HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/14/2011, PH 4 - 2011 PARKING FUND REVIEW counat June 14,2011
j ac,Enaa i2Epont N bw 044
CITY OF SAN. LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Jay Walter,Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Robert Horch,Parking Services Manager
SUBJECT: 2011 PARKING FUND REVIEW
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Review and discuss the 2011 annual Parking Fund Review.
2. Conceptually approve the Parking Enterprise Fund budget of 2011-12,with final action on
June 21,2011 with the adoption of the 2011-13 Financial Plan.
3. Approve additional expenses of$20,000 annually for the Downtown Access Pass (formerly the
Gold Pass).
4. Approve two resolutions authorizing charging in City parking structures from 1 PM to 6 PM on
Sundays and increasing parking fines and permit fees.
REPORT IN BRIEF
Several interesting developments will affect the Parking Fund this year. City Council has approved
charging for parking on Sundays and adding approximately 400 credit card-accepting parking
meters in the heart of the downtown beginning next fiscal year. The architectural design and
environmental analysis for the Palm-Nipomo parking structure continues to move forward. This
report highlights some additional operating costs to be incurred this year,including the services of a
half-time Transportation Planner to offset the Parking Manager's role as the Downtown Champion
as well as a part-time parking officer to supplement the Major City Goal for Neighborhood
Wellness. Also included are a budget reduction item and some minor revenue adjustments along
with funding requests for three capital projects.
Currently, the City has enough parking supply to handle the downtown parking demand due to the
recession. While several smaller downtown developments have been delayed, two major
developments, Garden Street Ten-aces and Chinatown, are projected to begin construction during
this budget cycle. These projects remove parking supply, increase parking demand, and provide the
Parking Fund with replacement parking revenue. The biggest challenge facing the Parking Fund is
with the timing of the Palm-Nipomo parking structure. The structure will not be built until it is
needed, but since it is itself a major downtown project, staff wants to ensure it is progressing so it
can absorb both the loss of parking supply and the increased demand for Garden Street Terraces and.
Chinatown. For the purposes of this report, staff projects the structure to be built in 2014-15 and
open the following year in 2015-16.
PH4-1
o
2011 Parking Fund Review Page 2
DISCUSSION
Parking Accomplishments in 2010-11
Although the Fund Review primarily concerns financial and budgetary information, it is important
to look back at the accomplishments that have occurred during this past fiscal year. Council's
approval of the Parking Fund budget allows the City to provide improved services and support.
The following is a list of highlights that Parking Services have been able to accomplish in the 2010-
11 fiscal year.
1. Substantial work on the Palm-Nipomo Parking Structure project including two public
workshops, work on architectural design, urban design for the site, and environmental
analysis.
2. Analysis and approval for Sunday parking services and the addition of 400 credit card-
accepting parking meters in a higher core meter area.
3. Parking Services website added information on the Palm-Nipomo parking structure project
and developed an interactive citation appeal form.
4. Light posts and energy efficient fixtures were placed on the top deck of the parking structure
at 842 Palm.
5. The Marsh Street parking structure access controls and gate arms were re-wired.
6. Staff coordinated, researched and enhanced enforcement of parking and code violations in
residential neighborhoods.
7. Four (4) Electric Vehicle charging stations were upgraded to the new standardized SAE
J 1772 connector and three stations were replaced with the use of grant programs.
8. The structure booth attendant manual was substantially upgraded.
9. The first annual Parking Services Annual Report was completed.
10. Parking Officers' handheld ticket machines were upgraded.
11. A new Hearing Officer was recruited and trained.
12. A new security firm was hired to patrol the parking structures.
13. Parking Services participated in the Public Works Assessment process.
14. Three new parking booth attendants were hired and trained.
15. The Parking Manager continued to represent the City as the Downtown Champion.
Parking Revenues
On April 5, 2011 City Council approved charging on Sundays from 1 PM to 6 PM and approved a
25-cent hourly increase for 400 parking meters in the heart of downtown that will feature credit
card acceptance. Although Council also postponed increasing structure rates and 10-hour meter
rates at this meeting, the approved increase will bring in added revenues of$346;300 annually that
is shown in metered lots, metered streets, and structure revenues in Table 1. These additional
revenues will help with the construction, operations, and debt service for the Palm-Nipomo parking
structure.
In the past few years parking revenues have been declining because of lowered parking demand due
to the recession. It appears that meter lot revenues, structure revenues, and long-term revenues have
stabilized in the past year. Fine and investment revenues continue to decline due to the economy but
PH4-2
2011 Parking Fund Review Page 3
show some stabilization as compared with previous years. Lower fine revenues are also attributed
to higher fine surcharges from the State and County(making packers more vigilant about avoiding
citations), the transfer of the Police Department parking fines to the General Fund, and fewer
parking citations being issued.
Table 1
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13
Revenues Actual Actual Projected Projected Projected
Metered Lots 362,800 392,100 396;500 508,200 351,300
Meters on Street 1,036,000 1,141,900 1,181,200 1,359,000 1,436,700
Structures 743,000 713,700 707,400 764,200 881,500
Long-Term Parking 376,900 349,900 354,100 379,600 383,400
Leases 216,400 204,800 201,300 210;200 376,300
Parking In-Lieu 15,100 12,800 20,600 21,000 4,481,200
Parking Fines 770,500 690,500 623,400 700,900 658,500
Investments 442,100 292,200 . 165,300 145,800 90,600
Totals 3,962,800 3,797,900 3,649,800 4,088,900 8,659,500
Again, the overall downturn in revenues is relatively modest, and appears to be stabilizing. Staff
anticipates a slow and steady recovery from here forward, except for the $4.4 million increase to
Parking In-Lieu revenue from Garden Street Terraces and the Chinatown projects.
Significant Operating Program Changes
For this budget period the Parking Fund has three significant operating program changes. The
additions cover the costs of charging for Sunday parking(plus the new credit card costs for the 400
new meters), funding half of a Transportation Planner position, and funding a part-time parking
officer dedicated to the Major City Goal for Neighborhood Wellness. Specific information can be
found on pages 70-84 in the Preliminary 2011-13 Budget(Appendix A)document.
Budget Balancing Strategies& Revenue Enhancements
In order to assist in the overall effort to have a more sustainable budget, the Parking Fund continues
to look for opportunities to reduce spending and make minor revenue adjustments. Staff has been
working to reduce spending in the last two years and will continue to do so. For this budget cycle
we asked all of our contractors to look for ways to reduce their costs. Staff worked with our
landscape maintenance contractor who is willing to reduce their overall contract amount by 25%or
approximately $12,500 without reducing their work frequencies. Another anticipated reduction is
the projected employee concessions. These concessions require the City to meet and confer with the
labor groups before this occurs.
Staff is recommending five(5)minor revenue enhancements for three different parking permits and
two fine amounts as summarized below. Specific information on these revenue enhancements can
be found on pages H-16-H-19 of the Preliminary 201.1-13 Budget document.
