Mobility Parking Space Review the Central Library Had to Close Due to Earthquake Risks

Home , Newtown Park

Mobility Parking Spaces Report on the 2019 mobility parking spaces review Contents Executive summary ...... 4 Background ...... 6 Method ...... 9 Findings…………………………………………………………………………...... 17

Conclusion ...... 21

Appendix 1: Table of all feedback received on individual mobility parking spaces plus results from the technical survey ...... 22 Appendix 2: Tables of feedback received on individual mobility parking spaces ...... 26 Appendix 3: Maps to show the distribution of comments received by category...... 31

List of figures and tables

Figure 1: Facebook post to promote the online questionnaire ...... 10 Figure 2: Example of a map of mobility parking space locations (Tawa) .... 11 Figure 3: Example of a map of mobility parking space locations (central area) ...... 12 Figure 4: Example of how the posters were used to provide feedback ...... 13 Figure 5: Facebook post on Wellington City Council page to advertise Central Library drop-in event ...... 14 Figure 6: Example of the poster used to promote the drop-in events ...... 14

Table 1: Number of Mobility Parking Spaces at different Parks, Sports and Recreation facilities ...... 7 Table 2: Breakdown of how people provided feedback on mobility parking spaces ...... 17 Table 3: Let’s Talk website statistics (at survey close) ...... 17 Table 4: Summary of feedback by category and by city area ...... 18

Executive summary It is important that all people with disabilities, particularly those that are not able to use public or active transport, can easily access services, educational venues, events and recreational facilities in Wellington. This means we need enough mobility parking spaces in the right places. It also means that how the Council engages with people with disabilities is effective and accessible. As we are reviewing the Parking Policy 2007 and Mobility Parking Policy 2005, we wanted to review our current mobility parking spaces to identify any issues with placement or design or destinations with no mobility parking provision. We also wanted to trial a number of different engagement techniques to determine which approach was the most effective at reaching people with disabilities. We tested several methodologies to engage with mobility permit holders in Wellington. These included a workshop, drop-in events and an online map- based user questionnaire. We targeted all current mobility permit holders with an information email via CCS Disability Action1. We sought feedback from the Council’s Accessibility Advisory Group and encouraged the members to promote the questionniare. We also emailed approximately 40 organisations that provide services or networks for people with disabilities and promoted the events and the questionniare via Facebook. The engagement approaches that generated feedback from the most contributors were the engagement website and comments on Facebook posts. From the feedback that was received, most comments were about mobility parking spaces in the central area. This may be due to: • the number of services and key destinations in the central area, • a higher number of mobility parking spaces, and • a higher dependence on on-street mobility parking spaces as there are fewer accessible off-street mobility parking options and a greater distance between destinations compared to a suburban town centre. The review also revealed a variety of user experiences with different parking spaces. This may be due to the differing types of disability that impact accessiblity and/or due to the variety of mobility parking spaces themselves. The results can be used by the Council to inform mobility parking space improvements; inform the development of the draft parking policy and improve how we engage with people with disabilities.

1 One of two organisations that administer mobility parking permit applications 4

Project aims The project had two aims: • to trial a number of different engagement approaches to identify which approach was most successful at reaching people with disabilities and what method would give us the best insights. Success will be measured by how many individuals provided feedback on their experience with using mobility parking spaces and the information it provided, and • to identify issues with our current mobility parking spaces, such as placement or design and to identify public destinations within Wellington City with no or not enough Council mobility parking spaces. The Council wants to ensure that our mobility parking spaces are fit for purpose, provide adequate information for users on the design, location and occupancy of these spaces and then address any compliance or enforcement issues. The results from this project will feed in to the review of the parking policies and inform any new guidelines that are required to support the management and use of Council mobility parking spaces in to the future. We can also apply learnings from the engagement approaches to the upcoming consultation on the draft parking policy to ensure people with disabilities have an opportunity to provide their views.

Background The Parking Policy and the Mobility Parking Policy provide the guiding principles for the supply and management of on-street and Wellington City Council-controlled off-street parking in Wellington City. We are reviewing both policies to ensure they fit with the future transport system vision for the city. The Council adopted the Mobility Parking Policy in 2005 with the aim to ensure Wellington is a liveable place for people with limited mobility by enhancing their ability to participate in employment, social, cultural and political life and their access to services and resources. The first stage of the Parking Policy review collected data and information about the use and occupancy of different types of mobility parking around the city. Statistics New Zealand figures show that in New Zealand one in four people live with a disability and over 20,000 working-age Wellingtonians have disabilities. Around 18 percent of people have limited mobility, and this is likely to increase as the population ages. In 2018, CCS Disability Action issued 3,223 long-term mobility parking permits and 204 short-term permits for Wellington City. 7,857 mobility parking permits were issued to residents of Wellington City, Porirua and Lower Hutt. At the time of the review, there were 66 Wellington City Council mobility parking spaces in use in the central city area plus 167 on-street and off- street mobility parking spaces in the suburbs and at Council facilities such as the Wellington Regional Aquatic Centre, Freyberg pool and Newtown Park plus mobility parking spaces at the car parks for other Wellington City Council-Controlled Organisations such as Zealandia and the zoo. The table below provides a breakdown of the number of mobility parking spaces at the Council’s key parks, sports and recreation facilities.

