I“"'‘'°'“‘‘‘''‘°" ( ' B 48055.3! _l,i'D,’9I'i~—- H E PARKING i-SURVEY AND 1 PROGRAM BUFFALO NEW YeR1|< v Tv“"'“'— hi-~~4ém!=_?_:__~,~"-_-_-7 I-Iv}-\“Z$§;Q~f.-S Rx,“ Plan .~ -_ ’ \-1* . .M€11~§(§ CfI€‘):' l~i_-’*j_}_ l! -QLR‘: ‘N . PROPERTY OF s SCIENTIA \/ERITAS 7: L. ART w E. ‘Q 3 ,_--__—e _______ ~ v--— PARKNG SURVEY AND PRDGRAM BUFFALQ NEW YQRK SMITH, DIBBLE AND COMPANY // I952 flu W .+L 8 LL fi- 0 W 8 III T‘ W E r1 W. L E it t i K H Q4. 1 2 \.. . .4 win. '_ tl\ ... ; , 165 Cuuncu Smsfl NE“, HAVEN’ CITY OF BUFFALO Mayor Joseph l\/‘lruk Comptroller Chester Kowal Common Council Elmer F. Lux, President Peter F. Frey, President Pro Tempore Frank J. Glinski Stephen B. Moskal Elmer J. Hoffman Joseph S. Swartz Anthony R. Lombardo Louis F. l\/lascari James J. l\/lcCabe Robert H. Childs lrving Williams, Jr. Vincent P. Masterson Leeland N. Jones, Jr. ' Edwin E. Ellis Walter A. Banas Board of Parking Welles \/. Moot, Chairman Peter Allen, Vice Chairman Henry H. Harper, Secretary Joseph L. Blaney Leonard R. Lipowicz Charles R. Diebold Edward A. Neider James A. Whitmore, Consultant-Coordinator TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xi SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS __________ __ I PART I INTRODUCTION 3 Authority 3 Action 3 Purpose and Scope of Report 3 Field Surveys .... -. 4 PART II PARKING NEEDS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ...... __ 5 Demand 5 Supply 8 Needs IO Parking Characteristics IO PART III THE THREE DOWNTOWN SITES I5 General Features of Recommended Sites I5 Q Parking Characteristics of Selected Sites I7 PART I\/ DESIGNS FOR DOWNTOWN GARAGES I9 Type Construction I9 Functional Plans ____ -- 20 Garage I 20 Garage ll 20 Garage Ill 20 Functional Details For Three Downtown Garages _________________ -_ 2] TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued PART \/ ECONOMIC FACTORS _________ __ Capital Costs Operating Costs Income A Financial Program PART \/I THE BROADWAY MARKET GARAGE Parking Demands Garage Design ______________________________ __ Operation Economic Factors Functional Details For Broadway Market Garage __________________ __ PART \/II A PROGRAM OF PARKING Parking in the Central Business District Three Downtown Sites Additional Downtown Sites Parking For Outlying Community Areas The Broadway Market Site Other Neighborhood Business Centers Policies Municipal Regulation of Private Parking Lots APPENDIX Section of Revised Building Code Pertinent to Open-Deck Garages _____________ -- Page 37 39 4O 45 45 45 45 46 46 46 47 49 (viii) Figure LIST OF FIGURES Variations in Maximum Accumulated Space Demands Population Growth and Vehicle Registration Parking Space Supply Present Density of Parking Space Deficiencies Projected Density of Parking Space Deficiencies Parking Sites Studied Proposed and Existing Garages Parking Practices in Off-Street Facilities Garage I Garage ll Garage Ill Broadway-Fillmore Area B roadway Ma rket Ga rage Page 24 26 38 42 Table \/I \/II \/III Xl XII XIII XIV X\/ LIST OF TABLES Trends in Parking Spaces—DoWntown Buffalo Current vs Future Space Demand, Supply, and Need Trip Purpose By Location of Parking __ Walking Distances Related to Length at Time Parked for all Off-Street Facilities Space-Need Factors Estimated Number of Parkers Using Each Garage Alternate Designs Studied Capital Cost of Garages Annual Land Costs Annual Operating Costs Anticipated Income Analysis of Car Services Cost-Income Summary Alternate Financial Plans Financial Summary—Broadway l\/larket Garage Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS During the study excellent assistance was received from many govern- mental, business, and civic organizations. The survey, initiated before the creation of the Board of Parking, was conducted in close collaboration with the Department of Public Works. The very valuable assistance given by Mr. Frederick W. Crane, Commissioner of Public Works, is especially acknowledged. Agencies of the City of Buffalo which were particularly helpful in furnishing information include: Board of Parking, Department of Public Works, Board of Safety, City Planning Commission, Police Department, Fire Department, Corporation Council, Comptroller, Real Estate Depart- ment, and Tax Department. The Erie County Sales Tax Department was most cooperative in the tabulation of survey data. The New York State Department of Public Works made available traf- fic survey data, highway plans, and other information essential to the investigations. The Main Street Association, the Retail Merchants Association, the Erie County Planning Board and other groups volunteered assistance and freely gave information requested. Valuable data were obtained from operators of off-street parking facilities, merchants and interested in- dividuals. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The central business district of Buffalo has l3,538 parking spaces. About l8% of these are at the curb, 62% in lots, and 20% in garages. Curb prohibitions necessary to meet the demands of moving traffic will reduce the present supply to l3,000 spaces, or less, by I962. Motorists destined to downtown blocks create peak demands for about 22,000 spaces. This peak is fairly constant from I030 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The excess of demand over supply is accounted for by illegal parking, cruising, and parking outside the survey area. If normal trends in population, vehicle registration, and automobile use continue, the peak demands should increase to more than 25,000 spaces by I962. When block demandsare related to supply and spaces outside, but immediately adjacent to the survey area are considered, it is found that a de- ficiency of about 7,800 spaces now exists. This will grow to l2,000 spaces needed in ten years. In considering all of these space demand figures, it must be remembered that it will never be eco- nomically feasible to meet the total demands con- venient tothe desires of motorists. In other words, the practical demands which any program of park- ing should contemplate will be lower than those" cited. Three sites have been recommended for garage development which will furnish a distribution of service to the downtown area, will be well inte- grated with the existing garage pattern, will be readily accessible from adjacent streets, and will accommodate a major part of the deficiencies within their respective zones of influence. The total cost of developing the three g'arages with city financing is estimated to be $4,l6l,540. They will provide about l,200 spaces which should serve about 3,200 daytime parkers; 625 parkers would use the garages during nights of heavy demand. ‘ downtown area will Economic analyses of the three downtown sites indicate that the most favorable financial arrange- ment would be achieved under a plan of municipal acquisition of land and construction of buildings, for lease to a private operating agency. The three garages would be operated by one agency as a joint activity. The Broadway-Fillmore district has l,l I0 spaces, with 35% of these at the curb and 65% in lots. The peak cordon accumulation occurs between