PH4-3
2011 Parking Fund Review Page 4
2011-12 2012-13
Revenue Enhancements BUDGET BUDGET
Increase Residential 10-hour Meter Permits $5,060 $5,060
Increase Commerical Loading Zone Permits $1,785 $1,785
Charge for Residential Parking Permits $15,120 $15,120
Increase Overtime&Restricted Parking Violations $2,700 $2,700
Adopt California Vehicle Code §40226 $1,250 $1,250
Totals $21,965 $21,965
Capital Improvement Projects
Staff is recommending three capital improvement projects, including the painting of the Marsh
Street Structure Expansion, the purchase of credit card-accepting meters, and the resurfacing of
Parking Lots 2, 3, and 11. The capital project for the resurfacing of Lots 2, 3, and 11 is for locations
where the City has deferred maintenance because of the pending Garden Street Terraces and
Chinatown projects. Both projects are anticipated to begin in January 2013, in the second year of
the Financial Plan. The capital project will only be used if these development projects are delayed
further. However, if the development projects are substantially delayed, the City will need to
resurface the parking lots. The specific information for all of the capital improvement projects can
be found on pages 3-207—3-216 of the Preliminary 2011-12 Budget(Appendix B)document.
Timing of Redevelopment Projects
There are three major projects that will continue to affect the Parking Fund in the next few years:
the Garden Street Terraces project, the Chinatown project, and the Palm-Nipomo parking structure
project. The Garden Street Terraces and Chinatown projects redevelop city-owned parking lots
creating a loss of parking supply while increasing parking demand downtown. This will trigger the
need for the City to construct the Palm-Nipomo parking structure so there is not a substantial loss of
available downtown parking. Since it is difficult for staff to anticipate exactly when they will occur,
staff has based the Parking Fund forecasts on the soonest timeframe that they could occur. If the
projects occur later, then it will only benefit the parking fund during this forecast period. Both the
Garden Street Terraces and the Chinatown projects are forecast in January 2013 with the Palm-
Nipomo parking structure forecast to start construction in 2014-15 and open in 2015-16.
Downtown Access Pass(formerly Gold Pass)
For the past two years the Parking Fund has allocated $10,500 annually for bus passes for
downtown employees. Due to rebranding efforts (Gold Pass) that started in 2009-10 along with
Regional Rideshare advertising and higher gasoline costs, the SLO Transit ridership(and use of the
pass) has dramatically increased. Projected SLO Transit ridership for 2009-11 was for 8,000 riders
annually. Based on current ridership, staff forecasts almost double the ridership at 14,000 riders in
2010-11. With ridership nearly doubling earlier forecasts, staff recommends the original allocation
of$10,500 annually be augmented by an additional $9,500; making a total annual Parking Fund
allocation of$20,000 annually.
Staff is recommending Council approve the$20,000 annually as an expense from the Parking Fund,
for both 2011-12 and 2012-13,to fully fund the existing SLO Transit Downtown Access Pass
PH4-4
2011 Parking Fund Review Page 5
program.The Preliminary Financial Plan and attached Parking Fund Analysis includes$10,500
expenses but not the additional $9,500 needed to support the program.
Response to Council Member Ideas and Questions_
After the April 5, 2011 City Council meeting approving Sunday parking services higher rate credit
card-accepting parking meters,Council Member Carter sent an email to staff concerning several
ideas and questions about downtown parking. Staff was asked to provide responses to those
questions as part of this report. Council Member Carter's email and staff s responses are found as
an attachment to this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
Attached to this report is a detailed analysis of the Parking Fund revenues, expenditures, and
changes in financial position, including the key assumptions used in preparing this review.
Consistent with the analysis presented to the Council in the Preliminary 201.1-13 budget there is
sufficient funding for the operations, capital projects, and debt service needs of the Parking Fund.
ALTERNATIVE
Council at its discretion can adopt all or part of the of the requested significant operating program
changes, capital improvement projects,or revenue enhancements presented in this report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2011-13 Parking Fund Analysis
2. Resolution approving Sunday hours in City parking structures
3. Resolution approving new parking fines and revenue enhancements
4. Response to Council Member Carter's Email
TABudget Folders\2011-13 Financial PlanTnterose Fund Woildng Capital\Pa&ng\CAR 2011-13 Pkg Fund Review.DOC
PH4-5
ATTACHMENT 1
Parking Enterprise Fund
2011-13 Financial Plan
2011-12 Budget
Parking Enterprise Fund
Fund Analysis
June 14, 2011
PH4-6
' Attachment 1
Page 2
2011-13 Parking Fund
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW
II. 2011-13 FINANCIAL PLAN
A. Summary of Operating Programs
B. Operating Cost Reductions
C. Capital Improvement Plan Requests
D. Debt Service Payments
III. ASSUMPTIONS
IV. EXHIBIT A—2011-13 FINANCIAL SCHEDULE
PH4-7
I
Attachment 1
Page 3
city of
�� san LUIS ow Spo
2011-13 Parking Fund Report
I. OVERVIEW
This report presents the financial condition of the Parking Fund, based on the draft 2011-13
Financial Plan operating program budgets, and recommends program and capital requests to
address the identified needs in the Parking and Access Plan. The Chinatown and Garden Street
Terraces projects have been programmed into this budget cycle, however these projects may or
may not occur in the time frames projected or may change during the approval process and
environmental review stages. The Palm-Nipomo parking structure has also been programmed
into the second to last year of report, 2014-15. During the same year the debt service for the 842
Palm Street and original Marsh Street structures conclude.
II. 2011-13 FINANCIAL PLAN
A. Summary of Operating Programs
2011-12 2012-13
BUDGET BUDGET
Staffing 1,175,200 1,186,300
Contract Services 584,500 609,600
Other Operating Expenses 192,300 188,000
Minor Capital 0 0
Total Parking Services 1,952,000 1,983,900
Operating cost information is provided on page D-83 to D-85 of the 2011-13 Preliminary
Financial Plan.
B. Significant Operating Program Change Requests
2011-12 2012-13
BUDGET BUDGET
Major City Goal-.Neighborhood Wellness 24,200 38,000
Sunday Parking Services&Super Core Meters 73,800 72,400
Parking Transportation Planning Staff 64,700 64,900
Total Parking Services 162,700 175;300
Significant Operating Program Change Requests information can be found on pages 70 to 84 of
Appendix A to the 2011-13 Preliminary Financial Plan.
PH4-8
( J Attachment 1
Page 4
C. Capital Improvement Projects
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET
Parking Lot Resurfacing(lots 2,3,11) 20,000 95,000
Marsh Street Parking Structure Painting 175,000
Replace Go-4-Enforcement Vehicles 60,000
IT City Website Upgrade 1,300
IT MS Office Replacement 5,000
Credit Card Meters 222,300
IT Firewall 5,000
IT Web filter/Security 3,100
IT-Network Equip.Replacement 9,500
Radio Replacement(handheld&mobile) 9;500
Palm Nipomo Construction 20,000,000
Debt Service Projections in Out Years* 71,500 299,100
228,600 195,000 234,600 20,019,000 299,100
*Fieldman Rolap&Associates(FILO)used a base projected amount of$200,000 annually for capital project calculations plus
CPI. For the"out years"staff used FRA's projections with an adjustment for known capital projects.
CIP project descriptions are provided in Appendix B, pages 3-207 to 3-216 of 2011-13
Preliminary Financial Plan..
