Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/30/2002, 1 - JOINT STUDY SESSION: PLANNING COMMISSION ROLE RELATIVE TO PARKING AND ACCESS ISSUES AND PLANNING CO Council MaanD� April 30.2002 Agenba Repont CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Mike McCluskey,Director of Public Works Prepared By: Peggy Mandeville,Transportation Associate PAI SUBJECT: JOINT STUDY SESSION: PLANNING COMMISSION ROLE RELATIVE TO PARKING AND ACCESS ISSUES AND PLANNING COMMISSION INPUT ON POTENTIAL FORMATION OF A NEW ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAO RECOMMENDATION: 1. The City Council and Planning Commission should receive and discuss this report regarding added advisory body review of parking, transportation and access issues. 2. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Council may want to provide direction to staff as appropriate. DISCUSSION Background As a part of the City's 2001/2003 financial plan process, the City Council established a major goal to create a citywide parking and access advisory body (see Attachment 1, Major City Goals- Parking and Access Advisory Body). In pursuit of this goal, Council has held two study sessions to discuss the pros and cons of creating a parking and access advisory body, the scope of responsibilities the advisory body would have, and how the advisory body would fit into the City organization. At the last study session (held on February 5, 2002), the City Council reviewed five advisory body alternatives that would increase the level of discourse regarding parking, transportation and access issues. They include: • Parking and Access Committee: Advise Council on parking and access issues • Enhanced Planning Commission role: Provide more focused review of issues • AD Hoc Committee: Advise Council on an as needed basis • Parking and Access Subcommittee: Advise PC on an as needed basis • Parking and Transportation Committee: Advise PC and ARC on issues Eliminates BAC and MTC The advantages and disadvantages of these alternatives are discussed in the February 5, 2002, Council Agenda Report(Attachment 2). Council Agenda Report: Parking and Access Issues Joint Study Session with the Planning Commission Page 2 At the study session, the Council agreed that: 1) more synergy should be created among existing advisory bodies relating to parking, transportation, and access issues; 2) existing advisory bodies should not be disbanded to accomplish this goal; and 3) while the Planning Commission might be the most appropriate advisory body to increase its level of discourse regarding parking, transportation and access issues, rather than a new committee, the impacts of such an alternative needed to be further explored with the Planning Commission. The Council also desired input on some of the alternatives for creating a new advisory body. As a result, the Council directed staff to schedule a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to discuss these issues. Existing Planning Commission Responsibilities The Planning Commission provides input on long range planning efforts, such as specific plans, community plans and all elements of the General Plan, which includes.the Circulation Element. Additionally, the Planning Commission reviews the annual Capital Improvement Program for conformance with the City's General Plan. The Government Code and City procedures require that the Planning Commission review parking, transportation and access implications of these plans and programs as part of their recommendation to the City Council. In fact, the nature of proposing new and revised uses in an area make parking, transportation, and access focal points of much of the Planning Commission deliberation. Projects that included significant review of transportation and access issues were the Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan, the Margarita Area Specific Plan, and the Airport Area Specific Plan. The Planning Commission also is engaged in many current planning efforts that involve parking, transportation, and access issues. In their capacity, the Commission reviews and provides input on a variety of transportation issues including roadway design, pedestrian linkages, site distance, secondary access, traffic calming measures and parking requirements. Every environmental initial study that is evaluated by the Planning Commission has a traffic and circulation component. Often, mitigation measures are proposed and discussed by the Planning Commission that will lessen the project's traffic impacts. Nearly every rezone, annexation, or major development proposal requires a significant discussion on traffic and circulation. The recent annexation of the Cannon Business Park (comer of Tank Fane and Broad) is an example of how traffic safety and area wide circulation issues required the attention of the Planning Commission. Other recent development projects that included significant discussion of transportation related issues are the DeVaul Ranch subdivisions, the SLO Promenade, the Madonna Plaza redevelopment, and the Wilson condominium project on Walnut Street. Recent Enhancements in the Review of Parking and Access Issues In the past, the Annual Report on the General Plan has focused on the implementation of specific policies and programs during the previous year. In response to the Council's desire to provide a more deliberate review of parking, transportation and access issues, the Annual Report on the General Plan will be expanded to include more information on the implementation of the Circulation Element. The 2001 Annual Report demonstrated the first step by including additional information on the status of the Circulation Element. Beginning in 2002, the annual reports will include a more coordinated effort by the Planning Commission (PC), Architectural Review Council Agenda Report:Parking and Access Issues Joint Study Session with the Planning Commission Page 3 Commission (ARC), Mass Transportation Committee (MTC), and Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)in the actual preparation of the Annual Report. How to Further Involve the Planning Commission in Such Issues Enhancement of Planning Commission Role To further address the Council's desire for a broader and more complete advisory body review of parking, transportation and access issues,the following options are offered: 1. City Plans and Projects. The role of the Planning Commission may be enhanced to include a review of the following City plans and projects: Bicycle Plan Pedestrian Transportation Plan Parking Management Plan NARF Transit and Parking Projects Short Range Transit Plan Neighborhood Parking Districts The Parking Management Plan and Neighborhood Parking Districts are currently the sole responsibility of the City Council. The other documents are currently reviewed by other advisory bodies (example BAC: Bicycle Plan) before being heard by the City Council. Adding the Planning Commission review of these plans and projects would provide a comprehensive review prior to Council consideration as it relates to the General Plan elements and planning documents. Parking related duties such as the review of parking rates, fees and fines would remain the sole responsibility of the City Council. 2. Other Documents. During the development of other City documents that might not normally be reviewed by the Planning Commission, staff should determine the appropriateness for them to be sent to the Planning Commission for an advisory review of parking, transportation and access issues. An example of a project that was not originally anticipated to be reviewed by the Planning Commission is the Bob Jones City to the Sea bike plan. Increased Synergy To increase the synergy among the existing advisory bodies as it specifically relates to parking, transportation and access issues, the following options are offered: 1. Staff Reports. To ensure that transportation issues are adequately addressed in staff reports, staff recommends that future Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission and City Council staff reports regarding development projects include a separate discussion section that addresses parking, transportation, and access issues. This recommendation /-3 A � Council Agenda Report:Parldng and Access Issues Joint Study Session with the Planning Commission Page 4 could be implemented immediately by the Community Development Department, and documented in the next Agenda Report Manual update. 