HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/1995, Agenda & STAFF MEETING WITH THE BIA PARKING COMMITTEE & HOMELESS SERVICES CENTER UPDATE & DOWNTOWN CLEAN UP PROJECT Agenda Distribution List
Y�
(8/24/95)i/
1. Unpaid Subscriptions:
(All mtgs.unless o/w noted)
�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIII CI O SWIS
AIA President
M OBISPO ASI President
VV1N1 � U J BIA /Deborah Holley
Chamber of Commerce
Cuesta College / K. Roberts
B. Thoma / Chamber of Comm.
COUNCIL AGENDA H. ovitt / Co. Spvrs. - Chair
Paul Hood, CO.Administration
Tuesday, November 7. 1995 - 9.00 a m Housing Authority
Council Hearing Room KCsx
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo KCOY
p I KCPR: (2) Gen-Mgr. & News Dir.
KDDB
KEYT
KGLO
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle KKJG
KSBY
ROLL CALL: Council Members Bill Roalman, Kat Library (front desk)
Vice Mayor Dave Romero and May Mustang Daily
New Times (front desk)
Pac.Bell / Brad Schram
Pac. Gas & Elec. / B.Burke
Planning Comm. (% Comm. Dev. )
So. Calif. Gas / V. Sterling
Council of Govts / R. DeCarli
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/BIA STUDYSIS League of women voters
Telegram-Tribune (front desk)
City Emp. Assoc. / T. Girvin
Fire Batt Chf Assc / S.Smith
Firefighters Assoc / D.Wunsch
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD {Not: exceed 15; inutesar,# MidMgmt Emp Assoc / D. Smith
Police Off Assoc / G. Nemeth
The COUnCII Welcomes yOU Input YOL1 <may address:;th Pol Staff Off Assoc/J.English
speakers s t and 1vjrg It to the City Clerl prior to the rnee. Denise Fourie
address the �ouncll on )terns tha#are not nri thea ends or 1t citizens Planning Alliance
T 8t,Rmiaent
Time runrt is xhree minutes State]aw does;not allpw Council EcosLo / Bonnie tevelae
155U6S 11Qt 011 file agenda, except that members of the Council Res.forQual.Neigh / C.Sanders
;i Sierra Club / Gary Felsman
#o sta...... is made or questlQns posed by p'ersons:;exerci5in sLo Property Owners Assoc.
(.Gov Code §54954 2) Staff'may be askedto follow up ori s; Fred Strong (The Citizen)
other wrattec documeri#atlon relator to each item referred to< Sonic Cable/Jackie
the CI 9
ty<C1erk'S', Office In ROom #h Of C1ty Hall II.Subscriptions Paid or
Env. Provided
(reer.meas.only) :
Easter Rents, Inc.
IMS/S. Krautheim
g oj . Dimensions/P.Kroll
SDA (Engr. Dev. Assoc.)
Ellenburg Capital Corp.
Fugro-McClelland
HawkCOUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS (not to exceed 15 minutes Local Government
RRM
Local Government Services
Council Members report On conferences or other City activi.
Vista eInffoormation Group /Services
Wallace, John L. & Assocs.
Walter Bros. Construction Co.
Willdan Associates
Council Agenda Tuesday, November 7, 1995
.COMMUNICATIONS (not to exceed 15 minutes)
At this:time, any Council Member or;the City Administrative Officer rnay;ask a question for
clarification,.make an'announcement, or report briefly onhis or her activrties .fh addition,
>sublect to Council Policies and Procedures'.; they may provide a refererice to staff orother
resources for: factual mforrrmation, request staff; to report back to 'the Counal at a
subsequent meeting conceriung ar►y matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter
of business on a future agenda (Gov Gode §54954 2)
STUDY.SESSION
► 1. DOWNTOWN OFFICER (GARDINER - 5 min.)
Introduction of the Downtown Officer, Tim Hedges.
► 2. PARKING (1 hour)
Consideration of the October 12, 1995 meeting and follow-up regarding downtown parking.
♦ RECOMMENDATION: Review meeting between BIA and City staff regarding downtown
parking issues and consider BIA goals, recommendations, and follow-up plan of action.
► 3. HOMELESS KITCHEN RELOCATION (30 min.)
Consideration of BIA level of participation, goals, concerns, and current status.
♦ RECOMMENDATION: Receive a status report from Police Chief Jim Gardiner and discuss
BIA role as appropriate.
► 4. DOWNTOWN CLEAN-UP PROJECT (45 min.)
Consideration of the Downtown Clean-up Project.
♦ RECOMMENDATION: For review purposes only, that the City Council and Business
Improvement Association Board of Directors discuss subcommittee group concerns about the
increasingly unclean condition of Downtown streets, sidewalks, and alleys.
► 5. OTHER ITEMS OF CONCERN AND INTEREST
A. ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995, AT 7:00 P.M. IN .THE COUNCIL
CHAMBER.
2
' �IIIIIII 1111111
cry Of San IDIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA
November 7 1995 - 9:00 a.m.
Tuesday,
Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo STUDY SESSION
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle
ROLL CALL: Council Members Bill Roalman, Kathy Smith, Dodie Williams
Vice Mayor Dave Romero and Mayor Allen K. Settle
JOINT CITY COUNCILIBIA STUDY SESSION
PUBLIC OMMENT PERIOD (Not to exceed 15 minutes total)
The ;Council' welcomes yqur input You may address the Council by completing a
speakerssl'i.p and grvrng.it to the':City Clerk pnor to the mee#rng At this timer you may
atldeess the::Council on items that.;are ngt;on the agentla or items on the Consent Agenda
Time limitisthree minutes: Statelaw does not allow Council to discuss or take action on
issues not on the agenda, except,#hat members of the Council or staff may,brefly respond
to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public tes4imony rights
Coder§54954 2) Staff may be asked to follow up on such items Staff reports and
other written tlocumentation relatwiag to each item referretl to do this ageniia are on;fie in
the City Clerk's Office rn Room #1 of City Halt
COUNCIL.LIAISON REPORTS (not to exceed 15 minutes]
Council IVlembers tepoit : conferences:or other City'activities Time limit - 3 minutes
1
Council Agenda Tuesday, November 7, 1995
.. ......................... ....... .
...........
............. ........................
... ........ ......
COMMUNICATIONS (nod to .........
....... .........
.. .........
t b6e r.the:C it :question. . :lbr
At his time, anVZoundil Me M 6 V. f
Y.::A Administrative. ....
. ........
c arification m-aKean..:announcement,. . .' - s.:..or.:r.e.poft. neo.on his i.s.;q-r:her. .. �activities. :....:1n..::addition
.... .......
... ............ .
subject-16C.6undli Pdidie&. df.f.o6wures Iney...: a provide.a referenc&4q:staff.. th
:or:o er
M
resources" TOr: TactUal; nTormation request: staff repot: back: tw1h&. Council at A :
%UDseqqent.meeting:.e..o....n..e.. rh
hj.....a...h...y....matter,.or:take:action
...1...
didirect
... place
.............................................................p.........
l...a....
....c....
&.....:...........4....
n....a.
fter
ofbusiness pn2.fu Wre.agq ....
......
...... .........
.................
..........
.... ............ .......... ...............
. ................ ...
..........
.......... .. ..... ........ . ............
......................... ...............
. ............ .
...................................
:::..........
... STUDY'zESSION.:.:..,1:.:. .. ...................... ......... . ...........
... .........................
►
. ................................ .......................
...........
.......... . .........
.................
. ..............................
...................... ... ...............
.....................
I DOWNTOWN OFFICER (GARDINER - 5 min.)
Introduction of the Downtown Officer, Tim Hedges.
► 2. PARKING (1 hour)
Consideration of the October 12, 1995 meeting and follow-up regarding downtown parking.
* RECOMMENDATION: Review meeting between BIA and City staff regarding downtown
parking issues and consider BIA goals, recommendations, and follow-up plan of action.
► 3. HOMELESS KITCHEN RELOCATION (30 min.)