D. Debt Service
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET
842 Palm&Marsh until Jun 2014 509,700 507,500 510,100 0 0
Marsh Expansion until Aug 1031 423,700 423,000 422,200 421,400 425,800
919 Palm until Jun 2036 539,300 540,000 540,400 537,847 538,100
Pahn-Nipomo(14MR) until 2045 1,500,000
Dispatch Center Upgrade until Jun 2039 10,000 9,900 9,900 _ 9,900_ _ 9,900
1,482,700 1,480,400 1,482,600 969,147 2,473,800
III. ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions have been programmed into the long term forecast of the Parking
Fund. The Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects impact three of the City's parking
lots. The dates of when these projects occur are staff's estimate of the soonest they could occur.
If they occur later than projected it will allow for additional revenues to accumulate for the Fund.
General Assumptions
1. Minimum working capital (reserve) should equal at least 20% of the total Operating
Program expenditures according to the City's fiscal policy and Standard and Poor's rating
criteria.
Parking Lots
1. Assumes a conservative 1%growth in parking demand.
PH4-9
Attachment 1
Page 5
2. Assumes increases to parking meter rates for lots 2, 3, 4, and 11 in 2011-12 from$1.25 to
$1.50 (20% increase) and assumes additional revenue of approximately 20% with the
meters that accept credit cards. (Approved by City Council on April 5, 2011).
3. Assumes expansion of Sunday parking services beginning in 2011-12. (Approved by City
Council on April 5, 2011).
4. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2015-16, and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
adjustments.
5. The MOA between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P.,
dated September 7, 2010 assumes that all parking spaces for Lot 2 will be eliminated
when the project begins. The soonest this will occur is January 2013. All direct revenues
will cease for this location in January 2013.
6. Parking revenues from Lot 3 and 11 will cease due to Chinatown Project construction
(assumed to begin January 2013) according to the "Second Modification to Option to
Purchase Real Property" between the City of San Luis Obispo and SLO Chinatown, LLC,
dated July 1, 2008.
7. It is anticipated that some of the drivers who would have parked in Lots 2, 3, and 11 will
instead park in garages due to the loss of lot parking spots. With the first hour free policy
in garages, it is anticipated that only 50% of the revenues formally tied to lots 2, 3, and
1.1 will be retained through garage parking fees.
8. Parking revenues from Lot 14 will cease due to the construction of the Palm-Nipomo
parking structure in 2014-15.
9. It is anticipated that the drivers who park in Lot 14 will shift to buying 10 Hour Meter
Permits when Palm-Nipomo construction begins on the site of Lot 14 in 2014-15.
Street Parking
1. Assumes a conservative I% growth in parking demand.
2. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2015-16, and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
adjustments.
3. Assumes increases to parking meter rates for lots approximately 180 on-street meters in
2011-12 from $1.25 to $1.50 (20% increase) and assumes additional revenue of
approximately 20%with the meters that accept credit cards. (Approved by City Council
on April 5, 201.1).
4. Assumes expansion of Sunday parking services beginning in 2011-12. (Approved by City
Council on April 5, 2011)
Parking Structures
1. Assumes a conservative I% growth in parking demand.
2. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2015-16, and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
adjustments.
3.. Assumes expansion of Sunday parking services beginning in 2011-12. (Approved by City
Council on April 5, 2011)
4. It is anticipated that some of the drivers who would have parked in Lots 2, 3, and 11 will
instead park in garages due to the loss of lot parking spots. Due to the first hour free
policy in garages, it is anticipated that only 50%of the revenues formerly tied to lots 2, 3,
and 11 will be retained through garage parking fees.
5. Additional revenues for the Palm-Nipomo parking structure is estimated at$320,000
beginning in 2015-16.
PH4-10
Attachment t
Page 6
Long Term Parking
1. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand.
2. 10% rate increases are assumed for 2015-16, and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
adjustments.
3. 10-hour meter permit fees increase by $13,100 for lost parking in Lot 14.
4. 10-hour residential permits will increase by $5,060 beginning in 2011-12.
5. Commercial Loading Zone permits will increase by $1,785 beginning in 2011-12.
6. Residential permit district permits will increase by $15,120 beginning in 2011-12
Parking Leases
1. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand.
2. Lease revenue of approximately $2,000 a year for trash leases in parking lot 2 will cease
beginning in January 2013 due to the Garden Street Terraces Project. ($1,000 in 2012-13
and $1,000 in 2013-14).
3. Section 16 of the MOA between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO
Partners, L.P. dated September 7, 2010 states that the Parking Fund will loan the
developer $2.4 Million in 2012-13. In 2012-13,the developer will begin repayment to
the City Parking Fund by paying approximately $165,000 per year for 30 years.
4. An increase in lease revenues for 610 Monterey is estimated at $15,900 annually,
including minor expenses and costs for the Housing Authority, beginning in 2009-10.
Parking In-Lieu
1. Garden Street in-lieu fees are a result of lost parking spots due to the Garden Street
Terraces Project. Section 14 of the MOA between the City of San Luis Obispo and
Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P., dated September 7, 2010, states that the parking in-lieu
fee will be $1,860,000 (62 parking spaces x $30,000/parking space) for the spaces lost
due to the Garden Street Terrace Project. Estimated to occur in 2012-13.
2. Chinatown In-Lieu Fees are a result of lost parking spots due to the Chinatown Project.
According to the Second Modification to Option to Purchase Real Property, dated July 1,
2008,the EIR mitigation measure for loss of the parking spots is approximately
$2,600,000. Estimated to occur in 2012-13..
3. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9960, Section 4 states that the parking in-lieu fee will be
adjusted on July 1 of each year by the annual percentage change in the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics consumer price index for all urban consumers for the prior calendar year.
For 2011-12 and 2012-13 a 2% increase is assumed, 1.5%for 2013-14, 2% for 2014-15
and 2.5% for 2015-16. The one-time payment for the replacement of the on-site public
parking removed for Garden Street Terrace Project in Lot 2 is not adjusted by CPI
according to clause 14 of the Memorandum of Agreement. The one-time payment for the
replacement of public parking removed for the Chinatown Project is adjusted by CPI
according to Clause 3 section C of the Second Modification to the Option Agreement.
Investment Earnings
1. Assumes projected interest earnings of 2% annually.
Parking Fines
1. Transfer of parking fines to the Police Department is approximately $94,000 annually.
2. State and County surcharges of$13 per paid parking citation is added then deducted from
fine revenues.
PH4-11
Attachment 1
Page 7
3. A total 9% decrease in fine revenues is due to loss of parking spaces resulting from the
construction of the Garden Street Terraces Project starting in January 2013. The decrease
is 4.5% in 2012-13 and 4.5% in 2013-14.
4. A total 9%decrease in fine revenues due to loss of parking spots resulting from the
construction of the Chinatown Project starting in January 2013. The decrease is 4.5% in
2012-13 and 4.5% in 2013-14.
5. A total 4%decrease in fine revenues due to the loss of Lot 14 for the construction of
Palm-Nipomo parking structure in 2014-15.
6. 10%rate increases is assumed for 2015-16, and every 3 years thereafter for periodic rate
adjustments.
7. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand.
8. Overtime parking violations will increase fine revenues by $700 beginning in 2011-12.
9. Adoption of§40226 CVC will increase fine revenues by $1,250 beginning in 2011-12.
10. Parking fines attributed to the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal will provide
$15,300 in 2011-12 and $22,900 in 2012-13.
