HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-02-20 DTPC Packet
DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, February 20, 2020
8:30 AM Conference Room 213, City Hall
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 16, 2020 MINUTES
4. OPEN FORUM
5. NEW BUSINESS
5.01. 2020 Minnesota Historic Preservation Conference
5.02. Main Street turn lanes
5.03. Electric Vehicle Show: event parking
5.04. Cruisin’ on the Croix: event parking
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6.01. AirGarage contract
6.02. Sustainable Stillwater: EV charging station
6.02. Parking study
7. UPDATES
7.01. Event calendar
7.02. Rusty Mile patio
8. ADJOURNMENT
DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION MEETING
January 16, 2020
Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.
Present: Chairman Anderson, Commissioners Glynn, Hopfe, Johnson, Lepage, McAllister,
Council Liaison Junker
Absent: Commissioners Lettner
Staff present: Parking Enforcement Officer Pasket, Zoning Administrator Tait, Community
Development Director Turnblad
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Community Development Director Turnblad noted that the City Clerk wants motions for all action items
including approval of minutes.
Possible approval of minutes of December 19, 2019 meeting
Motion by Commissioner McAllister, seconded by Commissioner Glynn, to approve the December 19, 2019
minutes. Motion passed 6-0.
OPEN FORUM
There were no public comments.
NEW BUSINESS
209 S Main - Greenbridge Coffee Shop Parking Mitigation
Community Development Director Turnblad stated that Michael Herman is planning to lease the ground
floor of 209 South Main Street as a coffee shop and electric bike rental shop. The Main Street portion of the
space will be the coffee shop and the Water Street portion will be the bike rental area. The current parking
load for the ground level of this property is 11 spaces. The new uses will generate a parking load of 14
spaces. The increased parking load is 3 spaces. Since an increase of 4 spaces is allowed before additional
parking is required, no parking mitigation plan is necessary and no Parking Commission action is necessary.
Chairman Anderson asked if the bikes will have any access issues and are they likely to ask for a parking
space for the bikes?
Mr. Turnblad replied there is a short flight of stairs due to the elevated sidewalk. The shop staff will carry
the bikes down the stairs rather than customers. They will not need on-street staging or parking spaces.
Parking Enforcement Officer Pasket remarked it is congested in the rear of that building and cars are parked
there. They will probably drop the bike right into the street. He has safety concerns due to the busy road.
Commissioner Glynn noted that all of Chestnut east of Main will be closed eventually.
Mr. Turnblad confirmed that eventually, as Chestnut is rebuilt, it will become a raised plaza. Water Street
will become one way southbound and will have a shared bike lane.
200 E Chestnut - Chestnut Building Parking Mitigation Revision
Mr. Turnblad informed the Commission that the ownership of the Chestnut Building, 200 E Chestnut Street,
has recently changed. The new owners plan to demolish the building and construct residential units. As
leases expire they are not being renewed. In addition, Reve is no longer in operation. Consequently the
parking needs of the building have changed dramatically since the Downtown Parking Commission
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 2 of 9
approved the last parking mitigation plan for the property, which requires the building owner to mitigate for
a deficit of 9 parking spaces. The property owner requests that the Parking Commission remove the
requirement to mitigate the 9 parking spaces. Staff recommends approving the request.
Motion by Commissioner McAllister, seconded by Commissioner Hopfe, to support the request and remove the
requirement for 9 mitigated spaces. Motion passed 6-0.
The Lora Valet License Renewal
Mr. Turnblad stated that the Commission is being requested to make a recommendation to the City Council
on the re-issuance of the valet license for the Lora. In June of 2016 the Parking Commission reviewed the
parking mitigation plan for The Lora Hotel. The 40 room hotel and restaurant created an increased parking
load of 15 cars over that which existed prior to the hotel conversion. The Lora Hotel proposed to fulfill the
15 car increase by valet parking cars in the lot behind the hotel, rather than pay a monthly mitigation fee.
The Parking Commission and the City Council approved this proposal and a three-year license was granted
for the use of two parking spaces on Main Street for the valet service. The license must now be renewed.
One condition of the license is that the fee for reserving the valet spaces would be $2,013 each annually.
The parking fees have not been raised since 2016, so staff would recommend that the fee remain the same
for the next license period. Another condition of the valet license was that “customer vehicles from the valet
stations shall be parked in the following facilities, in the priority order given here: 1) The private valet
parking lot on the west side of the hotel property, then 2) the municipal parking ramp, and finally 3)
municipal parking lot #20.” Staff believes that this priority system was used when the Lora opened, but has
not been used recently. The final condition of the license was that its term would be three years. Staff
recommends that the term of the re-issued license continue to be three years.
Corey Burstad, owner of the Lora Hotel, explained how their valet parking works. He noted that the valet
license was issued a year and a half before the hotel opened, in conjunction with the use permit for the hotel.
They park 19-22 cars in their back lot. Because they control the parking, they can stack the cars. They feel
they have a better handle now on how to do the valet parking which seems to be working well. Valet
parking is critical. The challenge they have had is employee parking. They plan to purchase some additional
permits for staff. He reminded the Commission the hotel has only 40 rooms.
Chairman Anderson asked Mr. Burstad if he foresees a change in the three priority parking areas.
Mr. Burstad replied it has not really been an issue. Last year was tough because of snow. This year is better.
Parking Enforcement Officer Pasket noted that right now it is easier because there is no 3-hour parking on
Main Street and the hotel is currently using that for some of their parking.
Mr. Burstad said some people are parking there because the sign is down. It should be used that way during
the off season because it sits empty otherwise. They were disrupted the entire summer with the wall which
was a mess.
Officer Pasket remarked it is hard to get employees to do something they don’t want to do.
Mr. Burstad said the hotel loses employees because they are coming to work and can’t find a place to park,
come back to their car and get ticketed. They are trying to find a way to deal with this.
Commissioner McAllister asked, why not have the valets valet the employee cars?
Mr. Burstad replied that the valets are needed to handle the customers. The customers support local
businesses. He feels the parking issues are minor because they have about six hotel employees during peak
times and about 8-10 restaurant employees.
Officer Pasket pointed out there is ample parking in Lot 1 from November 1 to April 1 when it is free
parking. That is where the hotel should be directing its employees to park in the winter.
Motion by Commissioner Glynn, seconded by Commissioner Lepage, to recommend that the Council approve
the valet permit for three more years with the conditions as is. Motion passed 6-0.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 3 of 9
Brian’s Bocce Ball Tournament Parking Reservation
Zoning Administrator Tait stated that Brian’s is requesting permission from the City to hold a bocce ball
tournament behind the establishment and in Lot 3. The event is taking place on February 22, between 10:00
AM and 11:59 PM. Set up will occur the day of the event between (though four parking spots are needed to
be reserved on Friday for sand delivery), and clean-up is to take place the morning after the event, so Lot 3
will need to be reserved for two days to accommodate the event and the next morning clean-up.
Additionally, 4 spots will need to be reserved in Lot 3 on Friday for sand delivery. Lot 3 has 33 spaces and
they can be reserved at $1.50 per spot per day. Staff recommends approval for Brian’s Bar to utilize Lot 3,
for the above stated time frames, for a cost of $105.
Motion by Commissioner McAllister, seconded by Commissioner Hopfe, to approve the use of Lot 3 on
February 21-22 as requested by Brian’s. Motion passed 6-0.
Sunrise Rotary Club/Sustainable Stillwater: EV Charging Station
Mr. Turnblad said that Don Schuld, representing the Stillwater Sunrise Rotary Club, and Kevin Tholen,
representing Sustainable Stillwater, are requesting the Downtown Parking Commission consider partnering
with them to install a public Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station downtown. They are proposing to raise
funds for a dual terminal level 2 EV charging station. In exchange, the City would allow the station to be
located within the public parking system and would also own and operate the station. In addition, the City
would allow Stillwater Rotary and Sustainable Stillwater to have sponsorship signage on the station. The
Rotary Club estimates that the capital costs of the station and installation would be about $10,630. If the
Rotary Club/Sustainable Stillwater team raises $7,000 for the project, then the City’s capital costs would be
$3,630. The annual operating costs for the EV station are estimated to be about $1,500 plus the cost of
electricity. A location for the charging station would have to be identified and approved by the City.
Kevin Tholen, Sustainable Stillwater, explained that passenger vehicles are now the top greenhouse gas
emitters in Minnesota. He presented the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) plan for corridor
development for electric vehicle charging stations. He explained location considerations for Level 2 and
Level 3 charging stations.
Commissioner McAllister asked if there is any information about demand in Stillwater for EV charging
stations.
Officer Pasket said he has not received one call from anyone asking about charging stations.
Mr. Tholen pointed out that sometimes a driver’s destination hinges on whether there will be a charging
station there.
Chairman Anderson commented this is not a matter of how will it benefit the City by bringing more people
to town, it is more about pushing the City toward modernization and recognizing the trends.
Councilmember Junker reflected that 3-4 years ago when this was first brought to the City’s attention,
discussion focused on the possibility of putting charging stations in private lots. As this trend continues to
grow, should they be scattered throughout town? He likes the idea of a combination of commercial/public
sector stations that could be connected.
Mr. Tholen showed depictions of some of the charging stations, the number of miles of charge per hour, and
the costs.
Chairman Anderson asked if Mr. Tholen has worked with the State toward including Stillwater in the
corridor.
