Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 2019- Study and Working File
Downtown Pualic Parking System E-iciency Study I S SSION ITEMS 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 Downtown Parkinc System --lciency Stucy 8 STUDY GOALS Maximize today's parking supply Maximize current investments Build on past studies Identify low-cost/high-benefit solutions Downtown 'colic 'arkinc System Efficiency Stucy DEFINING OUR USERS Parking User Typical Turnover/ Examples of User of Time Limit Public Spaces Parcel delivery Pickup/Drop-off (Uber, Lyft, Childcare) On-Stop-Shop Dry Cleaner 2% 15 - 30 minutes Convenience Store User 40 on-street spaces + loading zones Take-Away Food/Coffee Business Delivery EV Charging 1 Stop Shopping Fast/Casual Food (eat in) 29% 572 off-street spacesShort-Term User 1 - 2 hours Grocery Store Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery 2 to 4 hour max EV Charging Sit down restaurant /bar/brewery Multi-Stop/Window shoppers 34% Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours Tourists 667 on-street spaces Trailhead users 3 hour max or no restriction EV Charging Employees Residents 35% Daily User 4 to 8+ hours Events 675 off-street spaces Trailhead Users all day EV Charging Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Stucy 10111 USERS EXPECTATIONS User Standards User Expectation Time Restrictions Location Price Parking Type On-Stop- 15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free On-street Shop User Short-Term 1 - 2 hours 1 - 2 blocks Free On-street User from front door Off-street Free + Long-Term Convenient 2 - 4 blocks Nominal User Front-Door) 2 - 4 hours from the front Fee Off-street door On-site (Residents) Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or Nominal • Off-street/site (Employees) Park & Ride Fee Off-site (Events) Downtown )uolic Parkinc System Eiciency Study @ City Blocks 1,980 s Q City Blocks r 1,320 Q le N,. 1 City Blocko 660 feet) IL r 1 g i T d .. iuJ Je:1 1 LkxaP na 13ik It .)i:-rP)r1 , t,1 \ a n S, D,A,D,- ,, i o 3 l a U S tprrtr` 1 + t/ 4 City Blocks 1, 2,640 feet)', • 0 id City Blocks r' j 1,980 s a Y''" 2 City Blocks , d 1,320 6 4 Q City Block 660 feet) e., i,,,,,,I),,,,, If\. 1,,,,,,,,,.. ttl. I"..y\\\. it r" ss , 2.11(6e..:F:',.11 ri ram-lnlbla,c._..^.h,;l," f;;J ! u /rjlt:J!k"+,}^,11 D,,A•i l f"" o D,; 'i I}Ja 1,arkl ri'l-2,Li,..,,,"cAdrinrlurlW 0 Iffa ARKING Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study y ©8 t * KNOWN ISSUES On-street parking is heavily utilized throughout week. Stronger parking enforcement is needed to help minimize the number of vehicles violating on-street parking restrictions (e.g., exceeding the time limit). 0 Time restrictions for on-street parking and parking enforcement ends at 6 p.m. a. voitt\e'It is assumed there are a number of employees r on-street parking spaces during the evening hours. c‘,est ,,, 0ovoiest Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization Low High iDowntownPublic )ar<inc System E'iciency Stucy 01 ,..IIIIP) k A. v1a.1.8µ611/115611, Mal s i tM x r fit Y cy, l''''I'''''‘'''', k,';--"',:117;:-V\'''' '''' ''°' E^ {r a j^' f Createhigher turnover to r , accommodate the or e-sto sho er k #e and short t r us r, s COmerc: a\pie On-Street Time Examples Restriction (Max) a urs Y Anoka 2 hours Myr`ve Bemidji 2 hours Duluth 2 hours Hopkins 1 hour es`U St Mankato 2 hours Fargo/Moorhead 2 hours Red Wing 2 hours es NQ\soap\\ey 30 Min Rochester 0.5 - 2 hours NQ\Sonsti St. Cloud 2 hours Wayzata 2 hours White Bear Lake 2 hours Winona 2 hours Unrestricted 3 Hr 15 Min No Parking V Downtown Public Parkinc System Efficiency Stucy y ;,. ©© v w- B RECOMMENDATIONS Adjust on-street Increase on- Expand on- Charge for on- time restrictions street parking street parking street parking to 1 or 2 hours enforcement enforcement to 8 or meters) 10 p.m. ss ----4—$$$Low Cost High Cost Implementation Scale Lowest level of effort/cost Medium level of effort/cost Medium/Highest level of effort/cost Highest level of effort/cost General Business Feedback Next Steps Ongoing Activities Supports a reduction to on-street Establish a signage plan and Monitor Turnover time limits to 1 or 2 hours designated areas for one hour Curbside Management Agrees more on-street parking parking Business Coordination and enforcement is needed Budget resources for increased Collaboration Does not support paid on-street enforcement parking (e.g., meters) Downtown Public Parkinc System EDciency Study 04, Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study '' KNOWN ISSUES L.: li , Friday Evening Example Off-street parking is at or 12 9 approaching capacity: vompowmp.oferwegesolow*% avs Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons 7 Summer/Fail - Friday & Saturday Evening oa\Pie R k. coot' Off-street parking is underutilize it during: Mornings 3 Weekday Afternoons (M-TH) esto 2 Winter Months 14 Off-street is accommodating a wide range of user needs. 15 0 16 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93-100% 17 0,AIIIIIIMMIMIIIMIllft, 411111111110111111 Downtown Public Par<inc System ::--iciency Stucy to, f i.„1 .41. 1E113 I 1 oUr tiiderui- it one t(Excess Capacity; 11 50 spaces)?* 10 Shift users to underlized lots - maximize today's existing supply. i 12 1 c....i 8 9 Sending Zone 14oPsommoNwiwie, 7 Zone ParkingOff-street Peak Utilization cesOe' da\ Spaces Utilization Goal Shift to R 6 5 Meet Goal * Zone 1 383 100% 85%31 i.'.•13 4 Zone 2 157 100% 85%13 m). 0—ALt Total 540 100% 85%44 70 spak. s, Takes into consideration a 93% parking utilization threshold st coestixe, 2 rz.4„-ceivint„,1 Lone 14 7 Zone Off-street Peak Utilization Excess vie St tose I*" Spaces Utilization Threshold Capacity 15 Islekso IA St Ramp 248 64% 93%72 1 Lot 12 101 39% 93%55 Total 349 127 16 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93-100% 17 Zone 2 AMMO 1111111MINIIIIIIIIIMIIII aliillik,411111111111111111 Downtown Public Parkinc System L'iciency Stucy Sill \\ 1(1 RECOMMENDATIONS Install Provide mobile Over time, transition surface lots to paid wayfinding parking lots and charge during signage applications events Low Cost 0* S tcjh Cost Implementation Scale Lowest level of effort/cost Medium level of effort/cost Medium/Highest level of effort/cost Highest level of effort/cost General Business Feedback Next Steps Ongoing Activities Supports better Develop a comprehensive wayfinding plan for all of Monitor Utilization wayfinding downtown Business Coordination and Supports mobile Budget resources for mobile applications Collaboration applications for parking Budget resources to retrofit city lots to pay lots - information and to starting with Lots 3, 4, and 5 reserve parking spaces Establish a Parking Benefit District (PBD) to ensure collected parking revenue is reinvested into the parking system or other downtown improvements Downtown Public )arkinc System Efficiency Study 4th, 4 EMPLcYEE PA Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study4041 k KNOWN ISSUES Public ParkingOff-street parking is at or approaching capacity:Downtown Stillwater 2020 iolici Legend 1 e Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons iLL ,i4 i q 0 VA Pa..121/1,lovel(Crostay IM.0 2. Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening L...., 0 LOt 12 ED 14.1.4./1L3 go v.cles(Lca 12, I11.1 valet0 9,....0 Time restrictions for on-street parking and parking Lot 11 %,, Lot 10 4 i A Dr Fi.dani Pern t Val aenforcementendsat6p.m. Therefore, it is assumed mi4ams on,4,14ram9, Fr...np,otlYee".1,, Lot '''. A 407 • Pay parking am(F.aloa'Aar MI there are a number of employees using on-street 8 , Lot, 0 0 Avrnietopobt.ette 6 PM a - ttVont',..k„% parking spaces during the evening hours. j,, zi,,,,,,,,,,,,110 .; 4431 oLI(I.A clay Lo I/Oval Ina a*dOVStillwater's Business Permit program is not being Lot 13 ft 'fully utilized by businesses who need more employee parking during the evening hours. L0114 0 t e - ° a1 Lot 16 AB--. 111'i1te.3‘ 1111- ft) ki,01 of'EMEIDowntownPublicParkincSystemEiciencyStucyRHOaaLfaIVO11010.41464 OW 1004•Mvefl. 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). 4 City Blocks 2,640'" 1 • r• -.• jCity Blocks l-- 1-- s; 1,980 Q j 1' t<, City Blocks f., 1,320Q 11 gCity,Block 660 feet) 1i8 OM k J r" e x J1:,JI r r)' iaokba lHl,A^.NL2 J W J F. '• -.IN"k;h' o}) r0\l' n'GI'O ® . i go-« L? fll III! a R.S: ',17,.i .-a s f`°. ,, • MCIDowntownPu_Il1. I cmrvi ry Jy.Jlu(I LI l luu ILy JIUUy N DAT I N Encourage Develop informational employees to brochures for businesses Designate lots for Establish a park outside of to use to educate their employee parking Business Parking the core (e.g.,employee's on where to i.e., Ramp, Lot 12, program for Ramp or Lot 12) park and Lot 14) evening employees Low Cost High S$ Implementation Scale Lowest level of effort/cost Medium level of effort/cost Medium/Highest level of effort/cost Highest level of effort/cost General Business Feedback Next Steps Ongoing Activities Supports designated areas for Develop informational brochures for Education employee parking businesses to use to educate their Business Coordination and Supports a reduction to on-street employee's on where to park Collaboration time limits to 1 or 2 hours Establish better signage that marks Require new uses to provide Recognize solutions needs to be designated areas for employee parking parking management plans a collaborative effort between Refine the Business Permit program to as part of their development businesses and the City accommodate evening employee parking proposal needs Downtown Pu alic Parking System E2iciency Stucy EVENT PARKING Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study RIB1I1 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. I k .p., 44 i. N. ".,'; . 05.0fr,... ...0,,f,,,, ± „ .,1, -- '- , Irie a r 4 IIIISAIS I. tale P emu^,x-,... > x`+.:Fdu, r I i Downtown Public Parking System Eficienc Y StudY Lill GOAL Minimize parking demand in the core 31,during large events Hid lik - * -,. x A 1 r.'_. ' ' ilk\ 0 #4 - Ilk-sit- Ni6,,,,,,t .1r,,x...). N ft0„.*S0 ... ,.. 11., *-. Vss., I C It 44 % V 1 Ittp 441 , s 4., k Or$rit (.40 3 r0... , 4 ,, -...... . . 4 „ 4.- 1r .,,,. 4 * t.a. i III 04 kk1411: . . , 1 Zti 4imi; , 4.47nYijob.c No, ... I 8 S!.,,E % F)clirt-Sunnys de 1 kcil 1. . , . 4,-..,, - .. . ..,,. ,,,,.., —,,,,_, ... .. • 1,7"- ,,10;pt I- ** - '4r,***,`0, t,...., 44., Z' t: 1 4., ..,.. i I .w..4AL ***-ei it. I ' 4' 4 ea W 1111114 • 11 gal_ 0 ", , %:. 4 N.. f r .,y„1 ' - . , bi ,:-.11 m ..„L. JOft1IOU •0visif 4 4 i tf •* Ir. 1,1' 4***'..".- falt, * 111-.4 •1 4 Downtown Public Par<inc System E'iciency Stucy 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). Identify off- Develop event Formalize Provide off-site Charge event site parking management shared shuttle services and parking rates/fees in facilities plans for larger parking allow for pedi-cabs surface lots events agreements Low Cost Hign Cost General Business Feedback Next Steps Ongoing Activities Supports off-site event parking Identify roles and responsibilities (city Parking Commission Oversight Supports the idea of better event vs. event organizer) for off-site parking management strategies Establish a Parking Benefit District (PBD) to ensure collected event revenue is reinvested into the parking system or other downtown improvement owntown Public Parkinc System =-bciency Stucy II TRAILHEAD PARKING Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study KnownIssues 1TrailheadparkinghasincreasedAccesspointsame as current,but aF Perk entrance 90 degree intersection created. -... and will continue to grow with regional bicycle improvements frOti4„ ,- // llGoalstIi/j t r , ii Lyii,),i;/ Balance parking needs withJdowntownusersoIlli I ur ,C •'- f Parking lot extension in dark grey s 11f/I1f(/1/( .9- represents 24 potential spaces Iif l( for the park. Strategies pL,Discover solutions as part of the i '` iii If I i lli; l 7( itjl Parking lot in light grey to be at constructed by Theater. 1%k 4, eaNorthentrancetoTheater 4114*:.._..k.. ,k. 4. _ p..,,7..:.:.....710r/1 f il Downtown Pualic Paring System Efficiency Study THANK YOU 41frize r elk4e661- tft rtte'"1 (-676x-alz7 kteezel,_ Next Steps Draft Plan (March/April) Present Draft Plan to the Business Community (April/May) Finalize Plan/Adoption (May/June) Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING SYSTEM EFFICIENCY STUDY 01 .29.20 Downtown PublicParkingkny System Efficiency Study p W 7!, K3f1 DISCUSSION ITEMS Study Goals and Objectives Highlight Known Issues Defining our Users Discuss Potential Strategies Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study a I Legend PARKING STUDIES GNParking Ramp Lot 12 il Public upper level(Crosby Hotel) yw rew`' n \\,TraxMad Parking(Lot 12) Lot 12 ff Private parking only(Lot Ba)a 1 Past study's have not J Permit et kingparr cnly apped 12) Trailers 6large vehlota(Lot 12) On street haMicehicle C.I IS minute parking limit rn - 30 nonut parkkg limit looked at immediate Bus loalunlunloqN -Valet I Bus loa0 rglunbeding Bus parking Lot 11 - ' Lat 10 o Monthly Permit Business Permit Vaud needs (management v . OT Resident Permit Valid allows overnight parking( Free parking lot Near round) y • Pay parting lot(Free Nov 1-Apr 30) and efficiency) o Lot Avertable lopublwaher6PM 8 8 Lot Npmba nem.a g Y hour lmxs nn bea;no Lot i nasal parking c nee.but Nn te0 to J Ms unless posted for k.s 11.I\ 8a Jl ; 1 Apr 30) 96 spac» 2040 Com rehensive Ltpacpi 000 .se lot•3nr)—I5 spaces ycM's\ - Lot Fervate'•I 55 Spacest=uu. Clfo t 6 5 Lot eb(freeb 4 1 paces Plan (Downtown Lot 9gr b JD spaces Lot 10 to 1 ay; Lot 13 c ems v permit)40 spacesLin1l1asay: 1:. overnight y p xl 45 spare. Lot 12(pan tree all J.y. LO m wernof here) 78 spaces Master Plan) bl 4 ; overnight perm mnNeRI laJlineol spaces Lo1141nee lot-4 Prl•47 Spam. Lot 151nee lot-4 no-97 spaces J Lot 16 hee after N.1 60 scams Lot 1)Ilree afar Ms/ 75.peas 3, a eiK acno Ivan(s4a.o p..0, 0 Lot 1 Public Crosby(Pak)sz.pa.a. recognized long-term 3 Fuse 5 McbtaeerfiPM O O yf 1 oM-cnael parking spaces: Q O ^ 1211 gererlpubis Lot 14 0 Lot appea spaces 469 marked on-street mer416 genera p 1 1315 minute pace'csparkingneedsa • 2 30mn.spaLek 19 Loafing spaces 239 unmarked oncbeat spaces e Ilrekrdaa 91 on; a; 2M Sl iro.of Munerryl Nv\xoo MI f456 Ireepublic spansulal Th i s st u d was c puW spauclt4JY.) y AIt xa°°' Lo 7... initiated bythe u 15 1 , Lol lb Stillwater Parking Lot S\ 18 b0' ,,, o,,,,.. 00 Commission Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study B 1_'Q Legend ST U DY G OA LS y a!