Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParking Advisory Board - Minutes - 05/09/2016MINUTES of the CITY OF FORT COLLINS PARKING ADVISORY BOARD May 9, 2016 5:30 p.m. 215 North Mason – Community Room Fort Collins, CO 80524 FOR REFERENCE: Chair: Susan Kirkpatrick Vice Chair: Holly Wright Staff Liaison: Kurt Ravenschlag 221-6386 Administrative Support: Melissa Brooks 224-6161 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY STAFF PRESENT: Susan Kirkpatrick, Chair Kurt Ravenschlag, Transfort GM & Parking Svcs. Manager, 221-6386 Holly Wright, Vice Chair Melissa Brooks, Transfort, Administrative Aide, 224-6161 Carey Hewitt Seth Lorson, City Planner George Newman Kathleen Walker, Transfort/Parking Asset & Security Manager Nora Hill Maureen McCarthy, Compliance Coordinator Steve Schroyer Stephanie Napoleon Bob Criswell Michael Short ABSENT: OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE Councilmember Kristin Stephens Toby Gadd 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair, Kirkpatrick called the meeting to order at 5:30 2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS 3. AGENDA REVIEW APPROVAL OF MINUTES With the correction of minor editing errors, Hewitt moved to accept April meeting minutes, Newman seconds. Minutes were approved unanimously. 5. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 2 May 9, 2016 6. PUBLIC COMMENT Toby Gadd, Nuance Chocolate The Northern has tenants using prime Old Town parking spots. Due to this, there is often no parking for handicapped visitors. There are days that all the parking spots are taken up by Northern residents. I have videos and photos of handicapped vehicle users being unable to unload their wheelchairs because of the Northern tenants. Vehicles with handicapped placards can park indefinitely in any spot. We are giving up 8 to 10 parking spots that were priced by a consultant to be around $30,000 per space. It is a bad thing for Old Town. The easy thing to do is have parking available to the Northern tenants in the parking structures. It is not that farther to get to. These folks are low income and do have to have a place for them to park it is probably better to use. Most people walking back and forth seem fully abled bodied. They are carrying things and dragging carts back and forth. It clearly speaks abuse of the system. It is very easy to get a parking pass. I went to the doctor and asked for one and he gave it to me. The bar is pretty low to get a pass and I think the Northern tenants are taking advantage of that to get prime curb side parking in Old Town. I would like to see the City subsidize for the residents to park in the garage. I personally would be happy to pay for that, to move them into the garage, instead of using prime spots in front of my business. Wright: Have you spoke with the owners of the Northern? Gadd: No, I think that citizens reporting on owners and going back and forth, puts us in an awkward spot. The city is allowing it; it is not up to me or the Northern to enforce who has those and where to park. I am okay with people who have handicapped placards staying longer. Double the time allocation; give them four hours or all day for people who are legitimately handicapped. The ones who are at the Northern using it 24/7 that may not be legitimately handicapped. Newman: Is your complaint just about the handicapped spaces, or all of them. Who is parking in the other spaces? Gadd: It is both. Residents of the Northern with handicapped placards are parking in other spaces. Handicapped placard (my understanding) allows them to park anywhere in Old Town as long as you want. They will sometimes take over the handicapped spots; this bothers me more because the handicapped people who visit can’t off load right. It does irritate me that they park anywhere for days and weeks on end. The City also pays to relocate these vehicles. They tow them to outside the street closure then move them back to maintain their valet parking. It strikes me as a loop hole to be opportunistically being taken advantage of. Criswell: Someone from the Northern told me they don’t park in the structure because they can’t park overnight. Ravenschlag: They can park overnight, and many do have permits for the structures. For those who have disabled placards even when they have a permit, they are choosing to park closer to their residents. Gadd: It is very convenient to have unlimited free parking in front of my business, so I do know where they are coming from, but the City has an obligation to citizens and other businesses to stop it. Hill: Is it a law or a City ordinance they can do that? Ravenschlag: It is a City traffic code which is consistent with the State traffic code. In regards to paid parking, there are no restrictions outside of parking, standing and stopping of all vehicles are prohibited. Only special vehicles may be parked. Parking is not allowed during specific periods of the day. *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 3 May 9, 2016 McCarthy: There is nothing in the ADA that says you can’t limit handicapped parking spaces to a time and they have abide by (for example) if it is no parking between 3 am – 6 am it doesn’t matter handicapped or otherwise no one is allowed to park in those spaces during that time period. You can put time limits on designated handicapped, but signage would be an issue with all the restrictions on one sign. Ravenschlag: There is ability under the State code that municipalities can put a limit of a maximum of four hours. We have chosen to be consistent with the State regulation and not have a time limit. Hill: We could ask them to go to the garage, but that won’t