Mr. Tholen answered he talked to the State about making Stillwater part of the corridor but so far they have
not approved it. They have additional money available but are giving priority to locations where they can
install six stations at a time. They want a walkable distance to the charging stations. Currently in Stillwater
there is one charger available to the public at Goodwill. He doesn’t think vehicle owners will get too upset
about having to pay for charging. A smart charger would allow the City to track usage of the charger and set
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 4 of 9
a rate to charge for the electricity. It could be free for some people via entering a code, for instance. There
are lots of possible sources of funding: the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), an Xcel Energy
pilot program for fast chargers, and the Rotary Club.
Don Schuld, Stillwater Sunrise Rotary Club, chair of the Rotary Climate Action Committee, said climate is
s such a significant issue that it will impact all the other interest areas that Rotary works on. They would like
to see EV chargers available in Stillwater. The club is willing to provide some of its own funds and work to
get other grant funds in support of this project.
Chairman Anderson asked, do they want it in a public parking lot, or in a place that the public can access?
Mr. Schuld replied either. The club would not support a project on private property because it would be
using nonprofit funds to support a private business. If not a City parking lot, then some other nonprofit
organization that they could work with.
Chairman Anderson commented that the challenge is not the money but justifying the loss of parking
spaces.
Commissioner Johnson remarked he feels the decision should be in step with the percentage of electric
vehicle owners.
Chairman Anderson noted having electric vehicle charging stations would help with the GreenStep Cities
and other initiatives. The City would need guidance on where to put them.
Commissioner McAllister said she is hearing that the Commissioners are in agreement that the City should
consider this but the difficult task is making a specific recommendation to the Council because she doesn’t
feel like this is enough of a proposal to make a recommendation. The Commission needs to understand more
about the corridor opportunity. She likes the idea of aligning it with a broader State initiative. She would be
willing to consider multiple options, to recommend more than just one proposal to the Council.
Councilmember Junker noted when the City started looking at this four years ago, based on some residents
saying they would like to have some charging stations in downtown Stillwater, it piqued interest but
stopped. This is really the first time that an organization and potential funding has been brought forward.
The grant money and possibility of organizations that want to partake in this is a huge plus.
Mr. Turnblad noted it sounds like there is support to look at the proposal in some form or another. He asked
if the Commission would prefer to have a split between public and private spaces being committed.
Chairman Anderson answered he would prefer the priority would be private and then public spaces.
Mr. Turnblad added that the corridor infrastructure is regional. It doesn’t help people who want to come
downtown because it is over a one-mile walk from the Hwy 36 corridor to downtown.
Mr. Tholen replied that the MPCA told him within a mile is OK from the highway.
Commissioner McAllister remarked if a Level 3 charger is installed, and it charges in 20 minutes, if she was
planning on coming to Stillwater, she could drive a mile to park in the system. She thinks it could be the bait
for people who want to come from Rochester. A mile out of downtown, whether walked or driven, is not
going to be a barrier.
Chairman Anderson countered that there are people who won’t park in the outer lots and walk downtown.
He agrees with Mr. Turnblad that a charging station near the new bridge would be a little too far out of
range to help bring business to downtown Stillwater.
Commissioner Hopfe said she thinks it’s a great idea but the Commission needs more time to consider it.
Officer Pasket said from an enforcement standpoint, he observed that at Oakdale HyVee there are cars that
park in their charging stations that are not electric cars, just because it’s an open spot. That would be a
problem in Stillwater too. He asked, would the City issue citations, and if so, how much? There are those
issues to look at.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 5 of 9
Councilmember Junker noted that the State is looking for a minimum of six stations to create a hub. He
would like to definitely get 2-3 stations centrally in downtown Stillwater somehow. He likes the idea that it
is with private permission, not to make a profit but as a partnership with the City. It’s a place to start.
Commissioner Glynn suggested that the existing parking ramp may be the easiest place to install a charging
station.
Mr. Turnblad noted that the upper level is rarely used. There would be no capacity lost by putting a charging
station in the upper level of the ramp.
Chairman Anderson noted the Commission has a lot on the table with potential parking changes. The
Commission needs to slide this consideration into its schedule.
Commissioner McAllister asked if this could be tied into the parking study.
Community Development Director Turnblad replied they are opposing public benefits. If the Commission is
looking at maximizing public spaces, then dedicating spaces to something that makes them unusable is at
odds with those goals. The next step might be to find those people who are willing to commit to saying if a
charging station is installed, they would let the City have a space in their private lot.
Mr. Tholen remarked if the Commission would give him a list of people who may be amenable he would be
happy to go talk with them. He would like to move forward with more of a detailed cost estimate for putting
charging stations in the parking ramp.
Commissioner Glynn asked if there is someone on City staff who looks at grants for something like this.
Mr. Turnblad replied that Zoning Administrator Tait is the City’s GreenStep Cities coordinator. He thinks
the City can find funding sources and find places to put charging stations.
Councilmember Junker said he thinks the top level of the parking ramp would be a good place.
Commissioner McAllister suggested the Commission should pursue both approaches. She does not want to
remove critical spaces from parking system.
Mr. Tholen noted that a Level 2 charger costs about $1.50 per hour for the electricity.
Commissioner Glynn said in the future the City could charge if necessary for the electricity.
Commissioner McAllister added that with smart chargers the City can gauge use like a pilot program.
Motion by Chairman Anderson, seconded by Commissioner LePage, to recommend that the City review the
proposal for installing charging stations in the parking ramp on the top level and partner with Sunrise Rotary
and Sustainable Stillwater to utilize as many grants as possible. Motion passed 6-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Parking Ramp Revenue System Contract
Mr. Turnblad stated that staff has been working with Passport Parking representatives to draft a contract. In
the meantime Passport’s minimum charge for the Permit Management and Enforcement Management
Modules increased to $18,000 each. Previously there was no minimum fee for the enforcement module and
only a $6,000 minimum fee for the permit module. The result is that the annual cost of Passport’s services to
the City would increase by $30,000. Therefore, the Parking Commission and City Council should reconsider
awarding the project to Passport Parking. The alternatives are: continue with Passport Parking and pay the
extra $30,000 annually; continue with Passport Parking but only use their hourly parking module; award the
project to AirGarage; or request proposals from other companies. He explained the options in detail. If the
Commission starts again from scratch, they have lost almost five months and would have to simply open the
exit arm gate after hours and on weekends because Washington County will no longer deal with after hour
help calls. This would cause a loss of revenue equating to about 30% of the revenue.
Councilmember Junker suggested hiring a gatekeeper to sit there and operate the gate.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 6 of 9
Mr. Turnblad said in theory he agrees but there is the cost of installing a booth and it is very difficult to find
staff. The City could not find parking ramp attendants to staff it last summer.
Commissioner McAllister asked if there is a way the City could pay someone to sit at Washington County
and monitor the button.
Mr. Turnblad replied the existing mechanical revenue equipment does not do what the City wants it to do. It
was the bottom line and it has been tweaked as much as possible. So the solution is to get rid of it. If the
City awarded the contract to AirGarage, they are capable of providing the service needed for the parking
ramp. If the City wants to expand it to the rest of the system they are not presently positioned for that. That
is why it was decided not to go with them in the first place. If the City goes with AirGarage, then if it is
decided to expand to the rest of the parking system, the City would need to change vendors. If the system is
expanded, then Passport Parking becomes reasonable. With AirGarage there is only one up front cost of
$10,000 for the paying on foot station.
Commissioner LePage asked, when considering the revenue lost by leaving the arm up, versus the
additional incurred costs and possible revenue to be gained from having AirGarage, does it make sense now
to consider that as a reasonable option?
Mr. Turnblad replied that in past discussions with the Council about just raising the arm, there is natural
pushback against making it free. There would probably be a better reception from the Council if the
Commission went with AirGarage for a year. AirGarage has stationery cameras at the entrance. It notifies
enforcement if there is someone who has not paid. Enforcement will have to manually write out the ticket.
Officer Pasket said he likes manual tickets because they are easier to deal with if someone complains about
the ticket.
Mr. Turnblad spoke about the permits, AirGarage charges 10% but there is no minimum amount like there
is with Passport. So the real down side is that Officer Pasket has to write manual tickets and whenever the
City should decide to go systemwide, staff would have to learn a new system. However he feels this is a
better option than giving up revenue.
Officer Pasket noted he was not a fan of Passport Parking from the beginning as they were scattered across
the country and now they are not going to honor the contract. A camera was another up front cost for the
Parking Commission. He would rather start out small with AirGarage especially with a one year contract.
Later on if the City is not happy with what they’re doing, the contract would only be for a year and the
Commission would have time to investigate other companies with a more sophisticated system.
Commissioner LePage asked, since AirGarage is a young company, would it be possible to ask for a
contract on the City’s terms, for instance to negotiate 15% rather than 20% of parking ramp revenues?
Mr. Turnblad replied that AirGarage already dropped way down in cost during discussions with them.
Officer Pasket added with AirGarage, the City would have control of pretty much everything.
Mr. Turnblad stated if the decision is to just shut down and lose all evening and weekend revenue, it would
amount to an estimated 30% of the gross revenue. In comparison, going with AirGarage would cost 20% of
all the parking ramp revenue.
Commissioner McAllister said she feels the Commission has focused on upfront costs but this is bringing to
light that the Commission is looking at lost revenue that hasn’t been talked about too much. She would like
to have a better understanding of how much revenue would be lost in terms of profit on the garage.