ll :00 a.m. and l2:00 noon, when l,900 vehicles are in the area. Currently, there is a demand for l,400 spaces, which is 26% more than the present supply. The recommended development of the Broad- way‘ Market would provide a parking deck with a capacity of about 450 cars. A farmers’ truck parking area on the first floor could provide ap- proximately I30 additional spaces to accommodate overflow demands during evening peaks. The rec- ommended design would permit the addition of a second parking level when needs warrant and when sufficient street capacities can be developed in the area to meet added traffic loads. The estimated cost of developing this facility is $l,9B5,B00, of which about one-third is incurred in providing‘ parking facilities. Continuing studies will be required to provide an ”all-out attack” on the parking problem. The need additional short-time garages and a system of fringe lots for the all-day parker. Ways must be found of making existing parking facilities permanent for parking purposes. Outlying business centers will also require study. Adequate and attractive off-street parking in these centers is just as important as in the downtown area, even though demands in each area are rela- tively small. PARKING SURVEY AND PROGRAM BUFFALO, NEW YORK PART I INTRODUCTION Buffalo, the second largest city in New York State, has long recognized the inadequacy of con- venient and attractive parking facilities in its busi- ness districts. The growth in automobile use and the development of new retail centers outside of established business areas emphasize the need for immediate action. The central business district can be considered the hub around which the economic life of the Niagara Frontier revolves. Completion of the Thruway, with its connectors, and arterial routes will facilitate access to the downtown area, and will increase the demand for terminal facilities. Adequate parking is essential to the business health of the community. Enough spaces should be provided to accommodate normal demands within sound economic limits. An intensive pro- gram of development may be undertaken as a governmental function, by private enterprise, or as a joint effort. Whatever the administrative procedure used, the parking thus provided must be favorably located with respect to major destina- tions and should have a reasonable guarantee of permanency. Authority: It is fortunate that the State Legis- lature has been quite liberal in granting cities the power to develop off-street parking. Municipali- ties may purchase, lease, or condemn land for the construction and/or operation of garages.1 The property thus acquired may be sold or leased; por- tions may be used for commercial purposes to pro- vide auxiliary revenues. Chapter 665 of the Laws of I952 gives Buffalo the authority to exempt from taxation buildings constructed or remodeled to provide off-street parking. A local law, enacted by Common Council I. New York State Code, General Municipal Law Section 7 _. in May, I952, grants a I5 year tax exemption to any new garage structure that: (a) has a capacity of at least I50 cars, (bl is completed before I956, and (c) has at least 75% of its total floor area devoted exclusively to parking. The exemption does not include the land upon which the building is situated, nor any portion of the structure not incidental to parking. Action: The present parking study was con- tracted in February of this year, with the Com- missioner of -Public Works designated as the city's representative. Subsequently, a Division of Parking within the executive department was created by action of Common Council. The Division of Park- ing consists of a seven-man Board of Parking, which was officially appointed on May I3, I952, and staff assistants Upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Public Works, Common Council transferred his responsibilities under the contract to the Board of Parking. This action was taken soon after appointment of the Board. The Board is directed to: (al inventory existing parking spaces, (bl determine the extent and character of parking demands, (cl estimate the costs of acquiring property,‘ and constructing and operating off-street parking facilities, (d) con- trol, manage, and/or operate spaces owned by the city, and (e) recommend to Common Council the sale or lease of any property acquired by the city for parking purposes. Purpose and Scope of Report: It is the purpose of this report to present the magnitude and nature of the parking needs in the central business dis- trict and in the Broadway-Fillmore area. Needs are expressed in terms of demand and supply, with consideration given to rates, walking and driving habits in Buffalo, and competing facilities. The program was limited by contract to three downtown sites and to the Broadway Market site. Functional plans and operating requirements are recommended for each of these garages. Income from parking and other surces has been estimated, and related to annual capital and operating costs. Priorities of development are given, and extensions for the program are suggested. Field Surveys: The central business district is defined as the area bounded by Elmwood, Tupper, Michigan, Exchange, Terrace, and Staats Streets, (Figure 2). While this 97 black area is somewhat larger than the area of critical parking demand, it agrees closely with the limits used in previous studies. Furthermore, the surplus spaces on the fringes of this area serve parking demands in the interior. An inventory was taken of all curb and off-street spaces within the cordon limits. Data were col- lected as to capacity, rates, type of parking, and usage of each lot and garage. Half-hourly accumulations from 7 a.m. to I0 p.m. were obtained from a cordon count. All street crossings at the boundaries of the central business district were counted. Vehicles were classified as to type (ie., passenger cars, trucks, or buses) and to direction of travel. A control station count was maintained over several months to enable seasonal adjustments to be made. Detailed demand information was obtained by means of questionnaire postcards distributed to motorists leaving the central business district. Mechanical tabulating procedures were used to analyze relationships between parking habits and demands. Many previous reports were analyzed and long- range plans were reviewed in respect to the park- ing program. The Broadway-Fillmore district encompasses that area lying one-half block on either side of Broad- way, and bounded on the west by Reed Street and on the east by Woltz Avenue. This area is one of the older established outlying business centers, and has one of the heaviest concentrations of parking demand outside of the central business district. The existing supply of curb and off-street spaces was inventoried. The use of these spaces was ob- served and recorded by half-hourly periods from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. A classified cordon count was taken at all street crossings on the boundaries of the area. The data were adjusted on the basis of retail sales figures to represent average values. I I i~.._ L .0. ;. _ ... ‘. ‘ ".:..4’e..'n..