Consideration of BIA level of participation, goals, concerns, and current Status.
* RECOMMENDATION: Receive a status report from Police Chief Jim Gardiner and discuss
BIA role as appropriate.
4. DOWNTOWN CLEAN-UP PROJECT (45 min.)
Consideration of the Downtown Clean-up Project.
♦ RECOMMENDATION: For review purposes only, that the City Council and Business
Improvement Association Board of Directors discuss subcommittee group concerns about the
increasingly unclean condition of Downtown streets, sidewalks, and alleys.
► 5. OTHER ITEMS OF CONCERN AND INTEREST
A. ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL
CHAMBER.
2
K 1NG AGENDA - =TING NDA
DA(E ITEM # DATE �O'�2 9 #
9 Xt*
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 16, 1995 P-COUNCIL _❑ CDJDIR
Q-CAO 8-fIN DIR
TO: City Council RECEIVED �Q-ACA0TTO ❑ FIRPW DIR CHIEF
y$-ATTORNEY 9-P4V DIA
O C i -10
G i"o ErCLERK1ORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ,
FROM: John ❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR
CITY COUNCIL
❑ C F..E ❑ UTIL DIR
SUBJECT: Staff Meeting with the BIA Parking Committee ❑ PERS DIR
On the morning of October 12th, City staff met with members of the BIA Parking Committee.
The BIA Parking Committee is chaired by Mike Spangler, and there were approximately twelve
people from the Downtown/BIA Parking Committee in attendance. City staff members attending
were Mike McCluskey, Bill Statler, Keith Opalewski, and myself.
The meeting was quite positive and productive and, though differing perceptions were fully
discussed, we arrived to a point of essential agreement: that there is a shared perception of the
need for increased parking in the downtown, and shared thoughts on the best location to develop
additional parking. This would indicate that the BIA, staff, and City Council can work together
to expedite the staff level study, the buying of land, and the construction of a third parking
facility. Though we all recognize that more discussion and study needs to take place, there is
unanimity of opinion that the best way to increase the parking supply in the downtown in a
suitable location is to expand the existing Marsh/Chorro garage by adding an %-shaped"
extension along Pacific Street. This would require purchasing of the San Luis Medical Clinic
lot and the Post Office lot (though for the latter, aerial development rights might also be
workable).
Background
At the beginning of the meeting, nine letters from downtown merchants/property owners were
distributed; six of these letters spoke to desirability of increasing the parking supply and/or the
expansion of the Marsh/Chorro structure, and the other three were longer letters, also agreeing
with these objectives, but offering further commentary on the forthcoming downtown parking
management plan or the downtown parking system.
I'll divide the background for the meeting into the longer term background and the more recent
background. The longer term situation dates back to the fall/winter/spring of 1990-91. This was
after the completion of the Palm Street and Marsh/Chorro parking structures. At that time,there
were was a less intense use of the two garages, there were questions about the operation of a
downtown parking system but, as the most pressing matter, the parking fund was operating at
about a $300,000 per year deficit. A combination of BIA representatives, community
representatives, and City staff met for five or six months on every other Friday morning and,
despite considerable differences in perspectives, hammered-out a longer term downtown parking
management and financial plan which was subsequently reviewed and approved by the City
vt '-
- r
Council. The main features of that plan established 90-minute free parking for the two parking
structures, set appropriate rates for both the parking garages and the downtown meters, including
some agreed-to future increases, and developed the downtown trolley and parking programs as
complimentary efforts. Since that time, and until fairly recently, the BIA Parking Committee has
been less active and the staff has been implementing the results of that earlier approved plan.
More recently, the BIA Parking Committee has been holding regular meetings under the
chairmanship of Mike Spangler. While I have not attended any of these meetings, my
understanding is that many of them have been lightly attended, not producing a quorum, and that
different people have shown up at different meetings. However, in these meetings there has been
a series of questions about the operation of the downtown parking system and the finances of the
parking fund which had been discussed at length, but which the Committee-felt were not brought
to a conclusion. It has been my point of view that there was little likelihood of moving forward
on the basic issue of increasing the downtown parking supply, unless these unresolved issues
were openly discussed and brought to a resolution, since their unresolved nature seemed to detract
from trustworthy communication and relationships. Keith is normally the City staff person at
BIA Parking Committee meetings, unless an explicit invitation is extended to another person (for
example, Bill Statler recently spoke to the Committee).
Therefore, Mike Spangler and I agreed some weeks ago that we would hold this downtown
parking "summit" meeting involving the full Downtown Parking Committee and other interested
parties, and all relevant City staff.
Overview of Items Discussed
As you are aware, the agenda for the meeting consisted of 17 different agenda items. I will not
so much report on each agenda item as to give an overview of the discussion (Deborah Holley's
more detailed minutes are attached). Fourteen of the seventeen agenda items dealt more with
background issues on which there were different perspectives or inadequate communication items
which just needed to be discussed fully with a larger audience and brought to a sense of
resolution. It was agreed at the beginning of the meeting that we would spend sufficient time
dealing with these more recent background issues, but that we wanted to preserve enough time
to talk about the real issue, which is increasing the parking supply in the downtown, by adding
a third structure.
There was only one issue on which, after discussion, a vote was taken: whether the parking fund
should be used to pay $10,000 for public art on the southern end of the Palm Street structure;
the vote was 2-2 and it was agreed that this item would be deferred to a future discussion and
resolution.
BIA Parking Committee Concerns
Use of Parting Funds. There was a strong feeling from the Committee that, without constant
vigilance by the BIA Parking Committee, and with the growing fund accumulation, that the
parking fund would be subject to various "raids". As an example, Chairman Spangler was
worried that advocates of alternative transportation or transit would attempt to obtain funding
• J
from the parking fund, syphoning aside money that had been intended for purchase of land and
increasing the parking supply. Other Committee members strongly shared this concern.
Use of Recently Purchased Properties. Relative to the recent purchase of properties at Palm and
Nipomo, the BIA Parking Committee also expressed their concern that there were no current
.plans for an interim parking use of the site. Staff concurs with this concern, and we plan to
prepare a mid-year budget request to develop this site into a surface parking lot. In preparing
this finance future pro ects, and evaluate parking
whether this should be a metered ormont monthly pass
abilityty to to
lot.
Removal of Paddng Meters. While the removal of parking meters was discussed, there was
perhaps begrudging acceptance of the fact that the meters do provide the primary revenue to the
parking fund and that without this revenue, and with the continuing desire to add to the parking
system, then the only way to replace this revenue was with a merchant or property owner
contributions. While it was realized that it is fairly easy to discuss property owner or merchant
contributions to the parking system (as I did), in the final analysis these are very difficult
objectives to achieve as witnessed by the 20 or 25 year history of the downtown parking
program.
BIA Paiidng Committee Authority. There was also concern about the "authority" of the BIA
Parking Committee vs. that of the staff. I explained the relationship between the BIA Parking
Committee, as advisory to the BIA Board, which is in tum advisory to the City Council, and the
staff as advisory to the City Council, with both the staff and Council working within the policy
framework of the downtown parking management plan,the enterprise fund concept,the
prepared some
physical concept plan for the downtown, etc. Mike McCluskey shared a matrix, p p
months ago, which better defined the working relationship between the Committee and the staff,
and it was briefly discussed. It was agreed that the authority issue is only important in cases of
different recommendations, and that it was best to work closely together in a shared
which would make the
communication process, and to attempt to develop a mutual approach,
City Council's job a lot easier. .
sion on the
Consensus on Need to Expand Chonv/Mush Gauage. While the majority of discuthere was a
fourteen agenda items related to interpretations and perspectives of past actions,
strong concurrence that we needed to work together in a cohesive way, toward the goal of
developing additional parking in the downtown area. Most of that discussion centered around
the need to expeditiously add a third structure, and general agreement that the L-shaped extension
of the Marsh/Chorro garage would probably be the best location
todo that.
