Policy 1: Local governments shall consider estab lishing maximum parking requirements (or parking caps) in their current zoning codes to reduce th e amount of off-street parking supply provided by businesses. Policy 2: Local governments shall consider establis hing lower minimum parking requirements in their current zoning codes to encourage in-fill devel opment and the use of alternative travel modes. Policy 3: Local governments shall consider the imposition of parking fees as an indirect measure aimed at decreasing the amount of parking provided by new developments. Such fees may be levied on the developer, the tenant or the end-user. Policy 4: Local governments shall consider the red esignation of existing, general-use parking spaces to a different, special use so as to encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. Collectively , these policies encourage each city in the RVMPO area to consider their existing parking policies – both for on-street spaces and off street parking facilities – in light of the need to address the TPR requirem ent to reduce the overall per capita pa rking supply . These policies address a variety of strategic approaches that could be undertaken to addr ess the goal. In the following paragraphs some of these strategies are further discussed and an assessm ent of potential parking reducti on benefits that could be realized is include. Policy 5: Local governments shall manage the roadw ay space so as to have a measurable impact on the amount of parking in the region. Such strategies include the redesignation of parking spaces to other uses such as bike lanes, bus stops, turn lanes, and no parking zones, and the revision of street standards allowing for narrower street widths. Policy 6: Local governments shall consider parking optimization strategies that would make better use of parking that remains following implementa tion of parking reduction required by the TPR. Such strategies include, for example, the lo wering of the minimum parking requirements, establishing parking maximums, levying parking fees on developers, tenants or end-users, allowing shared parking among adjacent businesses, and forming Parking Management Associations (PMAs) in specific areas such as downtown Medford. Parking Management Considerations Parking is very expensive to build, maintain and m anage. Construction costs alone can range from $3,000 to $5,000 per surface parking space, and between $15,000 and $25,000 per space in a structure. This cost does not include the loss of land for other purposes, or the ongoing costs associated with parking m aintenance and m anagem ent. Nevertheless, free parking is provided to accom modate an overall average of 99 percent of daily trips throughout the United States17. Even in areas where parking prices are high, em ployers often provide free parking for their em ployees. The free parking subsidy means that developers, employers and m unicipalities m ust provide and m anagem ent this extensive “free” supply . As noted above, provision of this free supply conflicts with m any other com munity goals for reducing congestion and im proving the quality of life. Implem entation of parking m anagem ent strategies can address som e of the problem s inherent in the provision of extensive free parking. Through applica tion of one or m ore of these strategies it m ay be possible to provide less parking, and to bette r balance the dem and for the existing supply . 17 Hu, P.S. and J. Young, Summary of Travel Trends, 1990 N ationwide Person Transport ation Survey , Office of Highway Inform ation M anagem ent, Federal Highway Adm inistration, W ashington, DC , 1998. Medford Transportatio n System Plan 12-2 Parking M anagement

Transportation System Plan 2018-2038