or structures should not dominate at the <br />street level. An interesting and lively pedestrian <br />streetscape should be preserved. Parking structures <br />should include street level retail and /or be architec- <br />turally designed to fit in with downtown character. <br />Ideally one level would be constructed below grade, <br />one at grade and two levels above grade for a total <br />of four levels. This scale is most compatible from an <br />urban design standpoint and is about the Limit of <br />height that most individuals will use in a downtown <br />area of this scale. <br />Outlying surface parking lots should be designed <br />with sufficient lighting, attractive landscaping and <br />with strong pedestrian connections into the down- <br />town area. All parking lots, whether public or pri- <br />vate, should be buffered from the street, either by <br />landscaping or with storefronts. Ideally, parking fa- <br />cilities, lots and structures would be wrapped with <br />retail space so as to enhance the pedestrian experi- <br />ence as well as further animate downtown. In sum- <br />mary, parking should be designed in such a way that <br />it enhances the pedestrian and architectural charac- <br />ter of downtown. <br />Goals <br />Manage the downtown parking supply to maxi- <br />mize use of spaces. <br />are Balance development density with a reasonable <br />potential parking supply. <br />Encourage the provision of additional public <br />parking, such as through a cooperative effort <br />between property owners, the business commu- <br />nity and the City. <br />Coordinate off-street parking in a manner that <br />promotes maximum efficiency and ease of use. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.