In a 2009 Parking and Mobility Study prepared by the DDD, curb parking occupancy in the downtown area averaged from 61% during the weekday to 96% on the weekend evenings.. After engaging
Background on Parking Benefit Districts
Urban downtown parking is typically managed with a mix of on-street meters for curb spaces and off-street options in surface lots and garages For decades, curb parking has been priced lower per hour than off-street spaces, creating a pricing incentive for drivers to chase cheaper curb spots even when supply is limited As a result, during peak periods, customers and residents often struggle to find a space near their destination when they need it most.
Instead of charging a flat rate to park on the street, a performance parking policy will dynamically adjust parking fees so that some curb parking is always available for businesses, customers, and residents no matter how popular the destination is for parking 3 Lots and garages can accommodate drivers who want to pay a lower price or plan to park once and stay for a longer visit
The immediate benefits of performance parking policy include reducing traffic congestion associated with searching for spaces and ensuring availability for quick or urgent trips Sixteen studies conducted between 1927 and 2001 found that, on average, 30 percent of the cars in congested downtown traffic were cruising for parking In another study in 2008, the average time it took to find a curb space in a 15 block area of the Upper West Side of Manhattan was 3.1 minutes and the average cruising distance was 0.37 miles The cumulative consequences of these actions are surprising: In one year, cruising for underpriced parking on these 15 blocks alone creates about 366,000 excess vehicle miles of travel and 325 tons of CO2 2 This situation is not unlike what is experienced in several dense neighborhoods in New Orleans In a 2009 Parking and Mobility Study prepared by the DDD, curb parking occupancy in the downtown area averaged from 61% during the weekday to 96% on the weekend evenings As of April 2011, DDD reports the downtown area has over $4 billion of projects currently or soon to be under construction, which will only worsen traffic and parking demand if left unmanaged.
A Parking Benefit District (PBD) ties the economic benefits of performance parking directly to improving the quality of life in the surrounding area The DDD study identified a series of improvements to boost mobility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles, but did not identify any new funding sources Setting competitive curb parking prices can generate modest public revenues that are reinvested directly into the district for projects such as street and sidewalk repairs, planting and maintenance of trees, and enhanced security or neighborhood services.
2 Shoup, Donald "Free Parking or Free Markets” Access Spring 2011.38 (2011): 28+ Print
3 Shoup, Donald “The Ideal Source of Local Public Revenue” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34,
Goals and Objectives
This study develops a practical roadmap for implementing Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) in New Orleans and provides a transferable reference for other communities pursuing parking reform It outlines the study’s objectives and methodological approach to deliver actionable guidance for policymakers, planners, and stakeholders on how to design, implement, and assess effective PBDs.
• Collect existing data on parking supply and the demand to inform community stakeholders;
• Provide research on best practices nationally;
• Share the process and results of public involvement and stakeholder discussions on PBDs;
• Provide action steps and recommendations for implementation based on results from research, outreach and the stakeholder workshop.
Stakeholder Outreach
Stakeholder input was essential to developing the study’s recommendations and findings, which are further discussed in Section 5 Representatives from government, business, and residents were brought together to introduce the concept of Parking Benefit Districts and to explore how such a policy could be implemented in New Orleans These stakeholders were deliberately chosen for their ability to influence or be affected by a new on-street parking policy, ensuring the discussion reflects diverse perspectives on Parking Benefit Districts and their potential impact.
• The City of New Orleans –
• New Orleans City Council – District B
• New Orleans City Council – District C
• New Orleans Regional Planning Commission
• Vieux Carré Properties Owners, Residents, and Associates
Summary of Findings
A detailed list of the essential elements common to all successful performance parking policies, developed from research into best practices across the country, is provided in Section 3 These elements, discussed in Section 4, define the minimum parameters necessary to create an effective PBD policy.
• Where should we start, e.g introduce a pilot program?
• What is the optimal occupancy rate?
• How should we adjust the rates?
• How often can/should we adjust the rates?
• When should the rates apply?
• Where should the rates apply (e.g block, district)?
• How do we measure effectiveness (i.e occupancy rate)?
• How are additional meter revenues, if any, distributed?
If additional revenues are to be shared:
• How is spending of funds in the PBD decided?
• Who authorizes/approves the expenditures?
• How are program activities reported?
• How are permanent and/or additional districts created?
• How will the application of PBD to other districts be determined?
Interaction with Other Existing Programs
• How will PBD function with other existing programs, particularly Residential Permit
After engaging the previously identified stakeholders with the essential elements outlined in Section 5, this section presents the recommendations for creating a Parking Benefits District policy in New Orleans, with further discussion of these recommendations in Section 6.
• Establish one to two initial pilot districts in the downtown area with community concurrence
• Establish vacancy targets for all performance-based parking of 15% (one to two spaces) per block face
• Start with existing meters and annually adjust pricing
• Utilize existing community representative entities where appropriate
• Require any new districts to be driven by area’s residents/businesses and have an initial pilot phase
• Share any excess revenue above an existing parking revenue baseline with the impacted district
The following next steps were identified for implementation:
• Identify and engage representative neighborhood entity or entities for initial pilot districts
• Enlist pilot districts to measure occupancy
• Perform detailed analysis of existing parking demand
• Develop Pilot Parking Benefit District Ordinance
2 Existing Conditions in New Orleans
Section 2 is an overview of existing on-street parking conditions in New Orleans based on available resources.
Regulatory framework
This section identifies the basis for regulating parking spaces and implementing parking policy
Section 4-901 (4) of the New Orleans City Charter authorizes the Department of Public Works to
“prescribe regulations governing traffic and parking on streets and other public places”
Authority to establish on-street parking policies and regulations rests with the public parking administrator, as defined in the City of New Orleans Municipal Code of Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 154-682 The public parking administrator is the head of the division of parking.
Supply
The Division of Parking currently manages 4,170 on-street metered parking spaces Block faces with on-street parking meters in the downtown area are shown in Figure 2 Parking rates are flat.