2. Council Goal Setting Process. To improve advisory body coordination in the Council Goal Setting process, staff recommends that every City advisory body hold two separate meetings to discuss their recommendations. At their first meeting,the advisory body would develop their draft recommended goals. At the second meeting, the advisory body would review the draft recommendations of other advisory bodies and then finalize their recommendations with a better understanding of the other advisory bodies priorities and possible crossover issues. This suggestion would mean beginning the Council goal setting process at least a month earlier for advisory bodies, and would require the assistance of advisory body staff and the Finance Department to facilitate coordination. 3. Mayor's Advisory Body Quarterly Meeting. To become better informed as to the role and responsibilities of other advisory bodies, staff recommends that the advisory body chairs expand their quarterly reports delivered at the Mayor's Advisory Body Chair Quarterly meeting to include a forecast of significant upcoming issues their advisory body will be hearing. Such a foreshadowing would allow possible joint discussion to occur, as appropriate, between advisory bodies. Implementing this recommendation would require advisory body staff to work with committee and commission chairs to include appropriate information in their reports. ALTERNATIVES Outlined below are other alternatives that Council expressed some interest in obtaining Planning Commission input. The option of forming a Parking and Transportation Committee has been dropped, since Council did not want to pursue any alternatives that disbanded any existing committees. 1. Parking and Access Committee. This committee would provide some duplication of effort with existing advisory bodies that could result in conflicting Council recommendations. 2. Ad Hoc Committee. This committee could be activated at any time Council determines the need, therefore this option could be pursued if the expansion of the Planning Commission role did not produce the desired outcome for the review of parking,transportation, and access issues or if the Planning Commission felt the need for specialized feedback on a specific issue. 3. Parking and Access Subcommittee. This subcommittee also could be activated by Council at anytime. The Planning Commission could forward recommendations to the Council to form the subcommittee when it felt the benefits of a multi jurisdictional membership would be beneficial. 4. No Action. The No Action alternative would leave the current processes and procedures in place. This alternative was not pursued because it would not address Council's desire to provide a more deliberate review of parking,transportation and access issues. Council Agenda Report:Parking and Access Issues Joint Study Session with the Planning Commission Page 5 FISCAL IMPACTS No additional staff resources are needed to implement the staff recommendations identified in this report. ATTACHMENTS 1. Major City Goals- Parking and Access Advisory Body 2. February 5 Council Report 3. Minutes of February 5 Council Meeting. 1:\Council Agenda ReportsTarking and Access Advisory Body Study Session#3.doc POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES A1TACfIMENi I MAJOR CITY GOALS—PARKING AND ACCESS ADVISORY BODY OBJECTIVE Community-Based Groups. The Chamber of Commerce has created a subcommittee on parking Establish a Citywide parking and access advisory issues, and in recent years has also made body. recommendations to the Council and provided a different venue for community input on parking DISCUSSION issues. Additionally, other community-based groups such as Save SLO Downtown have emerged to Background advise the Council on such issues. These groups have promoted a higher level of awareness of Council Advisory Bodies. Through the years, the pedestrian access issues to be considered City has received parking "advice" from various simultaneously with downtown parking issues. bodies. When the City's fust Parking Management Plan was being developed in the mid-1980's, there Proposed Advisory Body Scope. Not Just the were two advisory bodies on parking issues: Downtown. The many points of view concerning Citywide Parking Committee and the Downtown how Downtown parking should be provided, and Association's (then called the Business how pedestrian access should be addressed, led the Improvement Area Committee) Parking Council to request forming a specific advisory body Subcommittee. Because there was a high-level of on these key issues. Further, ,the Council was overlap in membership between these two advisory concerned that the City be treated as a whole and bodies, the Council eliminated the City-wide that the new advisory body be charged with advisory body shortly after approval of the Parking reviewing parking and pedestrian access issues Management Plan in 1987, and delegated the throughout the City rather than just in the primary advise role to the Downtown Association's Downtown. (DA) Parking Subcommittee. This group has been the primary source of community input on parking The work program for this objective will determine issues since then. the best fit of the advisory body and its relation to the existing commissions and committees that In addition to overlapping membership, the Council currently advise the Council on transportation also based this change on their conclusion that with related issues regarding parking and pedestrian and adoption of overall policy guidance in the Parking bicycle access. Management Plan,main concerns would be focused on the day-today operations of parldng facilities, Challenges We Will Face in Achieving this Goal and the DA Parking Subcommittee would be closer to these issues. In short, this approach was There are many major challenges to achieving this predicated on the belief that major policy issues on goal: parking were resolved. In hindsight, this conclusion was pre-mature. 1. Developing duties and authority of the body as it relates to other Council advisory bodies. The Council has also created"ad hoc"task forces as needed on focused parking issues. For example,our Advisory bodies that deal with these issues in highly-successful rate structure resulted from a one form or another include the Planning special task force formed by the Council in 1991 Commission, Architectural Review composed of representatives from the Downtown Commission, Mass Transportation Committee, Association, Chamber of Commerce, citizens at- Downtown Association, Bicycle Committee and large and City staff from Administration, Finance occasionally the Cultural Heritage Committee. and Public Works_. As such, reaching a clear understanding of the purpose and role of this new advisory body will B-47 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES ATTACHMENT I MAJOR CITY GOALS—PARKING AND ACCESS ADVISORY BODY be essential in gaining "buy-in" from the other ACTION PLAN advisory bodies and the community at-large on Task -gate its new role. 1. Complete research into other 7/01 to 2. Determining the make-up and representation of jurisdiction's methods of similar 10/01 advisory body members. advisory bodies;receive input. from current advisory bodies on 3. Determining a work program and scope of the governance issues with and advisory body,including the nature and scope of between advisory bodies the"City-wide"responsibility. 2. Hold Council study session to 12/01 Although not requested by the Council, this discuss advisory body issues, might include the combining of various other such as purpose,scope of duties, committees that deal with transportation issues membership and staff support and such as the Mass Transportation Committee or receive direction Bicycle Committee into one advisory body on 3 Council approves formation of 01/02 transportation matters. advisory body,staff begins 4. Ensuring resources for adequate staff support recruitment 4. Council hold interviews with 03/02 Providing the necessary staff reports, research advisory body candidates and attendance at meetings to appropriately staff 5. New advisory body holds first 6/02 this new advisory body will take time from other meeting currently performed work. Advisory bodies tend to set their own work programs that may or may not coincide with Council goals and RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT objectives. This will be one of the key items to be addressed as part of the Action Plan. 1.. Public Works will act as the lead department on this goal. 5. Meeting any expectations that this advisory body will make addressing parking'issues easier. 