Mr. Turnblad noted that the 20% was built in when the original analysis of AirGarage versus Passport
Parking was done. Given the $120,000 that is already scheduled for equipment replacement, he does not
have a problem with either one of those original proposals.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 7 of 9
Chairman Anderson said he thinks the Commission should look at AirGarage for a year. It’s not an ideal
solution but would provide a chance to dabble in it. Then toward the end of this year maybe look at a new
company to take over and expand.
Councilmember Junker commented that the drop dead date with Washington County no longer monitoring
puts the City in a predicament.
Mr. Turnblad recapped that with AirGarage, the City would be losing 20% of revenue but would not be
spending $120,000 in capital costs.
Commissioner McAllister pointed out it costs money to make money and to solve problems.
Commissioner Glynn remarked that originally he was not a fan of AirGarage versus Passport. As a user he
likes Passport in Hudson and St. Paul, but talking about the one parking ramp, then he feels the City should
go with AirGarage.
Motion by Chairman Anderson, seconded by Commissioner LePage, to authorize staff to move toward
AirGarage for a one year trial period. Motion passed 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS continued
Sustainable Stillwater Summary of Transportation Survey
Mr. Turnblad informed the Commission that Sustainable Stillwater has a subcommittee that did a survey
this past summer on active transportation.
Wendy Gorski, Sustainable Stillwater, said that the active transportation workgroup aims to increase active
transportation like cycling and walking to reduce the use of carbon-emitting vehicles. The survey
interviewed Stillwater business employees, business owners, residents and visitors. There were 445
responses. She explained how the survey was designed, who responded, analysis and scoring. The goal was
to begin conversation on the issue of active transportation. Ms. Gorski presented findings of the survey. She
noted that the questions about widening sidewalks and removing parking spaces, in particular, seemed to
solicit the response “but where are the cars going to park if we do that?” So if the downtown parking
problem is solved, people may soften on that question and be more willing to entertain a more walkable
downtown with wider sidewalks and so on.
Linda Countryman said they are going to do the shuttle but haven’t moved forward a lot because they
waited for this survey in part. They got the validation they were looking for, for the most part. It isn’t
something they are asking the City to fund. They are working with a specific shuttle service and postponing
any activity on mass transit because Washington County and Metro Council are working on that. The time is
now to pilot test a system especially for large events. It is possible they could customize a pilot perhaps to
two large events. They know it is a challenge for people to ride a trolley or a shuttle but it would decrease
downtown congestion and reduce the pressure on current parking. They are aware of all the issues. They
look forward to working with the City to move forward and believe they will get funding. It will
demonstrate that the City really does care about visitors’ downtown experience. This service does not
discount moving residents and workers to the same locations.
Chairman Anderson commented when surveys are done, he feels there should be a distinction made whether
the person lives downtown. The questions about heavy trucks and motorcycles may elicit a different
response from tourists. He also asked what drove the topic of bike lanes because the City has a bike path
now.
Ms. Gorski responded one thing they are trying to do is reduce the amount of fossil fueled vehicles in
downtown - so they want to encourage bicycling to get around. Biking around the city makes a person feel
pretty vulnerable to the vehicular traffic now because there are no protected bike lanes.
Ms. Countryman added that the safety of the riders connecting to the trails is a huge issue.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 8 of 9
Ms. Gorski said the reason that downtown bike lanes would be great is because of the Loop Trail. A lot of
people will come in and see there is no place to park their bikes. Having a protected bike lane downtown
would be ideal but logistically might be impossible.
Ms. Countryman added that as a boomer, considering the increasing retirement population, they will
appreciate a ride up and down the hills. She wonders how many more people would come if they knew they
didn’t have to park all the way up by Teddy Bear Park.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS continued
Parking Study Update
Mr. Turnblad stated that there are no updates, the study is underway.
UPDATES
Lot 14 Expansion Plan
Mr. Turnblad said that the Capital Improvement Plan for 2020 includes the expansion of Municipal Lot 14,
which requires the purchase of the Shorty’s property on the corner of Second and Chestnut Streets. The
acquisition is not complete yet, but is nearing completion. Currently Shorty’s property has 18 private
parking spaces. After completion of the expansion project, 39 public parking spaces will have taken the
place of the dry cleaning building and its private parking. The purchase costs of the property will come out
of Tax Increment Financing funds. The improvement costs for the parking lot, estimated at $40,325, will be
paid from the parking enterprise fund. The cost of the building demolition will also come out of the parking
enterprise fund, but an estimate of these costs will not be available until the City owns the property. The
Shorty’s property is on the National List of Historic Places as a contributing building to the Downtown
Stillwater Historic District. The building itself does not have the character or story to be individually listed
as a Historic Place. Rather, it is a contributing structure, which in theory should exhibit architectural or
historical qualities that represent Stillwater’s period of historical significance. In order to demolish the
building, it will have to be formally “de-listed” by the Department of the Interior. That process could take
until summer to be completed and the cost is yet unknown. Demolition and parking lot improvements will
likely occur later this summer or fall following the de-listing process.
Parking on Third Street
Mr. Turnblad reported that Washington County said parking can be added back on Third Street as requested.
Commission Request Items
Commissioner Hopfe said, as far as downtown turn lanes, the Commission talked about getting some of the
parking spaces back now that the big equipment is away from the bridge, for instance, northbound on Main,
and the turn lane southbound on Main turning east on Chestnut - the turn lane that was previously used to go
over the lift bridge. She would like to look at gaining a few more parking spaces.
Mr. Turnblad said he thinks that last fall that turn lane was shortened. At some point it can be eliminated
completely, after Chestnut is no longer usable by vehicles. In the downtown plan, traffic engineers looked at
potential configurations after Chestnut is closed. That doesn’t mean how it will be built but it is
conceptually what is possible. It depends on what MnDOT will approve. If traffic patterns don’t warrant
some of these turn lanes there is no reason to have them. For the next meeting he will bring back more
information.
Commissioner Hopfe asked about Water Street being made one way.
Mr. Turnblad replied that Water Street will be one way south of Myrtle. From Myrtle northward it will be
two-way. There will be a dedicated or shared bike lane incorporated on the portion that is one way.
Commissioner Hopfe expressed concern about where all the delivery trucks will go because there are a lot
of them on Water Street.
Downtown Parking Commission Meeting January 16, 2020
Page 9 of 9
Mr. Turnblad said the City wants them delivering on Water and not on Main.
Commissioner Glynn added that with Water Street being half one way and half bike lane, the delivery trucks
will park in the bike lane.
Mr. Turnblad said the goal is to evolve Water to a multiple use street, not a vehicle street. It is intentional to
put bikes there.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Anderson adjourned the meeting at 10:58 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Julie Kink, Recording Secretary
Daren Anderson, Chair
ATTEST:
Graham Tait, Zoning Administrator
TO: Downtown Parking Commission
FROM: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner
DATE: February 14, 2020
RE: Preserve MN 2020 Conference Parking Ramp Fee Waiver Request
In conjunction with the State Historic Preservation Office, the City of Stillwater and its Heritage
Preservation Commission will be hosting the Preserve MN 2020 conference September 16-18th
in downtown Stillwater. The annual statewide conference focusing on historic preservation will
bring (approximately) 200 preservation professionals, appointed/elected officials and staff, and
historians to our community for networking, educational opportunities, and local/regional
tours. While portions of the conference will be spread throughout downtown Stillwater, the
conference’s ‘command center’ will be located at the Lowell Inn. The conference planning is
requesting the Downtown Parking Commission’s consideration of a parking ramp fee waiver for
conference attendees. The specific waiver requested would be from (approximately) noon on
September 16th to (approximately) 1:00 pm on September 18th.
DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION
DATE: February 13, 2020
SUBJECT: Main Street turn lanes
REPORT BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND
At the January Parking Commission meeting, Commissioner Hopfe asked about turn lane configurations
with the closure of the Lift Bridge and plans to convert part of Chestnut Street to a non-motorized civic
plaza.
COMMENTS
A traffic study was completed for the Downtown Plan that examined, among other things, the question
posed by Commissioner Hopfe. Highlights of the study as it relates to turn lanes are:
At the intersection of Main and Chestnut, all turn lanes will be removed. This will allow for
pedestrian improvements and additional on-street parking.
o West bound turns onto Chestnut for north bound traffic on Main Street is shown in the
traffic study to be allowed. But, there was some resistance to this as the Downtown Plan
was being developed. So, whether there will be left turns onto Chestnut from Main is still
to be determined.
Greenbridge Coffee and Mike’s Bikes
Page 2
The intersection of Main and Myrtle will remain as it is today, except for pedestrian
improvements.
The intersection of Main and Nelson will remain as it is today, except for pedestrian
improvements.
The pseudo-right turns at each intersection with Main would be eliminated with pedestrian
bump-outs.
bt
DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION
DATE: February 20, 2020
APPLICANT: Kevin Tholen (Sustainable Stillwater)
SUBJECT: Drive Electric – Electric Vehicle Show
LOCATION: City Lot 4, Water Street Inn parking lot and inside the Inn
REPORT BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND
Kevin Tholen, with Sustainable Stillwater, is requesting permission from the City to hold
an electric vehicle (EV) show for Earth Day. The electric vehicle show is being proposed
to be held on both private and public property. The applicant would like to reserve Lot 4
for dealership sponsored test drives of their electric vehicles and parking for EV owners
selected to speak with EV show-goers regarding their EV experience. The event will also
feature EV cars for viewing in the Water Street Inn parking lot1, and Earth Day exhibits
inside the Water Street Inn.