While the agreement on
Marsh/Chorro expansion was decided upon as the highestpriority, there wassufficient money o there should
the desirability to acquire the Wells Fargo lot. Initially, given
be) the Wells Fargo lot would be improved as a paved surface lot, with the potentiality that in
a 5 to 10 year period, a parking structure could be built at this location. It was recognized and
discussed that the 1987 parking management plan did call for the third structure to be located in
the southern end of anes on of Marshuahead of a southern structu t the BIA stated thy had Bone a survey which showed
large support for exp
-3
However, while there was essential agreement on the desired program, there was a differing ,
perception on the timeline of the project, which is considerable. City staff, consistent with the
program set forth in the adopted budget, has a multi-year time frame to accomplish a third site
acquisition, while the Parking Committee has an expeditious "do it now" program of both
acquisition and expansion. This difference in time schedule, I gathered, is one of the major items
that the BIA Parking Committee/Board of Directors wishes to discuss with the City Council at
the forthcoming joint meeting.
Alternative Transportation - Transit There was also discussion that there will be a community
perspective which will argue for the use of alternative transportation, transit in particular, to
reduce traffic and hence to either reduce the size of the third structure or eliminate it entirely.
While the members of the BIA Parking Committee strongly disagreed with this perspective, it
was recognized that this view would be heard during the process. As the letter from John French
indicates, there is some thought that this perspective should be "invited to the table" and be dealt
with. Staff reminded the Committee that the need for such a study, prior to garage expansion,
was directed for elimination from the Circulation Element, which will require subsequent
Planning Commission and City Council action. Bruce Frasier also reminded the group about the
need to proceed only after a complete environmental analysis was completed.
Summary
In summary, as earlier stated, the meeting was very positive and productive, allowing us to
transcend the "cobwebs" that were complicating and bogging down the process, and giving an
improved opportunity to work toward the main objectives of studying the downtown parking
needs and moving forward in addressing them in an expeditious way. For the Council's
information, I have given Mr. Spangler an opportunity to read this report in draft form, and he
concurs with its contents. He and others representatives of the downtown desire to make
supplemental comments to the City Council, and it is agreed that certain of these topics will be
further discussed in the joint study session between the BIA Board and the City Council, which
the Council is establishing this evening.
—�/7/
s
. AGENDA
BIA PARKING COMMITTEE MEETING - OCTOBER 129 1995
GOALS AND CONCERNS
A. Parking Committee Goals and Concerns Facilitator Page
Update on recent acquisitions and current projects
1. Purchase of 860 Pacific (current site of
Parks & Recreation administrative offices) Statler 1
2. Purchase of properties at the corner
of Nipomo & Palm McCluskey 1
3. Proposed public art at the Palm Street structure Statler 2
4. Currently approved capital improvement
plan (CIP) for 1995-99 Statler 2
Fixture improvement projects
5. Purchase of the Wells Fargo parking lot McCluskey 11
6. Expansion of the Marsh Street structure McCluskey 12
7. Use of outside resources (project manager)
for expediting garage expansion Spangler Oral report
Financial policies and plans
8. Future of the enterprise fund concept for
parking programs and projects Statler 13
9. Developing a model for financing future
parking system improvements Statler 13
10. John's notorious "five-legged stool' Dunn 13
11. Protection of th6 parking fund from future
proposals to use it as a funding source for transit Spangler Oral report
12. Removal of parking meters Spangler Oral report
Parking policies and plans
13. Status of the Parking Management Plan update and
the need for any changes in plans and policies to be
consistent with the Downtown Physical Concept Plan McCluskey 23
�— S
1
14. Decision-making authority on the expansion
or elimination of parking inventory McCluskey 23
15. Private control of metered spaces by
adjoining business owners Spangler Oral report
16. Controlling historic loss of parking spaces
(ie, bulb-outs, transit programs) Spangler Oral report
17. Liquidation of existing surface parking lots
in the downtown core Spangler Oral report
Background materials
■ Appendix A. Overview of parking fund sources and uses - where it comes from and
Where it goes
■ Appendix B. Materials provided to the BIA Parking Committee at its August 11, 1995
meeting regarding parking fund financial operations
■ Appendix C. Letter to the City Council from the BIA dated April 3, 1995 regarding
the Parking Fund budget and objectives for 1995-97
■ Appendix D. Letter to the City Council from Mike Spangler dated September 11, 1995
communicating BIA Parking Committee concerns
i
Memorandum
DATE: October 16, 1995
TO: John Dunn \'e,
FROM: Mike McCluskey0`�'
RE: Parking Meeting of 10/12/95
You asked for a sun—+mary of my statements at today's meeting of how the marsh street parking garage
expansion and purchase of another site could be expedited. Although not exactly as stated,I have
embellished as appropriate to approximate what will actually occur. They are as follows:
1. Process One: Expedite current policy and expand Marsh Garage and buy Wells Fargo site
• Hire consultant to assist staff in parking needs and location study
• Study concludes that highest needs site is in/near the existing marsh street structure;the
second highest need is in/near the Wells Fargo parking lot.
• Council adopts results of study and directs staff to proceed to begin negotiations on both
sites. Simultaneously,Council amends 95-97 CIP to include marsh structure expansion
along with third site purchase.
• After reasonable time for negotiations on property,and only if negotiations fail to be
productive,Council acts to condemn Wells Fargo site,and SLO-Med site(cannot condemn
Federal Gov't property). Ownership shifts to City of the two sites after court.proceeding and
sales price is determined by courts at a later date.
• During negotiations with Federal Government when results look promising,Council acts to
authorize design of new structure. Upon completion of negotiations,Council authorizes
bidding and construction of the expansion of the Marsh Street structure.
2. Process Two: Amend current policy and expand Marsh Garage and buy Wells Fargo site
• City Council directs staff to entirely eliminate Program 12.7 of the Circulation Element
calling for parking study prior to construction of additional structures. (note:the Council has
previously directed that staff amend the Circulation Element to eliminate from the study the
need to evaluate alternative forms of transportation as they would relate to the need for
additional structures.)
• City Council deletes Action 4.4 from the Parking Management Plan which calls for a
parking needs study prior to determining where additional parking facilities should be
located.
• City Council determines that expansion of the Marsh Street structure is the highest priority,
that purchase of the Wells Fargo site is second highest priority;amends the 95-97 CIP to
include the Marsh Street structure along with the third site purchase.
City Council authorizes retention of contract project manager to expedite property
appraisals,negotiations,design and construction.
2- 7
• After reasonable time for negotiations on property,and only if negotiations fail to be
productive, Council acts to condemn Wells Fargo site,and SLO-Med site(cannot condemn .
Federal Gov't property). Ownership shifts to City of the two sites after court proceeding and
sales price is determined by courts at a later date.
• During negotiations with Federal Goverment when results look promising,Council acts to
authorize design of new structure. Upon completion of negotiations,Council authorizes
bidding and construction of the expansion of the Marsh Street structure.
Comments:
Method 1 offers the City Council the a fast and rational basis for all site based decisions described above.
Due to the time constraints on existing City staff,method 2 will allow a faster process to occur as the sole
function of the contract person would be the completion of the two projects. Also the elimination of the
study would cut approximately 4-6 months from the total time frame. (Note:this assumes the standard
consultant retention process is hired and the consultant can immediately begin work.) The current
direction is for staff to perform the study,however given current workload levels it is doubtful that staff
could improve upon the time frame of the consultant.
Assuming that speed is of the essence,the City Council will need to address the long standing policy of
not using eminent domain for property acquisition purposes. Given the current history of property
negotiations(3-5 yrs.per property)so-called fast tracking of either site will not be possible within the
desired time frame. In either scenario,I anticipate that negotiations with the Federal Government for
either land or air space purchase will be arduous and time consuming.