New Demand & Residential
1. Based on proposed new projects in downtown San Luis Obispo as provided by the
Planning Department, actual land uses are run through a demand model and are reduced
by parking available on site.
2. The average rate for the prior 3 years of roughly $1.00 per vehicle in structures, assumed
new demand will either compress existing demand or go directly to the structures.
3. The scheduled rate increase in 2011-12 and the subsequent increases of 10% every three
years beginning in 2014-15 are assumed in the new demand.
4. It is estimated that there is a base number of 500 parkers in the residential areas
surrounding the downtown, assumes 5% capture in the City's facilities, times 12 months
(500*0.05*12=300).
5. Assumes that monthly parking will be moved into the structures at a rate of $75 per
month.
6. Due to the downturn in the economy the new demand and residential impacts are
anticipated to begin in 2013-14.
Transportation & General Government Expenses
1. Transportation expenses increase by $64,700 for one-half of the staffing of the Public
Works Transportation Planner position beginning in 2011-12.
2. Transportation expenses will increase by $24,200 in 2011-12 and $38,000 in 2012-13 for
the part-time parking officer for the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Council Goal.
3. Transportation expenses will increase by $73,800 in 2011-12 and $72,400 in 2012-13 for
expansion of Sunday parking services and for the 400 new credit card meters in the heart
of the downtown.
4. Transportation expenses attributed to parking lot 2 will decrease by $11,500 in 2012-13
and by $17,500 in 2013-14 thereafter.
5. Transportation expenses attributed to parking lots 3 and 11 will decrease by $11,100 in
2012-13 and $16,900 in 2013-14 thereafter.
6. Transportation expenses attributed to parking lot 14 will decrease by $6,300 in 2014-15
and thereafter.
7. Cost adjustments reflect projected annual CPI increases.
8. Transportation expenses for the Palm-Nipomo parking structure are estimated at
$192,700 beginning in 2015-16.
PH4-12
Attachment 1
Page 8
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Expenses
1. The CIP is based on specific project requests for 2011-13 as set forth in Appendix B.
2. 2014-15 includes a $6,000,000 contribution from working capital for the construction of
Palm-Nipomo and the $14,000,000 in net proceeds from the Palm-Nipomo Bond
Issuance.
3. Percentage expense increases per year are based on the historical annual percentage
change in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. In 2009-10 and
2010-11 are assumed to experience 2%. For 2011-12 onward, a very conservative 4%
expense increase per year is assumed(based on the 20 year historical average of the
Consumer Price Index of 3%, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,plus an
additional cushion of 1%).
Debt Service
1. Assumes a 30-year level debt service at 7%, no capitalized interest, net proceeds of
$14,000,000 and bond issuance on 11/1/2014. First interest payment is due 6/1/2015 and first
principal payment is due 12/1/2015.
PH4-13
Attachment 1
Page 9
EXHIBIT A
2011-13 PARKING FUND
FINANCIAL SCHEDULES
PH4-14
ATTACHMENT 1
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O
Q O o 0 0 0 M 0 M 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 O O O
N .--� •-• �D O� M •.• e+1 .• O O V v1 D\ V •-• oo M O� oo O�
o-Err N •--� o0 N �D O N t- V) Vi N o0 0 M •--� V1 00 N
Y 1%� y M •--� M V •--� N %D M m �o ON Vl 00 M O\ r-. •-+ •--� •--� O
�o. V V V O — �D '» O, N Vl 00 N 7 �D %D N �D
p[! N a •--' V N N N t v •--�
W
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000 O 00 O O O
%n y 00 V1 O N 01 ON V �o V) 00 M V n — O •-• N O N N I- V) 00
�iV V ., O V O --� Imo. •--� V 00 N N 0 •--� 0 O\ O\ O •--7 --� V1� V 00
4 O N %0 , O 00 N O Mr- •--� M •--� �0 00 -• �o �o O V1 V1 00 O •--�
•r •° •--� O V M 01' — W) N Cl V1 V1 O al wl O O N. V) N
N a N N v
64
O O O 0 0 0 C. 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl O O O O O
O O O O Cl O Cl O O O O Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
V y N O O N — V -•• O N �o l- h N V) n �o �c O\ N n r N h
r-7 tz -Z O O7 �D O i6 lz �D V N M O O �6 V
~ U M V1 O 00 [- N l- oo 01 l- N [- h M M 00 V) Vl Vl ll 00 O
N G4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 C. 0 Cl 0 Cl 0 0 Cl O O O O O O O O O O (D O O
M d' M ll- V1 V M N -+ h �o V1 �o 0% M N Cl v �c V) N M l� V1 N
u �o •-• M %0 O O 00 O� M 0� M V) O 00 1, O ll M r •--�
N Y Vl M 00 00 t- 00 .--. ON V1 Vl 00 V M 01 00 O 1, V1 N N Vl 00
.r •° M V 00 M M V 01 %o �o O% V) Vl -• ',t N M M •-+ V V�
N �y •-• 7 r 00 N V .N.. v N Il %
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
O
N 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 Cl C. 0 0 C. 0 0 O O O O O
N O N �c N O •-• M 00 ON O O M M..�o n �o . n n c� V V1
00 0 V O� O N Vj O O\ N cp .ti o0 N N lz
N y O Vl �o l- -+ (V V V O 00 %n V O N 00 l- M V1
N •° Vl M ll M O Os V1 n N V N `-' V)
Na --� M V •--� N --� V V
O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Cl O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O
'O vt 00 V
p •5
ON 00 O l� en O N V N N N V " �D Mo 00 O r- eq
rr W M •--� M N 00 00 •--� %0 %0 [- VI N IT M [- N to h
N a --• N M -+ N N --• �6 N n V
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
CD .-• Q' [-- M a0 00 �o �o N VI M O\ Vw R N O 1 N N ON m 00
N M O� V N O�'V1 N O 06 M o0 N O N V [z OV O
M
V --� V O -+ � O O� Qi 00 O M V O N b -�
O U M l— M N 00 N �c n b-V1 V) l� N N
Q
W
Or � � y �• h m •gyp
L` .aj
>/
Irl U
p 2 U to y oq a� f� a a
5 � cn
w° z0 a wa oa U
•o
eq � U coCi o
vdw om WE G
W L PC W
ua a � � a„ O 5HC7 � °
_ y d o Nov
v V 0 . C a d os es
W Z ° a D c " ?3 m U U
0
E= � w0 � � UA rAP. 0a. a, W
e
v • ►•
PH4-15
ATTACHMENT 2
� U
RESOLUTION NO. (2011 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING PARKING
FEES AND HOURS OF OPERATION IN THE CITY'S PARKING STRUCTURES;
AND REPEALING INCONSISTENT HOURS OF OPERATION
AND FEES IN PRIOR RESOLUTIONS
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo wishes to maintain effective usage of its three
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide secure and user friendly parking for all users of the
parking structures, and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the Parking Revenue Enhancements staff report and held
a public meeting on the proposed changes to the parking structure rates and hours of operation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as
follows:
SECTION 1. Parking structure rates and.hours of operation are hereby modified as follows:
1) Effective July 1, 2011;
a) Modify the hours of operation at all parking structures to include Sundays from 1:00
PM to 6:00 PM; and
b) The hours of operation for 842 Palm and 919 Palm structures shall be from 8:00 AM to
7:00 PM, Monday through Wednesday, and from 8:00 AM to 11:00 PM Thursday
through Saturday; and
c) The hours of operation for the Marsh Street structure shall be from 8:00 AM to 10:00
PM, Monday through Wednesday, and from 8:00 AM to 11:00 PM Thursday through
Saturday.