$1.50 per hour with a two-hour time limit between the hours of 8am and 6pm, Monday through Saturday
Table 2.1 presents the total parking supply in three downtown sub-areas—the French Quarter, the Central Business District (CBD), and the Warehouse District—and breaks it down by parking type: Off-Street Public (lots and garages open to the general public), Off-Street Private (lots and garages available for private or restricted use), and On-Street Supply (metered and unmetered curbside parking) The table also provides the overall total parking supply for each area, giving a clear view of parking capacity distribution across downtown.
As indicated by the table, 5,691 on-street parking spaces, or 12% of the total parking supply, are available downtown, including both metered and unmetered spots The downtown on-street supply is fairly evenly distributed across sub-areas, with the French Quarter accounting for 35%, the Central Business District 27%, and the Warehouse District 38%.
Figure 2: Existing On-Street Curb Parking in New Orleans Downtown Area
Source: New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study, Downtown Development District, 2009
Table 2.1: Effective Parking Supply in Downtown New Orleans
Source: New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study Final Report, Jan 2009
Technology
On-street parking is managed by a mix of traditional coin-only single-post meters and newer solar-powered multi-space Pay-and-Display meters that accept coins and credit cards Single-post meters cover one to two spaces on a block face, while Pay-and-Display meters can cover two or more spaces on the same block In total, 927 single-post units control 1,530 spaces (about 37% of the metered total), and 412 Pay-and-Display units manage 2,640 spaces (about 63% of the total) Pay-and-Display units were first installed from 2004 to 2005, and roughly 60% were replaced in 2006 after the levee failures associated with Hurricane Katrina.
Pay-and-Display meters can be accessed remotely for payment data, but current technology does not support remote adjustments to parking rates; rates must be programmed manually at each unit, at a small cost The City recently completed such an adjustment by extending pay parking to Saturdays The Department of Public Works says the City plans to retrofit all single-post meters with new tops that accept credit cards, are solar-powered, and can remotely adjust parking rates.
Demand
Completed in January 2009, the New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study Final Report presents an inventory of the current status of all three types of automobile parking in the New Orleans Downtown area and outlines projections for future demand.
The Mobility and Parking Study Final Report projects that at a moderate growth rate about 54 blocks will enter a parking deficit over the next five years Of these blocks, 23 are in the French Quarter, 16 are in the CBD, and the remaining 15 blocks are located in other districts.
Fifteen blocks are located in the Warehouse District In ten years, about 29% of downtown blocks are projected to experience parking deficiencies The French Quarter is expected to have 32 blocks with parking deficiencies, the Central Business District (CBD) 22 blocks, and the Warehouse District 24 blocks.
An accompanying table shows the growth in parking demand for the next 5- and 10-year periods under a moderate growth projection of 2% per year Projections for low growth and high growth were estimated as well, but are not shown here The analysis indicates that the largest total supply of parking is located in the study area.
Within the Warehouse District, the total supply is 23,815, with current usage at 10,160 (43%) Projections show usage rising to 11,217 (47%) in five years and to 12,385 (52%) in ten years, indicating steady growth over the forecast horizon.
Central Business District parking supply is currently the lowest, totaling 18,349 spaces with 11,507 in use—about 63% of capacity A forecast shows demand rising to 12,705 spaces (69% of capacity) within five years and to 12,705 spaces (76% of capacity) within ten years, highlighting a growing need for effective parking management in the CBD.
Table 2.2: Current and Projected Weekday Peak Demand
Source: New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study Final Report, Jan 2009
Optimal on-street parking occupancy to balance convenience and minimize driver search time is about 85%, meaning roughly seven of eight spaces per block face are typically occupied and leaving about 1–2 spaces open depending on total block spaces Figures 3 and 4 show current on-street parking occupancies during a weekday peak and a Saturday evening peak, with blocks colored red or black that exceed the 85% threshold On weekdays, 32% of French Quarter blocks exceeded 85% occupancy, while 19% of combined CBD and Warehouse District blocks did so; on Saturday evenings, 96% (24 of 25) of French Quarter blocks and 74% (17 of 23) in the Warehouse District exceeded 85% occupancy This data indicates that downtown parking demand regularly exceeds on-street supply, even when off-street capacity is available.
Source: New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study, Downtown Development District, 2009
Figure 4: Saturday Evening Peak Occupancy
Source: New Orleans Mobility and Parking Study, Downtown Development District, 2009
To understand performance parking and parking benefit districts, it is essential to identify best practices already in use across cities nationwide While these strategies remain an emerging field, there are many examples worth considering for potential implementation in New Orleans TMG researched numerous municipalities and selected six that best represent a spectrum of small, medium, and large cities, as well as the different forms of curb parking reform in practice Representatives from these cities were interviewed by TMG in March 2012.
• New York City - Department of Transportation, Division of Traffic and Planning
• San Francisco - San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA)
• Boulder - Downtown & Uni Hill Division/Parking Services
• Seattle - Department of Transportation, Division of Parking
• Washington, D.C - Department of Transportation, Parking Services
• Austin - Department of Transportation, Parking Enterprise Division
New York City
PARK Smart is an initiative of the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) designed to make parking easier, reduce congestion, and improve safety The program incentivizes drivers to park no longer than necessary, helping to increase the number of available metered spaces Meter rates are determined by a congestion-pricing model that adjusts prices based on demand to encourage turnover and optimize curb space usage.
At the outset, New York City held community outreach meetings to discuss congestion pricing in the five boroughs The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) invited volunteers to participate in the PARK Smart pilot programs that would experiment with parking pricing The pilot focused on on-street metered parking along retail and commercial corridors in predominantly residential neighborhoods, with the goals of exploring how parking pricing could work as a tool for managing parking demand and informing transportation policy.
• improve access to metered parking spaces, and
• reduce the time and mileage associated with searching for a metered parking space
Communities would voluntarily opt-in to the program and control the variables, with NYCDOT leveraging the existing Community Boards—local advisory groups appointed by New York City Council members and borough presidents—to implement the pilots Each community board was asked to write a letter of support for a pilot in their neighborhood Following these initial meetings, NYCDOT has implemented three of six planned pilots since 2008 in Greenwich Village, Park Slope, and the Upper East Side, funded by seed funding through a $1.4 million grant from the Federal Highway Administration’s Value Pricing Pilot Program.