2 �'
1
• t1I� o �P o _
I
X
Downtown Business Improvement Association
Parking Committee Meeting
12 October 1995
City Council Hearing Room
Minutes
Present
John Dunn, City Administrator
Mike McCluskey, Public Works
Bill Statler, Finance
Keith Opalewski, Parking
Peter Terhune, BIA President
Mike Spangler, BIA Board/Parking Committee Chair
Beth Law, Parking Committee
Pierre Rademaker, Parking Committee
Ken Schwartz, Parking Committee
Dan Gardner, Parking Committee
Correne Cotta, BIA Board
Al McVay, Vintage Properties
Rick Porter
Tom Copeland
Stephen Patrick
Pat Veesart
Bruce Frasier
Dick Cleeves
Howard Carroll
Deborah Holley, BIA Staff
Peter Eberle, BIA Staff
Letters from those unable to attend were distributed.
Meeting called to order at 8:07 by Mike Spangler
No Public Comment
Approval of minutes of 7 September 1995
Motion: Rademaker
I� Second: Gardner
I�
it P.O.Bar 1402•San Luis Ob*•QI•93406•8051541-0386
PAIF
New Business: Parking Committee Goals and Concerns
Dunn offered preliminary comments regarding the outcome of the
discussion as focusing on long term commitments to increase parking
supply. He added that the City of San Luis is blessed with the
financial capability to go ahead and build a third structure without
having to first figure out how to obtain the funding. Further, he
suggested that historical concerns need to be cleaned up before
moving on. Items 5 and 6 on agenda will be moved to the end of the
discussion.
Spangler said that time constraints kept some people from attending
the meeting; however, many of these had submitted letters to be
distributed at the meeting expressing their views about parking
issues.
Porter indicated he'd spoken to a number of merchants/
businesspeople Downtown who said they feel Downtown cannot
continue to compete unless more parking is made available.
Statler capsulized financial plan: the purchasse of parks & rec bldg
(Pacific St) was approved by City Council in 94-95 budget review. A
new park & rec bldg is under construction at old Emerson School site.
The Pacific St. location is a natural extension for Marsh Street
Parking Structure (hereafter indicated as MSPS). The purchase price
of the site w/ building was $485,000 which came in under the figure
given by an independent appraisal. The sale and transfer won't be
finalized until park & rec relocates. The general fund is paying the
debt service at this time on the loan.
Spangler advised that on this particular transaction, there was no
input from the parking committee solicited. While the parking
committee was aware the Emerson property needed to be purchased
as it fits in with long range conceptual goals, the parking committee
is uncomfortable that the transaction proceeded without their input.
Statler returned to discussion of the Pacific Street site/building. He
offered the best solution is to find someone who wants to move it
and turn the site into short term surface parking (a couple of years).
1
McCluskey agreed with Statler--that ownership of the building is not
desired as it is not ADA accessible and the City would have to sink
major money into the building for remodel to comply with standards.
He suggested actively pursuing selling it as a private home.
Spangler offered that many people don't understand how the City
could let an asset sit dormant--he suggested analyzing the project
and turning it into an income-producing asset. Spangler said that an
enterprise fund should be run on enterprise principles.
Dunn responded that the City will make every effort to work closely
with the BIA on alternatives in this situation.
Porter informed the group that the First American Title lot has been
purchased and will be converted into office spaces resulting in a loss
of 32 parking spaces.
Spangler said that he believes putting a plan in place is a simple
issue.
Dunn returned that as it gets closer to May, the City will work with
the BIA to take plan to City Council for final approval.
Statler suggested it is best to move the building on Pacific Street and
use it for short term surface parking.
McCluskey noted that once the City acquires a site with a building,
it's typical to be approached by non profits who want to lease the
property for a $1 a year. Debated the value of putting money into
upgrading for this purpose.
McCluskey also recounted conditions surrounding purchase of
property at Nipomo and Palm--he and Dunn saw the property for
sale, spoke with Opalewski and Ken Hampian, assistant CAO, and
agreed it was in keeping with Downtown Physical Concept Plan.
Contacted parking committee for their input, parking committee
stated that it was concerned about using $ for the project if it would
affect moving forward with the 3rd parking structure site; the City
offered positive feedback that enough money was available for both
options. Then, because it was general knowledge that the City was
interested in the property, it was more difficult to negotiate a lower
price however; a lower price was secured on the second property.
The existing house has been sold and it will be relocated. The metal
i
shed will be used by' the fire department to house an antique engine
that is going to be restored. No plans for the site for two years. This
property could be used to expand the adjacent surface lot (as a pass
or metered lot)--looking to today's committee meeting to establish
this as a priority.
Porter inquired why the property will be vacant for two years.
McCluskey responded that it depends on the direction obtained--
currently the City has a full plate including determining and
purchasing 3rd site and upcoming MSPS expansion. Need to use
available $ for this first. If Nipomo/Palm is determined to be of
higher priority then that could change. Nipomo and Palm was a
fortuitous situation--the City has a history of not taking advantage of
imminent domain--and these properties just, happened to come
available.
Spangler stated that this priority is probably 6th or 7th on the list.
While Spangler stated he was upset that the 2nd site was purchased
without communicating with the parking committee, he said he
believed it was the appropriate decision and he also believes
finances are available to go ahead with short term ,plans.
Dunn informed group that parking committe members Rademaker
and Schwartz were involved in originating the current Downtown
plan and that this property was a key parcel in that plan.
Rademaker added that the Nipomo site could be incoming producing
in the short term--can the parking fund afford to allocate it?
Statler moved on to item 3 re public art mural on Palm Street
Parking Structure (PSPS). When the structure was approved it was
contingent on having a public art project on the site. To fasttrack the
parking structure, $10,000 was allocated and the entire process was
followed. to procure the art except that the Cultural Heritage
Committee did not approve the palm tree as it did not appear to fit in
with the image of Chinatown. The project did not proceed. Now a
project has been proposed that meets all the criteria and it is the
finance director's recommendation to remain consistent with the
previously approved funding plan.
Spangler said that enterprise parking fund dollars should be used for
parking only. In 1991, the. parking fund was in the red, the
committee advised changes and we have pulled out of it. Also, it was
his understanding that 1% of public project monies was designated
for public art.
Statler agreed that any construction projects by the City are built to
SLO concepts and structures need design components.
Rademaker reminded that the PSPS has a zero setback and any
public art on the structure should be removeable.
Dunn offered that the parking committee will be given an
opportunity to look at this--hopefully the BIA and City will have a
single recommendation.
Spangler said the parking committee has not had a chance to address
this but is probably not opposed to it--it's a matter of timing--the
perception is that if we have money for art, why don't we have
money to move forward with parking?
Rademaker made a motion to approve $10,000 for funding of public
art project on PSPS from parking fund; Law seconded.
Discussion followed--Copeland stated he thinks priorities need to be
discussed.
Spangler stated that the parking committee is a fault for failing to
state specific wants and needs to the city council--priorities have not
been established--there's no long range vision and now we're
piecemealing together. He said if money is available for public art in
the general fund, then it could be completed without parking fund
money.
Further discussion indicated that public art should not be priority in
this meeting.
Statler said that sometimes you need to put lower priority items first
and deal with them to leave more discussion for other issues.
Public art funding vote: 2 in favor, 2 against, 1 abstention. Did not
pass; will be readdressed at next meeting.
Item 4. Statler discussed that there is frustration regarding the
development of a third parking site but the City is on time with its
/�
r
plan. Wells Fargo site looks like a possiblity but this decision has not
been made.
Item 8. Major sources of revenue--meters
parking fines
structures
interest . on investments
in lieu fees
leases
Statler indicated that debt service has been reduced but the City
does not have to change basic financing structure to accomplish goals.
Porter asked if the Downtown could be more meter friendly on the
streets and charge more in the structures?
Statler responded that he does not recommend changing the
financing structure but goals need to be accomplished first.
Dunn explained that the financing structure can be changed; however
it is a lengthy exercise and there is a constituency in the community
for the 1 and 1/2 hr free parking as established. If meters go, there
needs to be a couple of conditions which will be discussed later.
Spangler said that parking structures don't pay for themselves.