The event would be taking place on April 22 (Earth Day), between 2:00PM and 8:00PM.
The set up for this event will occur the day of the event between 10:00AM and 2:00PM,
and the clean-up is to take place after the event between 8:00PM and 9:00PM. This event
is expected to have a turnout of around 500 to 1000 people. There is not proposed to be
any amplified sound, food vendors, or alcohol.
ANALYSIS
Lot 4 has 29 spaces and they can be reserved at the “off season weekday” rate2 of $1.50
per spot per day. Below are the calculations for the amount it would cost to reserve the
parking spaces for this proposed event:
1 Every business in the CBD district is allowed to utilize their private parking lot 3 times a year for events (per City
Council Policy established in 2015). This will count as the first event for 2020.
2 “Off season” runs November thru April
Drive Electric – Electric Vehicle Show
Page 2
Lot Requested Spaces Number of Days Amount Per
Spot / Per Day
Total Cost to
Charge
Lot #4 29 (entire lot) 1 (Wednesday) $1.50 $43.50
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval for Kevin Tholen and Sustainable Stillwater to utilize Lot 4,
for the above stated time frames, for a cost of $43.50.
Additionally, according to the National Weather Service, the top six highest recorded
crests on the St. Croix River at Stillwater have all happened within ten days of April 22.
Accordingly, staff would recommend a discussion with the applicant, concerning an
alternative plan in the event of flooding downtown.
Attachments: Applicant materials
DATE: February 20, 2020
APPLICANT: Parker Shook (Cruisin’ on the Croix)
SUBJECT: Cruisin’ on the Croix - Special Event Parking
LOCATION: Downtown Public Parking Lots: 8B, 9, 10 and 11.
REPORT BY: Graham Tait, City Zoning Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
BACKGROUND
Parker Shook has made application for an event permit for the 2020 Crusin’ on the Croix. He
has requested the use of all the spaces in Municipal Parking Lot 8B (has 75 spaces total), Lot 9
(30 spaces), Lot 10 (48 spaces), and Lot 11 (45 spaces); this is a total of 198 parking spaces.
Last year, 234 spaces were requested. The Parking Commission recommended approval of 94
spaces as in 2018. Upon appeal the City Council approved 128 spaces. The following chart
displays the requested and approved lots last year:
Cruisin’ on the Croix - 2019 Parking Lot Requests
Lot # Approval/Denial Parking Spaces Approved
4 Partially Approved by Parking Commission;
denied by Council
12 by Parking Commission
0 by City Council
5 Approved by Parking Commission;
Denied by Council
7 by Parking Commission
0 by City Council
8B Denied by Parking Commission;
Approved in part by Council
0 by Parking Commission
53 by City Council
9 Approved 30
10 Denied 0
11 Approved 45
Total: 94 by Parking Commission
128 by Council
This year, eight event dates are requested, which would occur every other Wednesday beginning
June 10th and ending September 16th. These dates are June 10 & 24, July 8 & 22, August 5 & 19,
and September 2 & 16. This event will include one food vendor, who is proposed to be located
Cruisin’ on the Croix
February 20, 2020
Page 2
in Lot 8, and live music from 5:00PM to 8:00PM on Maple Island’s patio. The event will not
require the setup of, and space required for porta-potties, for they will be using the pedestrian
plaza restrooms.
ANALYSIS
In both the previous two years the Downtown Parking Commission has approved 94 spots,
though last year the Council decided to approve 128 spaces. Based off the minutes from the
previous year’s DTPC meeting these decisions boiled down to two main concerns:
1. The first concern was that the event is very big for the downtown, and closing off entire
parking lots for eight days of the summer is unfair to downtown merchants, in
consideration of both customers and employees. While it was acknowledged that this
event is good for the Downtown and Stillwater as a whole, it was noted that there needs
to be a balance between events and existing downtown businesses.
2. The second concern was the fact that multiple lots were unusable due to construction.
The second concern no longer applies, however the first concern put forth is still very real and
continues to be an extremely important part of the Commission’s conversations regarding events
downtown. That being said, the decision by City Council to increase the approved number of
spots (with the utilization of the back of Lot 8B) from 94 to 128 spaces, did not appear to have
any negative impacts to the downtown parking system. Therefore City staff holds the opinion
that somewhere in the vicinity of 128 spaces is an appropriate number to allow to be reserved,
because too many more spaces than that would stress the system and create an unfair burden to
the downtown business owners.
RECOMMENDATION
It is City staff’s opinion that the parking arrangements decided on last year was appropriate,
equitable to all parties, and functional. City staff recommends approving the use of Lots 9, 11
and the back of Lot 8B, for a total of 128 spaces, for all of the eight weeks that were proposed
(“back of Lot 8B” is indicated in red on the map below). These recommended 128 spots will cost
$192.00 per event, for a season total of $1536.00 (see table below).
Parking Prices
Lot # Description Number of
Spaces Cost per Space Total Cost
Lot 9 Free, 4-hour 30 $1.50 $45.00
Lot 11 Free, All day parking
(overnight by permit)
45 $1.50 $67.50
Lot 8B (back section) 53 $79.50
TOTAL (per event) → $192.00
TOTAL (season) → $1536.00
Cruisin’ on the Croix
February 20, 2020
Page 3
cc: Parker Shook
attachments: Application form
Parking system map
Historical Data & Requested 2020 Table
“Back of Lot 8B”
Office Use Only
Event Date/Time: Set up: Date ____________________________ Time __________ to __________
Date ____________________________ Time __________ to __________
Date ____________________________ Time __________ to __________
Incomplete applications or applications received after deadline will not be
accepted. See Event Instructions for application deadline and fees.
Description of Event (please be specific ‐ this information will be used to promote the event on the City of Stillwater website):
Primary Contact/Applicant Name:
Phone: Refer media or citizens inquires to:
Phone Number:
Sponsoring Organization Name:
Actual Event:
Clean up:
(If in Lowell Park please specify north or south Lowell park)
Applicant Information (Person/Group Responsible)
City, State, Zip Code:
Date Application Received ________________
Date of Application: _____________________________
Website Address:
Name of contact person during event: Cell Phone:
Alternate contact during event: Cell Phone:
Type: Event Special Event Event w/ Contract
Location (Address) of Event:
Estimated Attendance (participants and spectators):
Event Information
Title/Name of Event
(Events after 10:00 p.m. require a variance from City Council)
Mailing Address:
EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION
216 North 4 th Street, Stillwater, MN 55082
Telephone: 651-430-8837 Fax: 651-430-8810
Cell Phone: Fax:
Email Address:
Site Plan:
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
Will merchandise/food items be sold?
Will sound amplification be used?
Insurance certificate from rental vendor is required
Event Features
How many
vendors expected:
Fees for electricity may
apply see Instructions
What type:Fees for electricity may
apply see Instructions
Hours and Type:
Will there be any inflatables?
Will a stage or tent(s) be set up?
Will there be entertainment?
Will any signs/banners be put up Number and size:
Will cooking operations be conducted?
A site plan is mandatory for all events. Please provide a map of the site layout. Include any tables, stages, tents,
fencing, portable restrooms, vendor booths, trash containers, etc. If event involves a parade, race or walk,
please attach a route map highlighting route. Include rest stop stations, crossings, signage and indicate route
direction with arrows.
Contact Washington County Health Department, 651‐430‐6655
Dimensions:
Will food be prepared on site?
Will there be temporary fencing?
Contact Stillwater Fire Department, 351‐4950
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
No Yes
Fees may apply
see InstructionsNumber needed:
Number needed:Fees may apply
see Instructions
Will event need barricade(s)?
Will extra picnic tables be needed?
Describe level of advertisement (ie, radio, flyers, ads, tv, press release). Attach sample if available
Will alcohol be sold?
Describe power needs and location of power source.
City Sidewalks or Trails
City Services (After reviewing the event application, City services may be requried for the event.)
Will event use, close or block any of the following: If yes specify location on site map.