- O Downtown Parking District{ C_ City Parking Lot City Parking Ramp r/hl Public-upper level(Crosby Hotel) — p Trailhead Parking(Lot 12) n"''wa Lot 12 Private parking only(Lot tla(O Permit parkingkl only(Lot 12) I I J Traibrs 8 large velrcles(Lot 12) 1 On-street handicapped I 115 minute parking limit m _ 30 minute parking limit n J LoadingNnloading Maximize today's 2 Bus l parking unbatlirg Bus perklnp Lot 11 yijl of 10 Monthly Permits Business Permit Valid parking supply DT Resident Permit Veld allows overnight parking) Free parking lot(year round) Pay parking lot(Free Nov 1-Apr 30) p Lot u • AvaiWWe to public alter fi PM maximize current 6 IS a Npn eraont7.JJ 39 Hoer l.,,a on lrte wrklrg Lot On-street parking*free an kmnea 62 b ,./m]Ara unload poelad for lore Lot((pry bblFree Nor 1-Apr rot-98 spacesj.: r Lot Q Lot 2lay lop(Free Nos l•Apr]0/ tl4 spaces - investments Lot)(Peelot]hit ]]snows Lot 5( free bl-4 hr1 ]]spaces rS(tree lot 4 hr) ]spaces Lot 6llree lot]hn 16 snows y+\ r ry free lot]M) 16 spaces pw Lot e`] pat ea roue..•1 -61 spaces L. 1 Loth 6 Lot eb Or.lot-4 hoe 25 spaces Lot 9(free lot-4 ho-30 spaces Lot 13 I o dree.l my: r nlgntperma)•48 spaces 11(free al day B u i I d on past studies npefhy rek° 78spaceLo `` 2Wpa ln.en((rTa spaces WO 4 4 ` , 1p1( Penpe.only of 13(Lee loot•n lot-14 spacees f y^ TT Lot 14(free lot-4I.•47 spaces of 15(free lot-4lid•97 sparesLtt6jlrteaMrnre( Menaces Identif low-cost/high- 1. y Or Public level Crosby(pay 62 snoods L1,e,, nnt Si, Free pudlic lot age,PM N L262 on 211 general spores:bene fit so lu tions nwrapole 4t 6ancScaPped snows Lot 14 Lot 466 marked owslreel spaces: ral pudic i1 o k,418 handicapped spaces 13 15 minute spaces 5 G 1 30 minor spaces 19 Lowing c fora'."' LTLsre + marked on-street spaces 5 d J kdes 91 on 2nd 51 no of Mulberry/ Embrace a distrit-wide NpL nP°4y a n;loekpw (24]3./ GT ti/sop L approach 5parking i. Lot 16 1 ` ytoho k of 1 Downtown Public Parkins System E iciency Study w..,...e.aa.` r„' EXISTING CONDITIONS What we know today... Downtown uses have anc will continue to chance over time - resulting in different oaring needs. New entertainment uses have added pressure to today's parking supply (e.g., restaurants, cocktail lounges, breweries, etc.). There are limitec transit options to help reduce parking demanc . Ride sharing oroc rams (e.g., Uber and Lyft) can play a role in helping reduce parking demand. We need to accommodate multiple parking users (e.g., patrons, residents, emPloyees, delivery vehicles, events, and trail users). Par <inc utilization fluctuates curinc different periocs of the cay anc year. Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Stucy Fen CONDITIONS -J' j', o - `EXISTING On-street par is heavily p r,'1 An“•,..., utilized throughout the week.n , T. V Ave oecc a k+ QSt x MY t\ j pest Ne\son A\\ey Nes Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization Low H i g s IMO a downtown Nubile . -kinc System = iciency Study kl EXISTING CONDITIONS i Friday Evening 1: Example f Off-street parking is at or 2 approaching capacity: Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons i' 11 ,:.; t ' c.\ 8,. 9 7 Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening R 0‘" e 6 c000l''`: 113 Off-street parking is underutilized during: vot\tst 3 Viornings Weekday Afternoons (M-TH) Winter Months 14 t‘e\soINN i:": ' , Parking utilization at or above 93% suggest a parking facility is at capacity. 16 18 riP-759/0 75-85%85-93% " -100% 17 Downtown PuDlic Parkinc System :—iciency Stucy 0. Lir: 4 111151 4, iffin 6 1,,la-19114 Afr,...41.lor it 6te 0.1. DEFINING OUR USERS Who is our biggest user? Parking User Typical Turnover/ Examples of User of Time Limit Public Spaces Parcel delivery Pickup/Drop-off(Uber, Lyft, Childcare) Dry Cleaner One-Stop-Shop 2% 15 - 30 minutes Convenience Store User Take Away Food/Coffee 40 on-street spaces + loading zones Business Delivery EV Charging 1 Stop Shopping Fast/Casual Food (eat in) 29% 572 off-street spaces Short-Term User 1 - 2 hours Grocery Store Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery 2 to 4 hour max EV Charging Sit down restaurant /bar/brewery Multi-Stop/Window shoppers 34% Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours Tourists 667 on-street spaces Trailhead users 3 hour max or no restriction EV Charging Employees Residents 35% Daily User 4 to 8+ hours Events 675 off-street spaces Trailhead Users all day EV Charging Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 0) I. USERS EXPECTATIONS How should we balance expectations? User Standards User Expectation Time Restrictions Location Price Parking Type One-Stop- Shop User 15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free On-street Short-Term 1 - 2 blocks On-street User 1 - 2 hours Free from front door Off-street Free + Long-Term Convenient 2 - 4 blocks Nominal User Front-Door) 2 - 4 hours from the front Fee Off-street door On-site (Residents) Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or Nominal • Off-street/site (Employees) Park & Ride Fee Off-site (Events) Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 11w ter.. ©B i 1 Block = 660 ft or 1 /8 mile r City Blocks 1,980 1., EiCity Blocks 1,320 f$is oCity Block 11(660 feet) 0, .. 0 I 1 i I i 1 t r 4 u t ` , I#._,_ _`_ = `^ ter] r '. a ,r-a,'^d r'x.v•- .o r'11-, - 1„fi,,. rkan::)GJ1D, 0 7, 4 1 Block = 660 ft or 1 /8 mile 43 City Blocks 2,640 0 t 0 4° @City Blocks s s 4 1,980 feet) 1 I .4 2 City Blocks 1320 feet) 1. 4101eikikalP, 11 t 1 (660 feet) 11 0 it ildir,A WP*„...„ ' 11007., 4. ciett;:or mg i VI oilik et e 1 7,-0,-- 1. C.-..TO• - re/'..I-1 ' 2 ' • r - r. 1- 1.,,7 )suichlito011,:,:',Lbarl,,,,,s40111V a FINDING SOLUTIONS District-Wide Parking Approach 1 . Uses a comoination of strategies to maximize the existinc parking supply, while reducinc the demand to build additional spaces. 2. Commonly applied in downtown settings to encourage walkability, foster economic growth, and strengthen the uroan form. 3. Formalizes roles anc resoonsioilities (ownership, operations and maintenance). 4. Emphasizes low-cost/hic h-benefit solutions before large capital investments are made (e.c ., parking structure) Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study FINDING SOLUTIONS District Wide Parking Strategies (Ideas for Stillwater) 1 . Employee Parking 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies 4. Incentives to Reduce Demand 5. Liquor Licenses (Caps) 6. Vultimodal Options 7. Off-Site/Event Parking 8. Parkinc, Rates 9. Parking Permits ( residential or Business) 10. Parking Requirements for New Development 11 . Reconficure/Re-Stripe Existinc Lots 12. Shared Parkinc 13. Shifting Demand 1 L. Technology 15. Time Restrictions 16. Valet Service Downtown Public Parking System E 5ciency Stucy Underutilized SHIFTING DEMAND i Excess Capacity: , 50 ispace,,) 1 11 10 121 Goal j 1 8 9 s , Shift 40 users to the Ramp and Lot 12 (based on existing r 7 parking utilization rates) r R coc,‘, 06aNa 6 5 13\ - 4 Unael utiiii.eu st 0,,riv,4, , Excess Capacity: 2;(31spICes) 4‘k 3 Tweak the System k 4. Strategies) oe,totst 2 Adjust Time Restrictions 14 Redirect Users to Underutilized Lots 1, T,veSt Ne\so Adjust Parking Rates 15 kAe\sci‘ISt 16 18 17 fl-'6 • , 41 III 1:11 Downtown Public Parkinc System if---Iciency Stucy i - 4\‘ i' S TRATEGIES 1 i 12 t Q 911 Time Restrictions I, 1. In general, off-street time 7 restrictions are balanced mocoo t'A\Nle accordingly for the long-term R 6 113..