NYCDOT began its second six-month parking pilot in May 2009 in Park Slope, Brooklyn, a primarily residential area with neighborhood retail along 5th and 7th Avenues and the cross streets Union and 9th; the neighborhood attracts visitors from surrounding Brooklyn neighborhoods and a small share from outside the borough (about 5% of total visitors), and the pilot expanded coverage from 262 to 542 spaces while introducing peak and off-peak pricing; before the price adjustment, the standard parking rate was $1 per hour, and currently the peak rate is $1.50 per hour.
Off-peak pricing was set at $0.75 per hour, and the project spanned approximately nine months, encompassing community outreach, walk-throughs with stakeholders, pre- and post-implementation data collection and recommendations, and the full program implementation.
NYCDOT staff measured the pilot program through time-consuming physical surveys of the pilot area, finding higher turnover and an improved ability for drivers to find parking; even with peak-hour rates increased (in some cases tripled), occupancy remained high due to saturated demand and limited off-street parking options Before implementing peak-rate pricing, occupancy averaged 91% on 7th Avenue and 82% on 5th Avenue during noon to 4 pm, and six and twelve months after implementation occupancy remained unchanged Traffic volumes declined about 7% post-implementation, largely because faster parking turnover reduced cruising for parking.
Following strong pilot results, the Community Board and the neighborhood merchant group unanimously voted to permanently retain the PARK Smart program and apply the peak rate to all metered parking in the neighborhood They also extended peak-rate hours from 4 pm to 7 pm due to high evening demand from restaurant patronage, as staff observed.
Officials say parking policy must balance the demand for parking with other local access needs—such as commercial deliveries, bus stops, taxi stands, and curb cuts—and with mobility needs including general traffic flow, pedestrian space, and bus and bike lanes Peak-rate pricing is one tool in NYCDOT’s curb-management toolbox for addressing the varying curb demands of different neighborhoods A Transportation Research Board report details that NYCDOT’s curb-management strategies also include additional measures beyond peak-rate pricing.
Paid commercial parking replaced unpriced loading with an escalating pricing schedule, and a 2000 Midtown pilot cut average parking duration from 160 minutes to 45 minutes, with only about 25% of vehicles parked longer than an hour Since 2001, the program has expanded to cover most commercial parking spaces in Manhattan from 60th Street to 14th Street and in Chinatown and surrounding areas This initiative marked NYCDOT’s first use of parking pricing to improve curb access and reduce congestion, a strategy supported by the delivery industry for its effectiveness in freeing curb space on narrow crosstown streets where a single double-parked truck can block traffic Current rates for trucks and commercial deliveries are $2.50 for one hour, $5 for two hours, and $9 for three hours of parking.
Bus Rapid Transit, known in New York City as Select Bus Service (SBS), represents the city’s initial implementation of bus rapid transit First introduced in 2008, SBS routes currently operate on Fordham Road and Pelham Parkway in the Bronx and on First and Second Avenues in Manhattan, with three additional routes in planning and outreach.
NYCDOT collaborates with neighborhood merchants along retail corridors to designate delivery windows—specific times and curbside locations for commercial deliveries These windows free up curb space and aim to improve the efficiency of curbside deliveries while reducing congestion and double parking To date, delivery windows have been implemented as part of every SBS project and in several Brooklyn neighborhoods.
Manhattan freight deliveries exceed 100,000 trips daily, with about 80% heading to wholesale, retail and food enterprises In August 2009, NYCDOT, in partnership with a consortium led by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, launched a pilot program with eight delivery companies and 25 business locations to promote off-hour shipments through financial incentives and streamlined processes, including unassisted deliveries The pilot achieved notable efficiency gains, with travel speeds to the first stop improving by up to 75% and total delivery time dropping from 100 minutes to 30 minutes Encouraged by these results, the DOT plans to promote the program further and identify additional participants.
• Pedestrian and bike safety improvements (daylighting, traffic calming, bike lanes).
NYCDOT’s safety improvements in New York City include sidewalk extensions into curb lanes to accommodate extremely heavy pedestrian flows and daylighted intersections that give drivers a clearer view of pedestrians crossing The agency has also installed hundreds of miles of bike lanes citywide, with some lanes utilizing the curb lane to create a safer and more convenient bike network.
4 Bruce Schaller, et al., “Parking Pricing and Curbside Management in New York City,” Transportation Research Board 2011: 2.
San Francisco
SFpark, an initiative by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), uses innovative technology and policy to improve parking by delivering real-time information on available spaces, helping drivers find open spots quickly The live data enables dynamic pricing for meters and garages to align with demand, promoting parking in underused areas and easing congestion in overused zones SFpark also emphasizes accessible, cash-free payments through its website, smartphone app, and other interactive tools, making it easier for drivers to plan and pay for parking.
November 2008, the SFMTA Board of Directors approved legislation enabling the SFpark pilot project, funded by a $19.4 million Federal Highway Administration grant that covered 80% of the program SFpark aimed to improve parking availability, reduce congestion, and cut emissions from idling cars SFpark staff conducted surveys to select pilot locations, seeking a mix of neighborhoods with busy retail and commercial activity, and no fixed threshold criteria were used The pilot phase began in summer 2010 and included eight pilot programs across eight areas.
3.2.2 New Equipment: Parking Meters and Sensors
By the end of 2010, SFpark deployed new parking meters that accept credit and debit cards and added occupancy sensors to provide real-time data on parking availability The program covers 19,250 spaces: 7,000 of San Francisco’s 28,800 metered spaces and 12,250 spaces in 15 of the city’s 20 parking garages Most metered spots are paired with about 5,100 single-space meters, while the remainder are served by multi-space meters covering roughly 10 spaces each Occupancy sensors were installed under 8,200 spaces within the pilot area, alongside three control neighborhoods to supply baseline data for evaluation Meter installation costs ranged from approximately
Initial investment ranges from $1,000 to $1,500, with each sensor costing roughly $300 plus a $14 monthly usage fee Ongoing costs per meter include communications services, licensing, merchant services, and bank activities.