2;. Administration will assist in determining project objectives and coordinating discussions with the This advisory body will provide an added and Council, community organizations and the hopefully improved forum for public discussion public. on parking issues. however, this should not be viewed as a vehicle for expediting conflict 3. City Clerk's Office will assist Council members resolution. Due to the intensity of diverse in recruiting and interviewing candidates. community opinions on the parking and access issues that will be heard by this advisory body, FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES it is highly unlikely that forming it will result in REQUIRED TO ACNE THE GOAL fewer speakers, less confrontation or shorter incurred in hearings at Council(or other public)meetings. Minimal direct costs will be meetings, coordinating public. workshops, recruitments and interviews. We believe these can be absorbed within existing resources. Assessing advisory staff and other support needs for the new advisory body and its impact on other City programs B-48 POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES ATTACHMENT I MAJOR CITY GOALS—PARKING AND ACCESS ADVISORY BODY is part of the Action Plan workscope. Accordingly, we will not know added resource needs or impacts (if any)until we complete this analysis in Fall 2001. GENERAL.FUND REVENUE POTENTIAL It is unlikely that forming a new parking and access advisory body will produce any new revenue for the General Fund. OUTCONEE—FINAL WORK PRODUCT Creating a parking and access advisory body will provide an additional resource to the Council in determining the appropriate policies, programs and c projects regarding parking and access issues Citywide; and provide the community at-large, neighborhood groups, downtown organizations, property owners and merchants with an additional forum to express public opinion regarding often emotional and controversial issues. i - I 1 B-49 p —O ATTACHMENT 2 coon a t FFebniazy 5,2002 j acEnaa uEpont CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Mike McCluskey, Director of Public Wor Prepared By: Peggy Mandeville,Transportation Associate SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION: PARKING AND ACCESS ADVISORY BODY REPORT ON ALTERNATIVES CAO RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should: (1) receive a report on providing a more deliberate review of parking, transportation and access issues; (2) provide staff with direction regarding the Council preferred advisory body alternative; and (3) authorize staff to consult with various advisory bodies and to return to Council with final recommendations. DISCUSSION Background As a part of the City's 2001/2003 financial plan process, the City Council established a major goal to create a citywide parking and access advisory body (see Attachment 1, Major City Goals- Parking and Access Advisory Body). In pursuit of this goal, Council held a study session-on November 27, 2001 to discuss the scope of responsibilities of a parking and access advisory body: At the study session, Council directed staff to pursue input from the involved committees-and; commissions on several proposed alternatives for a parking and access advisory body. In order to have more clarity before requesting commission and committee input, staff has refined the advisory body alternatives further and is seeking Council consensus on a preferred alternative. Staff has also notified the involved committees and commissions about this second study session. November 27,2001 Study Session Three areas for improvement were raised during the Council's discussion of the scope of responsibilities for a parking and access advisory body at the November 27, 2001 City Council study session. 1. PC Role. There is a desire to have the Planning Commission (PC) be more active in discussing parking, transportation and access issues. To address this issue, staff proposes to work with the Planning Commission to enhance their annual report on the General Plan (beginning with the 2001 report) to include more information on the implementation of the Circulation Element. Additionally, staff would include parking, transportation and access issues within the discussion section of Planning Commission reports to facilitate discussion of these issues. /-9 Council Agenda Report: Parking and Access Advisory Body(Study Session#2) ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 2. Syne There is a desire to create more synergy among existing City committees as it specifically relates to parking, transportation, and access issues. To address this issue, staff suggests working with the Planning Commission (PC), Architectural Review Commission (ARC), Mass Transportation Committee (MTC), and Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) to prepare an annual report on the Circulation Element of the General Plan for review and discussion at a joint meeting at the Planning Commission and to provide input to the Planning Commission's annual report on the General Plan. This new coordinated effort would begin with the 2002 report on the General Plan because the General Plan annual report for last year has already been drafted and scheduled for Planning Commission review. Additionally, staff would send a memo to the committees informing them of the Council's request for their participation in the preparation of the General Plan annual report and encouraging them to hold other joint meetings to discuss common areas of purview and committee recommendations for the Council goal setting process. 3. Void. There is a desire to fill a void in the City's review of parking, transportation and access issues. The Council indicated that they would like to increase the level of discourse regarding parking, transportation and access issues. To address this issue, staff has developed five alternative advisory body solutions for Council consideration. Advisory Body Alternatives Staff recommends the Council consider pursuing one of the following alternatives described below and detailed in the attached comparison table(see Attachment 2): Recommended Alternative: Parldng and Access Committee. This committee would advise the Council on parking and access issues. The committee would meet quarterly. Staff support of the Downtown Association (DA) Parking Committee would be eliminated with the creation of this new committee. Typical topics this committee would address include: Review of the City's - proposed Pedestrian Transportation Plan; amendments to the City's Parking Management Plan; requests for neighborhood parking districts; review of parking rates,fees and fines; review of citywide parking standards; and updates to the Circulation Element as they relate to parking and access. Staff believes that this committee most closely reflects Council's goals for a new committee. This committee would provide-additional discourse and input on parking and access issues. The committee, which reports directly to the City Council, would provide . separate recommendations from the Planning Commission on updates to the Circulation Element and review of citywide parking standards. No other duplication of effort with existing advisory bodies is envisioned. l'J i TACHMENT 2 Council Agenda Report: Parking and Access Advisory Body(Study Session#2) Page 3 Alternative A: Enhanced Planning Commission Responsibilities. Although no new committee would be created, the Planning Commission could become more focused on the review of parking, transportation, and access issues with direction from the City Council. Additional topics the Planning Commission would address include: Review of the City's proposed Pedestrian Transportation Plan and amendments to the City's Parking Management Plan. With these new Planning Commission responsibilities, the only duties that would remain the sole responsibility of the City Council would be the review of parking rates, fees, and fines and requests for neighborhood parking districts. Alternative B: Ad Hoc Committee. An Ad Hoc Committee would operate on an as-needed basis as determined by the City Council. Members of the committee would be appointed by the City Council for their ability to address the specific parking/transportation issue before them. Typical topics this committee could address include: Review of the City's proposed Pedestrian Transportation Plan, the proposed LOVR interchange design; amendments to the City's Parking Management Plan; and proposed roadway alignments. An Ad Hoc Committee would provide additional discourse and input regarding specific parking,transportation and access issues, filling any void as identified by the City Council. Alternative C: Parking and Access Subcommittee. On an as needed basis, the subcommittee would advise the Planning Commission on parking, transportation and access issues. The. membership of the Parking and Access Subcommittee would consist of a representative from the MTC, BAC, ARC, and Downtown Parking as well as three members-at-large. Typical topics this committee would address include: Review of the City's proposed Pedestrian Transportation Plan; amendments to the City's