+':.‘< ‘l I I ' =.J4'('Q;':.-T.-‘. 2-isf‘.-»':"-.11.‘: I it 4-1 ‘ 1 ..-;;3'~> .' y ~ ‘IE-if v:"~$-.':- I 4: _’~;-‘i“..__ W “..-,|§=ii< .-M_. 2”’ 3 4 ,y94Z‘>‘M X i ivi I as ilwt /54 N J 1 I ’m -.3“ ~ ‘I’ ~11?” : ?Lfl~ ~ ~ J§'3§ Q S u f‘" \l O 0 0 0 300 l9IO 20 30 40 50 * 60 70 Erie 8| Niagara County 450 ‘ ’¢ ’ ‘I 425 v I ¢' ' I 400 ’i¢ ‘I I 375 I ” i>‘*’E 350 o\-\2l>$ 325 <99? $6 I’ ——--m‘ § mu — - -M 3 275 D -3 4 P 250 $5‘ 5 y $ 225 7 — 9 G) > 200 I940 45 50 52 55 60 62 POPULATIOLNNDGROWTH VEHICLE REGISTRATION eui=FAi_:_o, N. Y. I952 FIGURE 2 (7) Supply: The distribution of the I3,538 downtown parking spaces, curb and off-street, is given by blocks in Figure 3. The 2,396 legal curb parking spaces (only I7% of the existing supply) are widely dispersed throughout the survey area. In order to provide increased street capacity for moving traffic, some 300 spaces have been elimi- nated since I949. Over 500 more may be lost by I962. These restrictions have been, and will con- tinue to be, in the blocks of greatest parking de- mand. The degree to which these restrictions can be instituted and enforced will to a large extent depend upon the provision of more off-street fa- cilities. One third of the 8,42I parking lot spaces are provided in only six blocks. Garages show a similar concentration of supply, with most of the 2,72I spaces contained in five structures. Many of the off-street spaces are near the fringe of the high demand area and do not effectively serve short- ' Trends in the type and number of parking spaces are given in Table I. The total supply of spaces in the core area has shown a marked decrease in the past I5 years. Part of this has been due to the ex- tension of curb parking prohibitions previously mentioned; additional capacity has been lost as the tax-delinquent properties of the depression years became more valuable and were developed commercially. The large loss of garage capacity can be attributed principally to a reduction in the number of private residential facilities. In addi- tion, many automotive service agencies have moved to outlying districts and their former garage space converted to other uses. It is significant that no gain has been made in recent years in total parking supply. The decrease in curb spaces has been offset by an increase in parking lot spaces. If no concerted parking pro- gram is inaugurated, the total capacity probably ’(jm€ needs will remain constant or may even decrease. Table I Trends In Parking Spaces——Downtown Buffalo TYPE CORE AREA* SURVEY AREA FACILITY I937 I952 I948 I949 I950 I952 Cu rb 2,2I I I ,47I ______ -_ 2,692 2,600 2,396 Lots 6,206 5,498 ...... -- 8,884 8,800 8,921 Go rages 4,065 2, I 50 ...... __ 2,300 2,225 2,22I Totals I 2,482 9,I I9 I 3,433 I 3,876 I 3,625 I 3,538 *Bounded by Chippewa, Genesee, Elm, Seneca, Lower Terrace and Elmwood 1; I-_-Q,-K1,‘, .._i l I ,4-31.,-_ 2,-.;,,;:._< . ‘,"~;:.,.'.'~:.,;.i, . r _ .‘ij/J;-L __;; if -4~»‘~.1-i:‘;§'r.: I " ..>..i1z;.'.§..:;i>‘i;:"' <.> .-.=..>A»‘i~r.:i.\-.' ~ .- :;:<:sz=..:_\.'. .‘ FFFFFF IN / -4 ).4l__—.-‘@:I.4b\ -4 M 4% M XI Q61 @\ _l XXII II iiiE02i ie\“.\i II I _U:r 0 LLLLLL TT \\ /_\ AVE. fig Ba i \\ 4 \\y \\_I \\ \_ AVE. \\ \\ fi\\ \\ ®@@@@ C rn oaJv KaAJn$ jo 39NVHOX3 18 IDEBVO IIIIII AN ~l I l I If J 1 I _‘4f—lTI—] F—%\ @ /L® 4@8®D®@A A XRCII 8 II II i~iii8ii: HHHHH ,NlE<>§l IF \‘.\1ii I C 2 3 8 ékd \\ 0>4@44® ~4\\ \_l \ i ' AJE‘ A \. 7TT77< \\ \\ \\ \\ l—ll 7| Tll ii” ''''' ANll'—II 8 @ IE @ OI * ml C 2 m M ‘< X >I q 0 o 2 3Hfl9l;I 53 q 1 l_.__> UGQB /~ 15% U) U9 07 F“ JDD §i%§€ —* ~ ~ 3 / .i<_ 4+4-4+ —Il Q I F 13 4 0:§- 553 8 I .-F 5 -4 ‘LS - H3ddl'\.L -3 -7 I I I I I I I I l 8% q 55 “F J 00.2% 8 .15-— A —II:Il—+l——l 52¢/> RI . - .. 77- z 8-|ii2(.-3; m g» 3 ® 2 "’.O 8% -3 gig vs. '790') 4 5-D _'Q ————————J . . IS B3ddfil 3 LS U3ddfll __1 r________1 r________j r________j r_______1 r_____j r________________j r__________1 r__________j F____ Needs: If it were possible to provide attractive parking* wherever desired for all motorists with destinations in the downtown area, some 7,800 spaces would be required to meet demands in ex- cess of current supply. The density of space de- ficiencies in each block is shown in Figure 4. The blocks with either minor deficiencies or surpluses are those which have large parking facilities or those which contain relatively insignificant traffic generators. Growth in demand and a decrease in supply will create a total need for I2,l00 spaces by I962. The distribution of these anticipated deficiencies is shown in Figure 5. The ten-year increase in the density of block deficiencies can be seen by com- paring Figures 4 and 5. The major areas of de- *Within the block of destination, for the hour of peak de- mand in each block. ficiency are the same, but there are seven blocks with surpluses now that will have deficiencies by I962. The current and projected downtown parking needs already discussed are summarized in Table II. ' Parking Characteristics: The characteristics of. parking needs are primary considerations in the planning of any off-street facility. Parkers have been classified either as short-time (staying three hours or less) or long-time (staying over three hours). When the habits of these two groups are analyzed, it is found that the relative number of long-term and short-term parkers in each block is a function of prevailing land uses. Table II Current vs Future Space Demand, Supply, and Need YEAR I952 I962 Space Demands 22,346 25,990 Spaces Available Within Survey Area Curb 2,396 I ,858 Lots 8,42I 8,42I * Garages 2,72I 2,72I * TOTAL I 3,538 I 3,000 Convenient Spaces Available Outside Survey Area 980 860 Space Needs in Survey Area 7,828 I2,I30 -. _| , .. ._,‘ , _ - _ _ . . , - 4.7 -- ,4,‘ . . 2. Y ... A j 7 . __ . ‘ ' . i *Assumes no net increase in off-street facilities between I952 and I962. — ~ -. , . V - _ .-> . \ ., -, 0 . \ ~ ~ ~‘ I‘. ~_ ‘ he |.‘i‘v‘. ‘ , _ " “~‘-'1.‘ 1--.r.-'.-.4.L I i ‘.1 ‘_/L\‘ 1 I I I A I I I . I I w. TUPPER ST. E. _ TUPPER ST. -_I I I I I w. TUPPER ST. E. TUPPER ST. IF J L IF \ TRACY ST. \ J / /TRACY ST. / / \ -8222 _llX.>-QQ T I T I MW- \T \R I AVE. \ ~ I R§~ \\ \\ .w_ CHIPPEWA ST. (;j-||ppEwA 751 W CHIPPEWA ST E . CHIPPEWA Dst HURON __ __ / HURON __ __ /' /. . /I / /, /P /R ELI‘ / / W MOHAWK :: / / MOHAWK, MOHAWK - ,_._.?,"_.‘._"_._, M / Q g. '-:-:~:-:-:-r-' 44> _, I /“H WILLIAM ST. Li I 4 ~ WILLIAM ST. : NIAGARA COURT PROP) NIAGARA COURT Q SQUARE __ D SQUARE g .4 I CLINTON ST. 8 CLINTON ST. : Z m g l— S 32 0'0 ~ 5/ *" g 5 § 3 2 E 2 A Q 21 Z 3 E E1 3 E uJ 0 U1 2 L11 0 LL] 2 . EAGLE ST. : ...... \EAGLE ST. F .z;§;;;;:s:§ N. DIVISION ST. _ N. DIVISION ST. — LEGEND: - — A T SPACES NEEDED, I9523 CHURCH ST‘ U ~ LEGEND: CHURCH ,., \ I . 8 DIVISION ST. : ‘ SPACES NEEDED’ I962 . zil SIDMSION ST‘ : OOI—300 I I I ::':'t.2‘t.:-I I \ L__] OOI — 300 %2;3;§;‘ F . 