Table 1: Number of Mobility Parking Spaces at different Parks, Sports and Recreation facilities

Mobility parking permits allow holders to park in spaces for longer than the time restriction. This recognises the extra time needed to go to and from destinations. Mobility permit holders can park for an additional hour over any time restriction of 30 minutes or longer and an hour over the time paid for. Based on sensor data, mobility parking spaces in the central area have a lower occupancy compared to regular metered parking. Mobility parking has a 16 percent occupancy rate at the peak of day, compared to 75-95 percent for regular metered parking. Central area mobility spaces had an average stay time of 37 minutes, with 9 percent of visitors staying over 2 hours and 56 percent of visitors staying 10 minutes or less. A number of factors could contribute to an overall low occupancy such as: • low demand • design that does not meet the needs of users, • difficulties in locating spaces, • location and placement not being convenient to the destination, • payment price and accessibility of payment options, and • spaces used differently, such as more pick up/drop off rather than parking.

Analysis of usage of individual metered spaces shows that usage patterns of spaces vary considerably. Some spaces have long average stay times, while others have short average stay times. Many spaces have a high number of short-term (less than 5 minute) stays, which suggests that the spaces may be used for pick up and drop off by non-mobility permit holders. Sensor data shows the usage of spaces, but not who is using them. Council infringement records for the period 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018 show 487 infringements or formal warnings issued for vehicles parked “contrary to the signage” in Council-provided mobility parking spaces across the city. Feedback from the Accessibility Advisory Group (AAG) and CCS Disability Action is that many spaces are not designed to best practice and therefore are not usuable for all people with disabilities or their vehicles. The AAG and CCS Disability Action also say that the city’s mobility parking spaces and permits are often being misused and there needs to be more enforcement to ensure mobility parks are available for intended users.

Method To help inform future changes to the Council’s mobility parking spaces, we requested feedback from users on whether the Council's current mobility parking spaces are fit for purpose and in the preferred locations. We also requested views on whether there are other locations in Wellington City where access could be improved by adding mobility parking spaces. To supplement the views of users, the Council also did a technical survey of the central city area on-street mobility parking spaces. How did we communicate the drop-in events and online research? The Council used the following channels to alert people to the research and the different ways in which people could provide their feedback: • Facebook advertisement posts of the drop-in events and online research, • email to approximately 40 organisations with a focus on providing services or networks for people with disabilities, • presentations and emails to the Accessibility Advisory Group members, • email and follow up telephone calls via CCS Disability Action organisation to current mobility permit holders, • posters in our libraries and community centres advertising the drop-in events and online research, and • A5 flyers advertising the drop-in events and online research placed under the windscreen of cars parked in the central area mobility parking spaces. Online research We used an online engagement platform called “Let’s Talk” (Bang the Table) to collate feedback on the city’s mobility parking spaces. This was achieved in three ways: 1. A map-based questionnaire asking: • Which of these Council mobility parking spaces meet your needs? • Which of these Council mobility parking spaces need improving? • Where you think new Council mobility parking spaces could be added and why? 2. A poll asking mobility permit holders which type of parking space they most frequently use? • I most frequently park in the on-street designated mobility parking spaces. • I most frequently park in off-street designated mobility parking spaces. • I most frequently park in on-street undesignated parking spaces.

• I most frequently park in off-street undesignated parking spaces. 3. An open comment space for people to share their personal experiences of using the Council's mobility parking spaces in Wellington City, either as the driver or the passenger. The online website was open for contributions from 15 April to 29 May 2019 and the Council advertised the review via Facebook (refer to Figure 1 for example of Facebook post).