- 'and daily user. eStMilt Signage and way finding still needs to be addressed. N‘estotst 2 14 Ne\s°1% 15 tle\so 3 24 Hr 4 Hr f After Office Hours Only mci Downtown Public Parkinc System -:_t gib iciency Stucy 1 1,, . , .... 1„ .... I..- STRATEGIES t, 1•10' 7.,,,:-,*,'*, Time Restrictions On-street time could be d`Justed to betteraaccommodate restrictions 4- G`..'‘ '`no thueser 0\toe one-st_ , -shopper and short-term Creating Turnover). On-Street Time r* 2. Examples 4fiA 141- t..k.... . Restr3ichtioounrs(Max) illitater Anoka 2 hours Oest"etst Bemidji 2 hours 2 hoursDuluth Ho kins 1 hour Mankato 2 hours eSt 00soll 30 MinIsle 2 hours 0,,stc‘e‘s Fargo/Moorhead Red Wing 2 hours Rochester 0.5 - 2 hours St. Cloud 2 hours 2Wayzata hours White Bear Lake 2 hours Winona 2 hours Unrestricted No Parking15Min3Hr Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study iSTRATEGIES Under zed , E' espacit,11 50 spaces' 10 Parking Rates 12 t`= Parking rates could be adjusted to shift 0 8 9 the long-term and daily user to they fringe (2 to 4 block walking radius). R comoe 6a" 1 6 5 Where should parking be priced? z.13 T.'. 4 Examples Hourly On-Street Daily Rates MYrdeSt Rate Max Time 3 Stillwater 0 3 hours A, $ 3-$5 Anoka 0 2 hours 8 chesty° 2 Bemidji 0 2 hours NA Duluth 1 2hours 4-$10 14 Hopkins 0 1 hour 3 OVeSt 1eY Mankato 0 2 hours 3 toso Fargo/Moorhead 0 2 hours 8 st 15 Ne\so, Red Wing 0 2 hours 0 Rochester 1.5 0.5 -2 hours 14+ St.Cloud 1 2 hours 8 Wayzata 0 2 hours 0 White Bear Lake 0 2 hours 0 18 16 Winona 0 2 hours 0 17 Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study M MM+uM-q 4t r— ©® 10 Vndert.41i1Le9 Exce5s, paciSTRATEGIES c 1 -a ,ty,,k , gbitia5, $) 11 Zone 1 v ... _ , Employee Parking a s Employees are 8 9 5 currently allowed i.: n :,3n4-3';'3::: 1'.•,'3 : 7` :'" n to park in 4 hour 7 lots with a business R coo`ev 5 0 permit 0 1-.1 3 4 Where should 1,574,06 p:cetisiL)-,117:;5't‘ ' 41' ' a\ 6 3 employees be parking or other known users? costost 2 014 What should the I.St itpl.. employer's role be in helping facilitate 150 oos, employee parking? s. ., . .. 16 18 17 Zone 2 44•11t,.-. - Elll121 Downtown Public Parkin c System :—iciency Stucy STRATEGIES Ili ALI 1 A3:1044 11 tliiv,al E „ Event (Parking N ite arkin should be 4. ' .- 9Offspg explored. n relit, e +t i 4 ' II ' IT' I. I ' ,, \ Pa IS nr ys U i. Irr 01 tripolLs.- Pualic Parkinc System fi ienc Stec p®Downtowny Y Y DISCUSSION District Wide Parking Strategies 1 . Employee Par<ing 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies 4. Incentives to Recuce Demand 5. Liquor Licenses (Caps)What other 6. Vlultimodal Options strategies should 7. O-f-Site Parking we be exploring? 8. Parking Fees 9. Parking Permits (Residential or Business) 10. Parking Requirements for \ew Development 11 . Reconfic ure/Re-Stripe Existinc Lots 12. Sharec Parking 13. Technology 14. Time Restrictions 15. Valet Service 16. Wayfinding anc Signage Downtown Public Parking System E iciency Study DISCUSSION Thank Bill Turnblad Lance Bernard Community Development Director Parkinc Consultant City of Stillwater Gi oturnolad@ci.stillwater.mn.us lance@hkgi.com 651 -430-8820 612-252-7133 Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING SYSTEM EFFICIENCY STUDY 01 .03 .20 Downtown 1- 0 ig Public a DISCUSSION ITEMS Study Goals and Objectives Highlight Known Issues Defining our Users Discuss Potential Strategies Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 0, -"__ 1111 Ia I Legend PARKING STUDIES 0 Downtown ParkingDstrctv - City Parking Lot City Parking Ramp g Ulf Public-upper level(Crosby Hotel) sip cut'0 a IL, n Trailbead Parking(Lot 12) Lot 12 2 vA Private parking only(Lot Eta)0 1 -I Permit pang earony 0.0l 121 Past study's have not 1 Trailers d large vendee(Lot 12) Eill On-street handicapped 11115 minute parking limit 30 minute parking limit LoadingAmloading looked at immediate Il Vale, Pus loading/unloading Pao parkng Lot 11 V. 10 Monthly P to Business P t Valid needs (management f E - DT Resident Permit Veld+' allows overnight parking) Free parking lot(year Mond) and efficiency) y' Pay paMi g tat(Free Nov 1 90) p O Available topubis after B PM Ma\\"' ms\ g. .; Lot L 9 rmrere assineislmaaLoto -e free, e 8a I lea t j Nov 2040 Comprehensive LDt7 ° ` t4(oeewtF spaces A, ay t 3(hes lot Rite tal4ee lott5nreet 4 - t6Meoot•3 1spaces otW \. O lot/peels o-3 B spaces tc' Lot 51 Plan (Downtown s tui 9 Vied lot.n NI-30 spaces Lot 13 0 to timenaaaay:y permnl-4B spews11,Ones as day: o g 1tnigmbr wrma)-45 spaces rughl hare(•26 spaces perma Master Plan) yLy4le, t T.4 zdeeloi-Ib aerobia a y.°beret•23 spaces ys_ 9, N ut 13 line lot-4 MI•14 spaces 4 thee lot-4 hr)-42 spaces c sot IS Ikea b1•1 Pr)-97 spawn I ut 161hee ahr bra)-be stows I I2 One alter hrsl-75 spaces 11 1616ee to,24 hr)•22 spaces puibl.Ramp tans)-246 spans 0 8 Lo VebIK level.Crosby(pay)52 spaces recognized long-term a\3p bliplot after 6aM Z a publat Lot 14 Lot 458 marred s veef pacespaces parking needs la 0 2 4118315;An. Dv Pa5;An...Pacess 0 retools spaces L1\rvc$ t 19 Lowing 239 beel e Ilrcbdes 91 od2M St nu or Muberryi W Iola v.v. N`WxeA C,® S bed d avest243,t This study was initiated bythe 1; Lot lb Stillwater Parking 7 ' Dt- E,17. 1A sine 5\ Commission LLot17 Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study 0., 1_I Ittw NO r_••Illiw ©MI STUDY GOALS O Downtown Parking Disldct e C,ry Parking Lot p Ciry Parking Ramp ti! U/z Public-upper level(Crosby Hotel) en e g a ;N•\rrailbead Parking(Lot 12) Lot 12 VJ 1 g 2 j Private parking only(Lot 8a) Permit parking only(Lot 12) 1 trailers 6 large vehicles(Lot 12) 1___I On-street handicapped tb minute parking limit 30 minute perking limit O 1 Loadingfunloading Maximize today's y 'Valet o I ,Bus loading/unloading 1.11 Lot 11 Bus parkin Lot 10 n Monthly Permits a * Business Permit Valid parking supply G ,• DTReekent Permit Vakd allows overnight parking) Free parking lot(year round) l u1 1- It Pay parking lot(Free Nov I-Apr Art\F 4l - LOS i rc, U• Available topublic 6 PM Maximize current m 9 LL •• p Icmsb ik 1 p rkng LOI, O g Ire h ,tee 8a m3 I.: e icr less Ilrly tl y.10 Na Apr 30 investments Lot? lot-3rr)-33 es ili, lot ) La 4(free of a hr) 33 spaces7spares6( )_Loi (free of 3 la)-16 spaces Lot * 70ree a•3m) 11 spat.es11ealbrvote" fits Daces ins I Lo(6 $ -- et,thee t- M) 30 spacesLv911reelot-0 no-]0 spree Lot 10• tot13 1 all s Build on past studies k spaces g yce I-s Dares Lo l' olo21 9tl atl a)y tl WO's a permit ly 4 allowed ut y 6 9 1 spec a N` t 13{Ines lot-0 hrl- aepatns a tine lot-0 hr)-07 sprats fill after 0 1 60 spaces N d bM 176 gnusIdentifylow-cost/high- benefit sol utions re/affabee park,strobes f.01 handrcapped Lot Lot se p,ar d spacesH a 24,general public 18 d pP aoli spaces 161:•'8 1315 remote spaces CC1111 1 7 30 minute spaces 00e S\ 19 load,spacesspaces Embrace a d Mulberry, istrit-wide r unmarked p Na\ann A,\d 1 Vae i a a roachparkingpupoiLottp5 tot 16 Pin„St k Lot 17 Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study II EXISTING CONDITIONS What we know today... Downtown uses have and will continue to chance over time - resulting in different parkinc needs. ew entertainment uses have added pressure to today's parking supply (e.g., restaurants, cocktail lounges, breweries, etc.). There are limited transit ootions to help reduce parking demand. Ride sharing programs (e.g., Uber and Lyft) can play a role in helping reduce oarkinc demand. We need to accommodate multiple parking users (e.g., patrons, resicents, employees, celivery vehicles, events, and trail users). Parking utilization fluctuates during different periods of the cay and year. Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study 4„, 4.. r, k.„,,,,.,,,....:;„ . . EXISTING CONDITIONS _ '- s,,, ,11 On-street parking is heavily utilized throughout the week. re ' f' M a r t5t o n.- yv z t t t 9 Ve pStQ'. NeA5(/ pe. NQ SonSt p Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization Low High ar NZ.MINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMI Downtown )u)lic Par<inc System :lciency Stucy 8 g ... ••••• '.- 4i,„:., i r‘ liq41" EXISTING CONDITIONS a Friday Evening Example g or 12 Off-street parking is at s 9 approaching capacity: Usr. Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons 7 Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening R coomeloa`' e \ 6 5 Off-street parking is underutilized13 k, .4 during: ggttes, i Mornings x 3 \ Weekday Afternoons (M-TH) v. v t\ cOtt 2"eS Wintor Months pNveSr tkOsonp.'el Parkin utilization at or above 93% suggest a parkingfacility at capacity. g gg is16 0= 5% 75-85%85-93% 93-100%a:`'":' 17 Downtown Public Parkins System :ciency Study k '" mil DEFINING OUR USERS Who is our biggest user? Parking User Typical Turnover/ Examples of User of Time Limit Public Spaces Parcel delivery Pickup/Drop-off(Uber, Lyft, Childcare) One-Stop-Shop Dry Cleaner 2% User 15 30 minutes Convenience Store 40 on-street spaces + loading zones Take-Away Food/Coffee Business Delivery EV Charging 1 Stop Shopping Fast/Casual Food (eat in) 29% Short-Term User 1 - 2 hours Grocery Store 572 off-street spaces Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery 2 to 4 hour max EV Charging Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery Multi-Stop/Window shoppers 34% Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours Tourists 667 on-street spaces Trailhead users 3 hour max or no restriction EV Charging Employees Residents 35% Daily User 4 to 8+ hours Events 675 off-street spaces Trailhead Users all day EV Charging Downtown Public Parkinc System Efficiency Stucy Its-8 USERS EXPECTATIONS How should we balance expectations? User Standards User Expectation Time Restrictions Location Price Parking Type One-Stop- 15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free On-street Shop User Short-Term 1 - 2 hours 1 - 2 blocks Free On-street User from front door Off-street Free + Long-Term Convenient 2 - 4 blocks Nominal User Front-Door) 2 - 4 hours from the front Fee Off-street door On-site (Residents) Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or Nominal • Off-street/site (Employees) Park & Ride Fee Off-site (Events) Downtown Public Parkins System Eciency Study t!' =' FINDING SOLUTIONS District-Wide Parking Approach Uses a combination of strategies to maximize -: ne existing par<ing supply, while recucing tie demand to build additional spaces. 2. Commonly appliec in downtown settings to encourage wakabilLy, foster economic growtn, and strengtnen tie urban form. 3. lormalizes roles and responsibilities (ownershio, operations and maintenance). L. Empnasizes low-cost/nig n-benefit solutions before large capital investments are made (e.g., paring structure) Downtown Public 'ar<ing System E-Iciency Study o• FINDING SOLUTIONS District Wide Parking Strategies (Ideas for Stillwater) 1 . Employee Parking 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies 4. Incentives to Reduce Demand 5. Licuor Licenses (Caps) 6. Vlultimocal Cations 7. Off-Site/Event Parking 8. Parking Rates 9. Parking Permits (Resicential or Business) 10. Parkinc Recuirements for New Development 11 . Reconfigure/Re-Stripe Existing Lots 12. Shared Parking 13. Shifting Demand 14. Technology 15. Time Restrictions 16. Valet Service Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study 11111wawwwwr Undefutiliz'ea iiiik SHIFTING DEMAND pac go spaces) ..2 Ca a 11 A01 ; 10 5 Goal r 411 S' 8 9 xShift40userstotheRampy and Lot 12 (based on existing NM parking utilization rates) R CoomeCaa,E6 5 13 a 4 rill oil- Tweak the System 7paces}:3 Strategies) QSt""` s t 14• Adjust Time Restrictions veStRedirectUserstoUnderutilizedLots NO50°' 6 " Adjust Parking Rates 15 ks‘e"o"5t 1 16 18 17 Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study r.„.,..,,,. . i, ,. i . 4......i ,, ,,,.... ... „.. ,,. . \ otv... 0, STRATEGIES ii.J. .. A fr 1 i., C' .., * , I'',. '. '''.-,' ih, :• , S SS Time Restrictions ti ' i , i.t.,:-,\ i,,,In general, off-street time restrictions are balanced i---- R ' (00"e'i . ,.accordingly for the long-term 4 ' and daily user. 135 a- 4 Signage and way finding still 3 needs to be addressed. 20,e‘ co\me 6 f.7 14 c.:. I: ,,,,,.: oVVe St Itt‘e/ I,: 15 t'e‘soo St il 16 '',, 18 - — 24 Hr 4 Hr 3 Hr After Office Hours Only „.,...,...,..., ,„) Aignsummimm. AIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Downtown Pu alic Par<inc System E—ictency Stucy I a z ..„ ;',. 1 \ ty STRATEGIES 4 .,..., ,.. ..... ,_ 6:.,P,,, 1„,„ ,,, ,,,, ..., . , C t, Time Restrictions oli On-street time restrictions could be 4, adjusted to better accommodate the Ilk,* v.•-;,,, -s=- one-stop-shopper and short-term user 1. Creating Turnover). On-Street Time o\N\le 4, coo Examples tRestriction (Max) a. Anoka 2 hours Bemidji 2 hours 11 0„,..ces. 7,- 5 •' '''''',-'4',. Duluth 2 hours A -''''''It' 4 ' stohe Hopkins 1 hour Mankato 2 hours Fargo/Moorhead 2 hours t, „, , ... oweRedWing2hours he\5 30 IVfin Rochester 0.5 - 2 hours illiki, f: . : -,- St. Cloud 2 hours Wayzata 2 hours White Bear Lake 2 hours 4,, . , Winona 2 hours i„.... 4.-, fr.--, 1 i nrestricted 3 Hr 15 Min No Parkin . . - . ,' -,,:k4`. ' -- -, IIMIIMMIIN i, Downtown Public Parking System Eficiency Study 0.,, ii• Rill 4. STRATEGIES Underutilized 1 Exess Gapael 111411i ' Parking Rates Parking rates could be adjusted to shift ir t - , the long-term and daily user to the 7H,,fringe (2 to 4 block walking radius). 0000(. 0\6 5 Where should parking be priced?rptIliz-gi .13 , , -0, - • .."- Hourly On-Street Examples Daily Rates Rate Max Time 3 Stillwater 0 3 hours ' , $3-$ . Anoka 0 2 hours 8 Bemidji 0 2 hours NA Duluth 1 2 hours 4-$10 14 Hopkins 0 1 hour 3 Mankato 0 2 hours 3 Ne\() Fargo/Moorhead 0 2 hours 8 15 t\e Red Wing 0 2 hours 0 Rochester 1.5 0.5 -2 hours 14+ St.Cloud 1 2 hours 8 Wayzata 0 2 hours 0 White Bear Lake 0 2 hours 0 16It A Winona 0 2 hours 0 1 7 Downtown Pudic Par<inc System 7..--iciency Stucy 0•) i a 10 01111111111111111VM IFI II 4-4, a z-,-.9 .„-..:'..' TRATEGI I . 10* , 0 Employee Parking 0 7 0:. 8mployeesare 9. -‘ , currently allowed to park in 4 hour 7 lots with a business R 00.0,6att," ‘, 6 5 0 permit. 0 Uncie Where should Ex cet,_ Ns.al-s),4employeesbeparking 3 or other known users? st oes— 2 What should the 14 employer's role be t‘Ose41 r'Val in helping facilitate 150 v\e's° st employee parking? 