300-600 / / SWAN ST. T: ggg ' SWAN ST. T: ' _ 300-600 6007 900 ~ ‘ 6°°'9°° ~ 900-200 SENECA ST. :_ 9OO_|2OO SENECA ST. : - I200-I500 CARROL ST. L |2OO_|5o0 CARROL ST. L SURPLUS SPACESJ952 [ L SURPLUS SPACES, I962 EXCHANGE ST. I |___ l:] |__ EXCHANGE ST. W |_ PRESENT DENSITY OF 4*‘ PROJECTED DENSITY OF /4): 6' . PARKING SPAGE DEFIGIENGIES I/18* PARKING SPAGE DEFIGIENGIES I/088% O I 2 '4 6 8 I l I I LL Scale in hundreds of feet. Scale -In hundreds of feet. BUFFALO, N. Y. 9—l I I 6 E-’ BUFFALO, N. Y. I982 FIGURE 4 I952 . FIGURE 5 Table III Trip Purpose By Location Of Parking PERCENTAGE OF DRIVERS PARKING TRIP PURPOSE At Curb In Lots In Garages TOTAL Work 16.0% 32.0% 31.2% 24.7% Shopping 12.0 10.2 14.6 11.4 1\/ledicol 2.2 0.7 0.8 1.4 Business 558 47.2 50.8 51.2 Entertoinment 3.4 5.1 1.4 4.1 Other 10.6 4.8 1.2 7.2 TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Trip purposes ore reloted to porking locotions in Toble 111. /\ppro>1 Qv gt HURON 7 ST. TT7\ e §.\~ E_\ / A H ? MOHAWK ST. . MOHAWK J / //1 (//// (_____w IE7 $( LU M ST F__ Q ‘>1 N'AGARA COURT ST. f/////// X [7 Q Q SQUARE % CUNTON ST __ E e 2 57 5° 2 2 E L w Q$ < i (D, P 5 3 3 E E m 8 9 $1 / E1 01 < <51 2 3 E 2 5 la Q E - m w b__ W. EAGLE ST EAGLE ST ;“;.0,°9Z;‘;9;‘:‘ . 0 pi? §#5 ‘ 91 ‘Q0 P O I “Q ‘ O0 ééa \' v‘ »..9.*29292¢‘.¢.2.*. N.NVHHON ST E CHURCH ST §g WAG 1 1 _> <~ 1 s.onnmou ST. ::: %II 1 1 _/ EFT E—T _ SWAN ST. __ V /_ LEGENDI \ ~ 7/” sites STUDIED '1 SENECA ST. L- snes RECOMMENDED CARROL ST EXCHANGE ST Limits Of Survey Area I V J PARKING SITES STUDIED 1/yj BUFFALO, N. Y. '952 FIGURE 6 T11-__\T1 <22? 4. <.§ *2 Scale hihundreds of feet PART III THE THREE DOWNTOWN SITES A number of land parcels in areas of critical parking deficiencies were tentatively selected for study as garage sites. Discussions with the Board of Parking, City Officials, and local real estate interests narrowed the sites to twenty which might be most easily acquired in the areas of greatest parking demand. Given special attention were the three areas designated by Common Council. (a) The block bounded by Court Street, Pearl Street, Express Alley, and Franklin Street, except the buildings occupied by Denton, Cottier and Daniels and the Waldorf Res- taurant. (b) The block bounded by Washington, Huron, Ellicott, and l\/lohawk Streets, except the buildings occupied by the Fire Department and Catholic Charities. (c) The blocks bounded by Main, Washington, Seneca, and Quay Streets. All twenty of the sites are shown in Figure 6. Each was rated according to service rendered, economic feasibility, pedestrian and vehicular ac- cess, and general neighborhood characteristics. Estimated annual total cost of debt retirement and operation for each garage was compared with annual income. About one-half showed income- cost ratios of less than one and were thereby elimi- nated. Several others were discarded because of physical limitations which made them highly in- efficient for garage purposes. The three sites finally chosen provide a distri- bution of service to various sections of the down- town area, form a well integrated pattern with existing garages, have good access characteristics from adjacent streets, and have capacities which will accommodate a sizeable part of the deficien- cies within their respective zones of influence with- out creating excessive traffic loads on adjacent streets. These sites have been submitted to the Board of Parking, the Common Council, and the Mayor, and were formally approved for detail study. General Features of Recommended Sites: Site I encompases the entire block bounded by Washing- ton, Eagle, Ellicott, and North Division Streets. It is rectangular in shape, but almost square, being 243 feet by 266 feet. Present land uses include several parking lots having a total capacity of l75 cars, a grocery store, a small hotel, and a paint store. All of the structures are quite old, with the exception of a one-story concrete block warehouse, which is operated adjunct to the grocery store. An ideal circulation pattern is afforded by the one- way perimeter streets. Site I is favorably situated with respect to blocks having high short-time park- ing deficiencies. Site ll is located in the southern end of the block bounded by Washington, l\/lohawk, and Ellicott Streets. It has l97 foot frontage on Washington Street, 264 foot frontage on l\/lohawk, and lB9 foot frontage on Ellicott. lt is presently occupied by a parking lot which has a capacity of l45 spaces, two commercial-loft buildings, a repair garage, and a small hotel. Site ll is well served by the present street system. Its location is such that it should particularly serve parkers from the rapidly growing northeastern sections of the city; it will also attract some evening parking from nearby entertainment facilities. Site lll includes the l9B foot south frontage of Seneca Street between Main and Washington Streets. lt fronts l43 feet on Washington street and l54 feet on Main Street. Existing land uses include several lunch rooms, two industrial sup- ply companies, and some office and commercial developments. While this site is not ideally served by the present street pattern, it has a strategic relationship to the Niagara Thruway and the High Level Bridge. This garage will accommodate much of the short-time demand benerated by visitors to the large office and bank buildings that are near- by. It will also serve some of the parking demand created by auditorium events. In addition to the above-mentioned sites, plans are well under way for the private development of a large garage on the south side of Court Street between Franklin and Pearl Streets. This was one of the three locations originally selected for study by the Common Council. The facility will be very close to the center of parking deficiencies and has a demand potential. The area is presently used as a parking lot. Because of the plans to privately develop this site, it was not given further consid- eration in this report. The recommended garages are shown in rela- tion to existing major garages in Figure 7. Con- sidered as a group, they fit into a pattern of well distributed permanent parking facilities which will serve all parts of the downtown area. lt should WILLIAM ST. E NMGARA COURT ST. SQUARE . _ CLINTON ST. _ IE 5 E I-— Z < f_ E |_ < EAGLE ST. [:1 RE_L£Li_ ST. : X Q I I\ N. DIVISION ST. : CHURCH ST. 1] s. DIVISION ST. : \ PIE? 1—1 .__ V SWAN ST. _ EXISTING oARAoI-:s* '1 L I \ SENECA sr. _ SITES RECOMMENDED H L SITE BEING sruouzo FOR CARROL ST [ PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT * so CAR CAPACITY AND oven EXCHANGE ST. Limits Of Survey Area I I-_ PROPOSED AND EXISTING J < GARAGES §>>*‘~" 4 6 8 I I I I I I I I I I I J L w. TUPPER ST. E. TUPPER ST. __ TRACY ST. K / %/ °.>&' / w. CHIPPEWA ST. E. CHIPPEWA PST. 0 K LII w‘ ':¢E;E=E=: 2 2 <>[ b:o:0:O: EAGLE ST. K \ D I- Z 9 I u I I I I I7% '__ <[ > I I = _ l_I_I -.:-- 0 2 I I I -11 I I7 _ i I L: U) I 01, ‘_' _I I- 0 s I I I :_l_ __l l_I_I W | I \ / 4- NO. DIVISION ST. LOWER DECK SPACE USAGE I CAPACITY A. OFFICE LOWER DECK ZOOCARS B. WAITING ROOM UPPER DECK 2l6CARS D. LOCKER ROOM TOTAL 416 CARS 0 0 40 0.0 0.0 L00 — _ Scale In Feet CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, N.Y. 1952 FIGURE 9 (22) V‘ ' V Q Q 7" S‘ NO. DIVISION ELEVATION -> EAGLE Q-I7’-P ST. 25! _ oll F-l7'+ , ' '3!‘ 25'-o" WASHINGTON ST. 243'-0" ELLICOTT SI‘. ‘:15: ‘Q;-';-1"5¢ S .