Public Parking Lots or Spaces
Start/End Time:Date:
Start/End Time:Date:
Start/End Time:Date:
Will there be a fireworks display?Permit required, contact Stillwater Fire Department, 651‐351‐4950
City Streets or Right‐of‐way
See Alcohol Regulations in the Instructions
Will alcohol be served but not sold?See Alcohol Regulations in the Instructions
^
^
^
^
^
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
^
#
Lot
1
Lot
2
Lot
3
Lot
4
Lot
5Lot 6
Lot 7
Lot
9
Lot
8b
Lot 11
Lot 10
Lot 12
Lot 13
Lot 14
Lot
15
Lot 16
Lot 17
Lot
18
Lot
8a
M u l b e r r y S t
C o m m e r c i a l A v e
M y r t l e S t
C h e s t n u t S t
O l i v e S t
N e l s o n S tMain StWater StSecond StThird StN e l s o n A l l e yUnion AlleyP i n e S t
Crosby
Hotel
ramp
3
4
43
3
4
4
24
24
24
4
4
4
24 Lowel
lParkLowel
l
ParkL iftB r id g e
T e d d y B e a r P a r k
P i o n e e r P a r k
Public Parking
Downtown Stillwater
2019
Lot 1 (pay lot)(Free Nov 1 - Apr 30) - 98 spaces
Lot 2 (pay lot)(Free Nov 1 - Apr 30) - 84 spaces
Lot 3 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 33 spaces
Lot 4 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 29 spaces
Lot 5 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 7 spaces
Lot 6 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 16 spaces
Lot 7 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 16 spaces
Lot 8a ("private" *) -- 51 spaces
Lot 8b (free lot - 4 hr) - 75 spaces
Lot 9 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 30 spaces
Lot 10 (free all day;
overnight by permit) - 48 spaces
Lot 11 (free all day;
overnight by permit) - 45 spaces
Lot 12 (part free all day;
no overnight here) - 78 spaces
(part permit only;
overnight allowed here) - 23 spaces
Lot 13 (free lot - 4 hr) - 13 spaces
Lot 14 (free lot - 4 hr) - 47 spaces
Lot 15 (free lot - 4 hr) - 97 spaces
Lot 16 (free after hrs) - 60 spaces
Lot 17 (free after hrs) - 75 spaces
Lot 18 (free lot - 24 hr) - 22 spaces
Public Ramp (pay) -- 248 spaces
Public level, Crosby (pay) 52 spaces
* Free public lot after 6 PM
3
Legend
Downtown Parking District
City Parking Lot
City Parking Ramp
Public - upper level (Crosby Hotel)
Trailhead Parking (Lot 12)
Private parking only (Lot 8a)
Permit parking only (Lot 12)
Trailers & large vehicles (Lot 12)
On-street handicapped
15 minute parking limit
30 minute parking limit
Loading/unloading
Valet
Bus loading/unloading
Bus parking
^Business Permit Valid
#DT Resident Permit Valid
Free parking lot (year round)
Pay parking lot (Free Nov 1-Apr 30)
Available to public after 6 PMLotparkingStreetparkingPermitsvalid
FreeorPayMonthly Permits
(allows overnight parking)
Numbers in circles =
hour limits on free parking3
On-street parking is free, but limited
to 3 hrs unless posted for less
Map produced by
Community Development Dept
for Downtown Parking Commission
May 16, 2019
1,247 off-street parking spaces:
1,206 general public
41 handicapped spaces
468 marked on-street spaces:
416 general public
18 handicapped spaces
13 15 minute spaces
7 30 minute spaces
19 Loading spaces
239 unmarked on-street spaces
(Includes 91 on 2nd St no. of Mulberry)
1,954 total public spaces
1,451 free public spaces (74.3%)
Historical Data & Requested 2020
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Parking
spaces
111 159 159 141 94 243 198
# of event
dates
13 9 8 8 8 8 8
Cost per date $166.50 $238.50 $238.50 $211.50 $141.00 $364.50 $297.00
Total cost $2,164.50 $2,146.50 $1,908.00 $1,692.00 $1,128.00 $2,916 $2376.00
TO: Downtown Parking Commission
FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
DATE: February 14, 2020
RE: AirGarage contract
INTRODUCTION
Since last summer the Downtown Parking Commission and staff have been working on replacing
the gate equipment at the parking ramp with a mobile based revenue system. Proposals were
received from both AirGarage and Passport Parking. In October the Parking Commission
recommended that the City Council award the project to Passport Parking, which the Council did
in November.
Since then staff has been working with Passport Parking representatives to draft a contract. In
the meantime Passport’s minimum charge for the Permit Management and Enforcement
Management Modules increased to $18,000 each. Previously there was no minimum fee for the
enforcement module and only a $6,000 minimum fee for the permit module. The result is that
the annual cost of Passport’s services to the City would increase by $30,000.
Therefore, at the January meeting the Parking Commission recommended to the City Council
that the City enter into a contract with AirGarage. The Council agreed.
COMMENTS
After Passport Parking proposed a fee structure that made AirGarage less competitive, AirGarage lowered
their fees. AirGarage has agreed to stay with their lowered fees.
Attached you will find two spreadsheets. The first details the costs of the mobile based revenue
management system and the second shows how the costs would impact the parking ramp’s operational
budget. In an average year over the past five years, AirGarage would have cost the City about $16,5001.
But, if annualized, $15,000 a year would be saved by not installing the $120,000 gate system, which would
no longer be necessary. Therefore, actual cost of mobile system would have been only $1,500 more than a
traditional gate system. This increased cost is more than justified in saved staff hours and in eliminating
the need for an after-hours system for helping customers who cannot figure out how to use their credit card
pay and get out of the ramp.
Since enforcement with AirGarage was a concern of Commissioners last month, a note on how it will be
handled is in order. AirGarage would mount ALPR (automatic license plate recognition) cameras at each
1 Annual costs plus 1/8th of the initial equipment costs
AirGarage contract
Page 2
entrance to the ramp.2 If a driver has not paid for parking within 10 minutes of arrival, the ALPR software
would send a message with license plate number to the Parking Enforcement Officer giving notice of the
non-payment. The Parking Enforcement Officer would then issue the ticket based upon whatever protocol
the Police Department decides upon. No costs would be charged to the City for the ALPR system. Its costs
would be paid by AirGarge out of the transaction fee.
If you would like to refresh your memories on either company, you can check them out at their website
https://airgara.ge
REQUEST
City staff requests the Parking Commission to review the contract and make a recommendation to the City
Council on whether to enter into it.
bt
attachments: Cost Spreadsheet
Impact on Operating Costs Spreadsheet
Contract
2 An alternate enforcement system offered by AirGarage is the use of “the barnacle”. This was demonstrated in
July. Essentially this is a windshield attachment that cannot be removed until the fee/fine is paid on-line.
Revenue System Proposals
Cost Comparison
AirGarage (ALPR system; one camera at each entrance)
Hourly customer transaction fee 20%Includes credit card transaction fees
Permit customer management fee (not including Lowell Inn)10%Includes credit card transaction fees
Pay-on-foot station in lobby (for customers w/out handhelds)$10,000 $720 These costs are estimates based on info from Passport Parking
Enforcement: ticket payment fee 25%
ALPR (automatic license plate recognition) hardware $0 Included with AirGarage services; no additional fee to City
Totals I $10,000.00 $15,266.18 Totals I - 20% of avg hourly fee revenue last 5 years + 10% of avg permit fee revenue last 5 years
Totals II $10,000.00 $22,363.80 Totals II - 20% of 2018 hourly fee revenues + 10% of 2018 permit fee revenue
Total I over 8 years (expected life of new equip which costs $120K)$132,129.44 Equipment cost plus 8X city costs
Total II over 8 years (expected life of new equip which costs $120K)$188,910.42 Equipment cost plus 8X city costs
Notes:
1. City could reduce its costs by passing the transaction fee on to the customer. The weekend parking fee would then raise to to $6.00 instead of $5.00
2. Revenues for the parking ramp do not include fees for parking fines.
Municipal Parking Ramp
Revenue System Proposals
Impact on Operating Costs
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Adopted Account Description
$2,502 $36,163 $13,559 $33,380 $10,765 $13,445 $16,570 $13,537 $15,909 $15,684 $18,000 725-0000-3140-0105 Parking Permits
$0 $7,877 $12,627 $10,487 $15,086 $18,620 $18,668 $18,596 $16,884 $20,812 $15,000 725-0000-3140-0110 Parking Permits-Lowell Inn
$0 $0 $140 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 725-0000-3140-0115 Parking Permits-Events
$0 $0 $26,816 $3,176 $21,856 $31,355 $56,278 $68,046 $84,426 $103,977 $55,000 725-0000-3140-0120 Ramp Revenue-CC & Cash
$0 $0 $0 725-0000-3880-0900 Capital Asset Contributions
$0 $0 $0 725-0000-3910-0461 Transfer In-TIF District #1
$0 $0 $0 725-0000-3910-0720 Transfer In-Parking Fund
$2,502 $44,040 $53,142 $47,043 $47,708 $63,421 $91,516 $100,179 $117,219 $140,474 $88,000 REVENUES
Average transient revenue last 5 years $68,816
Transient revenue in 2018 $103,977
Average permit revenue last 5 years $15,029
Permit revenue 2018 $15,684
2017 2018 2019
Since $120K set aside for new equip to last 8 years, any annualized costs over $15,000 would increase operating Actual Actual Adopted
costs by that amount.$2,679 $0 $2,700 725-4725-1200-0000 Part-Time Salaries
(based on last 5 yrs)(based on 2018)$205 $0 $207 725-4725-1420-0000 FICA/Medicare
AirGarage annualized cost over 8 yrs (ALPR)$16,516 $23,614 $732 $451 $1,000 725-4725-2101-0000 General Supplies
$0 $0 $0 725-4725-2302-0000 Other Minor Equipment
$12,321 $11,353 $8,000 725-4725-3099-0000 Other Professional Services
Cost of new revenue equipment $120,000 $3,457 $3,871 $3,500 725-4725-3101-0000 Telephone
Annualized cost over 8 yrs $15,000 $0 $0 $0 725-4725-3202-0000 Meals
$0 $0 $0 725-4725-3400-0000 Printing And Publishing
So, if we had AirGarage in an average of the past 5 years, the $1,516 cost in addition to the annualized $15,000 $11,465 $11,912 $12,582 725-4725-3500-0000 General Insurance
equipment cost would have increased avg operating costs to $67,712.27. (The avg revenue was $102,562)$14,776 $19,673 $17,000 725-4725-3600-0000 Electricity
$2,993 $8,535 $9,000 725-4725-3702-0000 Equipment Repair Charges
$2,307 $3,052 $3,000 725-4725-3707-0000 Maintenance Agreements
$6,705 $7,325 $7,000 725-4725-3900-0000 Sales Tax
$3,224 $3,305 $3,405 725-4725-3906-0000 Admin Charges-General Fund
$6,250 $17,295 $2,500 725-4725-4099-0000 Miscellaneous Charges
$67,116 $86,772 $69,894 OPERATING EXPENDITURES
2016 $60,756.00
2015 $59,693.00
2014 $56,645.00
5 yr op cost avg $66,196.27
Revenues
Operating Costs
Impact of proposals on operating costs
1
AIRGARAGE SERVICES ORDER FORM
Customer: Contact:
Address: Phone:
E-Mail:
Services: AirGarage, Inc. (“AirGarage”) will provide website-based services for advertising and leasing the Customer’s
identified parking spaces (the “Service(s)”). AirGarage’s website allows the Customer to register parking spots, set
prices, and connect with drivers (“Drivers”). AirGarage will also provide the initial setup services as detailed in Exhibit
A, and the ongoing services as listed in Exhibit B. Except for the services described in Exhibits A and B, AirGarage is
not responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of Customer’s parking spots.