SECTION 2. Effective July 1, 2011, all hourly parking structure rates shall remain at $0.75
an hour, including Sundays,with the first hour free.
SECTION 3. Effective July 1, 2011, the maximum daily parking structure rate shall remain at
$7.50 per day, Monday through Saturday and$3.75 per day on Sundays.
R Page 2 of 2
PH4-16
ATTACHMENT 2
Upon motion of seconded by and on the
following vote:
AYES`:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 32011.
Mayor Jan Howell Marx
ATTEST
Elaina Cano
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO F
stine Dietrick
City Attorney
R Page 2 of 2
PH4-17
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO. (2011 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INCREASING
PARKING CITATION FINES; ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE FEE PER
CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTION 40226; INCREASING 10-HOUR
RESIDENTIAL METER PERMIT AND COMMERCIAL LOADING ZONE PERMIT
COSTS; AND SUPERSEDING INCONSISTENT FEES AND FINES IN PRIOR
RESOLUTIONS
WHEREAS, State law provides, in Vehicle Code Section 40203.5, that cities establish the
amount of parking penalties, fees, and surcharges; and
WHEREAS, State law authorizes the City to recover administrative fees, parking penalties,
fees and collection costs related to civil debt collection, late payment penalties, and other related
charges; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide secure and user friendly parking for all users of the
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the Parking Revenue Enhancements staff report and held
a public meeting on the proposed changes to the parking citation fines and the establishment of
additional fees.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as
follows:
SECTION 1. Effective July 1, 2011, parking fines shall be modified (see Exhibit A) as
follows:
a) Increase overtime parking violation(SLOMC Section 10.040.010) from $33 to $38;
b) Increase restricted parking violation(SLOMC Section 10.036.235) from$28 to $33.
SECTION 2. Effective July 1, 2011, there is hereby:
a) Established an administrative fee of twenty-five dollars($25) to process cancellation of
a citation for failure to display a disabled placard.in any case where the individual who
receives a citation can show proof that he or she had been issued a valid placard at the
time the citation was received. (CVC 40226 - Failure to Display Disabled Placard.
Administrative Charge)
SECTION 3. Effective July 1, 2011, increase the cost of a 10-Hour Residential Permit from
$5 year to $120 year.
SECTION 4. Effective July 1, 2011, increase the Commercial Loading Zone Permit from $25
year to $60 year.
PH4-18
O ATTACHMENT 3
Upon motion of , seconded by and
on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,2011.
Mayor Jan Howell Marx
ATTEST
Elaina Cano
City Clerk
O AS TO F
Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
PH4-19
- ATTACHMENT 3
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PENALTY SCHEDULE
REV.6/14111 EFFECTIVE DATE:JULY 1,2011
CODE S SECTION DESCRIPTION PENALTY
SLMC 10.12.050 INTERFERENCE WITH POLICE/AUTHORIZED OFFICER 93
SLMC 10.14.030 OBEDIENCE TO TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 58
SLMC 10.14.090 UNAUTHORIZED PAINTING ON CURBS 58
SLMC 10.36.020 STOPPING OR STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED 33
SLMC 10.36.030 STOP/STAND/PARK IN VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 33
SLMC 10.36.040 NO PARKING ZONE-PROHIBITED PARKING-Also Taxi Zone(d) 53
SLMC 10.36.050 USE OF STREETS FOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES PROHIBITED 23
SLMC 10.36.070 REPAIRING OR GREASING VEHICLE ON PUBLIC STREET 23
SLMC 10.36.080 WASHING OR POLISHING VEHICLES 23
SLMC 10.36.090 PARKING ADJACENT TO SCHOOLS 23
SLMC 10.36.100 PARKING PROHIBITED ON NARROW STREETS 23
SLMC 10.36.110 PARKING ON GRADES 23
SLMC 10.36.120 UNLAWFUL PARKING-PEDDLERS,VENDORS 23
SLMC 10.36.130 EMERGENCY PARKING SIGNS 23
SLMC 10.36.140 LARGE/COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING NEAR INTERSECTION 23
SLMC 10.36.150 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF LARGE VEHICLES 23
SLMC 10.36.160 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF VEH W/OPERATING AIR/REFRIGERATION 23
SLMC 10.36.200 PARKING IN A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING AREA 38
SLMC 10.36.230 PERMITS-DISPLAY OF PERMITS(Restricted Parking) 33'
SLMC 10.36.233 PARKING IN YARD 48
SLMC 10.36.235 NO PERMIT LOT 28
SLMC 10.40.010 TIMED PARKING 10 MINUTES TO 10 HOURS(Overtime Parking) 38i
SLMC 10.40.020 BACKING INTO PARKING SPACE PROHIBITED 28
SLMC 10.40.040 PARKING PARALLEL ON ONE-WAY STREETS 21
SLMC 10.40.050 DIAGONAL PARKING 21
SLMC 10.40.060 PARKING SPACE MARKINGS 33
SLMC 10.40.070 NO STOPPING ZONE 21
SLMC 10.40.080 ALL NIGHT PARKING PROHIBITED(3-5am) 38
SLMC 10.44.020 CURB MARKING TO INDICATE NO STOPPING/PARKING REGS.. 23
SLMC 10.44.030 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN YELLOW ZONE 53
SLMC 10.44.040 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN WHITE ZONE 33
SLMC 10.44.050 STANDING IN ANY ALLEY 33
SLMC 10.44.070 HANDICAPPED PARKING 288
SLMC 10.48.010 CERTAIN VEHICLES PROHIBITED IN CENTRAL DISTRICT 58
SLMC 10.48.020 ADVERTISING VEHICLES 33
SLMC 10.48.030 ANIMAL DRAWN VEHICLES 33
SLMC 10.48.040 TRUCK ROUTES 88
SLMC 10.48.050 COMM.VEHICLES PROHIBITED FROM USING CERTAIN STREETS 88
SLMC 10.48.060 MAX.GROSS WT.LIMITS OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN STREETS 88
SLMC 10.52.040 PARKING METERS-OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 23
SLMC 10.52.050 UNLAWFUL TO PARK AFTER METER TIME HAS EXPIRED 33
SLMC 10.52.060 UNLAWFUL TO EXTEND TIME BEYOND LIMIT 15
SLMC 10.52.070 IMPROPER USE OF METER 15
SLMC 10.52.080 PARKING METERS/STANDARDS-PROPER USE 15
SLMC 10.52.110 MOTORCYCLE SPACES 15
CVC 5204(a)' CURRENT TAB IMPROPERLY ATTACHED "114
CVC 21113(a) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-MOVING 116
Page 1
PH4-20
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PENALTY SCHEDULE
REV.6/14111 EFFECTIVE DATE:JULY 1,2011
CODE&SECTION DESCRIPTION PENALTY
CVC 21113(b) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-PARKING 33
CVC 21113(c) DRIVEWAYS, PATHS,PARKING FACILITIES ON GROUNDS 33
CVC 22500.1 STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: FIRE LANE 116
CVC 22500(a) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: WITHIN INTERSECTION 33
CVC 22500(b) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON A CROSSWALK 33
CVC 22500(c) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: BETWEEN SAFETY ZONE 33
CVC 22500(d) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: W/IN 15' FIREHOUSE ENTRANCE 33
CVC 22500(e) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: PUBLIC/PRIVATE"DRIVEWAY 33