make any difference. Kirkpatrick: In history of our community if we have prohibited overnight street parking downtown? Ravenschlag: This code is applied for individual with handicapped placards at least dating back to 1992. In the event of a snow storm, we do require vehicles to be moved in the downtown area for plowing of snow. These vehicles do get moved. That is what [Gadd] was referring to. Our streets department will move them out of the way then move them back. There are three to five vehicles on a routine basis that are parked beyond the 48 hour period. We do have the population that comes downtown during the day and exceeds the two hour limit. Gadd: I have documentation, that has been provided, that refutes that unequivocally. It is between 8 and a dozen, on a typical day there are at least six. Kirkpatrick: You have brought the problem to the attention of the Board. If there are ways to address the problem by first you demonstrated that it is a significant problem and deserves time and attention. Secondly, if there are strategies we could hear about that might result in a recommendation. It doesn’t seem to need to rise to a Council level, it is an administrative processes. Ravenschlag: The two options we have seen are, encouragement to move their vehicles to the structures, other is a code change that would require Council’s engagement to amend the traffic code to put time restrictions on handicapped parking. Criswell: What does encourage them to use the structure mean? Ravenschlag: Many already have permits. We currently do not offer a discount. There have been nonprofit organizations in the community that would purchase the permits for Northern residents. I think that could be an option if that is a barrier. What we have seen as a barrier is that they choose not to. Kirkpatrick: Can we ask for a walk around time in the next six weeks? By our July meeting have a decision that is status quo. 7. ACTION ITEMS A. Downtown Plan – Parking Element Draft Recommendations Approval Kirkpatrick: I wrote two additional paragraphs for more explanation at the bottom of the page. I added the discussion section, because this is from us to City Council and wanted to explain why our recommendation is different from staff. Hewitt: Under #2 the second bullet, Expand two hour parking to an entire zone, should be changed to Explore. Schroyer: #4 Engage in public-private partnerships to use under-utilized surface parking on privates lots and add parking structures. *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 4 May 9, 2016 Criswell: I am not clear on the hesitancy why our existing structures are not utilized. We oversell by 40%, but still have 40%vacancy. Ravenschlag: The utilization is increasing. A new City building is being built and we are having new employees come in and get permits for the Civic Center and more of a demand for Old Town Structure from the elimination of the Chestnut lot. Newman: Is there a waiting list for the two garages? Ravenschlag: There is and that is what we are evaluating, the occupancy levels in the garages to increase our oversell rates. History we have had a 40% oversell rate that is based on who has a permit. What we are seeing is that not everyone uses their permit. We want to base the information on occupancy information versus how many permits are sold. The time frame is in the next month to two months where we pull people off of the waitlist. We do not have a group discount. We do work with employers to make the process easier to get the permits to the employees. The biggest challenge is the psychology of that people want to park as close as they can. Kirkpatrick: What is the time frame of bringing this to Council? Ravenschlag: There is a scheduled work session on June 14. Seth is going to present the recommendations and the feedback from the various boards and commissions. From that meeting staff will receive direction of what Council would like us to do. If they do want to pursue the recommendation we would then put in a budget offer to begin that work in 2017. Short: In the second paragraph include private parking structures where it mentions surface parking lots in the inventory evaluation. The second sentence, “Parking spaces in structures cost $30,000 - $35,000 to build it is important to explore entering into formal relationships with parking lot owners to potentially structure financial arraignments to gain access to these parking assets with the City managing the permitting process. Newman: The recommendation in the Parking Plan was not to put on street paid parking right away. If we want to reference that plan in the first paragraph, second sentence, “consistent with the Downtown and surround neighborhoods parking plan, adopted January 15, 2013.” Kirkpatrick: Are we confident with the information that was submitted by Newman, Short and Hewitt we have the language down to send the letter to City Council? Criswell motions to accept. Schroyer seconds. All are in favor to accept the PAB recommendations with the changes that were discusses and that memo will be sent to City Council. 