Source: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority
SFpark began implementing demand-responsive pricing in May 2011 to maintain optimal parking availability by shifting demand away from overused areas and encouraging drivers to park in underused neighborhoods and garages, which helps reduce congestion in busy zones Meter rates now vary by neighborhood, with downtown the most expensive and commercial districts the least, replacing the pre-pilot range of $2.00-$3.50 per hour Under the pilot, six pricing structures apply, incorporating weekday and weekend rates across three time blocks (9am-12pm, 12-3pm, 3-6pm) and hourly rates ranging from $0.25 to $6.00, with rates and hours differing by pilot area The SFpark sensors monitor occupancy to enable pricing adjustments in $0.25-$0.50 increments based on occupancy.
Figure 5: San Francisco Pilot Parking Zones
Snapshot: San Francisco Dynamic Parking
• Spaces: 19,250 spaces (meters and City-owned garages) in eight pilots; 8,200 have sensors
(9am-12 pm, 12-3 pm, 3-6 pm) M-Su
• Revenue: Returned to transit service general fund
• Performance: Increase in meter revenue, longer duration, fewer parking citations; Net revenue neutral a 5-week interval According to the SF park website, changes to the rates will not be made more than once a month and are adjusted according to the below occupancy rates:
• When occupancy is 80-100 percent, the hourly rate will be raised by $0.25
• When occupancy is 60-80 percent, the hourly rate will not be changed
• When occupancy is 30-60 percent, the hourly rate will be lowered by $0.25
• When occupancy is less than 30 percent, the hourly rate will be lowered by $0.50
Since the implementation of the pilot program, SF park has conducted four rate adjustments
SFpark’s pilot phase will run until summer 2012 and will be followed by a formal evaluation and citywide launch scheduled for late 2012 While SFMTA has seen an increase in parking revenue, their overall revenue has remained neutral because of a decrease in parking citations The elimination or relaxation of time limits to a maximum of four hours has contributed to the reduction in parking citations because prior time limits were too short This has turned out to be an added benefit to SFMTA as well because the short time limits were difficult and expensive to enforce Contrary to the thought that demand-responsive pricing would lead to only increases in parking rates, SF park has lowered quite a few rates because they were found to be priced too high
Ms Mattern estimated that approximately 1/3 of the rates increased, 1/3 stayed the same, and 1/3 decreased
This program prioritizes parking availability and congestion reduction rather than raising new revenue It does not seek to generate additional funds; instead, all parking revenue collected is returned to the transit service general fund, reinvested back into transit operations to support a more efficient and reliable service.
Boulder
3.3.1 Central Area General Improvement District
Boulder, Colorado began in 1970 with the nation’s oldest parking benefit districts, created within the Central Area General Improvement District (CAGID) and the University General Improvement District (UGID) to address the high levels of activity in downtown Boulder and around the university CAGID operates 875 on-street metered parking spaces and nine off-street parking facilities across a 30-block district in downtown Boulder, as part of the parking benefits district program.
Snapshot: Seattle Performance-based Parking
• Pricing: $1-$4 fixed by zone, 8a-6p M-Sa (except core)
• Revenue: All revenue to General Fund
• Performance: Occupancy by observation automated payment machines and increasing meter rates, of which all revenues were reinvested in the district
3.3.2 New Equipment and Meter Rates
In fall 2007, Boulder installed multi-space pay stations that cover four to nine parking spaces and accept credit card payments About 80% of users paid with a credit card, and Boulder increased hourly parking rates by 25%, from $1.00 to $1.25 per hour The combination of the new meters and higher rates led to revenue increases, especially since leftover money from previous occupants could not be used as with the old single-space, coin-only meters The cost of each meter, including monthly usage fees, is approximately $7,700.
Funds from CAGID have funded free EcoPasses for city employees working within the district, and partially subsidized EcoPasses for downtown employers to provide to their workers The program also supports a bike share initiative and the installation of bike racks, expanding multimodal transportation options for residents and employees in the area.
Seattle
From 2004 to 2007, Seattle’s Division of Parking in the Department of Transportation converted every coin-only meter to multi-space meters that accept coins and credit cards or operate as Pay-and-Display This upgrade covered 13,500 metered spaces across twenty neighborhoods, modernizing the city’s parking infrastructure and expanding payment options for drivers.
Starting in 2010, Seattle implemented a mandatory, performance-based parking policy in which pricing is adjusted over time to meet vacancy goals, with the target of one to two vacant spaces per block face The approach depends on dynamic pricing to control turnover, but the older pay-station technology did not offer the same capabilities as newer systems deployed in other cities.
Francisco, the program was designed to meet performance goals using price adjustments as technology and implementation restrictions allowed
In its first year, the city established zone-based metered spaces and set their hourly rates at $2.50 in the downtown zone, $2 in downtown-adjacent zones, and $1.50 elsewhere The program’s results are measured and reported quarterly, and at the end of the first year—along with every subsequent year—pay-per-hour rates are adjusted based on those results.
After two years, Seattle has built on the program’s success by continuously adjusting rental rates to reach the vacancy goal Current rates, shown in the figure below, range from $1 to $4 and reflect a neighborhood-based pricing strategy To optimize occupancy, the city has subdivided neighborhoods into higher-rate zones in more popular areas and lower-rate zones in spill-over districts such as Ballard and the University District.
Figure 6: Performance-based Pricing in Seattle
Source: Seattle Department of Transportation
Implementation of performance parking has resulted in an almost 11% average annual increase in revenue Much of this growth is likely due to the expansion of metered areas and changes in metered hours In the downtown area, meter hours were extended from 6 pm to 8 pm and Saturdays were added in all zones The Division of Parking estimates that increases in rates in many neighborhoods have been offset by decreases in other areas.
Due in part to the citywide implementation, there is no revenue sharing with neighborhoods within zones, and all funds continue to go back in the City’s general fund
Although the program is broadly viewed as a success, it still grapples with two major challenges: limitations in price-adjustment technology and insufficient communication with communities about the benefits of performance pricing.
Washington, DC
Washington, D.C Department of Transportation (DDOT) recently began implementing a performance-based parking program in two pilot districts with a third in development for 2012 The goals of the program are to:
• Protect resident parking residential zones
• Encourage regular parking turnover in popular commercial areas
The pilot program, established by legislation, see Appendix 1, requires a vacancy goal of 10-20% vacancy per block face These goals are reported quarterly for each district
The district receives 80% of net revenue after expenses, and the shared funds must be used exclusively for non-automobile transportation improvements in that district, with priorities set by Advisory Neighborhood Commission 5 (ANC 5) The initial implementation of two pilot districts required approximately $1 million in capital costs.