-I (1 -~”:;- ?:l-‘>5: -*1 3 i; 0+. : ilk‘,-';;' ..-1, ‘$1 Ewill Q .~ ‘ ‘.:¥3'~ II. *;.r‘~ ?;.L.‘\“ 1 Scale In Feet ‘II NO. UPPER DECK 266'—O" DIVISION GARAGE I CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, N.Y. 1952 NOTE AISLES SPACES FLOOR HEIGHT Io '- 0" 22'-o" EXCEPT AS NOTED 18'-O" x 8'—6" FIGURE 9 CON'T. (23) I//////////////////////// !, '_, 21, |//// /////////////////// I : "—_T _ '1 UP” — —‘T' _ ‘: DOWN—> Q 5 |_' 1 U) Self Service Elevator Z I- O I- I— "_ o LD 0 Z ' - 3 I _ __l g 25'—- I I i |s'* L“ C J MOHAWK ST. FIRST FLOOR SPACE USAGEI CAPACITY A. OFFICE GROUND FLOOR II7 CARS B. WAITING ROOM FIRST FLOOR I25 CARS SECOND FLOOR II9 CARS ROOF I29 CARS TOTAL 490 CARS 9 2p 4'0 6'0 840 L30 — — Scale In Feet CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, NY. |952 FIGURE IO (24) 264'-O‘ I ///////////////////////,I:———— I32‘—<>'——--I l//////////////////////// '—_-I U P ——> J ': DOWN-> \\Men and Women's Rest Rooms (Second Floor) 0 Employee's Room and Service Areas (Ground Floor) 2 I I I I I __I __I Z :90 I [ I I I-L-I O I / |__ _o0 EXIT} 0 9 (Ground Floor) Z ‘R _ ' / / W ‘Entrance May Be 5% / Developed If Needed <[ I i__ \\Office and E I I 25 I Is Waiting Room (Ground Floor) MOI-IAWK ST. GROUND FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR NOTEI AISLES 22'-O" EXCEPT AS NOTED SPACES l8'—O" x e'- 3" Min. FLOOR HEIGHT |O'- O" O 2_o 4o 6.0 so IQO Scale In Feel GARAG E 11 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, N.Y. i I952 FIGURE IO (DON'T. — (25) ST. WASHINGTON DOWN —> \»>»,»»I SPACE USAGEI A.OFFmE B.WAHTNO ROOM C.MANUFT D.LOCKER ROOM 30 Scale In Feel elo go SENECA 4- ST. RESEVOIR SP!-\CE __ n 24 CARS GROUND FLOOR \\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ I I ‘ L I I I I Retail ,1 l—' I Stores . U) I I U I Z '4 E . ' . . I-jj / I‘ II CAPAOTY BASEMENT 87 CARS GROUND FLOOR 5? cARs SECOND FLOOR 58CARS ROOF 93CARS TOTAL 295CARS GARAGE III CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, NY. I952 HGUREII (26) I Parkin:7r:I Roof) =® SECOND FLOOR NOTEI AISLES 22'-O" EXCEPT AS NOTED SPACES I8'—O" x S‘-O" FLOOR HEIGHT IO‘-O" (L_ do so SO GARAGE 111 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT BUFFALO, NY. I952 FIGURE II OON'T. (27) PART V ECONOMIC FACTORS In planning garages it is desirable, as with other businesses, to have them financially seIf-support- ing. Income must be sufficient to cover operating costs and debt services. In some instances, income is supplemented by parking meter allocations, mer- chant, or other subsidies, but this does not alter the basic premise. The costs of developing a garage on each of the sites were computed in two ways. First, it was assumed that the city would acquire the land and construct the garage, retiring the investment over a 30-year period at a 2% interest rate. Secondly, it was assumed that the city would acquire the land as above, but that a private operator would build the garage and retire his investment over a 30-year period at a 4% interest rate. The city interest rate is quite conservative when compared with recent general obligation bond sales; private interest rates are currently increasing, and might be higher. Regardless of which method of financing proves most desirable, it is assumed that the garages will be operated privately. Capital Costs: Land costs were based upon ad- justed property assessments. The expansion factor represented the ratio of current sale prices to as- sessments for comparable properties in the vicinity of each site. Demolition was taken at a fixed per- centage of the values of the buildings to be re- moved. Unit prices in computing garage construc- tion costs were developed with the assistance of local architects. The values were compared with recent prices reported for similar type buildings in other cities having comparable labor and material costs. It is apparent that costs may be somewhat refined after ‘architectural plans are prepared. A contingency item was included to cover changes in garage designs, rising building costs, and simi- lar items. Professional services were considered to be approximately 8% of the building costs. It was assumed that existing city departments would ab- sorb the Iegal and administrative expenses incurred in the acquisition of the land. Changes during construction were computed for each of the fi- nancial plans previously described. Capital costs for each of the three garages are given in Table \/III. Separate calculations have been made for city financing and city-private fi- nancing. Garages II and III are shown with and without retail space. The reasons for not consid- ering retail development on Site I have been dis- cussed. Table IX expresses the capital costs of the land as annual costs over a 30-year debt period at 2% interest. These values, when added to amounts equivalent to present land taxes, gives the annual rentals that would be paid to the city if the land were leased to private developers. At the end of the 30-year period, the city will have clear title to the land. Under the present laws, the building will be subject to taxes after I5 years. In each case, the reserve funds and the increased revenues that can be expected from a highr ratio of short-time parkers and possible higher rates provide adequate margins for meeting these costs. Table IX Annual Land Costs SITE I SITE ll SITE Ill Amortization $30,910 $25,I.-30 $I3,IIO Taxes 5,800 8,400 3,600* Total $36,7l 0 $33,530 $l 6,7l 0 *lncludes taxes on retail portion. ,-WWW-_, -—__-~__ 1. ,,.____--A Table VIII Capital Cost Of Garages SITE I SITE ll SITE III Garage Only Garage Only With Retail Garage Only With Retail Land I. Acquisition $ 665,000 SIS 542,000 $ 542,000 35 268,400 SIS 268,400 2. Demolition And Clearing 30,000 23,000 23,000 26,300 26,300 Subtotal $ 695,000 $ 565,000 $ 565,000 SIS 294,700 $ 294,700 Improvements I. Building: Garage $ 572,000 $ 724,I00 $ 700,900 35 4I3,000 $ 355,000 Garage Basements ___________ .- 26I,300 ' 26I,300 I59,400 I59,400 Stores _____________________ -_ 48,800 __________ __ 6I ,200 Subtotal $ 572,000 $ 985,400 $l,0II,000 $ 572,400 EB 575,600 2. Construction, Engineering and Architectural Fees $ 45,000 SIS 78,800 $ 80,900 $ 45,800 $ 46,I00 3. Contingencies (I0%) 57,200 98,500 l0I,I00 57,200 57,500 4. Legal and Financing Expenses 6,800 I0,200 I0,800 6,800 6,900 5. Equipment 3,500 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 6. Insurance During Construction 500 800 900 500 600 7. Taxes and Interest on Land During Construction * I9,700 I7,600 I7,600 9,l00 9,l00 8. Interest During Construction Private I 4,I I0 23,900 24,500 I 3,950 I 3,950 City 20,760 23, I 00 23,400 I 2,740 I 2,780 Total Improvement Cost Private-City Eli 7I9,6I0 $I,2l7,200 $l,248,800 $ 707,750 $ 7II,750 City S 706,560 $I,I98,800 $I,230,l00 $ 697,440 $ 70I,480 Grand Total Private-City $I,4l4,6l0 $l,782,200 $l,8I3,800 $I,002,450 $I,006,450 City $I,40l,560 $l,763,800 $I,795,l00 EB 992,I40 $ 996,l80 * Private financing only; interest on land for city financing included under llInterest During Construction.” *City financing for land and private financing for