Parking Management Plan; parking rates; and updates to the Circulation Element. A Parking and Access Subcommittee would address the same issues as the Recommended Parking and Access Committee with the exception that the subcommittee would not review requests for Neighborhood Parking Districts. The subcommittee is also different from the Recommended Parking and Access Committee in that it would report to the Planning Commission on all issues with the exception of recommendations on parking rates, fees, and fines which the Subcommittee would report directly to the City Council. Alternative D: Parking and Transportation Committee. This committee would advise the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission on parking and transportation issues. The committee would meet monthly. With the creation of this new committee,the Bicycle Advisory Committee and the Mass Transportation Committee would be disbanded and staff support of the DA Parking Committee would be eliminated. Typical topics this committee would address include: Review of the City's proposed Pedestrian Transportation Plan; ATTAT 2 Council Agenda Report: Parking and Access Advisory Body(Study Session#2) Page 4 amendments to the City's Parking Management Plan; review of parking rates; updates to the Circulation Element; review of Long and Short Range Transit Masterplan updates; Bicycle Transportation Plan updates; and review of transportation/circulation components of subdivisions, speck plans, and planned developments. A Parking and Transportation Committee would provide the additional discourse and input Council is seeking filling the identified void. Evaluation of Alternatives If the Council prefers an alternative to the staff-recommended committee, we suggest Alternatives A and B as the most viable options. They would both allow for additional evaluation of parking and access issues, without overlapping responsibilities of existing committees and causing confusion. Alternative C creates an additional layer of organization that could be cumbersome in getting recommendations through to the Council. Alternative D eliminates the Mass Transportation and Bicycle Advisory Committees,both of which are functioning well at this time. Next Steps With Council direction on the preferred advisory body alternative, staff will seek input from affected advisory bodies (which may include the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission, Mass Transportation Committee, and Bicycle Advisory Committee). Staff will then return to the Council for approval of the advisory body's formation, including a more detailed statement of purpose,membership categories,and specific duties. At this point, staff simply wishes to assure that we are on the right track- FISCAL rackFISCAL IMPACTS The attached advisory body alternatives comparison table (see Attachment 2) identifies which advisory body alternatives will require additional staff resources. ATTACHMENTS 1. Major City Goals- Parking and Access Advisory Body 2. Comparison Table of Advisory Body Alternatives L\Council Agenda ReportsTarking and Access Advisory Body Study Session#2.doc Al IMM aft -0 0 o .. A e i = s. m w m Q � °oma' E XXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X pU„ ALU F z z z is aC. a o v O � �r O v u .r C R1 F1 9 _E _ y e Q V C N awn. E .. U N r. EY w E XXX X X X X X � z° I >" �° 0 U a �a U U w; 3 > > U . . ? F F F d Q U U U Q U e e o 0 0 o U mfi " Ci W U U � UUU U U a , > a a N cO f0H C = L7. d0 C vi N Z O N = r E E E E o A c v on o pQ fJ. a C b0 w ? m Co y o by.� a N E O F- O y Y O cc O ++ O O O ,,, C > L L L L L L L L O N C O C 0 �I L CU c 4' d d c e t c c � N C s Eca - c ai u € C m Oq O o co ed .� ed p = 0 to > c c � ° U 4+ > E 00 m A �' a �' �' m a �' °' > c aui ° a°i y r%� E m y .� Y •y r p > O N c0 G. .O L = C i N O N Q Q Uaz yU evU U � U OF 3 QUO sv� AF co to o, aUeo � °� L C C > '> > ti > _ > '> d > > > s N ° > o N°y� > > n. > r G N ._ N N V y o0 Q) O d V N 4 U L F•I d Q) E N �p N d 17a_ cE rLc� cn < aCa � oGCG ._ a arcl) QW LLL o Q . . .v. .;.in > 4 do i+ PC 8 ^C Q a a a; a F A 4 Q 1--13 City Council Meeting SACHMENT 3 Page 5 Tuesday, February 5,2002-7:00 p.m. STUDY SESSION 2. PARKING &ACCESS ADVISORY BODY–REPORT ON ALTERNATIVES. Transportation Associate Mandeville presented the staff report. Public Comments Deborah Holley, Downtown Administrator,reported that the Association has never opposed the formation of an additional advisory body although it has asked about the details of its formation and wants to have input. She clarified that the Downtown Association is a Council advisory body, is community based and open to meeting with other advisory bodies to develop solutions. Jean Anderson,544 Pacific Street,asked the Council to recognize that pedestrians don't have a voice and expressed opposition to Atemative D(proposed elimination of the Mass Transportation Committee(MTC)and the Bicycle Advisory Committee(BAC). Eugene Jud,665 Leff Street,spoke in favor of forming a new advisory body but urged the Council to be sure that other organizations are getting equal treatment and input on parking and access issues. He asked that the Council not subsidizes specific group by paying a City staff member to attend their meetings and provide datalinformation that others are not privy to. He asserted that parking and access issues are Citywide, not just in the downtown,and urged the Council to involve the Planning Commission and seek more expertise. Paul.Dahan,Chairman of the MTC,voiced opposition to Altenative D. Mike Spangler,Spangler Investments(644 Marsh Street),reminded the Council that the Downtown Association has been giving advice to the Council for over fifty years. He encouraged the Downtown Association and Chamber of Commerce to stay active in parking and access issues. Dave Romero.2057 Skylark,voiced opposition to Alternative D and questioned whether any committee will make things better. --End of public comments— Lengthy Council discussion followed. Council Member Schwartz reiterated his opinion that the Planning Commission is the appropriate body to provide advice on transportation,parking and access issues. Vice Mayor Marx said she envisions a committee that will give advice to the Planning Commission,to the Architectural Review Commission and to the City Council,depending upon the Mutation. She indicated she would not support the elimination of the MTC or the BAC. She argued that the Planning Commission needs to pay more attention, particularly in the areas where land use and circulation come together,but pointed out that it will need some assistance in doing that from others with more expertise and interest in parking and access issues. She proposed that staff support from the Parking Division be moved from the Downtown Association to any new committee formed. Council Member Ewan concurred that a new committee is needed to address parking issues, including parking demand reduction. /-141 ;HMENT � City Council Meeting AT Page 6 Tuesday, February 5,2002 -7:00 p.m. Council Member Mulholland agrees with Council Member Schwartz that these issues should and can be dealt with by the Planning Commission and proposed a joint study session with the Commission to explore that option further. She also argued in opposition to Alternative D. Mayor Settle indicated that he would prefer that the Planning Commission be given the opportunity to have an enhanced role,as described in Alternative A,and stated that a new commission would involve a lot of staff time. City Administrative Officer Hampian suggested that the Council look at Suggestions 1 and 2 in the staff report and wait to form a committee until it has an opportunity to meet with the Planning Commission sometime in the Spring to consider the alternatives. He emphasized that the Council has the ability to form an ad hoc committee at any time on a particular issue if they need to and clarified that any change in parking boundaries will require review by the Planning Commission. ACTION: Moved by Settle/Schwartz to direct staff to organize a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to explore and discuss in more detail the recommendations and alternatives outlined in the staff report.(3:2, Ewan, Marx) COMMUNICATIONS Vice Mayor Marx suggested that Council invite Christopher Rose of the Regional Water Quality Board to make a presentation about on-going work to monitor the water quality of San Luis Creek. Council concurred and asked staff to coordinate. City Clerk Price presented the preliminary Council Calendar for the next two months. Council authorized special meetings on March 12,2002 and March 26,2002. Council Member Ewan offered to act as the Council representative at meetings with City staff and the Army Corps of'Engineers about the status of the permit for the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields. Council concurred.. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Council Member Mulholland reported on the Mass Transportation Commission workshop of January 30,2002. Council Member Mulholland presented an update of the February 2,2002 Student Community Relations Workshop sponsored by Poly Voice and Residents for Quality Neighborhoods. There being no further business to come before the City Council,Ma or a le adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.m.to Tuesday, February 19,2002 at .00 in the ou it Chamber,990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo. Lee c ,C.M.C.. City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 2119/2002 LP:mk I?ED F1 LE . IVI�EMNG 3o AGENDA DATE . f -,�=ITEM #o_ TO: Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission COUNCIL CDD is FROM: Vice Mayor, Jan Howell Marx o FIN DIR FIRE CHIEF DATE: April 30, 2002 TTORNEY C PW DIR RE: Enhancement of Planning Commission Role LERK/ORIG C POLICE CHF ❑ 4EPT HEADS C, REC DIR and Formation of Parking and Access Committee ,D, Q.Y1N1q G UTIL DIR 13 LAW I am in favor of enhancing the Planning Commission role regar ' R DIR parking matters. I am also in favor of implementing Alternative#1,the Parking and Access Committee regarding parking and access operations. Enhancing the PC role alone will not adequately address the problems the City faces and will face in the future. We also need to take practical steps to enhance our city's mobility, identity and quality of life. Plans need to be implemented,just as mitigation measures need to be monitored. The Past: In 1992 the City-wide Parking Management Committee was dismanteled for being "redundant". (See Attachment #1) Since then, the only advisory body authorized and staffed to give the City Council advice on parking/access operations is the Parking Subcommittee of the Downtown Association. The Downtown Association Parking Subcommittee members may or may not live in the City, and are selected by the Downtown Association. Although parking is an all-city concern and the Parking Fund is an all-city enterprise fund, only Downtown business people are designated by the City to make recommendations regarding these issues. This advice has not proven adequate in my opinion, due partly to the fact that the Subcommittee by definition is so narrow in scope and approach, due partly to the fact that it has not made any progress in solving the"8 hour employee parker" problem, and due partly to the fact that a lot of things in the City have changed over the past ten years. But, the City's"parking philosophy" has not kept up with change. This has deeply concerned city residents and polarized the community. The Future: We need to prepare for the future. The City is about to undergo a number of changes in the next few years resulting from increased density in the urban core and accompanying zone changes, such as expansion of the CC zone into the"uptown" north of Santa Rosa and increasing mixed use. The City needs to develop a strategy for infill of the urban core, which goes beyond PLANNING and includes OPERATIONS, so that intensification of uses occurs in an orderly fashion and does not harm our quality of life. To achieve this goal, the city must create a sustainable transportation system, which includes walking and bicycling. Last year even CalTrans indicated that walking and biking should be considered to be transportation options that are as important as the automobile or transit. The new paradigm is how to move people, not only cars. We need to promote active community environments, places where people can easily and safely walk or bicycle for most routine trips. The Present: At present, forward-thinking programs, strategies and perspectives regarding access/parking are simply left out of the advisory body equation. (see Attachment #2). Also, parking and traffic data is incomplete and inconsistent, vanes from project to project, from study to study. The city needs a special purpose and technical advisory body to develop expertise in this area, regarding parking and traffic study data. We need a database of reliable information RECEIVED APR 3 0 2002 SLO CITY COUNCIL which is accessible to the public, developers and decision makers. Right now, for instance, we do not know how many 8 hour parkers (employees)there are in the Downtown. How many spaces would be freed up if the City created a park and ride/shuttle system? What would that cost per space? Is the building parking garages in the Downtown the best solution to accommodate employees? Are there better alternatives? What will be the effect of expanding the CC zone on parking operations/supply/demand? Are there places in the City where free parking should be metered? Where metered parking should be free? The upcoming update of Parking Management Plan (which I would rename the Access and Parking Management Plan) should include operational alternate transportation and parking demand reduction measures, as well as analysis of traditional approaches. While the Planning Commission could take on these operational functions, I believe that it would be best for all concerned if the PC reviewed such technical spade work in the form of recommendations from the Parking and Access Committee, much as it does from the Cultural Heritage Commission at present. RECOMMENDATION: The City should a.) revive, rename and redefine the city-wide technical and special purpose advisory body which was dismantled in 1992, (see Attachment #3), and b.) designate it as a"think tank" to research and compile data and make recommendations regarding levels of service, parking requirement formulas, operational strategies to reduce congestion and achieve mobility, access and a walkable urban core. I have drafted an initial proposal for discussion purposes(Attachment#4). �^ SLOPARKINGO. PAGE 01 �p0 17:0E057b=(267 l city of sAn luis OBIS Al 990 Palm Street/Post Offlce "Pages ► Post-It-brand fax transmittal memo 7671 T From June 16, 1992 co: co.. Dept. Phone d MEMOFLANDUX fJ TO: City Council FROM: John Dunn SUBJECT: x ation "sunset" of Parki an ement Committee The attached memo sets forth the staff recommendation that the City' s Parking Management Committee be allowed to "sunset" as was intended when the City last extended it in 1990. Under the present circumstances, there is an inadequate workload for the Committee and it is largely redundant with the BIA Parking Committee. Lacking any further Council action to extend the Committee, the Committee appointments have expired and appropriate thank you letters to the committee members will be prepared for the Mayor's signature. If requested by a Councilmember, this issue will be placed back on the agenda and further discussed. Otherwise, as stated we will allow the Committee to expire and send appropriate notes to the present membership, some of whom are not residents of the City. JD:mc Attachment hjPMC1 Administration The public works administration program helps plan, direct and evaluate all of the public works operating programs. Public works administration also assists the operating programs with various administrative and property management services. '��� Engineering The CIP project engineering program oversees design and construction of all projects in the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). These projects include improvements to buildings, parks, and streets as well as water, wastewater, and flood control systems. The program also provides inspection services for public infrastructure improvements constructed by the private sector in addition to those by the City. GeoData Services The Geodata Services Division operates and maintains the City's integrated geographic information system (GIS),which uses computes to link various digital City maps and databases. This program also provides graphic support services to other City programs. Developme teW The engineering development review program oversees desi and construction of various public works projects built by private developers for City ownership. These projects typically include additions to the City's water,wastewater, street, flood control, and park systems. t Transportation Pla raffic Engineering e AflAkt The transportation planning and engineering program analyzes the City's traffic Irl "� L circulation systems and proposes changes to these systems. ffle ��/ MAr/7 Transit 'The transit program (SLO Transit) provides daily fixed-route transit 4 � i service to the general public within the City limits and Cal Poly State University. This program also provides downtown trolley shuttle service. Parking The parking program implements the Parking Management Plan . Towv* him Avt#b% and directs the operation and maintenance of the City's parking facilities. These ��� facilities include 13 parking lots,two parking garages, five residential parking ^*% permit districts and about 1,550 parking meters. of Ng-A-7*(v1%tS 1b Street Maintenance The general street maintenance program o Ce �~4 1 maintains curbs, gutters, sidewalks, signs, and pavement markings on City streets. The pavement maintenance program maintains the paved portion of all streets under City jurisdiction. � Signal Maintenance The signal maintenance program operates and (r(, maintains traffic signals on City streets. Flood Control The flood control program maintains all storm drain facilities am Q C and creeks within the City streets and on City property. �� �R" Park and Landscape Maintenance The park and landscape maintenance program maintains parks, landscaped areas and open spaces within ! the City. Tree Maintenance The tree maintenance program plants, maintains, and w preserves trees along City streets and on City property Fleet Maintenance The fleet maintenance program maintains and repairs all City vehicles and construction equipment except those used in fire and transit programs. Building Maintenance The building maintenance program provides full maintenance service for all City buildings except the fire and police stations and the utilities plants. i Programs and Projects Coordinates Community Information Program, Community Volunteer Program, Storm Drain Mapping and Replacement Programs, Sidewalk Repair Projects, Street Lighting, Underground Service Alerts, Landscape Maintenance Projects, and Special Events. RESOLUTION N0. 6052 (1986 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ESTABLISHING A PARKING MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need for a technical and special purpose advisory body to assist in the implementation of the City's Downtown Parking Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish a Parking Management Committee to assist with the comprehensive and effective management of the quantity, location, cost and availability of parking in the Central Business District of the' City of San Luis Obispo. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that: SECTION 1. A eight-member technical Parking Management Committee is established consisting of two representatives from the BIA, one representative from the Chamber of Commerce, one downtown property owner, one representative from the. County of San Luis Obispo, and three citizens at large: A. The Committee as established on July 15, 1986 shall "sunset" on July 15, 1988, unless extended by action of the City Council; B. The Committee shall work under the direction of the City Administrative Officer and within the guidelines of the Advisory Body Handbook. SECTION 2. The Parking Management Committee shall have the following principal responsibilities: .. LAC7 !I i A. Provide advice and serve as a community public information link as the city increases its parking inventory through the development of parking decks, surface lots and private expansion; B. Advise on the management of the location, cost and availability of parking in the Central Business District. Programs to be administered would include: (1) Improving the effectiveness of parking supply; (2) Providing accessible, inexpensive parking for shopping; (3) Discouraging employees using parking intended for shoppers; (4) Examining and introducing measures to reduce employee parking demand; (5) Protecting residential neighborhoods. SECTION 3. This resolution replaces and' supercedes Resolution 6026 (1986 Series) of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. On motion of Councilman Settle seconded by Councilwoman Rappa and on the following roll call vote.: AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Rappa, Dovey and Mayor Dunin NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Griffin the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this L2..th day of August 1986. M s� ATTES City Clerk Pamela 17s APPROVED: City Administrative Officer City At rney f ATTACHMENT#4 (DRAFT) Access and Parking Management Committee WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need for an all-city technical and special purpose advisory body to assist in the implementation of the Access and Parking Management Program; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to promote an active community environment where walking and biking should considered to be transportaiton options that are as important as the automobile or transit; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish an Access and Parking Management Committee to assist with the comprehensive and effective identification and implementation of parking management, parking demand reduction and alternate transportation strategies and management of the quantity, location cost and availabiltiy of parking in the City of San Luis Obispo; NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that; SECTION 1. A_seven member technical Parking Access and Management Committee is established consisting of: - one Eason representative from the Planning Commission, -one Eason representative Bicycle Advisory Committee, -one Eason representative from the Mass Transit Committee, -one representative from the Downtown Association, -one representative who lives in a Parking District, -one representative from the Chamber of Commerce, -one appointee at large A. The Committee as established on shall"sunset" on unless extended by action of the City Council; B. The Committee shall work under the direction of the City Administrative Officer and within the guidelines of the Advisory Body Handbook; SECTION 2. The Access and Parking Management Committee shall have the following principal responsibilities:. A. Provide advice on operational issues of access, parking demand reduction, parking management, alternate transportation and addition or loss of parking spaces and other issues as requested; B. Provide advice on the,management of the location, cost and availabiltiy of parking and alternatives in the City. C. Serve as a"think tank" to research and assess the consistency of parking and traffic data and make recommendations regarding how best to achieve mobility, access and a walkable urban core. D. Programs to be administered would include: 1. Improving the effectiveness of the operation and management of City's existing parking supply; 2. Improving the effectiveness of parking demand reduction and alternate transportation programs, encouraging ridesharing and other alternatives to the usse of the private automobile; 3. Examining and introducing measures to reduce employee parking demand, such as employer incentives and park and ride/shuttle systems; 4. Reviewing city's parking and traffic data, parking requirement formulas, traffic studies, levels of service for vehicles and pedestrians; 5. Recommending strategies for reducing traffic congestion, achieving mobility, access and a walkable urban core; 6. Protecting residential neighborhoods and business districts; 7. Promoting pedestrian access and safety; 8. Monitoring the implementation of the Circulation Element and transportation plans, including the Pedestrian Transportation Plan, making recommendations on the traffic implications of certain projects as referred, and propose changes to operations. 9. -Research, hold community forums and report on strategies to enhance our mobility, community identity and quality of life. SECTION 3. This resolution replaces-Resolution No. 6052 (1986 series).ofthe Council-ofthe city of San Luis Obispo. ;p F!Lc- EETIN1y AGENDA ridek ,DATE `� 3oaZ ITEM # 5 L 0n TRANSPORTMM alefD C'i CDD DIR aKAO = FIN DIR D40AO M FIRE CHIEF M'PTORNE1' 0 PW DIR M-CLE K/ORIQ ® POLICE CHF CFQ SEA ❑ REO DIR ® LITIL-DIR April 22, 2002 Z't3LW2LE M HR DIR 1/ PlavLwiRo�. :Coivirv►issiov� Allen Settle City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401 DearAllen, As you know, Ride-On TMA has been active over the past four years in working to unite the people who support the construction of more parking.structures with the people who support increased access 10 reduce parking.. I-aman active participant on:the City's Parking and Access Committee'and the Chamber of Comineice's'Parking and.Access Committee: I have been following the City's attempt to develop'a new, working committee and would like to offer a plan which is gaining wide support in the . community. We hope this option can be explored at the Joint Planning session between the City Council and the Planning Commission on April0`n I believe that the formation of one committee to deal with parking structures, alternative transportation, SLO Transit, land use issues, bicycling, and future planning is too much for any one group to tackle. We believe a quarterly meeting with representatives from all the existing committees and the public to look at planning issues and share progress would be more effective. These meetings would allow the City Council to get feedback on topics before you tum the project over to your staff to develop recommendations. Many groups and individuals feel that they do not get to present their point of view until the week before you approve your staff s recommendations. The meetings would not require formal structure, but would have an agenda with a discussion topic for the first half hour and then information sharing for groups or individual NN.