CityBIA needs to look at long time financing in the near future
because there's only two other sources of income meters and fines.
Statler said it's not a perfect system but it has generated resources
for 2 addt'1 projects without looking for outside money. 6.8 million
dollars is available for improvements.
Item 8. Enterprise fund. Statler reminded that parking revenue
goes straight into parking. The general fund does not subsidize the
parking fund.
Dunn said that there is no borrowing between various funds.
Regarding future parking improvements, the City has a strong
commitment to parking fund general health and meeting current
obligations. There is an ongoing process of reviewing all enterprise
funds with a 4 year snapshot. How to finance parking is something
the City takes seriously.
Dunn's 5-legged stool: customers, property developers, City/Co
equity contributions, property owners. San Luis Obispo is different
from many other cities--sometimes we're more like a one-legged
stool. Dunn indicated that we can go through the next stage on
present financing but this is a clarion call to take the burden off the
customer and share the burden among the other interested parties.
Proposing assessments on property owners/developers hasn't
worked in the past however; in the longt term, a fairer plan is
needed. It is possible to remove meters if revenue is replaced by
gov't, property owners and merchants.
Spangler discussed that an enterprise fund pays for itself and will
eventually create money for the City when parking caps out. Will
have a cash cow.
Dunn responded that when the debt is paid off and money is still
coming in--it will be more than 30 years from now.
Spangler said the City ultimately becomes the benefactor.
Statler replied that the gov't runs the operation because private
business won't--it's not a moneymaker. Rates should. be able to come
down.
Dunn then stated that as a practical matter, no one in this town
wants to change the customer supported operation, but ultimately a
more equitable system needs to be devised.
Rademaker said existing businesses pay less than new businesses.
Spangler stated that there's no future in an in-lieu fee program and
asked when the enterprise fund was established?
Dunn responded that it was approximately 25 years ago by Ken
Schwartz for sewer and water--a necessary step.
Item 11. Spangler asked that the City assist the BIA in protecting
parking funds.
Future agenda item: Discuss long term parking meter removal. Need
to move forward with projects with current financing.
r
Item 13. McCluskey stated that action 4.4 requires a study for the
3rd parking site (jumping to items 5 & 6). The City did decide (when
it adopted the current budget) that a study will be done to show
where to establish the site. Then another meeting will direct
negotiating--knowing the process could take 1 and 1/2 years of
negotiations--to actually purchase. City has a history of not using
eminent domain and negotiates instead. City needs an appraisal but
there are certain time lines that drive ability to move fast. City/Co.
agreed not to use a consultant for study and do this in-house instead.
Focus is to do the study to determine where 3rd site should be.
Items 15-17: Spangler said a possible solution would be to build
surplus parking--if parking were turned over to private enterprise it
would become a creative process. Parking fund also needs to be
compensated for any removed spaces. There needs to be a long term
plan for existing surface lots.
Item #5. Dunn said the most prudent thing for the City is to expand
the MSPS and purchase the Wells Fargo parking lot. (This second
item not a short term structure but perhaps in 5 - 7 years). A
minimal analysis of supply and demand is necessary as well.
Spangler stated that when the documents (of today's session) are
reviewed, they all need to lead us back to the above comment by
Dunn. If not, we have not furthered the process. Our number one
priority is to expand MSPS.
McCluskey added that the study is going to say a 3rd site is acquiring
the lot in back of the post office and SLO Med site; then 4th is Wells
Fargo. If the parking committee calls the MSPS expansion the 3rd
site, it will kill two birds with one stone.
To fast track, it is also recommended to eliminate all studies of
circulation and amend CIP to include expansion of MSPS.
Statler recommended not subordinating efforts to expand with
purchasing.
Frasier indicated he sees two potential killers to moving forward--
EIR and purchasing property you can't use.
Sp.angler's straw poll: Is appropriate new location/additional location
MSPS?
1
Yes votes: 17 Nay votes: 0
Spangler congratulated the group on a consensus.
Holley indicated she would address remaining agenda items at next
meeting.
Meeting adjourned 10:45 AM.
Prepared by D. Holley 10/16/95
MEETIN AGENDA f
'TE ' 3 ITEM # .
1751 Sydney Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
November 4, 1995
Mr. David Romero, City Councilman
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Dave,
I've noted with interest that the City Council meeting of Tuesday, November 7, 1995 will include a discussion
of the downtown parking problem.
As a 48 year resident of SLO, I've seen many changes to our city and I believe most of them have been very
positive. Like most residents parking is the first thing we think about when journeying to the downtown area.
I'm a frequent user and booster of downtown San Luis Obispo and for that reason I have formulated a
number of opinions and ideas concerning ways to make downtown parking more convenient to the
shoppers. Hopefully in your discussions some of my ideas can be considered. They are listed as follows:
1. Instead of buying additional property along Pacific Street, including the Post Office parking lot, to
enlarge the Marsh Street Parking Garage, why not double or triple deck the parking lot on Higuera
Street, between Court and Morro Streets. This would be just as convenient to the downtown shops
and it would give better parking possibilities to users of the courthouse and city hall. We already own
this property and it may also serve to revitalize the upper end of Higuera and Marsh Streets.
2. Presently on Marsh Street the entire space in front of the Post Office and the block in front of the
Union Bank are poorly utilized. The space if front of the Post Office was originally designed for Post
Office customers, but with the advent of the Downtown Center it is now being used by individuals
shopping in that location. These spaces should have parking meters and made available to all down
town users.
3. The post office boxes on Marsh Street alongside the Union Bank should be removed and that entire
block should have parking meters installed.
4.The Morro Street block alongside the Post Office and the Post Office parking lot should have parking
meters installed. The post office boxes are presently on the right side of the vehicle and are unsafe
and awkward for the vehicle driver to use.
5. Drive up post office boxes should be placed in the Post Office parking lot and located in a manner
that would allow mail to be deposited from the drivers side (left side) of the vehicle. As a frequent
traveler throughout the US I have observed this method being used at the majority of the US Post
Offices (example -- Madonna Rd. PO). A sign could be posted in front of the PO telling patrons the
drive up boxes are in the rear. The balance of the Post Office parking lot could be used for short term
parking for Post Office customers.
I'm sincere when I say I believe the above changes to downtown parking will add to the parking revenue, add
more parking spaces at a minimum of expense, make it easier and safer for a vehicle driver to deposit mail,
eliminate the unfairness of individuals parking in front of the Post Office in spaces originally intended for PO
patrons when doing business at other locations and better utilize the Post Office parking lot. Also, this
would eliminate the need to purchase extra land for a parking structure.
You are doing a good job on the Council, Dave. Keep up the good work! RECEIVED
NOV OV 7 19yb
CITY COUNCIL
t� SAIN � � ��� na�GPY) r.A
Don Coats
MEETINGAGENDA
DATE 1F1-.- ITEM #qAtn
j
October 30, 1995
Honorable Mayor Settle & Council
City of San Luis Obispo
Ca.
C'COUNCIL
B CDD DIR
B-6AO
❑ FIN DIR
Q-XCAO
❑ FIRE CHIEF
B-ArrORNEY
PIPW DIRC
U"ERWORIG
❑ POLICE CHF
❑ MGMT TEAM
❑ REC DIR
❑ C RF.ADfILE
❑ UTIL DIR
O
❑ PERS DIR
Dear Mayor Settle & Council Members; I 181A
1RONMI NI'AL CENTER OF
N LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
Increased traffic and parking congestion in the downtown area have highlighted the need
for a comprehensive study of traffic and parking mitigation plans for the downtown San
Luis Obispo area. The Circulation Element of the City's General Plan requires this study
to be conducted before any new parking structures are built. The City has delayed
contracting for this study. There is now an attempt to bypass the study while spending 7.5
million dollars on new parking structures. Parking Structures are not the most cost
effective way to accommodate more shoppers in the downtown area. The required study
would clearly demonstrate this fact, and delineate alternatives.