improvements. Operating Costs: The annual operating expenses for each of the garages are given in Table X. The personnel requirements of each facility will be a function of its capacity, the type of parking used, the character of parking demand as measured by turnover, the locations of entrances and exits, the hours of operation, the number of~ floors, and the rate of peak arrivals and departures. It is anticipated that Garage I will operate from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., six days a week. In addition, the garage would remain open approximately 65 nights (8 p.m. to I0 pm.) a year to accommodate eve- ning shoppers. Personnel includes a manager, six attendants, and four cashiers. Personnel on each shift would be scheduled to overlap during hours of highest parking demands. Garage II would require a manager, six attend- ants, four cashiers, and a janitor. This garage would have the same daily operating hours as Garage I, but would be open about I00 nights a “year to serve entertainment as well as shopping needs. Since attendant parking is used in Garage Ill, personnel requirements are more sensitive to the capacity of the structure. Enough attendants must be provided to park cars during peak hours. Suc- cessful operation as a garage only will require a manager, two cashiers, a janitor, and fourteen at- tendants. If the capacity is reduced by including retail space, only twelve attendants would be need- ed. This garage should open earlier in the morning than the other two in order to accommodate office demands; it is anticipated that it will also annually serve I50 night events at the auditorium. Labor costs were based upon prevailing rates now being paid by operators of off-street facilities in Buffalo, but slight upward adjustments were made for possible wage increases. Insurance costs include: fire; owner's, landlords and tenant's liability on the building; comprehen- sive and collision coverage; employee liability; and worIw>5m *0 w:Ej .|||ll. |.l..l|_ _ ® / Fm 4wm< N._.._0\<, / .. G W E @ ~ 6 .._.m v_m_ Q G M / _.......... Fm x0wm .._.m n_.,..__O|_ Q SPACES AT CURB OFF STREET SPACES J 0 oh 5 GE 2 .._..w 30 zQmm_0 @ @ Q .w>< wmO_>_|_|__h_ lF'__"___ "'_""'_" "_-'_ _1__ '_'_'q_''''' —'_' "- Hm owwm .._.m zOw|__>> ® Hm n_zwwz>>O.._.. Hm ._._O~...C.wQ / @ BROADWAY—MARKET SITE BROADWAY-FILl_l\/\ORE AREA BUFI-'A|___o, N.Y. I952 Scale In Hundreds Feet FIGURE I2 (38) details at the garage have been designed for this expansion. Two levels at parking would provide approxi- mately 850 spaces. The net gain in total spaces serving the area would be considerably less, since curb restrictions would have to be extended to provide additional surtace street capacity. Operation: ln local shopping areas, self-parking at cars is a well-established habit. Any attempt to change this practice through the use of attend- ant parking might lessen the attractiveness of a garage facility, so the Market garage provides for customer parking. Personnel requirements will be minimized, since attendants would be used only to collect tees and to maintain an orderly parking pattern. While this type at operation lessens the need for reservoir space, some has been provided to accommodate peak intlows. It is recommended that the daily (9 a.m. to 6 pm.) tee be ten cents per hour. During the evenings when stores remain open, a flat charge at ten cents would be made which would be payable in advance. \/alidation privileges could be worked out with local mer- chants. Table XV Financial Summary—Broadway Market Garage Capital Costs Land City Owned Demolition $ 40,000 Construction l ,6l 5,000 Construction, Engineering and Architectural Fees (8%) l29,200 Contingencies l 6i ,500 Legal and Financing Expenses l6,000 Equipment 3,500 Insurance During Construction l,000 lnterest During Construction l9,600 W W Annual Debt Service $ 88,330 Operating Costs Personnel 35 l 2,200 lnsu rance 2,500 Employee Benefits 600 Utilities 2,000 Maintenance 2,000 Uniforms 500 Payments for Damage 500 Miscellaneous 2,000 Total $ 22,300 Total Annual Costs 35 l l0,630 Annual lncome from Parking Day 35 54,000 Evening 3,900 Total __________________ _- $ 57,900 Annual lncome Required from Market Rentals in Excess of All Expenses 55 52,730 Economic Factors:Construction costs have been determined by adjusting previous estimates to cur- rent unit prices. Certain economies over the earlier designs resulted trom the use of straight ramps, right angle truck loading bays, and shorter span lengths The costs were checked with square toot- age values tor comparable markets recently con- structed in other cities. The other capital cost items (Table XV) have been computed in the same manner as tor the three downtown sites (see Part V) The total cost at the structure is estimated to be $l,985,800 Ap- proximately one-third of this cost can be assigned to the parking tacilities provided Annual operating expenses for the parking deck only, total $22,300. This includes salaries for a manager (who will also serve as a relief attendant) and tour attendants The other cost items have been explained previously. The total annual capi- tal and operating costs will be $l l0,630. It is assumed that this garage will normally op- erate from l0 a m. to 6 p m , for six days a week. In addition, the garage will remain open until 9 p m at least two nights per week when stores are open tor night shopping The annual income ex- pected trom parking is $57,900. This means that the annual net income from market rentals, in ex- cess of annual market operating expenses, will have to be at least $52,730 A portion at this cost in excess of present net revenues could be derived trom increased rentals; the remainder could come trom leases ot the farmers’ truck market area. ~ !"""'_‘_"‘l ~ H -- Qt» ! u~ l 1 ~' Mil W W .-t I ~J l I l‘!!*g*‘ I - ‘qf§;1z"_---U,‘ I ?~ I~ I ~; _,- __ 4 n W W v ‘''V" " I :1? M} f — -— -— >- — wig, @ I ~ x -— r x M —--——-F pd —~ : ., ma —- 1“ -———-—~ 7 ex‘, ~—~————~ ngcr-§__:&.'-— V.-- _, r r I r r l FUNCTIONAL DETAILS FQR BRQADWAY MARKET GARAGE l4ll <- LOM~BARD ST. 4- I II Retail Stores 7/\ 7/\ (Parking On Roof) ' I I ' I I II II FARMER'S TRUCK PARKING iiiiiiiiiiiiii oown-> <- UP Retail Stores (‘Parking On Roof) (ZI7) ~ I T“ R“ w~ ~ I I . ~ III I ~ I I-P GIBSON ST. -p F FIRST FLOOR <-DOWN 2 Arcade To Market 1 E I N MARKET AREA NOTEI CAPACITY AISLES 28'-o" EXCEPT AS NOTED FARMER'S TRUCK PARKING I26 TRUCKS SPACES ii‘-0" x 27'-0" SECOND FLOOR 443 CARS Q zp 4,0 so so iop CEILING HEIGHT |6'—O" Scale In Feet BROADWAY- MARKET GARAGE BUFFALO, N. Y. I952 _ FIGURE I3 L -.~: -; -" ' »‘~.<$‘."-.. ‘, V 1." ' ," -’ ' S. , -.-S ‘I;-' ' .... .q- ’ H ' ' l .- "Y 3 ‘ , . 1.2.-.i-=:.~:> ‘ ' I ..>.~~ ‘.1: S; ' r qrzoo Q ESE $2 I .> .Z .@l__ i><>>Q_m MN I . _oi_@@k Fm m_W__©i_ r ; I.ltUItl\“U“_Hm.TLE..@~@1rWl TIIIIEE Ar‘ 4 —* k w -|— 4 _,._~_,_.. "- fir sv- ._.»