-ho requested to be on the agenda. These groups could include: Mass Transportation Committee, Bicycle Committee, Planning Commission, Eugene Judd's students, Downtown Association"s'Parking and Access Committee, Transportation i RECEIVED APR 2 3 2002 1160 Marsh Street, Suite 107 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 I SLO CITY COUNCIL (805) 541-8747 FAX (805) 543-2045 • www.ride-on.org -o ,oices Program, the Chamber of Commerce Parking and Access Committee, the Planning Commission, and any other interested parties. These parking and access issues concern the entire county, as many people commute from all over San Luis Obispo County into our city. The problem with San Luis Obispo City Committees is that they exclude participation of commuters and professionals who do not reside in the city. This group would look at all commuter issues and help you develop a consensus on the future of parking and access. In closing, I know that many of the existing committees support this regular gathering to explore issues and share information. I hope you will consider this concept at your planning session on April 30`h. If you need to discuss the concept further, please feel free to contact me at 541-8751. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Mark T. Shaffer Executive Director RGO FILE MEETING AGENDA. DATE so ITEM # TO: Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission COUNCIL CDDpIF FROM: Vice Mayor, Jan Howell Marx V FIN DIR DATE: Aril 30, 2002 0 0 FIRE CHIEF P TTORNEY G PW DIP RE: Enhancement of Planning Commission Role LERK/ORIG G POLICE CNF and Formation of Parking and Access Committee 9.EPT HEADS, G REC PIR O �� Vlq G UTIL DIP I am in favor of enhancing the Planning Commission role regardi G R DIP parking matters. I am also in favor of implementing Alternative#1,the Parking and Access Committee regarding parking and access operations. Enhancing the PC role alone will not adequately address the problems the City faces and will face in the future. We also need to take practical steps to enhance our city's mobility, identity and quality of life. Plans need to be implemented,just as mitigation measures need to be monitored. The Past:In 1992 the City-wide Parking Management Committee was dismanteled for being "redundant". (See Attachment#1) Since then, the only advisory body authorized and staffed to give the City Council advice on parking/access operations is the Parking Subcommittee of the Downtown Association. The Downtown Association Parking Subcommittee members may or may not live in the City, and are selected by the Downtown Association. Although parking is an all-city concern and the Parking Fund is an all-city enterprise fund, only Downtown business people are designated by the City to make recommendations regarding these issues. This advice has not proven adequate in my opinion, due partly to the fact that the Subcommittee by definition is so narrow in scope and approach, due partly to the fact that it has not made any progress in solving the"8 hour employee parker" problem, and due partly to the fact that a lot of things in the City have changed over the past ten years. But, the City's"parking philosophy" has not kept up with change. This has deeply concerned city residents and polarized the community. The Future: We need to prepare for the future. The City is about to undergo a number of changes in the next few years resulting from increased density in the urban core and accompanying zone changes, such as expansion of the CC zone into the"uptown" north of Santa Rosa and increasing mixed use. The City needs to develop a strategy for infill of the urban core, which goes beyond PLANNING and includes OPERATIONS, so that intensification of uses occurs in an orderly fashion and does not harm our quality of life. To achieve this goal, the city must create a sustainable transportation system, which includes walking and bicycling. Last year even CalTrans indicated that walking and biking should be considered to be transportation options that are as important as the automobile or transit: The new paradigm is how to move people, not only cars. We need to promote active community environments, places where people can easily and safely walk or bicycle for most routine trips. The Present: At present, forward-thinking programs, strategies and perspectives regarding access/parking are simply left out of the advisory body equation. (see Attachment 42). Also, parking and traffic data is incomplete and inconsistent, varies from project to_project, from study to study. The city needs a special purpose and technical advisory body to develop-txpertise in C this area, regarding parking and traffic study data. We need a database of reliable information RECEIVED APR 3 0 2002 I SLO CITY COUNCIL which is accessible to the public, developers and decision makers. Right now, for instance, we do not know how many 8 hour parkers (employees)therearein the J Downtown. How many spaces would be freed up if the City created a park and ride/shuttle system? What would that cost per space? Is the building parking garages in the Downtown the best solution to accommodate employees? Are there better alternatives? What will be the effect of expanding the CC zone on parking operations/supply/demand? Are there places in the City where free parking should be metered? Where metered parking should be free? The upcoming update of Parking Management Plan (which I would rename the Access and Parking Management Plan) should include operational alternate transportation and parking demand reduction measures, as well as analysis of traditional approaches. While the Planning Commission could take on these operational functions, I believe that it would be best for all concerned if the PC reviewed such technical spade work in the form of recommendations from the Parking and Access Committee, much as it does from the Cultural Heritage Commission at present. RECOMMENDATION: The City should a.) revive, rename and redefine the city-wide technical and special purpose advisory body which was dismantled in 1992, (see Attachment #3), and b.) designate it as a"think tank" to research and compile data and make recommendations regarding levels of service, parking requirement formulas, operational strategies to reduce congestion and achieve mobility, access and a walkable urban core. I have drafted an initial proposal for discussion purposes (Attachment#4). i V � SLOPARKINGL.__R PAGE 01 X00 17:07 E057t17267 ' X11 Illli� city of san luis 0BjSP.0* 990 Palm StreettPost Offlc6NotPagee Post-It"brand fax transmittal memo 7671 T From 06- Co. June 16, 1992 Dept. Phone N MEMORANDUM Fax a U Faz TO: City Council FROM: John Dunn ' SUBJECT: ation "sunset" of Par i ne ent Committee The attached memo sets forth the staff recommendation that the City's Parking Management Committee be allowed to "sunset" as was intended when the City last extended it in 1990. Under the present circumstances, there is an inadequate workload for the Committee and it is largely redundant with the BIA Parking Committee. Lacking any further Council action to extend the Committee, the _ Committee appointments have expired and appropriate thank you letters to the Committee members will be prepared for the Mayor's signature. If requested by a Councilmember; this issue will be placed back on the agenda and further discussed. Otherwise, as stated we will allow the Committee to expire and send appropriate notes to the present membership, some of whom are not residents of the City. JD:mc Attachment h/Pmd Administration Theublic works administration p program helps plan, direct and evaluate all of the public works operating programs. Public works administration also assists the operating programs with various administrative and property management services. � Engineering The CIP project engineering program oversees desig an'F d ��� C J construction of all projects in the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIO). These projects include improvements to buildings, parks, and streets as well as water, wastewater, and flood control systems. The program also provides inspection services for public infrastructure improvements constructed by the private sector in addition to those by the.City. GeoData Services The Geodata Services Division operates and maintains the City's integrated geographic information system (GIS),which uses computes to link various digital City maps and databases. This program also provides graphic support services to other City programs. Developme IeW The engineering development review program i oversees desigill and construction of various public works projects built by private developers for City ownership. These projects typically include additions to the City's water, wastewater, street, flood control, and park systems. Transportation Pla g raffic Engineering The transportation planning and engineering program analyzes the City's traffic I I i circulation systems and proposes changes to these systems. t ` 1''hrrT Transit The transit program (SLO Transit)provides daily fixed-route transit u.