A goal of the City Circulation Element is to encourage the Community to reduce the
number of single occupancy vehicular trips in the City. Increasing parking without also
increasing transit alternatives deprives the community of its ability to meet the goals as
outlined in the Circulation Element.
As citizens concerned about the cost and long term effects of these decisions, we are
asking the City to complete the Study as outlined and approved in the Circulation
Element.
Motion:
Due to increasing traffic and parking congestion in the downtown area of San Luis
Obipso, the Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County recommends that the City
proceed with the parking and transportation study as outlined in Section 12.7 of the
General Plan Circulation Element.
This study should identify parking improvement and alternative transportation possibilities,
helping the City to create a more rational and broad based update to its Parking
Management Plan, and to allow the City to proceed with a cogent parking and alternative
transportation strategy.
JohnR. Ewan G RECEIVED
Chair, Board of Directors xec tive D' ect r NOV 2 1995
CITY COUNCIL
SAN Mr- aaisPA. CA
Environmental Center Mailing Address Recycling Center
967 Osos Street P.O. Box 1014 45 Prado Road
Tel. 805/544-1777 • Fax 805/544-1871 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Tel. 805/781-3199 • Fax 805/781-3198
CRAIG M. ANDERSON _ETING AGENDA
1052 Islay Street DATE /�ITEM#il off.
Safn 'c o CA 93401
❑ CDD DIR 9AM
SAO ❑ FIN DIR
3'ACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF
November 2, 1995 ?ATTORNEY 9-PW DIR
'G`LERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHFMr.John Dunn, City Administrative Officer MGMTTEAM ❑ REC DIR
C ILE ❑ UTIL DIR
City of San Luis Obispo O.
990 Palm Street ❑ PERS DIR
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
9
Dear Mr. Dunn:
I write to express my concems with regard to the City's downtown parking program and to offer a
recommendation for resolution of, what I consider to be, a potentially volatile situation.
Concern # 1- City_ County and Regional Adopted Policy vs. City Actio
Major goals of the City have clearly and consistently stated that a shift from auto trips to bus, bike and walking
trips needs to occur in order to maintain the qualities that make San Luis Obispo a desirable place to live and visit.
Programs for reducing auto trips are introduced in the Circulation Element including a parking management
program which states that additional parking structures should only be built after a comprehensive parking study
(that includes the evaluation of alternative transportation possibilities) is completed and its results considered".
The County's Clean Air Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan give further support to these goals. The
City's bicycle and transit programs, the Regional Rideshare Program and the activities of the Council of
Governments and the Air Pollution Control District serve to implement these policies set forward by the City.
It does not take much insight to observe that recent actions of this City with respect to the construction of
additional parking are in direct conflict with and serve to undermine these goals. In an era when city's throughout
Europe are banning the automobile entirely from CBD's (with a resulting 20%-50%increase in retail sales) and
cities such as Boulder and Portland, are leading the way to aggressively adopt parking demand management
programs, here we are in San Luis Obispo following a model that was out-dated twenty years ago. Can't we do
better than this?
Concern #2-RM s Possessory Role in Cit;Parking Facility Decisions
It has been my observation (and that of several City, County and regional government staff) that the BIA takes a
possessory role in the decisions affecting parking in the downtown. My questions are: When did the BIA purchase
and how much did they pay for the street and surface parking in the City? What financial interest does the BIA
have with respect to the acquisition of additional parking by the City?What programs has the BIA implemented
to alleviate parking demand in the downtown?Why doesn't the BIA build their own parking structure?What
evidence does the BIA have that additional parking = additional business? How much parking is enough?How
many downtown employees drive to work alone and park their cars in the downtown?What are some
alternatives to building more parking?What are the opportunity costs of more parking?What are the social and
environmental costs of more parking?
It should be noted that parking in-lieu fees (the money paid by downtown businesses for the parking provided by
the City) account for a measly 5% of parking revenues.
Concern #3- Conflict of Interest Regarding Business Interests and Parking Acquisitions
I am intimately familiar with the less-than-open nature of meetings between City staff and the BIA's parking
committee. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that most of these discussions (while purported to be
"public meetings") take place in smoke-filled back rooms. These meetings are simply a charade, or as one City
staffer calls it, "a bitch session". Diverse interests groups are not a party to these discussions. Furthermore,the
atmosphere of these meetings is both hostile and intimidating to individuals who might have views other those of
parking committee members. Apart from City staff,those present are individuals with a vested financial interest
in the City's decisions related to parking.My understanding is that it is out of these meetings that a bulk of City
parking policy decisions and implementation programs arise. Call me paranoid, but it seems to me that some
conflict of interest may exist.
Concern #4-Dovo ntovn Concept Plan as WorkingCity Document
It is my impression that the BIA uses the Downtown Physical Concept Plan as a blueprint for determining future
parking acquisition in the downtown. This plan hardly represents any sort of publicly debated document. On the
contrary, it was ram-rodded through with virtually no review by City staff, commissions, or other affected
parties. It is the ambitious brainchild of a handful of prominent local architects and designers supported by the
BIA. It is certainly not a legitimate document upon which multi-million dollar decisions can be made.
Concern #5- "5aueaky "eel Gets the Grease"Sy _of Government
I am well-aware of the difficult position in which you and the Council have been placed. On the one hand, you
have been charged with the implementation of the City's Circulation Element-a generally good document that
has undergone scrupulous review- and on the other,the shrill voices of the BIA with respect to their demands for
more parking. However,the credibility of the City is in serious jeopardy when the public's interest (and financial
resources) are expended on the basis of greasing the squeaky wheel.
Recommendations
Clearly there is a wide gap between adopted City, County and regional government policies with respect to trip
reduction and the direction of this City's parking program as guided by the BIA.You should also be aware that
there is a growing resentment among the environmental community, government officials and others towards the
BIA's proprietary role in these discussions. It is my belief that the interests of all parties to this debate would be
well-served by some sort of mediation/consultation effort.
I hope you will forgive the venomous tone of this letter. Furthermore, I recognize that the BIA is a generally good
organization with dedicated and hard-working volunteers and staff. It is not my intent to inflame the situation. I
simply feel that very important decisions are being considered with little public debate. In the long-term, this does
not serve anyone's interest. I intend on attending the "study session" scheduled for Tuesday November 7. Thank
you for your attention to my concerns.
Sincerel ,
1
Craig An erson
c: Tom Fulks, SLO Regional Rideshare
Larry Allen, APCD
Geof Land, ECOSLO
Deborah Holley, BIA
Pat Veesart, Sierra Club ATTF
•
14 iE I NG
//.7L
ITFM#a
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
1039 Chorro Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 3278
(805) 781-2777 . FAX (805) 543-1255
David E. Garth, Executive Director
November 3, 1995 [TCOUNCIL a CDD DIR
@ CAO t]-FIN DIR
C'rACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF
Mayor Allen Settle and Members of the City Council DoATTORNEY BTW DIR
City of San Luis Obispo OOCLEW-0NO ❑ POLICE CHF
❑ MGMT TEAM 13REC DIR
990 Palm Street ❑ C RE D ILE ❑ UTIL DIR
San Luis Obispo, California 93401 B' ❑ PERS DIR
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
The Chamber of Commerce, like many other organizations within the community, is interested in
ensuring that San Luis Obispo provide adequate parking facilities for our businesses and their
clientele. Our vision for the future of the downtown area is predicated on the opportunity for
consumers to easily and conveniently access parking in the downtown core. If they are unable
to do so, they will turn their attention elsewhere, possibly outside of our community. We feel
that the current level of available parking does not meet the needs of our consumers, and we
strongly support efforts to quickly bring more parking to the downtown area.
The short-term need for parking becomes obvious to us each time we enter one of the parking
structures and are unable to locate a parking space. We feel that the most prudent manner to
alleviate this situation is the expansion of the Marsh Street parking structure. Under current
procedures, however, such an expansion would require at least two years to complete. Because
the provision of needed parking cannot afford any delay, we suggest a"fast-tracking" of this
project by City staff. We can anticipate a rapid increase in downtown traffic in coming years
because of cutbacks in Cal Poly's transit system and reductions in funding for public
transportation. Two years is already too long to wait for completion of this project; any
additional time spent contemplating the issue could result in disastrous consequences for
downtown businesses.
