The Downtown Meadville Parking Study, recommended as part of the state of Pennsylvania’s Early Intervention Program review of city operations that took place in 2007, was funded by a grant from the state’s Department of Community and Economic Development and conducted by DESMAN Associates. The study examined and evaluated the overall financial and operational performance of the city’s public parking system.

The report specifically identified the financial performance of the city’s public parking system as an area needing attention, noting that the parking fund has experienced a cumulative deficit of almost $600,000 since 2001. Part of the study involved surveying the hour-to-hour utilization or occupancy of all the city’s downtown on- and off-street parking spaces. That survey took place on April 16 and 17, 2008.

Some recommendations of the final report, which was presented to the city in December, were discussed during Wednesday’s Meadville City Council study session.

In the words of the report’s executive summary:

“The present supply of more than 1,400 parking spaces in downtown has generally satisfied the prevailing peak period demand for parking which hovers at approximately 54 percent of the system capacity. Parking spaces are widely available both at on-street meters and in the majority of the City-owned, off-street parking facilities.

“Capital improvements are needed at the Mill Run Ramp (entered from Market and Water streets between Chestnut and Arch streets), several parking lots could benefit from paving, curbing and lighting improvements and the inventory of parking meters needs to be upgraded.

“Non-compliance with Municipal parking regulations is common, but parking enforcement is inconsistent and spotty. Consequently, meter revenue collections and rental space sales appear to lag behind actual downtown parking activity.

“The management of the parking program is fragmented. As a result, the parking system is not viewed as a system but rather as a series of separate and unrelated custodial functions and operations. By default, the City Manager is accountable for resolving system problems and issues when necessary but this reactive management approach fails to maintain the daily level of coordination and communication necessary to ensure the operational effectiveness of the system.”