CVC 22500(f) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON SIDEWALK 33
CVC 22500(g) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ALONG/OPPOSITE OBSTRUCT 33
CVC 22500(h) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON ROADWAY SIDE OF VEHICLE 33
CVC 22500(i) IMPROPER PARKING IN BUS ZONE 263
CVC 225000) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: IN TUBE OR TUNNEL 33
CVC 22500(k) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: UPON BRIDGE EXCEPT AUTH 33
CVC 22500(1) IMPROPER PARKING IN WHEELCHAIR ACCESS 263
CVC 22502(a) CURB PARKING 33
CVC 22502(b) PARKING OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC 33
CVC 22502(c) CURB PARKING-WHEELS MORE THAN 18 INCHES FROM CURB 33
CVC 22504(a) UNINCORPORATED AREA PARKING 33
CVC 22505(a) PARKING ON STATE HIGHWAY WHERE SIGN POSTED 33
CVC 22505(b) POSTED NO PARKING-STATE HIGHWAY 33
CVC 22507 UNLAWFUL PARKING 33
CVC 22507.8(a) PARKING IN SPACEFOR HANDICAPPED 288
CVC 22507.8(b) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-OBSTRUCT/BLOCK 288
CVC 22507.8(c)(1) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-ON LINES MARKED 288
CVC 22507.8(c)(2) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-PARKING LOT 288
CVC 22510 PARKING IN SNOW REMOVAL AREAS 33
CVC 22511.7 HANDICAP ZONE 288
CVC 22512 VEHICLE UNATTENDED 116
CVC 22513 TOW CARS-PARKING ON FREEWAY 33
CVC 22514 FIRE HYDRANTS 63
CVC 22515(a) UNATTENDED VEHICLES-SET BRAKES/STOP MOTOR 33
CVC 22515(b) UNATTENDED VEHICLES-SET BRAKES/WHEELS/PREVENT MOVE 33
CVC 22516 LOCKED VEHICLE 116
CVC 22517 OPENING AND CLOSING DOORS 116
CVC 22520.5 VENDING ON FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY 116
CVC 22520.5(a) VENDING ON FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY 116
CVC 22521 ILLEGAL TO PARK ON RAILROAD TRACKS 33
CVC 22522 PARKING NEAR SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS 288
CVC 22523(a) VEHICLE ABANDONMENT-On Highway 283
CVC 22523(b) VEHICLE ABANDONMENT 283
CVC 22650 UNLAWFUL REMOVAL OF UNATTENDED VEHICLE 116
CVC 22651(b) VEHICLE PARKED/LEFT STANDING TO OBSTRUCT TRAFFIC 116
CVC 40225" PROCESSING OTHER VIOLATIONS _ '10
CVC 40226' FAILURE TO DISPLAY DISABLED PLACARD-ADMINISTRATIVE FEE '"25
LATE PAYMENT PENALTY 30
Fine or fee amounts are set by the Uniform Bail&Penalty Schedule or by speck CVC section
All other fine amounts set by City Council pursuant to CVC 40203.5
Page 2
PH4-21
ATTACHMENT 4
council memoizanbum
June 14,2011
TO: City Council
FROM: Jay D. Walter, Public Works Director
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
SUBJECT: Response to Councilman Carter's Parking Follow-up Email
After the April 5, 2011 City Council meeting when the Council considered and approved
charging for parking on Sundays and a higher core meter rate with credit card meters, Staff
received an email from Council Member Carter with many questions related to parking in the
Downtown. Staff agreed to provide a response to those questions as part of the Parking Fund
review on June 14, 2011. Below is Council Member Carter's email and following that is staff's
response to those questions and ideas.
From: Carter,Andrew
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 20111:16 PM
To: Walter,Jay
Cc: Lichtig, Katie
Subject: Parking follow-up
This is my follow-up from the 04/05 meeting. I will undoubtedly raise these issues when we do the
annual Parking Fund review.
1) Parking keys. For those meters which will not get the credit card upgrade, I continue to believe that
we need to publicize ON THE METER the ability to use parking keys. I continue to envision a sticker that
encircles the parking key hole. It could say something like, "Use the parking key. Call xxx-yyyy." (Hint.
"Continue" means I've recommended this numerous times to Bob.)
FYI, I believe we should provide a discount for parking keys. Perhaps 10%. In other words, pay$45 and
get$50 worth of parking. Full disclosure, I have a vested interest in recommending this since my wife is
a parking key fan.
2) On-going review of where we have meters and where we don't and what zone they are in. For
example, which areas are free parking vs. which are 10-hour vs. which are 2-hour vs. which are "super
core."Also, where we have 30-minute meters vs. where we don't.This on-going review should be based
on occupancy rates. As you know, I would like staff to be proactive in continually looking at these issues
and making adjustments based on the data. I'm not always convinced this proactive review is taking
place.
Specific questions/suggestions -- Both sides of Pismo in front of Grace Church? Elsewhere along Mitchell
Park?The no meber block of Pacific between Osos and Santa Rosa --why? 10 hour zone in front of Jack
House in what is otherwise a 2-hour zone--why? (It's probably being done for the benefit of docents.
That's probably the wrong reason since anyone else can park there.)Are meters needed so far down
Higuera toward the merge with Marsh? Should Osos between Palm &Monterey, Monterey between Santa
Rosa &Osos, Marsh between Garden &Chorro, and Higuera between Broad &Nipomo be super core?
PH4-22
ATTACHMENT 4
Response to Councilman Carter's Parking Follow-up Email Page 2
Should Pismo between Osos& Broad or Nipomo be 10-hour instead of free? (I'm not sure it actually is all
free parking, but that's what the parking guide shows.) Should Pacific between Nipomo and Beach and
Nipomo between Pacific&Pismo be 10-hour instead of free?
3) Lot 15 and Lot 9 should be 2-hour lots, not 10-hour.The art center and history center employees &
docents who use these lots because they are 10-hour should be using Lot 14 instead. Lot 15 &Lot 9, by
their location, are too "valuable"to be have 10-hour use. Also, the "free spaces" in Lot 15 for the art
center should be moved to Lot 14 for the exact same reasons.
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obispo
Staffs Response on Councilmember Carter's parking follow up ideas and questions.
1. Parking Key Stickers
We concur that marketing the meter key is important. Many cities advertize their meter
keys with stickers on the meter but they do not have as many stickers on their meters as
we do. In addition to rate and time information posted on the inside of the meter, stickers
are posted on the outside of the meter identifying towing provisions as well as hours and
days of operation. Additionally, stickers are posted on meters and.meter poles restricting
parking on Thursday evening for Farmer's Market. Finally, every Thursday additional
rubber banded paper notices are posted for Farmer's Market because many motorists are
overlooking the Thursday evening restrictions. We have received customer feedback that
there is too much information on the meter making it confusing to the public. Adding
more information would increase the overload of information.