A cogent and cost-effective long-term strategy would go beyond merely examining parking
structures, and would evaluate all of the options available to create parking spaces in our City.
For that reason, we support the concept of completing a study to that effect. This study should
identify as its principle focus the need to create more parking spaces in the most cost-effective
manner. It should therefore examine the concept of building additional parking structures, but
also include the possibility of using other methods to create additional spaces by offset, such as
improving our mass transit system and providing incentives for employee ridesharing and
carpooling.
:Rg a .. RECEIVED
NOV 6 1995 IM
ACCREDITED
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
CITY CLERK CITY COUNCIL, ii^mnrn or commirncil
SAN .UIS OBISPO.CA l l.ZR� t�PQ,rt`,Iq
We feel that this study is important to ensure that our parking needs are met in the most
healthful manner to the economy of our city. We must be clear, however, in stating that the
study should in no way be a prerequisite to committing to the expansion of the Marsh Street
structure. The structure must be built without delay.
We feel that addressing both short-term needs and long-term planning will help alleviate the
parking pressure that our downtown currently faces in the most timely manner, while ensuring
that in the long term, our downtown land is put to its best economic use.
Yours very truly,
'"L7 I � Z��
William Thoma
President
MEET6__ AGENDA
DATE ��. ITEM #-
MEMORANDUM
October 27, 1995
FROM: Jim Gardiner, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Homeless Services Center Update
Progress on the Homeless Services Center is proceeding well on site design and layout. The
preliminary drawings have been approved by all parties and building plans are currently
being drafted. It is anticipated that these plans could be ready to go to Community
Development in November.
Progress on the programming component is proceeding less expeditiously. As was
envisioned, working with many providers is a complex task. After several different
iterations, a"bare-bones"annual operating program of around $100,000 was reviewed by the
Center "Steering Committee" on October 16th. While major efforts in achieving grant
funding have been made, none have yet materialized. It is also becoming clear that the
group of providers will need an existing organization to coordinate staffing on the site.
Therefore, also presented on the 16th was a draft proposal for a contract with the Economic
Opportunities Commission to staff the site and supervise the program.
As noted above, one of the critical factors which has not been resolved is developing annual
operating funds. It appears highly unlikely that the group would be able to do annual fund-
raising to support the operating program. While they can and should help in generating
funds, it is a strong probability that both the City and the County will be asked to assist in
supporting the operating budget. Naturally, no commitments will be made until the entire
program is brought back to the City Council. Additionally, the Steering Committee will be
working with the Chamber of Commerce, the BIA, and any other interested parties to
develop plans for supporting the operating program.
3 -/
Day Center for the Homeless
Operations/Program Budget
4/96-3/97
Hours of Operation:9 a.m.to 4 p.m.Monday through Friday
12-1:30 Saturday and Sunday
Salaries and Frinae
Homeless Program Director(.15 FTE) 5616.00
grant writing,grant management, community relations
staff supervision,program development
Program Coordinator(.75 FTE) 18720.00
daily program supervision on site,staff and
volunteer supervision, coordination of on-site
services,program development,interagency coordination
Intervention Workers
(76 hairs each week® 7.00 per hour) 27664.00
daily supervision of consumers and volunteers, fight
maintenance
Fringe Benefits(30%for full time) 15000.00
payroll taxes, worker's comp, insurance
Total Salaries and Fringe 67000.00
Utilities
Electricity 4800.00
Gas 600.00
Disposal 1500.00
Water/Sewage 4500.00
Phone 4200.00
first year cast includes equipment/installation
Total Utilities 15600.00
Transportation w
Client Transportation to Site 8000.00
500 individuals at 16.00 ea.
Staff(.25 per mile) 900.00
Total Transportation 8900.00
Maintenance and Repair
Janitorial Supplies 3600.00
Paper products,soap, cleansers
Repair and Maintenance Supplies 3500.00
parts, tools, miscellaneous
Contracted Labor 5000.00
plumbing,heating,electrical, carpentry, etc
Total Maintenance and Repair 12100.00
Office Supplies
papa, office products and equipment.mist.
center supplies 3000.00
Total Office Supplies 3000.00
Indirect Expense
payroll,accounting and personnel services
(.0925 of budget) 9860.00
TOTAL PROGRAM/OPERATIONAL BUDGET 116,460.00
3-2
MEETING AGENDA 3
11724' ITEM #
9qr'►
San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
1039 Chorro Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401.3278
(805) 781-2777 • FAX (805) 543-12
David E. Garth, Executive Direc qT COUNCIL::. :E3Uft
OIACAO
DR
November 3, 1995 ErCAO, IR
CHIEF
IR
Mayor Allen Settle and Members of the City Council E
City of San Luis Obispo l7 MOWTEAM OW
990 Palm Street 0 C � ld,-
San Luis Obispo,California 93401 .., .,
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
The Chamber of Commerce would like to reiterate its support for the proposed Homeless Services Center.
We are pleased to continue providing what support we can to the project to ensure that it successfully serves
our homeless population and the community at large. The Chamber has been supportive of this project since
its inception and has provided, in conjunction with the BIA,the commitment of$30,000 of in-kind service to
construct the People's Kitchen portion of the project.
During our continued involvement with development of the site,the operations side of the project had yet to
be finalized. The Chamber Board recently moved to again pledge its philosophical commitment to the long-
term operation of the Center on an annual review cycle basis. As before,this commitment is to be made
through in-kind support,not the contribution of capital. The operating budget for the Center includes the
need for maintenance and repair,as well as replenishment of office supplies. Although we cannot obligate
our membership to provide these services in a specified amount,we believe that the business community does
have the ability to furnish a great deal of this type of support,and is anxious to do so. Many of our members
are frequently able to contribute their time and talent in lieu of cash. To the extent that these activities can
offset the operations budget,they are of equivalent value to a cash donation.
The Chamber possesses a unique and powerful set of resources that,we will utilize in support of this effort.
This includes promotional advertising in our newsletter,and acting as a liaison between the Center and those
of our members who may wish to contribute in-kind support to the project. We will be happy to publicize
and solicit support for the needs of the Center whenever we are able.
We cannot make commitments for extended periods of time without having an opportunity to evaluate the
success of the project. We would be pleased to offer this type of assistance for one year,and our Board of s
Directors will look at continuing commitment again at that time. We sincerely hope that the project will be a
success,so that we can continue to support this important community venture.
Thant:you for your continued commitment to this endeavor. We look forward to a successful partnership in
the coming months.
Yours very truly,
RECEIVED
NOV_b Im
William Thoma
President SA COUNCIL
Nov L 1"s qns" C CA
R
' CN"BEH OF COMMENCE
C Orn or iauci.A�i
CITY CLERK I,,,N ,n s„ %
SAN LUIS O@ISPO,CA
����IIII�Rlllltlllllll��l�llul�l M _D TE: 9.•
IIIYIXII Ci".7 of san Luis oBispo ITEM NUMBER:
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
30 October 1995
From: Deborah Holley, Administrator
Prepared by: Same
Subject: Downtown Clean Up Project
CAO Recommendations
For review purposes only, that the City Council and Business
Improvement Association Board of Direction discuss subcommittee
group concerns about the increasingly unclean condition of
Downtown streets, sidewalks and alleys.
Discussion
• Background: In August, the City Council reviewed the issue of
whether or not to issue a permit for a new business known as
The Library, based on the challenge that another bar in the
Downtown would ultimately result in the worsening of
Downtown's appearance. Overriding the appeal, the City Council
indicated that it would like to see the BIA work with Downtown
merchants to address the unclean condition of Downtown streets
primarily after Thursday, Friday and Saturday night activities.