8. DISSCUSSION/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Residential Parking Permit Program Evaluation, Kurt Ravenschlag Ravenschlag: This presentation provides an overview of what the RP3 objectives are, the effectiveness, process improvements that have been made and the sustainability of the program. The objectives are that it is meaning that it is designed to manage public on street parking in residential areas. The key principles of the program are, it is a property owner initiating permitting not the City. Manage versus eliminate on street parking, it is designed to address nonresidents’ spill over parking and designed to address residential, not commercial, parking issues. Currently we have six active zones: Spring Court, Sheely, Mantz Old Prospect, University North and Old Fort Collins High School. Library Park did not meet the thresholds of the program and will have to wait one year to reapply. Right now we are working on Old Town West. The commercial areas will be outside of the zone. Schroyer: If the residential people wanted to park in front of the business they could? *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 5 May 9, 2016 Ravenschlag: Technically, yes they could. The evaluations of the current active zone: Before the program, occupancy levels were well over the 70% threshold; after implantation occupancy levels dropped significantly. Process improvements: Residents must submit a petition with at least 10 signatures of other residents. We will define a general area based off of feedback from the citizens and do occupancy studies. If there is greater than 70% occupancy we move on to the next step. We then define the boundaries and number of permits to be available. There will be a neighborhood meeting to present all the information. If they are still interested in pursuing a vote will be conducted. 50% of the defined zone property owners will need to vote, out of that 50%, 50% plus 1 need to vote in favor of implementation to be valid. After approval, it will take about two months to be fully implemented. Continuing efforts for process improvements: Still working on being able to purchase and renew permits online. Currently residents have to come to Parking to purchase/renew. We did make one improvement this year by making permits available at the CSU Transit Center. We are looking at route enhancements for the growing area of coverage for enforcement. We are modifying routes by mostly eliminating walking routes. Occupancy studies were done manually and now we are looking at how to utilize technology to do them. Follow up customer satisfaction surveys, so we can collect information on how the program is working. Program Sustainability: In terms of staffing, the program currently receives Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) funding, which is a sales tax initiative. We receive funding for one part time coordinator as well as funding for signage, about $50,000 a year. In addition to that we are utilizing 1.5 FTE enforcement officers to facilitate enforcement. We are evaluating process improvements to see if we could be more efficient with enforcement. Break down of revue sources: Primarily from KFCG funding, permit sales and citations which adds up to $88,000. Expenses: Between the RP3 coordinator and 1.5 FTE enforcement officers expenses come to around $120,000. The delta is made up through the Parking Fund. Level of enforcement: A growing program without additional staff will result in fewer enforcement periods. Not only in RP3 but also downtown. Enforcement limitations: Currently it is Monday – Friday, 8 am – 5 pm. We are seeing request for nights which the program is currently not designed for. Issues to consider moving forward: Special event parking. We have heard people comment on how they think the RP3 program will address parking issues like CSU game days. The way it is currently designed it will not address those issues. Weekend and night enforcement. Permit pricing, is something we would like to address because it is a very low price. Fine escalation for citations, currently they do not escalate. Hewitt: Have you had feedback from some of the districts? Ravenschlag: We have not formal, but we do receive email and on the phone which are all positive. Wright: How successful have permits sales been at the CSU Transit Center? Ravenschlag: It has been really successful. We need to make commuters aware that there are additional permits available. Schroyer: Will there be a CP3? Instead of having to buy a permit, they could park in a non- permitted zone. Ravenschlag: In those situations the most appropriate solution would be timed parking. The logic behind not including commercial properties is because we believe the demand is greater than what we would be able to make available through permits. Hewitt: Could you do something to address Schroyer issue and base it on square footage? *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 6 May 9, 2016 Kirkpatrick: Our work plan says we will create a report to Council. The question on how to manage commercial frontage is one to add to issues to consider. Ravenschlag: It is an area that you don’t want turn over based on the type of business in that area like a downtown merchant would want turnover. Schroyer: Canyon Ave is four lanes why doesn’t the City look at doing angle spaces and make it two lanes. Ravenschlag: I think they are. Kirkpatrick: The reason I wanted this to be on our work plan is that I don’t know that your staff level gets to talk to Council about the changes you’ve made to this program. I think it is exciting to some of the improvements. There are still plenty of issues, but without a PAB you really can’t speak out. Council wants to hear about how to improve neighborhood livability. Hewitt: Another issue is 14% occupancy what about the other 86%. Kirkpatrick: So to promote commuter permits would be another. Criswell: When it was at 80% occupancy who was parking there? Ravenschlag: It was nonresidents. The nonresidents are unable to purchase a permit in that neighborhood. If there is room to add commuter permits we will. The target is 70% occupancy. Kirkpatrick: Staff has priced the permits close to what CSU permits cost. You have a