Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/14/2024 Item 4a, Welch Wilbanks, Megan From:Samantha Welch <samantha@bluemangomanagement.com> Sent:Thursday, May 9, 2024 12:05 PM To:E-mail Council Website Subject:5/14/24 City Council Meeting: Agenda Item 4.a. This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond. Re: City Council Meeting on Tuesday, May 14, 2024 Agenda Item 4.a. Dear City Council, I want to first say thank you for your continued attention to this hot button matter, and thank you in advance for the time it will take for you to read and consider my email below. I have had the privilege to work on the Parking Program Task Force over the last few months. As a task force we have met with Parking Service leadership and with Julie Dixon Consulting (and her team) on multiple occasions to try and find a solution that keeps the parking Enterprise Fund sustainably funded while creating a more welcoming downtown experience to community members and visitors alike. As a task force we came to a clear consensus that is taken from the community feedback. The number one community concern/ask was rate reduction- these options were presented to us by Dixon in a meaningful way in 'Option B’ and in part, in 'Option C’ of their financially solvent parking solutions. Task Force Reasons for Supporting Option B, as referenced in the Dixon Recommendations: 1. It provides the greatest rate relief- the #1 concern for the community, as provided in survey results 2. We are aware of parking service intention (at some point in the future) to extend the paid parking area to further up North Monterey once construction is completed and potentially elsewhere in the city. These additional paid parking spaces provide more revenue, which justifies lower rates. Other additional R e commendations: 1. I SUPPORT City Staff recommendation to lower long term parking rates to $45/month in the structures and KEEP the 10 meter parking rate at $60/month. If you are concerned about equitability here (regarding geographic location of the structure compared to those who can access them) then a creative solution could be to level the playing field- $50- 52/pass/month. Users get to decide if they want to purchase a meter pass or a structure pass. 2. I SUPPORT City Staff recommendation to bring back a gated solution that is consistent to all structures in the city. Park PLAY then PAY. I cannot tell you how many times I overhear conversations on the street of people choosing to cut their time short in downtown because they did not buy enough time in the structure; or- walking out of the structure people saying "that was weird that I had to estimate my time...". Park, Play, Pay at a kiosk, then the gate lifts so long as the ticket is within 10-15 minutes of them paying to leave. (considering elderly, slower moving parkers time to get back to their car, and heavy traffic times) 1 3. I would recommend that the city retains the 1st hour free on a limited basis. I do not think that people should need to pay for parking to patronize the Library or visit a government office (clerks office, register to vote, pay a citation, drop off plans for a building permit etc. etc.) If there could be some sort of validation for an hour offered for these specific services then I think that would create alot of good will. We offer 'free parking' for those who worship on Sunday mornings in DT- I think it would be important to allow the same for these types of community services. o While we would LOVE to keep 1st hour free across the board, I learned alot in working with Dixon. Industry research shows that offering a blanket "free" anything when it comes to parking, encourages people to 'leave before they are charged'. This made sense to me and I can absolutely see that as not being the best strategy. So, while it was a tough pill to swallow- I am willing to accept and support this. o I see the community temperature staying hot if on-street parking rates still have a $4 price tag. $2.75 does not have the same sticker shock o With proper marketing and communication from council- I believe the message can be 'sold' so to speak that we are 'Building in that 1st free hour' to our rates.  Suggested campaign from council "You spoke, we heard you" when announcing reduced parking rates.  If someone stays in DT and parks in a structure, once they hit 2.5 hours in the structure- they start paying less overall. Partner that with the Cap at $8 and that is significantly more affordable. Another (important) Financial R ecomendation: Make the Parking Enterprise Fund whole An additional (roughly) $880K was charged to the Enterprise Fund loan for the New parking structure.  This add-on expense is not needed to build a parking facility  The expense is to reinforce the building to support the weight of a roof-top event space. If we were using the roof for parking, the expense would not be there.  As we are all aware- the general fund can NOT be used to support parking related expenses  Parking related revenues can NOT be used to fund General Fund expenses. The line is clear  The needed support for the event space should come from the general fund- not the parking enterprise fund.  The relief of this $880K loan value from the parking fund responsibility gives you all SO much flexibility to meet the needs of all of your constituent concerns. Phase 2 consideration: - From the community feedback, the NEXT most important factor after cost/rate reduction is Reduced Enforcement Hours. I believe the conversation needs to be continued in the subsequent years once the new plan is fully rolled out and adopted- which will take time. Anytime we use a term like 'technology roadmap' we know we are not getting an end to end solution tomorrow. Should the fund find extra revenue once we have fully rolled out this phase of changes, then I believe that reduced enforcement hours should be considered in phase 2. Likewise- should we find ourselves in the red, then a small, incremental increase from $2.75 2 to $3 could be acceptable in the future. While I hope we do not have to do that- if the math shows it is needed then community involvement in solution finding should be invited at that time- just bring us along in the process. Again, I thank you for your time and consideration, Sincerely, S amantha Welch 3