The BIA formed the Downtown Cleanup Committee, consisting of
eating/drinking establishment owners7managers and other
merchants to discuss solutions. The committee meets every two
weeks and is usually well attended (between 6 - 12 persons)
Some ideas have been advanced which are the basis for today's
discussion.
• Significant Impacts: Improvement of unclean conditions.
�r�
���IN�IN�VdIIIII�III A1p�IIII IIVI`I � f MEETING DATE:
f IIYiNI+ �' O ��� ���� OB�Sp� ITEM NUMBER:
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Page 2
• Citizen Participation
Besides merchants, the BIA is considering soliciting the services of
student organizations, seniors, misdemeanor community service
sentence servers, private industry and thegeneral public.
Fiscal Impact
None at this time.
Attachments
Support documents are attached.
Downtown Cleanup Committee
City Hall Conference Room
October 16, 1995
9:00 a.m.
Ron Munds City of SLO - Conservation
David Hix City of SLO-Wastewater
Jim Kilbride Natural Selection
Mike Clemmensen McCarthy's
Virginia Yasumoto Pendleton/Smart Shop
Nancy Pickering Marshall's Jewelers
Jeff McKeegan Marshall's Jewelers
Linnea Phillips Linnea
Richard Stephens Garden St. Goldsmith
Venetia Greer Everyone's Favorite Wedding Center
Phillip Bairley Beneficial
Roy Navarro Beneficial
Greg Walker City of SLO - Streets
Keith Hamilton Hamilton Estate Jewelry
• Walker spoke of a possible program concerning adopt a block downtown. This could
be done through service groups in the area that want exposure. Question on whether
the downtown merchants want to see signs advertising service clubs downtown.
• Walker spoke about the schedule for sidewalk cleaning. Every sidewalk gets cleaned
once every third week. Walker said he spoke with the sidewalk contractors to try to get
them to be more efficient. They are trying to get Bubble Gum Alley cleaned three times
a week. The cleaner is used in specific locations on Friday mornings to concentrate on
areas that are hit hard during Thursday Night Activities. The machine that is used
vacuums the grease when it sprays it.
• Hosing is not against the law. The City would prefer that merchants sweep up as much
as possible. Whenever a hose is used, the water goes straight down the storm drain
and into the creek. A hose is encouraged to be used when it is a health issue with vomit
or urine. Kilbride, Natural Selection, was given a hose by the City to hose down
bubble gum alley whenever it is in bad shape.
• It was suggested that the BIA put the graffiti hotline in the monthly newsletter.
• Gum is still an issue all over town. A question arose whether there is a specific
cleanser that can be used to loosen it from the ground. The committee suggested calling
Disneyland to find out how they handle the gum situation.
• The committee pointed out that public restrooms are not available downtown. Some
questioned why the restroom behind SLO Brewery is locked during the day. Eberle
explained that the portable restroom is for Thursday Night Activities. The potential for
harm to the structure is too great for it to be opened all of the time.
y3
9/19/95
Downtown Cleanup Committee Meeting
Present
Mike Clemmensen
Paul Brown
Bill Hales
Elias Nimeh
Stephen Patrick
Peter Krom (SLOCO Recycles)
Deborah Holley (BIA)
• Patrick indicated owner of his building "seems okay" with gating
Gum Alley; not sure about other building (Natural Selection)
owner but doesn't see a problem...
• Liability issue of gating--discuss with City
• It was discussed that lighting might be as effective and less
expensive, or for full effectiveness, a combination of both
• More discussion about Natural Flavors trash on the curb; Peter
Krom will contact them regarding recycling tips to reduce trash on
curb; composting--regulated by Health Dept.?
• Downtown cardboard recycling: M - Sat
• Nimeh recalled that Dodie Williams (past BIA admn.) had been
involved in a Downtown clean up program. Holley will talk to her
about this.
• List of community service labor--those who have to fulfill
community service hours, how do we obtain access to this
resource? Also, increased fines for littering and fines go to
cleanup.
• Sororities/Fraternities--Pete Eberle and Bill Hales will be speaking
at Cal Poly.
• Chief Gardiner: Holley will contact him regarding calls made by
tavern owners/employees when those persons witness problems
or apprehend troublemakers (knocking over trash cans,
vandalism, etc)...when calls are made, the bar is reported as
having a call (even though not necessarily related to that
establishment's activity) and then also reported to ABC. This
keeps some people from getting involved in reducing these
activities.
• More merchants should come to meetings--not enough
people/input.
• Main problem: Garbage on Street
• Main solution: More people to sweep it up
Next meeting: Monday 2 Oct 9 AM
City Hall Conference Room
y �
City/County Library Conference Room
August 21, 1995
9:00 a.m.
Guests
Dan Conners Bulls Tavern/McCarthy's Irish Pub
Tom Conners Bull's Tavern
Wade Howard Bull's Tavern
Mike Clemmensen McCarthy's Irish Pub
Elias Nimeh Tortilla Flats
Bill Hales Frog &Peach/The Library
Paul Brown Mother's Tavern
Don Burns Mother's Tavern
Kevin Dyson Mother's Tavern
Kelly Walshe Mother's Tavern
Bart Topham SLOPD �.
Joe McDermott City of SLO Streets Division j
Pam Copeland BIA Board
Terry Westrope BIA Board
Correne Cotta BIA Board
Deborah Holley Bim►
Pete Eberle BIA
The meeting opened with introductions around the table. The guests let it be known that
they were not happy with the name BARR This is a serious situation for them and should
not be handled lightly.
BIA topics covered
1. Awareness - Eberle spoke of the need to be aware of your neighbors. The night life
of San Luis Obispo attracts a lot of people from all over the area. Not all of those people
are responsible, nor do they care about the condition of the downtown area. Eberle spoke
of the need to be aware of your patron's actions when they leave your establishment.
There is also a need to be aware of the condition in front of one's own establishment as
well as the neighbor. The establishment of a new bar downtown has also made others
aware of the mess that they create. Eberle reminded the owners of the discussion of the
City Council. He also stated that many people will be watching the cleanliness of the
downtown area: City Council,local businesses and individuals. Discussion continued
about awareness, especially concerning one's neighbor. Eberle pointed out that one's
neighbor can either promote your business or not.
2. Cooperation- It is necessary for all of the late night businesses to clean up after
themselves. It is not required or expected for a merchant to get on hands and knees to
clean, but there are some basic services that can be done. Sweeping up the cigarette butts
that are in front of a bar and surrounding shops was stressed. Late night business owners
need to concentrate on working together to produce a positive image of downtown San
Luis Obispo.
3. Education - It was a general consensus that today's student is not as responsible as in
o
the past. Whether it is a lack of morals or a lack of common sense, people are not
respecting private property. With the students coming back into town, an education
y' �
process was discussed. Eberle will contact the Inter-Fratemity Council and find a list of
their meetings. Hales and Brown volunteered to speak with students to let them know that
certain behavior, vomiting and urination in public, are not excepted. By making personal
contact, we might be able to calm certain inappropriate actions.
4. Action- Owners need to act on the items discussed. Eberle asked all of them to think
about their relations with their neighbors. Eberle stressed that we are not looking for
owners to get into physical confrontations with patrons. The BIA would like to see the
owners "Cleaning up their own back yard" .
Police Department- Bart Topham of the police department suggested using those arrested
for indecent acts to clean up downtown. That is something that needs to go through the
County rather than City. Owners would like to see foot patrol downtown at night.
Topham would love to accommodate that but there is no budget to do such things. There is
no way he would let an officer patrol alone that late at night. The police department has not
figured out how to increase downtown patrol.
Suggestions
Replace Tuesday/Wednesday street cleaning with Saturday/Sunday street cleaning.
Increase police enforcement
Have merchants leave their outside lights on for longer amount of time.
Better dialog between merchants and bar owners.
BIA Follow up
Information during Week of Welcome
Lights in Bubble gum Alley
Look at the use of water to hose off the sidewalks.
Invite local merchants
Next Meeting Wednesday, September 6, 10:00 a.m. City Hall Conference Room
�/ 7