choice to buy a permit in the neighborhood or be closer and by one on campus. Ravenschlag: CSU oversells permits like we oversell parking structure permits. There is a lot of availability on campus. They had a decrease of 2000 permit sales this past year. Hill: If you implement Old Town West the free on street parking will be 100% occupied. Ravenschlag: That is where we need look and see if we need to increase the two hour parking signage in the commercial areas. A lot of the parking in the neighborhood is associated with those businesses so it will be consolidating it in an area where there might not be enough availability. There probably needs to be additional inventory in that area based on the demand. We will put together a memo and let you all look at it. B. Budgeting for Outcomes, Kurt Ravenschlag Ravenschlag: The process, Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO), is unique to where departments draft offers. Offers are essentially what we want to do the next two years. Typically it is the current services you are providing would be considered ongoing offers and then enhancement offers are anything new. We then submit the offers to Results Teams. They represent seven outcome areas: Community & Neighborhood Livability, Culture & Recreation, Economic Health, Environmental Health, Safety, Transportation, and High Performing Government. In the past Parking Services submitted to Neighborhood Livability, but instead this year we will submit to Transportation Results Team. The team is made up of City staff from various departments and two citizens. They review the offers and prioritize them. What is above the line is recommended for funding. They present those results to the Budget Lead Team which is made up of the City Manager and his direct reports. They review the recommendations from the Results Team and may make a few minor changes. Then that becomes the City Manager’s Recommended Budget. The City Manager presents this to Council and Council might make a few changes and then they adopt it. It began in April and go through November. Parking Services Enhancement Offers: • Capital Equipment, funding for two Nissan Leafs and license plate recognition equipment. This is in alinement with trying to be more efficient with our enforcement *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 7 May 9, 2016 practices without having to add more staff. Funding for camera and pay station retro fits for Civic Center and Old Town parking structures. Currently each structurer only has one camera pointed at the entrance. This does not provide the level of surveillance and security that we feel is appropriate. We would like to have cameras throughout the structures. The pay station retro fits would make each of the existing structures to be consistent with the new structure being built. This would eliminate the access gates. We also included the technology to pay and add time by an app. • Capitol Repair and Maintenance. This is for the Civic Center and Old Town parking structures. We had a three year maintenance plan developed and have only been able to do one year of work. It is catching up on repair and maintenance issues that need to be addressed. • Operating & Maintenance Expenses of Fire House Garage. • Game Day Parking Management for CSU Football Games. Schroyer: Where would you cover the five items recommended by staff or PAB. Ravenschlag: After the June 14 work session based on the direction we receive from Council. If yes we will submit an enhancement offer to do on street paid parking. Short: Don’t you currently have $100,000 from the last budget for paid parking? Ravenschlag: There is $700,000 that is set aside that will be going for appropriation for the space counters. Based on direction we receive on June 14. There was $50,000 to do public outreach which was provided to the Downtown Plan to start the conversation. Short: How often do you have to spend the money for capital repair? Ravenschlag: We are working on deferred maintain and once that work gets caught up we will go on a regular maintenance schedule that will be less costly. Hill: What about additional staff? Ravenschlag: We are not requesting that. A general guiding principle is that parking is self- funded. If revue increase and we have the ability to add an officer we will do so. Newman: What happens to the employees being replaced by the pay stations? Ravenschlag: That would happen through attrition. Some may be repurposed like in enforcement or customer service. C. BOARD REPORT Kirkpatrick: Saw a presentation for the new park being planned along the Poudre. It describes it a city park. It is intended to available for use in 2017. It has changed my opinion about paid parking. I don’t think we have that big of a parking problem, but foresee a bigger problem coming soon with the new park. The need for predicable length of time is best achieved through on street paid parking. I would like others to see the plans for this park. Short: When we went to Missoula to look at their paid parking situation. One thing that stood out was the effectiveness they had with developing the public private partner ships with surface lots. The City maintains the lots, including the insurance and in return, off hours, the lots are added to the inventory of the local community. Ravenschlag: We were discussing that. Reality is that we have to find a way to make it attractive to the private property. D. STAFF LIAISON REPORT None *DRAFT* Meeting Minutes Page 8 May 9, 2016 10. OTHER BUSINESS None 11. ADJOURN The meeting was concluded at 7:12 pm Respectfully submitted, ___________________________ Melissa Brooks Administrative Aide Transfort