The first pilot district, the Ballpark District, centers on the rapidly redeveloping area south of the Capitol around the recently completed Washington Nationals baseball stadium The second district, Columbia Heights, is a mixed-use neighborhood with a pre-existing residential parking permit program.
5 ANCs are established advisory boards for a number of community issues with members directly elected
Snapshot: Washington DOT Performance-based Parking
• Revenue: 80% after expenses (per space rate) to PBD
–Initiated by DDOT, prioritized by Advisory Neighborhood Commission
• New PBD: City initiated, project dependent
• Performance: Occupancy by license plate reader;
The Ballpark district, shown in Figure 5, includes 130 multi-space meters covering
6,200 parking spaces In both cases DDOT has opted to implement a tiered rate structure with hourly rates increasing after the first hour up to a 4-hour limit In the
Ballpark District parking is priced hourly: $1 for the first hour, $2 for the second, $2.50 for the third, and $3 for the fourth On home baseball game days, these rates more than double, so a full four-hour stay can total $20, which matches the flat-rate private off-street parking available on game days.
The Columbia Heights district includes a mix of a heavily used commercial node with medium density residential, shown in Figure
This parking district spans 40 blocks with about 2,000 metered spaces, offering rates of $2.50 for the first hour and $3 for the second and third hours Metered spaces operate from 7:00 a.m to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday Unique among many PBDs is its interaction with the Residential Permit Parking (RPP) program, where some sections of metered parking provide exemptions for permitted residents.
DDOT has expressed a positive response to the program and plans to expand to additional districts as directed by the City The agency’s experience shows that constant monitoring and data collection to identify occupancy rates are essential to the program’s success, enabling a data-driven approach to occupancy management At the same time, DDOT has found that revenue sharing can limit their flexibility to fund future projects, presenting a trade-off between shared revenue models and independent district investments.
Figure 7: Washington DC Ballpark District
Source: District of Columbia, Department of Transportation
Figure 8: Washington DC Pilot Parking District - Columbia Heights
Source: District of Columbia, Department of Transportation
Snapshot: Austin Parking Benefit District
• Spaces: 96 in pilot; adding 200 in permanent
• Pricing: $1 per hr fixed, 3 hour limit
• Revenue: 51% after expenses (per space rate) to PBD
–Neighborhood association is deciding entity –Submit prioritized project list
• New PBD: Community initiated “pro-forma”
• RPP: Starting to go into effect -
Austin
In 2007, the City of Austin’s Department of Transportation launched a Parking Benefit District (PBD) pilot to extend metered parking coverage to a small section of the existing metered commercial strip located next to the University of Texas The initial phase covered 96 parking spaces The goal was to capture the spillover effect of parking demand, since drivers often congest adjacent streets to avoid meters Since then, the area west of the campus has grown substantially with large residential projects to support the university, and the UT area now receives nearly 75,000 visitors daily, highlighting the importance of effective metered parking management in that corridor.
In 2012, a full PBD program is being finalized as established by ordinance, shown in
Appendix 1 outlines the district's plan to expand to the entire neighborhood and add approximately 200 new metered parking spaces, as shown in the accompanying figure The program was launched to improve parking turnover and is now fully supported by the neighborhood after a year of stakeholder meetings with students, residents, and the University Parking rates will remain at the current $1 per hour, while extended weekend hours and additional meter locations are expected to boost parking availability for retail and commercial uses.
The PBD will receive 51% of revenue after expenses, with expenditures driven by the neighborhood associations The associations develop a priority-based project list in consultation with the City, and strict input and advertising guidelines ensure broad awareness and participation from district residents and businesses in an annual community meeting where the final prioritized project list is approved The DOT will also support the PBD with an assigned enforcement patrol funded by the City’s share of the revenue.
This program is noteworthy for its focus on a community-driven and supported approach Additional PBDs are under consideration as initiated by neighborhood associations
Figure 9: Austin Parking Benefit District
Source: City of Austin, prepared by TMG
Original meters Pilot PBD meters Permanent PBD meters PBD boundary
Summary
AUSTIN Department of Transportation WASHINGTON DC
Department of Transportation SAN FRANCISCO
SEATTLE Department of Transportation Spaces 96 in pilot; adding 200 in permanent Columbia Heights
19,250 spaces (meters and City- owned parking garages) in eight pilots; 8,200 have sensors
Pricing $1.00 per hr fixed, 3 hour limit
(1 st , 2 nd , 3 rd , 4 th hr) 7a – 6:30p, M-S
(9am-12 pm, 12-3 pm, 3-6 pm) M-Su
$1-$4 fixed by zone, 8a-6p, M-S generally 8a-8p, M-S commercial core
Revenue 51% after expenses (per space rate) to PBD
Overall increase due to more meters
Initiated by DDOT, prioritized by Advisory Neighborhood Commission
100% returned to transit service general fund
Overall revenue neutral (before/after PBD)
Annual Review with the City
Initiated by DDOT, prioritized by Advisory Neighborhood Commission
New PBDs Community initiated using "Pro-
Forma" City initiated, project dependent Under consideration Under evaluation
Coordination with RPP Starting to go into effect
Limited supply (40-50 permits) Mix – exempt and exclusive N/A in zones N/A
Measures Occupancy by field observation;
Regular reporting Occupancy by license plate reader;
Quarterly meetings, Annual Report Sensor technology - instant reporting Occupancy by field observation
Successful parking reform does not happen overnight, especially when fear of negative impacts on private businesses or neighborhoods blocks change City interviews show that targeted community outreach is critical to move a new strategy from concept to practice, with stakeholders recognizing its benefits Some programs, such as New York City's PARK Smart and Austin’s Parking Benefit District, were voluntary, allowing communities to opt into pilots after learning through outreach sessions When reforms are not voluntary, it’s wise to structure discussions around the specific concerns and needs of each impacted group to build buy-in and smoother implementation.