Services Fees: AirGarage will withhold 30% of Payments
made by Drivers for Customer’s parking spots. AirGarage
will transmit the remaining 70% to Customer.
Initial Service Term: The Services will begin on the
Effective Date and will continue for one year unless
terminated by either party upon fourteen (14) days’
written notice.
SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Services Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into on this ____________________ (the “Effective Date”)
between AirGarage, Inc. with a place of business at 1112 Bryant Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 (“AirGarage”),
and the Customer listed above (“Customer”). This Agreement includes and incorporates the above Order Form, as
well as the attached Terms and Conditions and contains, among other things, war ranty disclaimers, liability
limitations, and use limitations.
AirGarage, Inc. Customer
By: By:
Name: Name:
Title: Title:
2
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. SERVICES AND SUPPORT
1.1 AirGarage is an online service that connects automobile
owners (“Drivers”) with parking spot owners (“Spot Owners”).
AirGarage does not own, create, sell, resell, provide, control, or
manage cars, parking spots, Drivers, or Spot Owners. When
Drivers and Spot Owners reach an agreement, they enter into a
contract directly with each other. AirGarage is not and does not
become a party to, or other participant in, the contractual
relationship between Drivers and Spot Owners, nor is AirGarage
a real estate broker or insurer.
1.2 Subject to the terms of this Agreement, AirGarage will
use commercially reasonable efforts to provide Customer the
Services. As part of the registration process, Customer will
identify an administrative user name and password for
Customer’s account with AirGarage. AirGarage reserves the
right to refuse registration of, or cancel, passwords it deems
inappropriate.
1.3 Subject to the terms hereof, AirGarage will provide
Customer with reasonable technical support services in
accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit C.
2. RESTRICTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1 Customer will not, directly or indirectly: reverse
engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to
discover the source code, object code, or underlying structure,
ideas, know-how, design, construction, or algorithms relevant to
the Services or any software, documentation, or data related to
the Services (“Software”); modify, translate, or create derivative
works based on the Services or any Software (except to the
extent expressly permitted by AirGarage or authorized within the
Services); use the Services or any Software for timesharing or
service bureau purposes or otherwise for the benefit of a third
party; or remove any proprietary notices or labels.
2.2 Customer represents, covenants, and warrants that
Customer will use the Services only in compliance with
AirGarage’s then-current standard policies published on the
AirGarage website (https://airgara.ge/terms/) (the “Policy”) and
all applicable laws and regulations. Customer hereby agrees to
indemnify and hold harmless AirGarage against any damages,
losses, liabilities, settlements, and expenses (including without
limitation costs and attorneys’ fees) in connection with any claim
or action that arises from an alleged violation of the foregoing or
otherwise from Customer’s use of Services. Although AirGarage
has no obligation to monitor Customer’s use of the Services,
AirGarage may do so and may prohibit any use of the Services it
believes may be (or alleged to be) in violation of the foregoing.
2.3 Customer shall be responsible for obtaining and
maintaining any equipment and ancillary services needed to
connect to, access, or otherwise use the Services, including,
without limitation, modems, hardware, servers, software,
operating systems, networking, web servers and the like
(collectively, “Equipment”). Customer shall also be responsible
for maintaining the security of the Equipment, Customer’s
account, passwords (including but not limited to administrative
and user passwords) and files, and for all uses of Customer
account or the Equipment with or without Customer’s knowledge
or consent.
3. CONFIDENTIALITY; PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
3.1 Each party (the “Receiving Party”) understands that the
other party (the “Disclosing Party”) has disclosed or may
disclose business, technical, or financial information that is
material to the Disclosing Party’s business (hereinafter referred
to as “Proprietary Information” of the Disclosing Party).
Proprietary Information of AirGarage includes non-public
information regarding features, functionality, and performance of
the Services. Proprietary Information of Customer includes non-
public data provided by Customer to AirGarage to enable the
provision of the Services (“Customer Data”). The Receiving
Party agrees: (i) to take reasonable precautions to protect such
Proprietary Information, and (ii) not to use (except in
performance of the Services or as otherwise permitted herein) or
divulge to any third person any such Proprietary Information.
The Disclosing Party agrees that the foregoing shall not apply
with respect to any information after five (5) years following the
disclosure thereof or any information that the Receiving Party
can document (a) is or becomes generally available to the public,
(b) was in its possession or known by it prior to receipt from the
Disclosing Party, (c) was rightfully disclosed to it without
restriction by a third party, (d) was independently developed
without use of any Proprietary Information of the Disclosing
Party, or (e) is required to be disclosed by law.
3.2 Customer shall own all right, title, and interest in and to
the Customer Data. AirGarage shall own and retain all right, title,
and interest in and to (a) the Services and Software, all
improvements, enhancements, or modifications thereto, (b) any
software, applications, inventions, or other technology developed
in connection with Services or support, and (c) all intellectual
property rights related to any of the foregoing.
3.3 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, AirGarage
shall have the right to collect and analyze data and other
information relating to the provision, use, and performance of
various aspects of the Services and related systems and
technologies (including, without limitation, information
concerning Customer Data and data derived therefrom), and
AirGarage will be free (during and after the term hereof) to (i)
use such information and data to improve and enhance the
Services and for other development, diagnostic, and corrective
purposes in connection with the Services and other AirGarage
offerings, and (ii) disclose such data solely in aggregate or other
de-identified form in connection with its business. No rights or
licenses are granted except as expressly set forth herein.
3
4. PAYMENT OF FEES
4.1 Drivers will pay AirGarage the applicable price as listed
by AirGarage on its website for the use of designated parking
spots (the “Payment”). AirGarage will retain 30% percent of the
Payment for its Services. AirGarage will disburse the remainder
of the Payment (70%) to Customer.
4.2 AirGarage will disburse the owed amounts to Customer
by the fifth (5th) day of each month for all money accrued in the
previous month (the “Disbursement”). If Customer believes that
the Disbursement is incorrect, Customer must contact AirGarage
no later than 60 days after the Disbursement. Inquiries should be
directed to AirGarage’s customer support department.
4.3 AirGarage shall be responsible for ensuring the security,
privacy, and legal compliance of the Payments. Customer
assumes no responsibility for the Payments made by Drivers to
AirGarage.
5. TERM AND TERMINATION
5.1 This Agreement is for the Initial Service Term as
specified in the Order Form, and shall be automatically renewed
for additional periods of the same duration as the Initial Service
Term (collectively, the “Term”).
5.2 Both AirGarage and Customer can terminate this
Agreement for any cause upon fourteen (14) days’ written notice.
5.3 In addition to any other remedies it may have, either
party may also terminate this Agreement upon fourteen (14)
days’ written notice (or without notice in the case of
nonpayment), if the other party materially breaches any of the
terms or conditions of this Agreement. Customer will pay in full
for the Services up to and including the last day on which the
Services are provided. Upon any termination, AirGarage will
make all Customer Data available to Customer for electronic
retrieval for a period of thirty (30) days, but thereafter AirGarage
may, but is not obligated to, delete stored Customer Data. All
sections of this Agreement which by their nature should survive
termination will survive termination, including, without
limitation, accrued rights to payment, confidentiality obligations,
warranty disclaimers, and limitations of liability.
6. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
6.1 Any and all disputes arising out of this Agreement shall
be governed by California law.
6.2 In the event of a dispute, Customer and AirGarage shall
first convene to attempt to resolve the dispute through informal
meetings and discussions.
6.3 Any and all disputes arising out of this Agreement that
cannot be resolved by the parties through an informal meeting
process shall be resolved by binding arbitration. Arbitrations
shall be conducted by the American Arbitration Associatio n
(AAA) pursuant to its Consumer Arbitration Rules and shall take
place in San Francisco County, California.
6.4 In any action or proceeding to enforce rights under this
Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to recover costs
and attorneys’ fees.
7. WARRANTY AND DISCLAIMER
AirGarage shall use reasonable efforts consistent with
prevailing industry standards to maintain the Services in a
manner that minimizes errors and interruptions in the Services
and shall perform the Services in a professional and workmanlike
manner. Services may be temporarily unavailable for sched uled
maintenance or for unscheduled emergency maintenance, either
by AirGarage or by third-party providers, or because of other
causes beyond AirGarage’s reasonable control, but AirGarage
shall use reasonable efforts to provide advance notice in writing
or by e-mail of any scheduled service disruption. HOWEVER,
AIRGARAGE DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE
SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE;
NOR DOES IT MAKE ANY WARRANTY AS TO THE
RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE
SERVICES. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS
SECTION, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND
AIRGARAGE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-
INFRINGEMENT.
8. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
8.1 NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE
CONTRARY, AIRGARAGE AND ITS SUPPLIERS
(INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL EQUIPMENT
AND TECHNOLOGY SUPPLIERS), DIRECTORS,
OFFICERS, AFFILIATES, REPRESENTATIVES,
CONTRACTORS, AND EMPLOYEES SHALL NOT BE
RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE WITH RESPECT TO ANY
SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT OR TERMS
AND CONDITIONS RELATED THERETO UNDER ANY
CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR
OTHER THEORY: (A) FOR ERROR OR INTERRUPTION OF
USE OR FOR LOSS OR INACCURACY OR CORRUPTION
OF DATA OR COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE
GOODS, SERVICES OR TECHNOLOGY OR LOSS OF
BUSINESS; (B) FOR ANY INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY,
INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES; (C) FOR ANY MATTER BEYOND
AIRGARAGE’S REASONABLE CONTROL; OR (D) FOR
ANY AMOUNTS THAT, TOGETHER WITH AMOUNTS
ASSOCIATED WITH ALL OTHER CLAIMS, EXCEED THE
FEES PAID BY CUSTOMER TO AIRGARAGE FOR THE
SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN THE 12
MONTHS PRIOR TO THE ACT THAT GAVE RISE TO THE
LIABILITY, IN EACH CASE, WHETHER OR NOT
AIRGARAGE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY
OF SUCH DAMAGES.
8.2 CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT
AIRGARAGE IS A SERVICE PROVIDER THAT CONNECTS
DRIVERS WITH CUSTOMER AS A SPOT OWNER AND
THAT AIRGARAGE ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR,
4
NOR LIABILITY FOR, ANY INTENTIONAL OR
UNINTENTIONAL DAMAGE CAUSED TO CUSTOMER BY
DRIVERS.
9. MISCELLANEOUS
9.1 This Agreement does not, and shall not be construed to,
create any partnership, joint venture, employer -employee,
agency, or franchisor-franchisee relationship between Customer
and AirGarage. Customer does not have authority of any kind to
bind AirGarage in any respect whatsoever.
9.2 The Services are non-exclusive; AirGarage retains the
right to enter agreements with other customers.
9.3 Customer warrants that it possesses the legal authority
to enter into a binding legal obligation and that Customer will
only use Services to make legitimate transactions with Drivers.
9.4 Customer warrants that all information Customer has
provided pursuant to this Agreement, and that Customer will
provide in the future to AirGarage for the rendering of services,
is true, accurate, current, and complete.
9.5 If any provision of this Agreement is found to be
unenforceable or invalid, that provision will be limited or
eliminated to the minimum extent necessary so that this
Agreement will otherwise remain in full force and effect and
enforceable. This Agreement is not assignable, transferable, or
sublicensable by Customer except with AirGarage’s prior written
consent. AirGarage may transfer and assign any of its rights and
obligations under this Agreement without consent. This
Agreement is the complete and exclusive statement of the mutual
understanding of the parties and supersedes and cancels all
previous written and oral agreements, communications, and other
understandings relating to the subject matter of this Agreement.
All waivers and modifications must be in a writing signed by
both parties, except as otherwise provided herein. All notices
under this Agreement will be in writing and will be deemed to
have been duly given when received, if personally delivered;
when receipt is electronically confirmed, if transmitted by
facsimile or e-mail; the day after it is sent, if sent for next day
delivery by recognized overnight delivery service; and upon
receipt, if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt
requested.
5
EXHIBIT A
Setup Services
Preparation of physical signage for parking spots
Designation of parking spots for rent
Creation of parking spot listing on website
Customer training (as necessary)
6
EXHIBIT B
Ongoing Services
Advertise Customer’s parking
Provide an online dashboard for Customer to control the number of parking space s available for rent
Provide a system to allow Customer to register the vehicles of pre-approved
drivers that are not using AirGarage’s services
Enforce Customer’s parking spots for Driver non-payment
7
EXHIBIT C
Support Terms
AirGarage will provide Technical Support to Customer via both telephone and electronic mail on weekdays during the hours of 9:00
am through 5:00 pm Arizona time with the exclusion of Federal Holidays (“Support Hours”).
Customer may initiate a helpdesk ticket during Support Hours by calling 480-401-2401 or any time by emailing support@airgara.ge.
AirGarage will use commercially reasonable efforts to respond to all Helpdesk tickets within two (2) business days.
TO: Downtown Parking Commission
FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director
DATE: February 13, 2020
RE: Electric Vehicle Charging Station
BACKGROUND
Last month Don Schuld (Stillwater Sunrise Rotary Club) and Kevin Tholen (Sustainable
Stillwater) requested the Downtown Parking Commission to consider partnering with them to
install a public Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station downtown. The Commission supported
the concept of installing one or two on the fourth level of the municipal parking ramp and asked
city staff to investigate the feasibility.
COMMENTS
Mick Greiner, the city’s Facility
Manager, has asked Marshall Electric
to check to see if it is possible to install
a station at the ramp, and if so at what
cost. The location that will be looked
at will be the two parking spaces next
to the handicapped spot at the south
tower. The location can be seen in the
photo to the right.
Staff hopes to have Marshall Electric’s
findings in time for the Parking
Commission meeting of February 20th.
bt
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
PARKING COMMISSION - 02.20.2020
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
» Recap Study Goals
» Present Preliminary Recommendations
»Highlight Input from Business Meetings
1. Main Street IBA (1.03.2020)
2. Chamber of Commerce (1.29.2020)
» Seek Guidance on Next Steps
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
STUDY GOALS
» Maximize today’s parking supply
» Maximize current investments
» Build on past studies
» Identify low-cost/high-benefit solutions
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
DEFINING OUR USERS
Parking User Typical Turnover/
Time Limit
Examples of User % of
Public Spaces
On-Stop-Shop
User 15 - 30 minutes
• Parcel delivery
• Pickup/Drop-off (Uber, Lyft, Childcare)
• Dry Cleaner
• Convenience Store
• Take-Away Food/Coffee
• Business Delivery
• EV Charging
2%
40 on-street spaces + loading zones
Short-Term User 1 - 2 hours
• 1 Stop Shopping
• Fast/Casual Food (eat in)
• Grocery Store
• Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery
• EV Charging
29%
572 off-street spaces
2 to 4 hour max
+
34%
667 on-street spaces
3 hour max or no restriction
Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours
• Sit down restaurant /bar/brewery
• Multi-Stop/Window shoppers
• Tourists
• Trailhead users
• EV Charging
Daily User 4 to 8+ hours
• Employees
• Residents
• Events
• Trailhead Users
• EV Charging
35%
675 off-street spaces
all day
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
USERS EXPECTATIONS
User User
Expectation
Standards
Time
Restrictions Location Price Parking Type
On-Stop-
Shop User
Free +
Convenient
(Front-Door)
15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free • On-street
Short-Term
User 1 - 2 hours 1 - 2 blocks
from front door Free • On-street
• Off-street
Long-Term
User 2 - 4 hours
2 - 4 blocks
from the front
door
Nominal
Fee • Off-street
Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or
Park & Ride
Nominal
Fee
• On-site (Residents)
• Off-street/site (Employees)
• Off-site (Events)
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
ON-STREET PARKING
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
KNOWN ISSUES
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
StMain
StSecond S
t
Thi
rd
St
Low High
Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization
»On-street parking is heavily utilized throughout the
week.
»Stronger parking enforcement is needed to help
minimize the number of vehicles violating on-street
parking restrictions (e.g., exceeding the time limit).
»Time restrictions for on-street parking and parking
enforcement ends at 6 p.m.
»It is assumed there are a number of employees using
on-street parking spaces during the evening hours.
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
GOAL
Examples On-Street Time
Restriction (Max)
Stillwater 3 hours
Anoka 2 hours
Bemidji 2 hours
Duluth 2 hours
Hopkins 1 hour
Mankato 2 hours
Fargo/Moorhead 2 hours
Red Wing 2 hours
Rochester 0.5 - 2 hours
St. Cloud 2 hours
Wayzata 2 hours
White Bear Lake 2 hours
Winona 2 hours
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
StMain
StSecond S
t
Thi
rd
St
Unrestricted 3 Hr 15 Min No Parking
30 Min
Create higher turnover to
accommodate the one-stop-shopper
and short-term user.
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
RECOMMENDATIONS
Implementation Scale
$ - Lowest level of effort/cost
$$ - Medium level of effort/cost
$$$ - Medium/Highest level of effort/cost
$$$$ - Highest level of effort/cost
Adjust on-street
time restrictions
to 1 or 2 hours
Increase on-
street parking
enforcement
Expand on-
street parking
enforcement to 8 or
10 p.m.
$$$$$$$$$$
Ongoing Activities
• Monitor Turnover
• Curbside Management
• Business Coordination and
Collaboration
Low Cost High Cost
General Business Feedback
• Supports a reduction to on-street
time limits to 1 or 2 hours
• Agrees more on-street parking
enforcement is needed
• Does not support paid on-street
parking (e.g., meters)
Charge for on-
street parking
(meters)
Next Steps
• Establish a signage plan and
designated areas for one hour
parking
• Budget resources for increased
enforcement
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
OFF-STREET PARKING
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
0-75%75-85%85-93%93-100%
KNOWN ISSUES
1
2
3
4
56
7
89
10
12
13
R
14
15
16
17
18
11
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
StMain
StSecond S
t
Thi
rd
St
1
2
3
4
56
7
89
10
12
13
R
14
15
16
17
18
11
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
StMain
StSecond StThi
rd
St
Off-street parking is at or approaching capacity:
• Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons
• Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening
Off-street parking is underutilized during:
• Mornings
• Weekday Afternoons (M-TH)
• Winter Months
Off-street is accommodating a wide range of user needs.