Figure 1: Facebook post to promote the online research

Drop-in events We set up three drop-in events to provide access to the questionnaire for those that may not have a device to get online. Large A1 maps were printed to show the location of every mobility parking space in the city, with several zoom-ins at A3 size of the central area and suburban town centres (refer to Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2: Example of a map of mobility parking space locations (Tawa)

Figure 3: Example of a map of mobility parking space locations (central area)

Mobility permit holders or those that drive for people with a mobility permit were invited to drop-in and provide feedback on any mobility parking space using post-it notes and ‘sharpie’ pens directly on to the maps (see figure 4), plus general feedback via a printed comments form. We used colour-coded stickers (replicated as coloured pins on the online version) to categorise people’s feedback into: • Mobility parking space meets my needs (pink) • Mobility parking space needs improving (orange) • More mobility parking spaces needed here (black).

Figure 4: Example of how the posters were used to provide feedback

The first drop-in event was held at the Central Library in Wellington City on 25 February 2019 from 11.00am until 5.30pm. Council officers were available to answer questions and help people do the questionnaire. A New Zealand Sign Language interpretor was available all day too. The second and third drop-in events were held at Karori and Johnsonville libraries on 7 May 2019, 11.30am to 1.00pm and 10 May 2019, 9.30am to 11.30am respectively. The same approach of using A1 printed maps and post-its was used each time. Figures 5 and 6 are examples of the promotion for the events.

Figure 5: Facebook post on Wellington City Council page to advertise Central Library drop-in event

Figure 6: Example of the poster used to promote the drop-in events

Technical survey The technical survey was conducted in November 2018 and looked at 60 on- street mobility parking spaces plus two off-street parking spaces at Freyberg Pool and Fitness Centre. The survey recorded, in person, the following details about each parking space: • dimension (length and width) • location, including a photograph • type (angle or parallel park) • mobility ramp/kerb crossing • slope of the road • distance to access footpath • distance to access nearest parking payment machine • any observations in relation to road traffic volume and speed The results from the technical survey are provided in Appendix 1.

Findings Aim 1: Which engagement approach was most successful? Overall engagement In January 2018, 3,427 permits were issued for the Wellington area and we received feedback from approximately 80 contributors (refer to table 2). Some may have contributed via more than one method as it was not possible to identify individual submitters for all of the engagement channels. The engagement website received 504 visits, of which 112 were informed (taken the 'next step' from being aware and clicked on something such as a news article, a photo, etc.) and 23 were engaged (participated in on-line map questionnaire). Table 3 provides a breakdown of the engagement in the Let’s Talk website. Table 2: Breakdown of how people provided feedback on mobility parking spaces

Note: the same person may have contributed via more than one option and provided many comments. Facebook posts that had a ‘share’ but no additional text or comment were not included in the count. Table 3: Let’s Talk website statistics (at close of research)

Note: An aware visitor, or a visitor that we consider to be 'aware', has made one single visit to the site or project. Aware visitors will have visited at least one page. The online Quick Poll had received 10 responses at the end of the engagement period.

Online map questionnaire 14 contributors provided comments against 60 map pins. Note: one pin was placed outside of the Wellington City Council boundary and some pins were placed in error (marked as ‘mistake’) so were not included in the results. People were able to comment on as many or few mobility parking spaces as they wished and some spaces received comments from more than one person.

What did not work? We tried to set up a workshop with invited representatives from across a range of disabilities who use our mobility parking spaces to spend a day identifying those spaces that meet people’s needs and those that do not. However, we did not receive enough confirmed attendees for the date in January the workshop was scheduled. This may have been due to the timing of the workshop, as it was close to the holiday period, or we did not allow sufficient time between sending the invitations and scheduling the workshop date so potential attendees did not have enough time to make arrangements to attend an all-day event. The location of the proposed workshop was considered suitable as the central library has good access via lifts to a large enough room with disability toilets on the same level (the Mezzanine room). The central library has mobility parking spaces close by too2.

2 Since the mobility parking space review the Central Library had to close due to earthquake risks. 18

Aim 2: What are the issues with our current mobility parking spaces? Table 4 provides a summary of the feedback received by category and by city area. Appendix 1 provides a full list of all the mobility parking spaces and comments received against each space from all of the engagement sources. Across all the engagement approaches, the mobility parking spaces in the central city attracted the most feedback and those in the Eastern suburbs the least. Table 4: Summary of feedback by category and by city area

Additional maps to show comment distribution by category: meets my needs; need improving or need more spaces, are in Appendix 3. Mobility parking space design For those mobility parking spaces in the central area that the Council has done a technical survey, the most frequent comments received across all engagement sources related to either: • the location/placement of the mobility parking space, or • the lack of accessible kerb ramp/cutting. For example, the two spaces on Stout Street have a ramp but the feedback says these ramps are too steep. In terms of location or placement, some of the comments received were in relation to the space not being near any useful destination, such as one of the spaces on The Terrace, or that the current location is difficult to access or use due to the suitability of the road itself (such as on Bolton Street) or from conflict with other users nearby, such as Harris Street and Grey Street mobility parking spaces. As there are no New Zealand mobility parking space design standards or specifications specifically for on-street parking spaces, the Council uses four different documents as guidance on mobility parking space location and design. These are: • Wellington City Council Mobility Parking Policy 2005. • New Zealand Standard 4121:2001 Design for Access and Mobility – Buildings and Associated Facilities.