Our biggest "marketing" tool for meter keys has been our staff interaction with the
public. All of the Parking staff have meter keys and when we see people struggling to
pay meters we put time on the meter and show them the key. Also if someone is issued a
parking citation we have the meter key system on our front counter to show them a tool
for not getting a citation. During the holidays we promote the meter key as a gift idea
and give free decorative bags. The Downtown Association assists us in getting the word
out about the keys.
Lastly,staff is reluctant to purchase, apply, and maintain more meter stickers to promote
the meter key when we are having difficulty purchasing key inventory from the company
(our last order took one year to be filled) and we anticipate that the credit card meters will
become the preferred meter paying option as other cities are experiencing.
a. Discounting the meter keys
Staff has not proposed discounting the meter keys for two reasons. First, the City's
parking rate pricing strategy has been to make on-street parking more expensive to
encourage motorists to park in the City's parking structures. Discounting the meter
key would work in opposition to this strategy.
Second, the City's cost for the keys continues to rise and staff has been reluctant to
pass that cost on to the customer because the additional cost could discourage meter
key use. We charge a$17 dollar refundable deposit for new keys now. That cost used
PH4-23
ATTACHMENT 4
Response to Councilman Carter's Parking Follow-up Email Page 3
to cover the City's cost to purchase the key. Our costs have increased now to $24 a
key. Due to delays in getting keys and the economy, staff decided to keep the deposit
at the lower amount with the Parking Fund currently subsidizing$8 for each key.
The primary benefits of the keys are ease of use, lowering the likelihood of a ticket,
and reductions in coin processing. However the cost savings for these benefits would
be small and would not offset the reduced revenue resulting from a discount program.
2. On-going review of locations of meters.
Staff consistently monitors parking use in and around downtown and makes minor
adjustments accordingly. As part of the annual review of the Parking Fund, staff brings
larger issues to the City Council for its direction. Our meter tracking software tracks the
meter rate, the hourly time limit, and the type of meter it is to a specific meter location.
The only thing we lack is an up to date map of locations. The current map we have is not
up to date for recent changes because we held off from updates.anticipating the loss of
Lots 3 & 1 I and Lot 2. Because the Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects have
been delayed, updating the map with current meters zones and time limits will be
undertaken next fiscal year.
a. Why there are no meters across from Grace Church and elsewhere around
Mitchell Park?
Sometime before the current Parking Manager was hired in 2003, parking meters
were installed on Pismo Street across from Grace Church but they were removed
soon after because the park users objected to paying for parking. Staff replaced the
meters with time zones on all streets surrounding the park except for Osos Street to
discourage downtown employee parking.
b. Why no meters on Pacific between Osos and Santa Rosa?
Staff previously recommended this street be metered in 2006 however metering was
not pursued by the City Council because of push back by residents and businesses on
this block.
c. Why is there a 10 hour zone on Marsh in front of the Jack House?
The 10-hour zone was put in to address the lack of long term parking in this section
of downtown. It was not put in for docents or City staff working at the Jack House.
Parking Services received complaints from employees about the lack of long-term
parking for employees. Businesses in this location did not want the time limits
changed in front of their side of the street because they wanted turn over for
customers. Staff working with all of the stakeholders in the vicinity created the 10-
hour zone as a compromise. Employees can purchase monthly and quarter 10-hour
permits for$40/month and park near their work location.
d. Are meters needed on Higuera near the merge of Marsh Street?
Although parking demand has diminished due to the recession, there is still activity
that benefits from charging for parking in the area. If meters are removed it will be
parked all day by those who do not want to pay for parking. This would reduce
turnover and therefore staff has not recommended their removal at this time.
PH4-24
ATTACHMENT 4
Response to Councilman Carter's Parking Follow-up Email Page 4
Additions and removal of streets within the City's parking meter zone require an
ordinance change approved by City Council. This specific location can be removed
from the metered zone if City Council has a noticed hearing to remove it. Staff does
not recommend removing meters along this stretch of Higuera.
e. Should various streets be added to the super core?
No. These locations were approved by the City Council on April 5, 2011. Staff will.
continue to monitor the super core locations and make recommendations to add or
remove locations once the new meters are in and the adjustment period has taken
place.
L Should other blocks on Pismo, Pacific, and Nipomo be metered and not be free?
Not necessarily. In 2006 meters were added to Pismo Street with the goal of better
managing downtown parking and generating more revenue for the Palm Nipomo
Structure. Unfortunately as a result, this block is now under-parked and staff believes
the motorists moved their parking into the unmetered Old Towne residential area.
Because of this, staff has not recommended these additional streets for metering.
3. Lots 9 and 15 time limits from 10-hour to 2-hour.
Staff supports keeping lots 9 and 15 at the current 10-hour limit at this time due to the
type of parking demand currently found in this area. These locations are being used for
long-term parking by employees and business owners in this area of downtown. The on-
street meters in the same vicinity have 2-hour time limits and available spaces have been
observed during the day. As with other parking strategies, the meters on the street have
the highest demand, then the demand lessens in lots, and lastly to structures. The long-
term parking demand is currently in the parking lot and not on the street so staff believes
these lots have the appropriate time limit at this time. Once the Palm-Nipomo structure is
built and parking habits re-adjust then it would be appropriate to consider this change.
File pathTABudget Foldcn\2011-13 Financial Plan\Enterpise Fund Working Capital\ParkingWtt 4 Caner Response.doe
PH4-25
RED FILE
e MEETING AGENDA
9 June 2011 PATE&11q111 ITEM #-&J--
To: Mayor Jan Marx and City Council Members
14 From: Pierre Rademaker,Parking and Access Committee Chair
San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Downtown Association
Downtown
Association Prepared by: Deborah Cash, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Downtown Association
PO Box 1402
San Luis Obispo Re: Parking Fund Review Item on Council Agenda
California 93406
Phone 805-541-0286 The Downtown Association Parking and Access Committee reviewed the Council
Fax So5- c
www.downtownsio.com
Agenda Report"2011 Parking Fund Review" item, #PH4, slated for discussion on
www.downtownsio.com
June 14.
The Parking and Access Committee has worked closely-with the City and Parking
Services Management for many years regarding recommendations on parking
decisions and use of the Parking Enterprise Fund and appreciates the opportunity
to partner in the effort to deliver an efficient and well-managed parking
management system.
At this time, the committee would like to make three recommendations for the
Council's consideration at Tuesday's budget hearing. .
1. Downtown Champion Funding
The Parking Services Manager's position is funded entirely by the Parking
Enterprise Fund. The Parking Services Manager has also been assigned duties as
the Downtown Champion. While the.Downtown Champion's position is much
supported by the Downtown Association, the committee believes these duties are
not necessarily related to parking. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the
Parking and Access Committee that the percentage of the Parking Services
Manager's salary covering non-parking duties be paid by the general fund and not
the Parking Enterprise Fund.
2. Principal Transportation Planner
In reviewing the budget, it was noted that one-half of the Principal
Transportation Planner's salary is proposed to be paid from the Parking Enterprise
Fund. The committee understands that planning is an essential part of parking
structure citing, development and construction and is therefore the basis for this
decision. However, historically, planners have worked on a variety of projects,
some of which were parking related, and their salaries.have been included as part
of the administrative overhead (general government) component, not as additional
costs to the parking fund. The committee recommends that this practice continue
and the Principal Transportation Planner's salary not be funded by the Parking
Enterprise Fund.