The level of direct impact a change has on an entity drives how deep the discussion and engagement will be For the public and community at large—who may be directly affected by changes in parking rates—the depth of discussion is likely medium Outreach to these audiences could include a large forum or symposium where information about parking reform is shared and the implications explained.
However, engagement at the point of existing neighborhood organization is also very effective Utilizing neighborhood associations or more formal community-based entities allows interaction with existing civic activity
Outreach should be tailored to groups closest to the impacted area, including business owners, neighborhood residents, and city officials, whose input guides practical, on-the-ground decisions The discussion is likely to be deep and highly engaged, addressing operational concerns such as maintaining easy access for both potential customers and local residents Opinions may diverge: some argue that new parking regulations will improve access by increasing available parking, while others fear that higher rates could push customers to unregulated areas Residents may also worry about bearing higher local parking costs and about drivers circling the area for cheaper spots, which can add traffic and neighborhood congestion.
Beyond representing the best interests of their constituents, city officials also focus on the program's operations and maintenance to create, implement, approve, monitor, and enforce new parking reforms.
An effective stakeholder outreach strategy for parking benefit districts (PBDs) in New Orleans combines multiple workshops to educate participants on PBD concepts, discuss the specifics of a PBD in New Orleans, and build the implementation framework Because participants represent neighborhoods with diverse characteristics, the approach should pair broad group forums with breakout sessions based on clear geographic boundaries (e.g., neighborhoods) or themes (businesses, residents, city officials) when examining specific PBD design elements, while keeping discussions within defined parameters to ensure focused, actionable outcomes.
Below are essential elements of a parking benefit district program Answering these questions among public officials and the stakeholder community will provide the basis for establishing a PBD program.
Creation
• Where should the program start, e.g introduce a pilot program?
Function
• What is the optimal occupancy rate?
Pricing
• How often can/should rates adjust?
• When should the rates apply?
• Where should the rates apply (e.g block, district)?
Performance Management
• How should effectiveness be measured (i.e occupancy)?
Revenue Distribution
• How are additional revenues distributed?
If additional revenues are to be shared:
• How is spending of funds in the PBD decided?
• Who authorizes/approves the expenditures?
• How are program activities reported?
Replication
• How are permanent and/or additional districts created?
• How will the application of PBD to other districts be determined?
• Role of the community in creation and administration of new PBDs?
Interaction with Other Existing Programs
• How will PBD function with other existing programs, particularly Residential Permit
Community Symposium featuring local speakers and keynote speaker Dr Donald Shoup
ULI Louisiana, enabled by a grant from ULI National’s Urban Innovation Fund, hosted a well-attended community symposium and a productive stakeholder workshop on Parking Benefit Districts Highlights from both events are summarized below, outlining key insights, policy considerations, and actionable next steps to advance parking reform and urban development through Parking Benefit Districts.
Community Symposium
ULI Louisiana hosted a community symposium that was free and open to the public on March 13,
2012 featuring national parking expert Dr Donald
Shoup, Professor of Urban Planning at UCLA Local leaders offered complementary perspectives of business owners, developers, and city planners
The symposium aimed to educate the public about the current parking situation in downtown New Orleans, drawing on experiences shared by local developers and businesses, examining challenges stemming from current parking requirements and management strategies, and exploring potential solutions through improved parking policies Overall, the event was well received by attendees and the media, with participants ranging from neighborhood association representatives to city officials noting the topic's applicability and calling for its citywide implementation.
Stakeholder Workshop
On March 14, 2012, TMG facilitated a stakeholder workshop for ULI-Louisiana focused on how Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) function and how similar policies could be implemented in New Orleans The session built on a well-attended public symposium held the previous night, which introduced PBDs and broader parking reform opportunities as a means to improve the city’s quality of life The workshop was co-facilitated by Dr Donald Shoup.
Twenty-three participants representing the New Orleans City Council, the City of New Orleans Department of Public Works (DPW), the City Planning Commission, the Regional Planning Commission, the Regional Transit Authority, the Downtown Development District, and the French Quarter Management District, along with residents and business representatives from the French Quarter, Faubourg Marigny, and the Central Business District, attended the Workshop The diverse representation across government and community groups fostered an environment conducive to an effective and meaningful discussion A complete list of workshop participants and invited attendees is available in Appendix 2.
TMG in consultation with Dr Shoup developed the following objectives for the workshop:
• Review existing parking conditions in New Orleans
• Understand how Parking Benefit Districts work generally
• Establish criteria for a successful Parking Benefit District and compare relevant case studies
• Outline a policy for PBD in New Orleans for one to two pilot districts
The presentation that was made during the workshop providing details for each objective is included in Appendix _
5.2.2 Review of existing parking conditions in New Orleans
To bring all participants to the same baseline of understanding existing parking conditions, TMG presented details on the following:
• Inventory of meters (pay & display multi-space meters vs coin-only meters)
• Effective hours of parking rate
• Occupancy rate comparisons (weekday vs Saturday night)
• Details of Residential Parking Permits: how they are initiated, how many resident signatures are needed, number of permits/guest passes available to each household, costs of the permit
5.2.3 Discussion of how Parking Benefit
Dr Shoup explains that the objective of a Parking Benefit District (PBD) is to provide convenient parking rather than generate revenue A practical approach to achieving this objective is to operate and price parking meters around the clock to ensure one or two spaces are available on every block To encourage acceptance of PBDs, he proposed that parking meter revenues be used to fund public investments He cites Old Pasadena as a real-world example of how the policy has worked in practice, illustrating a transformation from Skid Row to a more prosperous area.
Although no single factor fully explains the change, addressing the parking problem emerged as a key driver Merchants and property owners realized that employees occupied many of the most convenient curb spaces, but they opposed the city’s plan to install meters, fearing that parking meters would deter customers from visiting the area rather than free up spaces for shoppers.
Dr Donald Shoup Co-Facilitating the Stakeholder
Old Pasadena's parking meters were installed after the city reached a compromise with merchants and property owners, with the understanding that the revenue would stay in Old Pasadena As Marilyn Buchanan, chair of the Old Pasadena Parking Meter Zone (PMZ) Advisory Board, stated, “The only reason meters went into Old Pasadena in the first place was because the city agreed all the money would stay in Old Pasadena.” The PMZ Advisory Board, established by the city, consists of business and property owners who advise on parking policies and set spending priorities for the zone’s meter revenues Returning Old Pasadena’s parking meter revenue to support added public services has greatly benefited the city as a whole.