• Australian Standard 2890.5-1993 Parking Facilities Part 5: On-street Parking. • Australian/New Zealand Standard 2890.1:2004 Parking facilities Part 1: Off-street car parking. However, as mobility parking spaces have been installed across the city over a very long timeframe (since the 1990s) and over that time placement and design considerations have changed resulting in a broad variety of mobility parking spaces. Interestingly, the feedback received was also varied and sometimes opposing. For some users, a particular mobility parking space did meet their needs in terms of location and design. However, another user’s experience was that the same space needed improving in order to better meet their needs. This is likely to be due to the wide range of mobility issues amongst permit holders and how different disabilities impact on mobility. Secondly, the feedback was either from the perspective of a passenger with a mobility permit or the driver. Therefore, the user-experience will be different. Based on the responses received, there does not appear to be a strong correlation between average occupancy of the mobility parking space and whether or not the space met people’s needs or needed improving. Some spaces with relatively high average occupancy received comments about needing improvements and conversely spaces with relatively low average occupancy met people’s needs. The feedback received suggests that for those permit holders with wheelchair-accessible vehicles (WAVs), particularly those that are rear- loading, more spaces need improving – either with accessible kerb- cuttings/ramps or with sufficient space to manoeuvre a wheelchair safely to and from the vehicle. Feedback was received for mobility parking spaces not managed by the Council, such as in supermarket car parks. When resource consent applications are received for buildings with off-street parking provision, they are assessed against the requirements of the AS/NZ Standard 2890.6 2009 Off-street parking for people with disabilities. This is a requirement of the District Plan. Respondents aso raised compliance and enforcement issues. Although the compliance and enforcement feedback is out-of-scope of the review, the information has been noted and will be considered in the broader context of the parking policy review. Additional Mobility Parking Spaces For comments about new and additional mobility parking spaces, the most requests were for within the central area (central business district plus parts of Thorndon Quay and Oriental Bay). These were a mix of destination- specific suggestions, such as outside the Ministry of Social Development or the Work and Income office on Willis Street, or general location requests, such as along Courtenay Place.

Conclusion Aim 1: Engagement approaches For the mobility parking space research, the online engagement via the website and engagement via social media, such as the Facebook posts, attracted the highest number of comments. In order to reach more mobility permit holders and encourage more individuals to provide feedback on future consultation and engagement on mobility parking issues, we need to ask them what form of engagement works best. There is an action in the current Accessible Wellington Action Plan to develop guidance on accessible communications and engagement. These guidelines will be used to identify improvements we can make to our consultation and engagement approaches. Aim 2: How to improve our mobility parking spaces As part of the Parking Policy review, the Council should ensure that high- level objectives and principles that cover accessibility and mobility parking spaces are proposed as part of a city-wide parking policy and propose that the provision, design and location of mobility parking spaces is considered on an area-by-area basis inclusive of broader parking management plans. The Council could also consider producing separate guidelines on mobility parking space placement and design, covering the decision-making process for requesting additional mobility parking spaces. The guidelines could also cover both the design of new mobility parking spaces on road space that currently has no parking spaces and ‘retro-fit’ design guidelines to apply when converting a non-mobility parking space into a mobility parking space. The Council could also consider rolling out the technical survey of it’s mobility parking spaces to the rest of the city to provide up to date information on the design of the mobility parking spaces and to inform an ongoing programme of works to improve existing spaces. To ensure there is user feedback to inform the programme of works, the Council could keep the mobility parking space feedback map up and running on the Let’s Talk website. Mobility permit holders could then continue to add comments about specific mobility parking spaces at any time. When considering the location of new mobility parking spaces the Council could assess the need within the context of other uses for the same street space and the availability of current, or likelihood of future, mobility spaces being provided in the same area by a non-Council provider. The Council does not currently hold information on the number or location of non-Council mobility parking spaces. Collecting this information could help decision- makers improve accessibility across the city and give mobility permit holders a broader selection of parking options, both on and off the street.

Appendix 1: Table of all feedback received on individual mobility parking spaces plus results from the technical survey

Appendix 2: Tables of feedback received on individual mobility parking spaces

Meets my needs Needs improving Appendix 3: Maps to show the distribution of comments received by category.

Need more spaces