Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-01-16 DTPC MIN 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