5.2.4 Comparison of relevant case studies and necessary criteria
Case studies highlighting cities implementing some form of PBD—Austin, D.C., San Francisco, and Seattle—are presented, with brief details on each PBD’s boundaries, pricing, revenue collection and distribution, performance, and replication potential An in-depth set of interviews with each city is provided in Section 3 The article also presents the criteria deemed necessary for PBD implementation.
• Well-defined area with high demand for parking
• Insufficient supply of curb parking
• Ability to charge for curb parking space
• Means of measuring effectiveness, i.e occupancy
• Added public services for the neighborhood
5.2.5 Creation of a policy for one to two PBD pilots
Time constraints limited our ability to finalize a policy for implementing a PBD, but participants used breakout sessions to explore how a PBD could be rolled out in the Downtown/Warehouse District or in the French Quarter/Marigny Area These breakout discussions were steered by the questions from Section 4, and participants’ detailed responses are presented in the following sections To move toward a concrete implementation plan, an additional workshop is recommended to develop and approve a final policy for one or two pilot PBD initiatives.
5.2.6 Identification of challenges to implementation
During the workshop, participants highlighted political and financial challenges to Place-Based Development (PBD) Although case studies of cities facing similar issues and Dr Shoup’s research and experience were shared, it became clear that additional outreach, education, and engagement are needed Merchants, business owners, and tourism industry representatives were identified as key groups to include in further outreach sessions A separate workshop focusing on detailed implementation steps for city officials and representatives was also proposed The article outlines participants' identified challenges to implementing Place-Based Development and the suggested next steps.
The three-hour workshop was split into two parts: Part One offered an introduction to PBDs and, led by Dr Shoup, presented the economic and political case for their implementation; Part Two provided a detailed review of several city case studies that have adopted some form of PBD.
The workshop’s second half focused on policy elements required to create policy-based districts (PBDs) in New Orleans After a broad discussion of community-wide issues, participants split into two geographic breakout sessions—Downtown/Warehouse District and the French Quarter/Marigny—preselected as pilot district candidates based on prior research and stakeholder consultation City officials participated in both groups They addressed general and specific questions about the creation, function, pricing, performance measurement, revenue distribution, replication, and interaction with existing programs to guide the discussions The resulting observations reflect the participants’ direct feedback on these essential policy elements.
To determine where to start a pilot program, several areas are proposed as potential PBDs beyond the Downtown/Warehouse District and the French Quarter/Marigny These include Mid-City, Bywater, the Magazine Street commercial corridor, and the Oak Street commercial corridor There is enthusiastic support for broad outreach to individual merchants and business owners to gather input and build buy-in.
• What is the optimal occupancy rate? o The recommended parking vacancy by Dr Shoup of 1 to 2 spaces per metered block face, or 15% vacancy, was generally agreed as an effective goal
How should we adjust the rates? Existing parking meters cannot be remotely updated to support new pricing schemes and require a hard-wired data connection DPW staff indicate that a software upgrade could reverse this restriction, and this option is included in the current RFP for parking management, which is now under review by the City.
• When should the rates apply? o Downtown/Warehouse District:
DPW was able to implement extending metering to Saturday without significant outreach
While there was significant resistance by merchants to Saturday metering at the outset, there has been little to no complaint since implemented
Rubenstein's initially resisted Saturday metering, but is now fully supportive of expanded hours and pricing to meet occupancy objectives, provided the additional revenue is redirected to improvements in the local area.
All agreed perception of parking challenges was a significant problem Rubenstein’s pays for valet service to entice customers All parties agreed using pricing to ensure some availability at the curb would be a significant benefit to changing the perception of driving to downtown as a destination o French Quarter/Marigny Area:
In residential areas, suggestions for adding meters included:
Meters should be applied to only non-residents
Meters should run 8-7 pm Monday through Saturday with a 2-hour time limit
For the French Quarter/Marigny area, rates should be increased on weekday evenings and Saturdays, especially after 6 pm when activity is high
During street cleaning, cars should be allowed to park on the opposite side (e.g switch the fire lane during the applicable period)
Special events should have specific rates and fines (e.g Mardi Gras)
• Where should the rates apply (e.g block, district)? o French Quarter/Marigny Area:
District boundaries should not include just the Marigny Triangle (area bound by the Mississippi River, Rampart St/St Claude Ave, Esplanade Ave, and Elysian Fields Ave), but extend beyond that to include the Rectangle (area bound by the River, St Claude Ave, Elysian Fields Ave and Press St)
City-owned garages should have the same rate structure and occupancy goal as on-street meters
Time limits should be applied to residential areas, not commercial areas
2-hour time limits should be removed on currently metered streets
Recommended implementation strategy
6.1.1 Establish one to two initial pilot districts in the downtown area with community concurrence
A one- to two-year pilot district will enable the community and public officials to test the new PBD parking management policy, with the opportunity to refine and adapt it for a full rollout or to pull back if PBD proves not to be the right tool; pilot districts should be selected in areas where vacancy rates are below 15% to ensure meaningful assessment and impact.
Downtown areas experience the highest on-street parking demand due to the concentration of workers, tourists, and growing high-density residential populations, with parking demand peaking on both weekdays and weekends Stakeholders in these districts have shown positive initial support for Parking Benefit District (PBD) implementation, a critical step toward addressing parking needs and moving the project forward.
6.1.2 Establish vacancy targets for all performance-based parking of 15% (one to two spaces) per block face
From the outset, establish the goal of any performance-based parking program and define clear performance metrics While adjusting meter rates, operating times, and locations can generate ancillary revenue, the primary objective is to reduce the time drivers spend searching for parking, increase the availability of metered spaces, and improve turnover.
Implementing a vacancy or occupancy target provides a single, clear objective that is easy to measure Case studies across the country consistently advocate a goal of one to two vacant spaces, or roughly 15% of each metered block face These targets are typically codified in an enabling ordinance and paired with reporting requirements to monitor progress and ensure accountability.