1 1 6 1 8 1 7 zone 2 Downtown Pudlic Parkinc System --ificiency Study 11111 STRATEGIES stillvvater•C!ty F-all y 0 fik c)Event Parking 4, t. N Off-site parking should be explored. ilkliSor1 i .4tAkite. Ili 1.*4, p lir • ,, - S.44' 7741111t'4:' t...':: V.: 4111:'•,.;..:'1' 11,.. '44‘ fat'*."',.‘ *! 1,„, 44-',...:,.''''''''''' L*... 4., ''.:, 4',,,,\ 0).'. 41:,..* I'''''',,, 414:: \';‘)'4;',,,,.. ii.,'\ 11,,.,: tk,(, 1, k''', 114, N , , ,,,,;. S V nyside ,leans s'. E Port-`Surliiyside e.0 Il64 t• ,iip, .,!.., , ,.. .......,:iira k w.....la 4.; o--It,.,. I..." ,, "l".' , ;.,A* , 1-4,'..„; . -* 1,.'"11 '4* -' r4 •' •'''' ''.4'"It* ' t4 r •I' 4 -41., •4 *"' v. 4 * ? * 4 * --* 4' St **, '*, z,,, 0'.", .- A 'I.; II 7,441 4' 1 k,• Downtown Public Parkinc System _---.'iciency Study DISCUSSION District Wide Parking Strategies 1 . Em3loyee Parking 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies L. Incentives to R.ec uce Demand 5. Liquor Licenses (Caps)What other 6. Multimodal Options strategies should 7. Off-Site Parking we be exploring? 8. Par<ing Fees 9. Parking Permits (Residential or Business) 10. Parking Requirements for \ew Development 11 . Reconfigure/Re-Strioe Existing Lots 12. Sharec Parking 13. Technology 14. Time Restrictions 15. Valet Service 16. WayLincinc anc Signace Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 40, Rim DISCUSSION Thank You Bill Turnblad Lance Bernard Community Development Director Parking Consultant City of Stillwater HKGi oturnblac@ci.stillwater.mn.us lance@hkci.com 651 -430-8820 612-252-7133 Downtown Public Parking System Ficiency Study LIM41101/4 Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. gin August 27, 2019 Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Subject:An Agreement between the Ciry of Stillwater and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.for services pertaining to the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study Dear CLIENT; This letter outlines a Scope of Services,Fee Schedule and other elements which together constitute an agreement between the City of Stillwater hereinafter referred to as the CLIENT, and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.,hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT for the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study,hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT. The CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree as set forth below: A. BASIC SERVICES The CONSULTANT'S basic services for the PROJECT are as provided in Attachment A Work Program. B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT and the CLIENT may agree in writing to amend this Contract for additional services related to the PROJECT and compensation for such services. The following services have not been requested by the CLIENT but are available upon written authorization. 1. Meetings in addition to those specified in Paragraph A above. 2. Services or Deliverables not specifically identified in Paragraph A above. C. FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT agrees to complete the scope of work contained in Paragraph A in exchange for professional fee compensation as noted below. The CLIENT agrees to pay the CONSULTANT for PROJECT services rendered as follows: 1. For the CONSULTANT'S Basic Services described in Paragraph A above, a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule(see Attachment B)not- to-exceed$25,000 inclusive of expenses as noted in Paragraph A. 123 North Third Street,Suite 100,Minneapolis,MN 55401-1659 Ph(612) 338-0800 Fx(612) 338-6838 Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 30,2019 Page 2 2. For the CONSULTANT'S Additional Services described in Paragraph B, a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule plus incidental expenses or a negotiated fee. 3. Invoices will be submitted electronically(PDF form)to the CLIENT via email on a monthly basis as work is completed and shall be payable within 30 days in accordance with this Agreement. 4. The CONSULTANT reserves the right to suspend services if the CLIENT is delinquent in making payments in accordance with this Agreement. D. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY The CLIENT shall be responsible for the following: 1. Assembly of background information including,but not limited to digital copies of all files,pertinent plans,aerial photographs,base maps, inventory data, available GIS mapping, limited to those that are reasonably available. 2. Arrangements and notification for public meetings and stakeholder meetings. 3. Reproduction and distribution of Project reports as deemed necessary and not otherwise specified in paragraph A. 4. Participation in team workshops as needed. 5. Presentation of draft materials to stakeholder groups as required. 6. Provide traffic and municipal engineering support to the project as needed. E. INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall maintain insurance of the kind and in the amounts shown below for the life of the contract. Certificates for General Liability Insurance should state that the CLIENT, its officials, employees, agents and representatives are Additional Insureds.The CLIENT reserves the right to review CONSULTANT's insurance policies at any time to verify that contractual requirements have been met. 1. Commercial General Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per occurrence 3,000,000 general aggregate 300,000 damage to rented premises 15,000 medical expenses 2. Umbrella Liability 1,000,000 per occurrence 1,000,000 general aggregate 10,000 self-insured retention Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 30,2019 Page 3 3. Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability a. Worker's Compensation per Minnesota Statutes b. Employer's Liability 500,000 per accident; 500,000 per employee; 500,000 per disease policy limit. 4. Professional Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per claim 4,000,000 annual aggregate F. COMPLETION SCHEDULE The services of the CONSULTANT will begin upon CLIENT approval and will,absent of causes beyond the control of the CONSULTANT,be completed within eight months of the date that the CLIENT issues a notice to proceed. The notice to proceed shall come from an authorized representative of the City. G. NONDISCRIMINATION The CONSULTANT agrees not to discriminate by reason of age,race,religion,color, sex, national origin, or handicap unrelated to the duties of a position,of applicants for employment or employees as to terms of employment,promotion, demotion or transfer, recruitment, layoff or termination,compensation, selection for training, or participation in recreational and educational activities. H. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY During the performance of this Contract,the CONSULTANT, in compliance with Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375 and Department of Labor regulations 41 CFR Part 60, shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,color,religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants for employment are employed,and that employees are treated during employment,without regard to their race,color,religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include,but not be limited to,the following: employment, upgrading,demotion,transfer;recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment notices to be provided by the Government setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. The CONSULTANT shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color,religion, sex,or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 30,2019 Page 4 I. INDEMNIFICATION CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree to indemnify and hold the other harmless,and their respective officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against liability for all claims, losses, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees,to the extent such claims, losses, damages or expenses are caused by the indemnifying party's negligent acts, errors,or omissions. In the event claims, losses,damages or expenses are caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of the CLIENT and CONSULTANT,they shall be borne by each party in proportion to its negligence J. TERM,TERMINATION,SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS 1. The Term of this Agreement shall be concurrent with the work authorized and shall be in accordance with the schedule to be established between the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT. 2. Either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the other party at its address by certified mail at least ten(10)days prior to the date of termination. 3. Neither the CLIENT nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 4. The time schedule shall not apply and/or time extensions will be allowed for any circumstances beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. 5. This Agreement shall be governed by all applicable laws. 6. Upon termination,Consultant shall be entitled to fees earned through the effective date of termination. K. DISPUTES In the event the CLIENT and CONSULTANT are unable to reach agreement under the terms of this contract, disputes shall be resolved using alternative dispute resolution (ADR). L. REVOCATION If this agreement is not signed and accepted by both parties within 90 days of the contract date, it shall become null and void. M. AUTHORIZATION IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The CLIENT and the CONSULTANT have made and executed this Agreement for Professional Services, This 3rd day of September,2019 r t 14 Aoa Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 30,2019 Page S CLIENT City of Stillwater Mayor Ted Kozlowski Title 66Z-11 City Clerk G Beth Wolf Title CONSULTANT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. tom Prt—e_ 1c:L" Name: Title Nam Title SCANNED • t. • k • 4 ,. 44 AtIV t, „tf,,,,,,,,,f,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 4 ' ' f.,4,6 ',.;,;,•,7,17:104, QcV',11. 4 , , ,,34'.‘,`'..,, ',""\,:31, 4' 1',1*,k-'4 4::: 1,',v‘," k,'` 4‘'1 '''''''' '''''''1r,,,,.c''''l ,?I` t,.. '^..Z.„ ,,:' l• , , :.*: ...*. ,.'''% 4, ',,• ',ft '•, s* 1: '3.**',,i.‘‘' '''*,.., Z.0 , 4":., r , . , .•,,, ., Py., f r,'.., 14.:,',3,,,,,,',', ''',,, . t ''' ",-'`'..',,, .'',. „ „„,., „,, ''''''.: ' ' a s. EN .' 04', '-‘i, ..,,,,; ,,,,"." ‘,.'`,,„,`i,1',..,,t,,, ."..,:::,, i•....... ir -,.....„,,,„ ,A! 1 6 i',.` fir 47' s" 00100000,•.•:. 4iiiiiii 1. $111 III lb 1..., N_.., ,irsost,,w. 44Parr7:-"'*'' - 1.r... , ,,,-- -- 4,.., t....., cyli, S. 410 0 :owi 4A,. 4."-4i. 2 '' i'e';',,'.':*:"'''''."414.*.iiree,„'igtr.', ..:1,,';':-I:',,.f:F ...fo, A, 074.41110.'"1 ; MEIDowntownpuDlicJarkingSystem :--flciency Stucy Ila 0....., EVIIII DISCUSSION ITEMS Study Goals and Objectives Highlight Known Issues Defining our Users Discuss Potential Strategies ffliaDowntownPublicParingSystemE-iciency Study I,, _ BB PARKING STUDIES water P Past study's have not P Lot12 y r Public Parking Lots Downtown Stillwater looked at immediate 2019 Legend needs (management Lo. I City Parking Lot City Parking Ramp Lot 10 i l Permit parking ONLY I/ and efficiency)2CTrosby Rd Parking Crosby Ramp-2nd St level public chlty B Private parking until 6 PM 4 Bus load Trailers r loading/unloading 2040 Comprehensive Lot usarking r 1r _,.It Lots where Monthly Permits are Valid / 1{ Business Permit Valid* Plan (Downtown Lot \' DT Resident Permit Valid" Lot 6 6 Allows vehicle in lot longer than the posted limit(but not overnight) y Allows Downtown Resident to Master Plan) park overnight Lot 13 2 q Lot MY+yS 9 N 4 6 Free parking lotsNj J Pay parking lot a 0 Lot availble to public after office hours recognized Iong—term Public restroom 1$1 hesm Lot j• 4 Numbers In circles=hour 3 e limits for free parking lots r- On-street parking is free,but limited parkingneeds Lot 14 L2 • to three hours unless posted for less 2 - we 6t aw,w vex u dson Aloe This study was Lot® initiated by the15. Stillwater Parking IXtioot,715$s ° Commission maDowntownPublicPar<ing System Efficiency Study STUDY GOALS I, Lot 12 Public Parking Lots® Downtown Stillwater 2019 Maximize toda 'sY Legend h\ 2\ I City Parking Lotof 24\ \ I City Parking Ramp ti. Permit parking ONLYparkingsupplyIlit ( ,ti p p g n_a v//J Trailhead Parking fir \ Lot 8 \ Crosby Ramp-2nd St level public I of Maximize current M5,be y St Yq g Cra0 private parking until 6 PM Bus,RV,Trailers I I Bus loading/unloading OM Bus parking investments Lot? .C'', C Lots where Monthly Permits are Valid 17::-'\FIrl Business Permit Valid* d-` Cos"' Lot Avc Lot plc A DT Resident Permit Valid** Lot 6 Allows vehicle in lot longer than u i l d on past studies I} the posted limit(but not overnight) t Allows Downtown Resident to Lot 13 St I of (4 park overnight M9i'kc i° ° Free parking lot v: l Pay parking lot P , \ O Lot availble to public after office hours Identify lovv-cost/high-3. rn Ches11°St Lot,'-Numbers-n c'rcles hour 3'ma limits for free parking bts benefit solutions On-street parking is free,but limited rin Lot \ i unless posted for less Lot 14 2 -r? to three ours unle Em race a d i St ri t-w ide eSenNW Lot I Octll. parkin . a p p r. ac h se" Lot ` 1 16 7Lot 18 Lot 17 s\ PIPDowntownPudicDar<ing System E-iciency Study i I'" ter.•.. ©8 EXISTING CONDITIONS What we know today... Downtown uses have and will continue to change over time - resulting in different parking needs. ew entertainment uses have accec pressure to today's oarkinc supply (e.g., restaurants, cocktail lounges, Qreweries, etc.). There are limitec transit options to help reduce 3arkinc cemanc . Ride sharing programs (e.g., Uber and Lyft) can play a role in helping reduce parking demand. We neec to accommocate multiple parking users (e.g., Qatrons, resicents, emQloyees, celivery vehicles, events, anc trail users). Jar<ing utilization fluctuates durinc different periocs of the cay anc year. Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 141W. k , 7 - 4- ,f4,-;'.44.-?-', ‘41-\)--‘"\itk 1'' EXISTING CONDITIONS 41•i 4,,,,,,T4-400.k, 4 f.. TA i.On-street parking is heavily utilized throughout the week. 1 is. , eSt' A 2 111111.1 s exso ii v,.. Ail, Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization 4, r. . , ow High 0,0, , ,,,, .U111[21 Downtown Pualic Par<ing System L'-'21ciency Study L-- RIB EXISTING CONDITIONS I-, Friday Evening 1 1 i i - i , 1Al ! it • - Example Off-street parking is at or approaching capacity:i z Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons 71, i..