- T / T 5" R -2 @5- PART Vll A PROGRAM OF PARKING While the spaces that will be provided by the garage facilities proposed in this report will do much to meet the critical parking demands, it must be recognized that the entire parking problem of Buffalo cannot thereby be considered solved. The program proposed will be an important supplement to the facilities that are presently in operation by private operators and businesses. The needs for these garages have been determined on the as- sumption that the existing garages and parking lots will continue in operation and, there is no intent that the new facilities should replace those now in use. On the contrary, it is essential that all of the off-street spaces be properly integrated to form a comprehensive and adequate program of parking. As in all large cities, the entire program should be considered and approached as two parts. The central business district, as the focal point of both city and regional business, civic, and retail activi- ties, has problems of vehicular movement and parking that are different from those found in other parts of the city. Today, as never before, it is recognized that the business and shopping needs are not wholly served by the central business dis- trict. The outlying, or community business districts, generate heavy concentrations of vehicles and pedestrians and thereby form the second major patt of the program. Parking in the Central Business District: The central business district of the city was given prin- cipal consideration in the survey. Before recom- mending the sites for three garages in this area, numerous sites were examined and the parking needs of each were considered in relation to the services each is capable of rendering. Three Downtown Sites: The garages recom- mended for the central business district will provide some I200 parking spaces. They should accommodate approximately 3200 day-time parkers and an additional 600 parkers on nights they remain open. These garages, together with existing garages and the one under development on Court Street, will form an integrated pattern of parking for the areas of heaviest demand. It should be re-emphasized, however, that these facilities will not meet conveniently all the needs of the central business district A continuing program will be required to provide additional short-time capacity in garages and long-time capacity in fringe parking lots. The garages proposed in this report thereby become the important first step in initiating a comprehensive and continuing program of off-street parking development. Additional Downtown Sites: Many of the twenty sites investigated in this study should be assured as future parking facilities. Some of them are essential to a sound program of off- street parking, and their loss to other land uses would be a vital blow to the overall program. To prevent such a loss of vital areas to uses other than parking, it is recommended that measures be taken to guarantee the retention of the following: Site A: The north end of the block bounded by Elmwood Avenue, Huron Street, Delaware Avenue, and Mohawk Street. Site B: Portions of the block bounded by Genesee Street, Delaware Avenue, and West Eagle Street. Site C: The south end of the block bounded by Main Street, Exchange Street, Washington Street, and Quay Street. Site D: Portions of the block bounded by Franklin Street, Chippewa Street, Pearl Street, and I-luron Street. Sites B and D may become desirable garage sites as traffic and parking demands grow. The on- ticipated redevelopment of the area west of the Terrace, made possible by the relocation of rail- road tracks, should make Site B particularly attractive. Site D presently has a very high usage as a parking lot and is well situated to serve demands developed by evening entertain- ment areas. While Sites A and C are on the fringes of the downtown parking deficiencies, they can satis- factorily serve the long-time parker. Site C would provide parking close to the auditorium and long-time parking near important office build- ings. These two fringe sites could have a total capacity of approximately 375 spaces, with customer parking allowed. Parking For Outlying Community Areas: Some of the community business districts in Buffalo are quite old They are well established and serve long existing communities Many of the retail businesses in these areas are entirely local in ownership, management, and character. In some of the newer sections of the city, sizeable shopping areas have recently been developed. In other communities of the city, carefully planned modern shopping centers have been erected. Now the large regional type shopping center (relatively new in merchandising circles) has appeared in the metropolitan area. All except the newest planned community centers suffer from a deficiency of parking to a degree relative to the central business district. These needs must be objectively evaluated, and a com- prehensive parking plan must include ways and means for relief of such deficiencies. The Broadway Market Site: The garage recommended for this site will satisfy much of the existing demand in the Broadway-Fillmore area and will be part of a sorely needed market replacement. Although provision has been made in the proposed plans for approximately doubling the 450 spaces of this facility by the addition of a second parking level, serious consideration must be given to traffic capacity restrictions of adjacent streets. Unless major physical im- provements are made in access roadways, addi- tional parking demands might be better accom- modated by dispersed facilities, rather than by an enlargement of the single site. This important community area must be carefully observed in order that its growing traffic and parking needs can be progressively met. Other Neighborhood Business Centers: While this survey was limited to only one community outside the downtown area, it is recognized by city officials that very serious problems exist in a number of major retail areas. The Board of Parking has already initiated action to obtain detailed factual studies for other districts‘. Such studies will be a'necessary undertaking in deter- mining the parking needs and in developing ‘ feasible plans for meeting them. ' Policies: Officials of the city acknowledged the necessity of assisting private interests in the development of parking garages by sponsoring state legislation and enacting local legislation to provide tax relief on new structures. Since the formation of the Board of Parking, important studies have been taken toward the for- mulation of basic parking policies for the city. Some important policies are still to be established. In discussing financial plans/for the garages, it was pointed out that marked savings can be effected if both the land and structures are pro- vided by the city. While 'it will be necessarysfon the city to acquire the necessary land, private development of garage buildingscould be planned: However, there are many factors to be considered. In general it would appear advisable to take ad- vantage of the comparatively low interest rates available to the city, but this is one of the import- ant policies yet to be decided. Several methods of operating the garages are available. There appears to be wide agreement that operation of the garages should be by private interests. Such a plan is recommended. It can take several forms, but the character of the downtown garages is such that it would be advisable to have all three operated as a unit. In this way the most desirable financial plan is obtained. Some will obviously develop greater“ profits than others; yet all are necessary in the overall program. The mer- chants and other business groups have expressed keen interest in assisting with the parking develop- ments. From this group, an ”operating agency" could be formed to take over the garages from the city for management and operation. Important precedents have been established for such a plan in other cities, and it is strongly urged for Buffalo. ' =»»’3 um I»: 2 ~ ~ I41-'1-11%. It WI \*!