► service to the general public within the City limits and Cal Poly State University. This program also provides downtown trolley shuttle service. Parking The parking program implements the Parking Management Plan a �pwDNh and directs the operation and maintenance of the City's parking facilities. Theser1.• facilities include 13 parking lots,two parking garages,five residential parking i permit districts and about 1,550 parking meters. OP r%2A-7'(1>JV$ Street Maintenance The general street maintenance programa ce ' maintains curbs, gutters, sidewalks, signs, and pavement markings on City streets. ! The pavement maintenance program maintains the paved portion of all streets under City jurisdiction. Signal Maintenance The signal maintenance program operates and maintains traffic signals on City streets. �` Flood Control The flood control program maintains all storm drain facilities aw �o and creeks within the City streets and on City property. Park and Landscape Maintenance The park and landscape mb pa maintenance program maintains parks, landscaped areas and open spaces within j the City. Tree Maintenance The tree maintenance program plants, maintains, and w preserves trees along City streets and on City property Fleet Maintenance The fleet maintenance program maintains and repairs all City vehicles and construction equipment except those used in fire and transit programs. Building Maintenance The building maintenance program provides ! full maintenance service for all City buildings except the fire and police stations - and the utilities plants. Programs and Projects Coordinates Community Information Program, Community Volunteer Program, Storm Drain Mapping and Replacement Programs, Sidewalk Repair Projects, Street Lighting, Underground Service Alerts, Landscape Maintenance Projects, and Special Events. RESOLUTION NO. 6052 (1986 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ESTABLISHING A PARKING MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need for a technical and special purpose advisory body to assist in the implementation of the City's Downtown Parking Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish a Parking Management Committee to assist with the comprehensive and effective management of the quantity, location, cost and availability of parking in the Central Business District of the' City of San Luis Obispo. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that: SECTION 1. A eight-member technical Parking Management Committee is established consisting of two representatives from the BIA, one �i representative from the Chamber of Commerce, one downtown property owner, one representative from the County of San Luis Obispo, and three citizens at large: A. The Committee as established on July 15, 1986 shall "sunset" on July 15, 1988, unless extended by action of the City Council; B. The Committee shall work under the direction of the City Administrative Officer and within the guidelines of the Advisory Body Handbook. SECTION 2. The Parking Management Committee shall have the following principal responsibilities: A. Provide advice and serve as a community public information link as the city increases its parking inventory through the development of parking decks, surface lots and private expansion; B. Advise on the management of the location, cost and availability of parking in the Central Business District. Programs to be 'administered would include: (1) Improving the effectiveness of parking supply; (2) Providing accessible, inexpensive parking for shopping; (3) Discouraging employees using parking intended for shoppers; (4) Examining and introducing measures to reduce employee parking demand; (5) Protecting residential neighborhoods. SECTION 3. This resolution replaces and supersedes Resolution 6026 (1986 Series) of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. On motion of Councilman Settle seconded by' Councilwoman Rappa and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Rappa, Dovey and Mayor Dunin NOES: None ABSENT: Councilman Griffin the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this �jlday of August , 1986. N1 ATTES City Clerk Pamela V es APPROVED: City Administrative Officer City At-lz rney ATTACHMENT#4 (DRAFT) Access and Parking Management Committee WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need for an all-city technical and special purpose advisory body to assist in the implementation of the Access and Parking Management Program; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to promote an active community environment where walking and biking should considered to be transportaiton options that are as important as the automobile or transit WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish an Access and Parking Management Committee to assist with the comprehensive and effective identification and implementation of parking management, parking demand reduction and alternate transportation strategies and management of the quantity, location cost and availabiltiy of parking in the City of San Luis Obispo; NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that; SECTION 1. A seven member technical Parking Access and Management Committee is established consisting of: _ - one Eason representative from the Planning Commission, -one Eason representative Bicycle Advisory Committee, -one Eason representative from the Mass Transit Committee, -one representative from the Downtown Association, -one representative who lives in a Parking District, -one representative from the Chamber of Commerce, -one appointee at large A. The Committee as established on shall"sunset" on unless extended by action of the City Council; B. The Committee shall work under the direction of the City Administrative Officer and within the guidelines of the Advisory Body Handbook; SECTION 2. The Access and Parking Management Committee shall have the following principal responsibilities: A. Provide advice on operational issues of access, parking demand reduction, parking management, alternate transportation and addition or loss of parking spaces and other issues as requested; B. Provide advice on the management of the location, cost and availabiltiy of parking and alternatives in the City. C. Serve as a"think tank" to research and assess the consistency of parking and traffic data and make recommendations regarding how best to achieve mobility, access and a walkable urban - core. D. Programs to be administered would include: 1. Improving the effectiveness of the operation and management of City's existing parking supply; 2. Improving the effectiveness of parking demand reduction and alternate transportation programs, encouraging ridesharing and other alternatives to the usse of the private automobile; 3. Examining and introducing measures to reduce employee parking demand, such as employer incentives and park and ridelshuttle systems; 4. Reviewing city's parking and traffic data, parking requirement formulas, traffic studies, levels of service for vehicles and pedestrians; 5. Recommending strategies for reducing traffic congestion, achieving mobility, access and a walkable urban core; 6. Protecting residential neighborhoods and business districts; �1 7. Promoting pedestrian access and safety; 8. Monitoring the implementation of the Circulation Element and transportation plans, including the Pedestrian Transportation.Plan, making recommendations on the traffic . implications of certain projects as referred, and propose changes to operations. 9. Research, hold community forums and report on strategies to enhance our mobility, community identity and quality of life. SECTION 3. This resolution replaces Resolution No. 6052 (1986 series) of the Council of the city of San Luis Obispo.