3. Gold Pass Program
The Downtown Association has supported the Gold Pass Program since its
inception as a way to reduce the need for parking in the Downtown area. Noting
that there is a recommendation to increase funding for the program, it is the desire
of the committee that the City implement a system for monitoring the program
more closely to reduce or eliminate the likelihood of abuse (sharing passes, for
example) and ensure the program's success.
Thank you for considering these recommendations at the Council meeting.
Cc: SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors
SLO Downtown Association Parking and Access Committee
Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Robert Horch, Parking Services Manager/Downtown Champion
hard co email•
PGR o
a M,MCDDIR2
G ASSTCM 0FIREC
HW
o ATTORNEY c PWDIR
o CCLLFRR/ORIG o POLICE CHIEF
o PARRS R RECDIR
oTRIRUNE G UrILDIR
o SLO CITY NEWS o DNR
o coUNCIL
G CRY MGR
n CLERK
council m c m o iza n a um
June 10, 2011
TO: Mayor and City Council RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Pub ' orks DAT // ITEM # P
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manage
SUBJECT: RED FILE—AGENDA ITEM PH4 (PARKING FUND REVIEW)
On Friday June I Oth the City received a communication from the Downtown Association Parking
and Access Committee. The communication commented on issues associated with the Parking
Enterprise Fund Review scheduled for discussion on the Council's June 14th meeting. This memo
responds to the recommendations made by the committee and provides the Council some
additional information to consider.
1. Downtown Champion Funding
The DA Parking and Access Committee recommended that the percentage of the Parking
Services Manager's salary covering non-parking duties be paid by the General Fund and not the
Parking Enterprise Fund.
The Parking Manager was chosen to serve as the Downtown Champion, since many of his duties
and daily tasks puts the Manager in close proximity to the happenings of the Downtown. The
Parking Manager has done a very effective job in this regard and it is estimated he spends
approximately 20% of his time attending meetings, providing information, and connecting
downtown business issues to the appropriate City services. Some of these issues overlap with
parking related services as well as development projects that effect parking. One significant duty
of the Downtown Champion is his role as liaison with the Downtown Association and its
subcommittees.
Funding of the Downtown Champion roles (and where those duties reside) are under the full
discretion of the Council. The creation of the Downtown Champion was a direct result of
requests from the DA and other downtown stakeholders for a greater level of contact between the
City and downtown. Thus all or part of the 20% of time the Parking Manager spends doing
Downtown Champion role could be paid by the General Fund.
However, it's important to note that the City has provided significant investments that have
benefitted the Parking Fund over many years by providing it with land at no cost. A significant
portion of the Parking Fund revenues come from street meters and the General Fund has never
charged the Parking Fund for the use of this right-of—way. In addition, other properties previously
acquired by the General Fund are currently being used as parking lots, from which the Parking
Fund receives revenues from metered parking. Based upon these facts it seems appropriate and
prudent to continue the fiscal arrangement as currently constructed.
2. Principal Transportation Planner
The committee recommended that the Principal Transportation Planner's salary not be funded by
the Parking Enterprise Fund and instead be calculated as an indirect cost to the Parking Fund as
part of the Cost Allocation Plan.
The proposal to shift '/2 of the Principal Transportation Planner salary to the Parking Fund is a
result of reassigning '/2 of this staff person's time to a "direct" role to the Parking Fund and
assisting the Parking Manager in running daily operations. The Downtown Association has
focused upon the planning assistance this position will afford the Division however the request
contains a detailed write up of all duties that will likely be done by this position which include:
1. Assisting with staff supervision and management of eight regular and ten FTE
temporary positions.
2. Addressing requests to redevelop City parking lots (i.e. Chinatown and Garden
Street Terraces).
3. Responding to special programs needs such as new technologies and rate
strategies.
4. Responding to special project needs such as downtown residential parking.
5. Staffing City committees such as the Neighborhood Services Team.
6. Maintaining desired levels of customer service and community support.
7. Developing and implementing strategies to make maximum use of existing
parking spaces and reduce the use of single occupant vehicles.
These are direct Parking Services duties and should be reflected as direct costs through the
enterprise fund in order to appropriately account for costs and services of the Parking Services
Division.
3. Downtown Access Pass Program
The committee recommended that the City implement a system for monitoring the DAP program
more closely to reduce or eliminate the likelihood of abuse (sharing passes, for example) and
ensure the program's success.
Staff does not believe that there is abuse or fraud within the Downtown Access Pass program.
The DAP is already monitored by SLO Transit staff and we are unaware of any fraud or abuse
currently occurring. Each DAP is only valid for 90 days and renewals need a new application,
current pay stub as an employee in the parking district and a photo ID each time. While sharing
the DAP is possible, this is the same as any transit pass and the bus drivers monitor pass abuse as
best they can, but admittedly it is hard to enforce since all transit passes do not have a photo. To
date we have seen no abuse of the DAP. hard eman
o dffwUt 0 FIT=
o AWCM a FM CHIEF
o AMRNEY 0PWDIR
a CLE UU01UG a POLICECMU
o PHI a PAW&RECDIR
a 7RIHUNE a Ulq M
a NEWTIME4 o HRDIR 2
a SLOCITY NEWS 000UNCIL
o MY MGR
a^LERK
counat memoRAnbum
June 14, 2011 RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
TO: City Council DATE* * 1ATEM #��Y
FROM: Jay D. Walter,Public Works Dir �tor
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manage
SUBJECT: Response to Council Member Carter's email regarding the Parking Fund Review
Staff was asked to provide responses to City Council Member Carter's email to staff concerning
tonight's Parking Fund Review.
1) Is there supposed to be something in the first resolution re. changing adding Sunday
meter enforcement?
2)Is there supposed to be something in the second resolution re. charging for residential
parking permits? (Page H-17 of budget document).
3)What sort of outreach has taken place with 10-Hour residential permit holders? A change
from the current$5/year to$120/year is quite significant.
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obispo
Staffs Response to Question 1 and 2
Both changes referenced by Council Member Carter require a change in several ordinances
which require a public hearing and second reading of the ordinance. Staff intends to bring
ordinance changes for expanding meter enforcement to Sundays, the increase to the meter rate
for the $1.50 an hour super-core, the residential permit cost, and the ordinance for commercial
loading zones on Sundays at a later date. Staff anticipates returning with the ordinance changes
on August 16, 2011 and the second reading on September 6, 2011. The resolutions were
included tonight because they do not require a formal hearing process.
Staffs Response to Question 3
Staff did not provide information about the increase to residents who qualify for downtown
residential 10- hour permits. If City Council would like staff to conduct an outreach effort the
permit increase can be postponed until such effort has been undertaken.
File pathG:\Staff-Reports-Agendas-Minutes\_CCMemos\201 I\Pkg Response to Carter.doc
hard CO e-milk
aCOUNCILo CDD DIR
a CITY MGR a FIT DIR
a A=CM a FIRECHIEF
o ATTORNEY o PW DIR
o CLERNORIG a POLICECHIEF
a PB a PARKS&RECDIR
a TRIBUNE a UTILDIR
a NEWTUM a HRDIR
o SLO CRY NEWS a COUNCIL
o CITY MGR
0 CLERK