6.1.3 Start with existing meters and annually adjust pricing
PBD programs and performance parking do not inherently require a large upfront capital investment, unlike the major expenditures seen in cities like San Francisco and New York City The experiences of Seattle and Austin demonstrate that PBDs can be successfully implemented using existing parking meter technology, significantly reducing start-up costs while still delivering effective parking management and performance outcomes.
Section 2 shows that New Orleans’ current meter technology cannot update parking rates remotely A hybrid model inspired by Seattle and Washington, DC enables New Orleans to deploy price-based dynamics (PBDs) at a lower cost by creating sub-zones within a pilot PBD, with each sub-zone keeping a uniform parking rate Initial pricing would be set from an occupancy survey of the pilot districts Sub-zone rates, operating hours, and the addition of metered spaces would be adjusted annually based on occupancy data collected quarterly throughout the year.
6.1.4 Utilize existing community representative entities where appropriate
Representative entities can be formal and defined, such as New York City's Community Boards or Washington, DC's Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, yet meaningful community input can also come from less official channels For example, in Austin, a well-established neighborhood association demonstrates that the process can successfully engage residents through non-governmental advisory entities.
Experience shows that a pre-existing community representative organization with a proven history of engaging its constituents and reconciling diverse interests consistently enables effective implementation of PBDs In the absence of a formal community advisory entity, neighborhood groups and similar associations should participate actively and responsibly to improve parking management and shape policy formation Although this engagement can take time, it tends to yield broader support and greater program success The advantage of relying on established entities is that the process moves forward with community backing and confidence in the program’s outcomes.
Business improvement districts have long proven a natural fit for urban development, a pattern observed by the City of Boulder over thirty years ago In New Orleans, the Downtown Development District (DDD) has earned strong praise from stakeholders as a capable representative and steward of both resident and business interests The DDD also maintains a proven track record of managing improvement projects through close consultation with area stakeholders to ensure initiatives reflect community needs.
The French Quarter is anchored by an established entity, the French Quarter Management District (FQMD) Although the FQMD is distinct from the DDD and lacks a dedicated revenue stream for full-time staff, it successfully unites the diverse business and residential interests and organizations into a single collaborative body In its current form, FQMD can guide neighborhood consensus on key policy points, mobilize volunteer support for data collection, and prioritize capital projects that improve the area.
6.1.5 Require any new districts to be driven by area’s residents/businesses and have an initial pilot phase
New Parking Benefit Districts (PBDs) should be opt-in, mirroring the existing Residential Parking Program (RPP) District boundaries should be shaped by input from community representatives, resident and business organizations, while also reflecting practical parking patterns, as seen in Washington DC and Austin, where districts extend beyond metered blocks to capture spill-over parking demand on currently unmetered blocks By starting with a pilot phase, final district boundaries can be established after the program’s effectiveness is measured.
An initial pilot program acts as a crucial introductory step because a PBD policy should establish clear guidelines and minimum requirements for community stakeholders when forming new PBDs To prove a parking demand issue, neighborhoods must demonstrate the problem by surveying both metered and unmetered on-street parking conditions and showing occupancy levels regularly exceeding 85% before requesting a new PBD This evidence-based approach helps ensure the policy is transparent, enforceable, and aligned with actual local needs.
Several neighborhood association representatives expressed enthusiastic support for PBDs for their neighborhoods, including Faubourg Marigny Improvement Assocation, Bywater Neighborhood Association and Mid-City Neighborhood Organization
6.1.6 Share any excess revenue above an existing parking revenue baseline with the impacted district
Early input from residents and local business stakeholders shows a willingness to experiment with performance-based pricing for curbside parking, provided the community shares in any additional revenue Public acceptance of adjusted rates and operating times may not come from simply increasing parking availability However, given the City of New Orleans' current budget challenges, any form of revenue sharing should be over and above existing parking meter revenue This baseline can be assessed now with existing technology for a defined district or zone before implementing a performance-based pricing district (PBD) The exact percentage of revenue sharing should be determined by public officials and stakeholders and codified in the enabling PBD ordinance.
Next Steps
The following have been identified as necessary follow-on steps to the work summarized in this report for full implementation
6.2.1 Identify and engage representative neighborhood entity or entities for initial pilot districts
Building on the outreach and stakeholder workshop outlined in Section 5, several entities have been engaged to advance the development of the PBD pilot program The next step is to identify the pilot district(s) and the implementation partners—those entities that will collaborate to execute the program.
6.2.2 Perform a detailed analysis of existing parking demand
Parking meter revenue data provides substantial insights into the utilization of existing meters Even with a limited data set for this study, granular revenue information—broken down by time of day and by geographic area—can reveal not only when meters are most active but also where they are being used, informing smarter decisions about meter deployment, pricing strategies, and urban parking management.
Collect occupancy data across the proposed pilot districts to determine new, adjusted parking rates and hours of operation; at a minimum, the study should include an analysis of morning and evening parking conditions on two weekdays, as well as mid-day and late-evening conditions on Saturday.
New data-collection technologies, including license plate readers (LPR), can dramatically reduce the time and labor involved in data gathering, though they can be expensive yet highly reliable In Washington, DC, license plate reader vehicles for two pilot districts cost about $120,000 annually for three days of data collection every quarter Since the City of New Orleans already uses license plate readers as part of its enforcement work, costs may be lower for utilization data The City should investigate the cost and usage of license plate readers to generate utilization data and inform decision-making.
6.2.3 Enlist pilot districts to measure occupancy
Parking administrators nationwide stress the need to regularly measure parking occupancy to guide policy decisions In the early stages of district creation, neighborhood associations or other groups can conduct preliminary counts, producing actionable data on how parking is used within the proposed district This information helps public officials understand overall parking utilization and supports adjustments to metered parking rates and hours to better align supply with demand.
Section 4 defines the essential elements that must be addressed in a PBD policy, many of which were explored in stakeholder workshops and are summarized in Section 5 with the corresponding recommendations for policy components All these elements should be thoroughly presented, discussed, and approved with stakeholders prior to finalizing the PBD policy.
6.2.5 Develop Pilot Parking Benefit District Ordinance
Using the finalized parking policy elements and identified pilot district(s), create a pilot parking benefit district ordinance to implement these changes Appendix 1 contains sample legislation from other cities.