&2-!i‘l I “Tits I Iris-twl Ii :1“ I 5-.i“.~1-t I I M I I Ks I I» I I ‘ s I 5 gew I I’ -M1-gels!‘ W -V ~— " QITXSQEM r’__ MFW ~-Yf;gx,g M‘ ~> J ~ ~ M 175? V ~ ~ T ~ __ _.,~I"__.' _ -~__ . .‘, Municipal Regulation of Private Parking Lots: Many of the existing downtown parking lots are poorly maintained and have little control of en- trance and exit conditions. Some of these are in the areas of highest parking demand, yet have rates conducive to long-time use It is recom- mended that consideration be given to the licens- ing of all off-street facilities. Under this plan a minimum license fee would be charged, but cer- tain standards would have to be met. These stand- ards would require a dustless surface, adequate lighting if the facility were operated at night, fencing to prevent sidewalk encroachments and random access and egress, use of portable signs to indicate when the facility is full, posting of rates and hours of operation, and proper insurance cov- erage The liability of the lot operator in trans- ferring cars from one location to another via the public streets should be made clear. Experience in other cities has shown that such licensing, when impartially administered, has gen- erally raised the level of all off-street facilities and has encouraged their use by the public. ..¢.W..\||I||l\z%“nWm...»»..... /\\t %. lkwrekie E Tlllhnwvfivé 45% 2 %h%& H}, Curr v sf. sh Mi? 4, 7 ._fl~MGW..r u NHYM»MI§r # VF \~w 4 NR J W \ , w KIIMMHVU %\fiW»~{ TIP%$RuW Eflfiiiilgg _F!§€€ Eetifilililfillkll APPENDEX (49) Fl. .t e i S I is L _;_ _ i ' I i i I .! 1 _:—Dw- g R is i M§mw.\ SECTION OF REVISED BUILDING CODE PERTINENT TO OPEN-DECK GARAGES SEC. I6. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter regulating the classification, de- sign and construction of buildings or structures, it shall be lawful to erect in this city, subject to the provisions of the zoning law, open air parking garages designed, constructed and used in the manner set forth herein. For the purposes of this section, an open air parking garage is defined as a structure or building used for the parking of passenger motor vehicles, not including omnibuses, which building or structure has not less than fifty per cent of two sides of said building or structure open and unenclosed at each story used for park- ing purposes, except as hereinafter modified. I\lo open air parking garage shall have any other oc- cupancy than garaging existing above the stories or roof area designed or used for garaging, and such garage shall not be used for motor vehicle repair work, truck storage or truck parking. Open air parking garages shall not have open s?des with- in fifteen feet of any lot line, excluding street lines, nor within fifteen feet of another building of wood frame or unprotected metal construction on the same lot, nor within fifteen feet of any openings in another building on the same lot. The height and area limitations shall comply with section sixty of this chapter. The ceiling heights shall be as fol- lows: The maximum distance from a finished floor to the underside ofa floor slab above or to the sup- porting members of such slab, shall not exceed seven feet-six inches. The clear height of a ramp, an elevator door or any other means of access or egress shall not be more than seven feet-six inches. The live floor load of any story having greater ac- cess height than seven feet-six inches in the clear shall be designed and constructed in full compli- ance with all other provisions of this chapter. _AIl floor constructions shall be designed and constructed to sustain a minimum of fifty pounds live load per square foot, androof constructions shall be designed and constructed to sustain seventy pounds live load per square foot, if such roof is used or to be used for the parking of motor vehicles. The floors and the roof, if used for park- ing motor behicles, shall be designed and con- Ordinances of the City of Buffalo—--Chapter XII. structed to carry a load of two thousand pounds assumed to be concentrated at any location on an area 2’-0’I x 2-0”, provided such a design load pro- duces greater stresses in the member under con- sideration than the uniform distributed live load. Columns and foundations shall be designed for the full dead and live loads. Enclosing walls, where required shall be of such materials and construction that are approved for two-hour fire resistance and shall be so designed and constructed that the walls for a distance of three feet-six inches from the floor level will with- stand five hundred pounds per linear foot hori- zontal impact. Walls subject to impact of full momentum of a motor vehicle descending a ramp shall be designed for a horizontal impact of one thousand pound sper linear foot of wall for a dis- tance of three feet-six inches from the floor or landing level. The open sides of open air parking garages shall be exempt from the requirements for two-hour fire resistance. The open sides of all parking and garaging areas shall have vertical curbs of a minimum height of three feet-six inches, two feet-six inches of which shall be of solid construction and designed to with- stand on horizontal impact of five hundred pounds per linear foot of wall. Above such curbing a rail- ing, wall, screening or other construction may be used, if of non-combustible materials. All openings in floors, or roof when designed and used for garaging, shall be curbed as herein required for curb walls. Drainage shall be provided for all floor and roof areas used for garaging. Standpipes shall be provided as required by section nine of this chapter. Open air parking garages shall be provided with not less than two means of egress from each park- ing level or floor. One means of egress may be an unenclosed ramp or elevator and the other means one or more stairs which shall be enclosed the en- tire height with walls and doors having a minimum of one-hour fire resistance. Such means of egress shall be placed in locations remote from each other. ,a..~ mlrsfikfiiwmta M “Mike R‘ w mug — ~. E SE .~ ~lI I‘ i_ \..i—1.—|— — 4 E? I S.‘ R ~l»ni 5.3 SC “rim, BJW, 1 5 i % Q % 5 i l l - Ii II It I .3 R .e....,.... ...§ i .. lll - .§.§»..1 { 1% i It .. 15$ miflaihwfl IiiIiiitiiitiiiiliiiiliiii ~ u v,v.v.,‘-I ‘r; R ~ '1‘ H S < ~ _ 2 V 1 w I ‘ . , _ I -. . ...-. n_ . ‘*1 I r . I Q . - ., .., _ \ _ I J ... ' ' V -V — ' 5*. I ‘ ~ ’~"‘--(' _ _" . I ' \ N ":'r::.-n-Q;-_ F a v