Friday Evening
Example
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
0-75%75-85%85-93%93-100%
GOAL
Sending Zone
1
2
3
4
56
7
89
10
12
13
R
14
15
16
17
18
11
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
StMain
StSecond S
t
Thi
rd
St
1
2
3
4
56
7
89
10
12
13
R
14
15
16
17
18
11
Chestnut S
t
Olive St
Nelson Alle
y
Nelson St
Myrtle St
Commercial
A
v
e Water
S
tMain
StSecond StThi
rd
St
Underutilized
(Excess Capacity:
70 spaces)
Underutilized
(Excess Capacity:
50 spaces)
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone Off-street
Spaces
Peak
Utilization
Utilization
Goal
Parking
Shift to
Meet Goal *
Zone 1 383 100%85%31
Zone 2 157 100%85%13
Total 540 100%85%44
* Takes into consideration a 93% parking utilization threshold
Zone Off-street
Spaces
Peak
Utilization
Utilization
Threshold
Excess
Capacity
Ramp 248 64%93%72
Lot 12 101 39%93%55
Total 349 --127
Receiving Zone
Shift users to underlized lots -
maximize today’s existing supply.
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
RECOMMENDATIONS
Over time, transition
surface lots to paid
lots and charge during
events
$$$$$$$$$$ Low Cost High Cost
Install
wayfinding
signage
Ongoing Activities
• Monitor Utilization
• Business Coordination and
Collaboration
General Business Feedback
• Supports better
wayfinding
• Supports mobile
applications for parking
information and to
reserve parking spaces
Next Steps
• Develop a comprehensive wayfinding plan for all of
downtown
• Budget resources for mobile applications
• Budget resources to retrofit city lots to pay lots -
starting with Lots 3, 4, and 5
• Establish a Parking Benefit District (PBD) to ensure
collected parking revenue is reinvested into the
parking system or other downtown improvements
Implementation Scale
$ - Lowest level of effort/cost
$$ - Medium level of effort/cost
$$$ - Medium/Highest level of effort/cost
$$$$ - Highest level of effort/cost
Provide mobile
parking
applications
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
EMPLOYEE PARKING
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
»Off-street parking is at or approaching capacity:
1. Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons
2. Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening
»Time restrictions for on-street parking and parking
enforcement ends at 6 p.m. Therefore, it is assumed
there are a number of employees using on-street
parking spaces during the evening hours.
»Stillwater’s Business Permit program is not being
fully utilized by businesses who need more
employee parking during the evening hours.
^
^
^
^
^
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
^
#
Lot
1
Lot
2
Lot
3
Lot
4
Lot
5Lot 6
Lot 7
Lot
9
Lot
8b
Lot 11 Lot 10
Lot 12
Lot 13
Lot 14
Lot
15
Lot 16
Lot 17
Lot
18
Lot
8a
M u l b e r r y S t
C o m m e r c ia l A v e
M y r t l e S t
C h e s t n u t S t
O l i v e S t
N e l s o n S tMain St Wat
er
St
Second St
Thi
r
d St
N e l s o n A l l e yUnion Al
l
eyP i n e S t
Crosby
Hotel
ramp
3
4
43
3
4
4
24
24
24
4
4
4
24 Lowel
l
ParkLowel
l
ParkL iftB rid g e
T e d d y B e a r P a r k
P io n e e r P a r k
3
Legend
Downtown Parking District
City Parking Lot
City Parking Ramp
Public - upper level (Crosby Hotel)
Trailhead Parking (Lot 12)
Private parking only (Lot 8a)
Permit parking only (Lot 12)
Trailers & large vehicles (Lot 12)
On-street handicapped
15 minute parking limit
30 minute parking limit
Loading/unloading
Valet
Bus loading/unloading
Bus parking
^Business Permit Valid
#DT Resident Permit Valid
Free parking lot (year round)
Pay parking lot (Free Nov 1-Apr 30)
Available to public after 6 PMLotparkingStreetparkingPermitsvalid
FreeorPayMonthly Permits
(allows overnight parking)
Numbers in circles = hour limits on free parking3
On-street parking is free, but limited
to 3 hrs unless posted for less
Lot 1 (pay lot)(Free Nov 1 - Apr 30) - 98 spaces
Lot 2 (pay lot)(Free Nov 1 - Apr 30) - 84 spaces
Lot 3 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 33 spaces
Lot 4 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 33 spacesLot 5 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 7 spaces
Lot 6 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 16 spaces
Lot 7 (free lot - 3 hr) -- 16 spaces
Lot 8a ("private" *) -- 51 spaces
Lot 8b (free lot - 4 hr) - 75 spaces
Lot 9 (free lot - 4 hr) -- 30 spaces
Lot 10 (free all day;
overnight by permit) - 48 spaces
Lot 11 (free all day;
overnight by permit) - 45 spaces
Lot 12 (part free all day; no overnight here) - 78 spaces
(part permit only;overnight allowed here) - 23 spaces
Lot 13 (free lot - 4 hr) - 14 spaces
Lot 14 (free lot - 4 hr) - 47 spaces
Lot 15 (free lot - 4 hr) - 97 spaces
Lot 16 (free after hrs) - 60 spaces
Lot 17 (free after hrs) - 75 spaces
Lot 18 (free lot - 24 hr) - 22 spaces
Public Ramp (pay) -- 248 spaces
Public level, Crosby (pay) 52 spaces
* Free public lot after 6 PM
1,252 off-street parking spaces:
1,211 general public 41 handicapped spaces
468 marked on-street spaces:
416 general public
18 handicapped spaces
13 15 minute spaces
7 30 minute spaces
19 Loading spaces
239 unmarked on-street spaces
(Includes 91 on 2nd St no. of Mulberry)
1,959 total public spaces
1,456 free public spaces (74.3%)
Map produced byCommunity Development Dept
for Downtown Parking Commission
December 6, 2019
Public Parking
Downtown Stillwater
2020
KNOWN ISSUES
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
GOAL
Designate parking areas for employees that do not compete with
customers - shift long-term and daily user to the fringe
(2 to 4 block walking radius).
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
RECOMMENDATION
Encourage
employees to
park outside of
the core (e.g.,
Ramp or Lot 12)
$$$$$$$$$$ Low Cost High
Establish a
Business Parking
program for
evening employees
Implementation Scale
$ - Lowest level of effort/cost
$$ - Medium level of effort/cost
$$$ - Medium/Highest level of effort/cost
$$$$ - Highest level of effort/cost
Ongoing Activities
• Education
• Business Coordination and
Collaboration
• Require new uses to provide
parking management plans
as part of their development
proposal
General Business Feedback
• Supports designated areas for
employee parking
• Supports a reduction to on-street
time limits to 1 or 2 hours
• Recognize solutions needs to be
a collaborative effort between
businesses and the City
Next Steps
• Develop informational brochures for
businesses to use to educate their
employee’s on where to park
• Establish better signage that marks
designated areas for employee parking
• Refine the Business Permit program to
accommodate evening employee parking
needs
Designate lots for
employee parking
(i.e., Ramp, Lot 12,
and Lot 14)
Develop informational
brochures for businesses
to use to educate their
employee’s on where to
park
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
EVENT PARKING
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
ISSUES
»Stillwater is seeing an increase in the number of event requests.
»Local businesses are hosting more indoor events (e.g., weddings, celebrations, and plays).
»Surface lots are being used to accommodate larger events.
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
GOAL
Minimize parking demand in the core
during large events
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
RECOMMENDATION
Event Parking
Parking rates could be adjusted to shift the long-term and daily user to
the fringe (2 to 4 block walking radius).
Charge event
parking rates/fees in
surface lots
Develop event
management
plans for larger
events
$$$$$$$$$$
Ongoing Activities
• Parking Commission Oversight
Low Cost High Cost
General Business Feedback
• Supports off-site event parking
• Supports the idea of better event
management
Formalize
shared
parking
agreements
Next Steps
• Identify roles and responsibilities (city
vs. event organizer) for off-site parking
strategies
• Establish a Parking Benefit District (PBD)
to ensure collected event revenue is
reinvested into the parking system or
other downtown improvement
Identify off-
site parking
facilities
Provide off-site
shuttle services and
allow for pedi-cabs
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
TRAILHEAD PARKING
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
DISCUSSION
Known Issues
Trail head parking has increased
and will continue to grow with
regional bicycle improvements
Goals
Balance parking needs with
downtown users
Strategies
Discover solutions as part of the
North Aiple Park Master Plan
700 6907007108208107208
3
0
830
820
810
750 710Parking lot in light grey to be
constructed by Theater.
Parking lot extension in dark grey
represents 24 potential spaces
for the park.
Access point same as current, but a
90 degree intersection created.
Park entrance
North entrance to Theater Brown'sCreekTrailStateHighway95
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study
THANK YOU
Next Steps
• Draft Plan (March/April)
• Present Draft Plan to the Business Community (April/May)
• Finalize Plan/Adoption (May/June)