„_\ toeSummer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening 6''' R ovvoe'-' Off-street parking is underutilized during:0„,,,,, , „ wo,„1-•V Mornings it Weekday Afternoons (M-TH) 0 Winter Months 114a A ovoaSt ON‘el VtSt 15 tA6S° vir- ;..4'. MA ' '' Parking utilization at or above 93% suggest a parking facility is at capacity. 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93- I I % 44,., ak, Downtown Public Par<ing System Efficiency Stucy DEFINING OUR USERS Who is our biggest user? Parking User Typical Turnover/ Examples of User of Time Limit Public Spaces Parcel delivery Pickup/Drop-off(Uber, Lyft, Childcare) On-5 p-Shop Dry Cleaner 2% User 15 - 30 minutes Convenience Store 40 on-street spaces + loading zones Take-Away Food/Coffee D Business Delivery EV Charging 1 Stop Shopping Fast/Casual Food (eat in) 29% 572 off-street spacesShort-Term User 1 - 2 hours Grocery Store Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery 2 to 4 hour max EV Charging Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery Multi-Stop/Window shoppers 34% Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours Tourists 667 on-street spaces Trailhead users 3 hour max or no restriction EV Charging Employees Residents 35% Daily User 4 to 8+ hours Events 675 off-street spaces Trailhead Users all day EV Charging Downtown Public Paring System Ficiency Study 4b, ' USERS EXPECTATIONS How should we balance expectations? User User Standards Expectation Time Restrictions Location Price Parking Type n-Stop- 15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free op User On-street Short-Term 1 - 2 hours 1 - 2 blocks Free On-street User from front door Off-street Free + Long-Term Convenient 2 - 4 blocks Nominal User Front-Door) 2 - 4 hours from the front Fee Off-street door On-site (Residents) Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or Nominal • Off-street/site (Employees) Park & Ride Fee Off-site (Events) Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study MAIL 03 FINDING SOLUTIONS District-Wide Parking Approach 1 . Uses a comoination of strategies to maximize the existing parking supply, while reducinc the demand to build additional spaces. 2. Commonly appliec in cowntown settings to encourage walkaoility, foster economic growth, and strengthen the uroan form. 3. Formalizes roles anc resoonsioilities (ownership, operations anc maintenance). 4. Emphasizes low-cost/high-benefit solutions before large capital investments are made (e.g., parking structure) Downtown Public Parkins System Efficiency Study 111121 FINDING SOLUTIONS District Wide Parking Strategies (Ideas for Stillwater) 1 . Employee Parking 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies L. Incentives to Reduce Demand 5. _icuor Licenses (Ca as) 6. Multimocal Options 7. Off-Site/Event Parking 8. Parking Rates 9. 9ar <ing Permits ( Resicential or Business) 10. Parking Recuiremeo or New Development 11 . econrigure/Re- drirp„E 'sting Lots 12. Snarec Par<ing 13. Shifting Demand 14. lechnology 15. Time Restrictions 16. Valet Service ft , „IL:. M1211DowntownPublicPar<ing System efficiency Stucy i underuthize, SHIFTING DEMAND at, viro i tExcesskapac e-, 50 spaces1114 I. , - 11 10 Goal 12 9 Shift 40 users to the Ramp r...,„ I and Lot 12 (based on existing 041- . ; , k, parking utilization rates) R colo°(-°“ 1/4Ye 6 514* 113 4 u.. ill ncle t witt- s Exce 0 spaces)'3 Tweak the System 7„... . 2Strategies) 0,estotst Adjust Time Restrictions v st Redirect Users to Underutilized Lots Adjust Parking Rates 15 ItetsonSt 1 1 16 t 18 17 tt Downtown Public Public Parkinc System E'lciency Study Illi\w Ea STRATEGIES 12 / to ty. 8 9\ Time Restrictions I'' Y•s• In general, off-street time 7restrictionsarebalanced 103‘Nle accordingly for the long-term e R coo' 6 and daily user. Signage and way finding still needs to be addressed. wast 2 O.'. 14 ip* ouveSt M\elkle\soll 44 15 ifiliA' • S. r 4 Hr 3 Hr 17 After Office Hours Only Downtown )uplic Jar<ing System Efficieicy Stucy MO - 0,.INIMMINIMIft STRATEGIES f4 4„, .. , , ,„ Time Restrictions r 1 1 r t "° , On-street time restrictions could be t 4 , 04adjustedtobetteraccommodatethe ' 1 - 4 one-stop-shopper and short-term useru. -, ,t p ,, CreatingTurnover). 4..-r cool' Pie 1........ , ` - Y Examples On-Street Time Restriction (Max) tti , ,. water 3 ho 4Anoka2hours Va gp Bemidji 2 hours Duluth 2 hours Stnutsc y pt., .:,; he t 5. Hopkins 1 hour Mankato 2 hours y--r s- Fargo/Moorhead 2 hours Red Wing 2 hours pest Ne so1p e'l/ r . 30 Min Rochester 0.5 - 2 hours NQ So st St. Cloud 2 hours w 2 Wayzata 2 hours White Bear Lake 2 hours Winona 2 hours t 4. Unrestricted 3 Hr 15 Min Ion' . r ing Downtown Public Parkinc System E'icienc Study ii\\`1 STRATEGIES f,Excess Capacity: . i Parking Rates 12 li 1 9'Parking rates could be adjusted to shift , v, 8 the long-term and daily user to the 1' s V V. fringe (2 to 4 block walking radius). 7 aN Pie 6 50006 Where should parking be priced? i3 , Underutiliz, Excess Ca.: 4\ Hourly On-Street t,st 1--"-1---"- . Examples Daily RatesRateMaxTime 4 3Stillwater03hours3- Anoka 0 2 hours 8 Bemidji 0 2 hours NA Duluth 1 2 hours 4- $10 t 14 Hopkins 0 1 hour 3 l t, ow e St kel sMankato02hours3iIs‘e\so Fargo/Moorhead 0 2 hours 8 v‘st 15RedWing02hours0 Rochester 1.5 0.5 -2 hours 14+ St.Cloud 1 2 hours 8 Wayzata 0 2 hours 0 White Bear Lake 0 2 hours 0 16 i 1Winona02hours0 17 Downtown JuJlic Dar<ing System .71ficiency Stucy OP 001111101110 Rill Underutilized STRATEGIES 11 4 0 i.= 4 12 Employee Parking 0 Employees are 4.1 15 1.1: 8 9 r. currently allowed to park in 4 hour 7 lots with a business D 00(0\1Ye 6 0 5 R (0111 permit. 0 113 0.. 4zAitt, Und Where should Excess ili st 1, 2;0 sRar,employees be parking 3 or other known users? oestost 2 What should the 014 s employer's role be t Ne\son 1041 in helping facilitate 15 0 employee parking? 1 16 18 17 Zone 2 il\Aater 1:1 'Downtown Jublic Jarkinc System :1fficiency Stucy STRATEGIES 4.,,,,..„„,.L.t.lw r- . 4' Snily a`ter( ity Nall', Event Parkin yam,2 Off-site parking should be y explored. wit* teans•S$+E _ S +,ysttl p Port-Sunnysttle aw,` lub`' r... .-' ".., i,.. f 0411 f ' ..,- ,... " a4to,,r- 1 ,,..„ . i__,..., , ,..... , ., -, .,-, 0., ..,.41 f*. it atly COUtL Downtown ar<ing System -fficiency Stucy 11,. DISCUSSION District Wide Parking Strategies 1 . Employee Parkinc 2. Enforcement 3. Financial Strategies 4. Incentives to Reduce Demand 5. Liquor Licenses (Caps)What other 6. Vultimocal Options strategies should 7. Of-Site Parkinc we be exploring? 8. Parking Fees 9. Parking Permits (Resicential or Business) 10. Parking Requirements for \ew Development 11 . Reconfigure/Re-Strip Existing Lots 12. Sharec Parking 13. Technology 14. Time Restrictions 15. Valet Service 16. Wayfincinc anc Signace Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study MIN DISCUSSION Thank You Bill Turn olac Lance Bernard Community Development Director Parkinc Consultant City of Stillwater HKGi oturnolad@ci.stillwater.mn.us lance@hkgi.com 651 -430-8820 61 2-252-71 33 Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study PARKING COMMISSION - 11 .21 . 19 Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Study 01111111 bISCUSSION ITEMS Reaffirm Study Goals and Objectives Confirm Known Issues Discuss Small Moves ( Potential Strategies) Select Engagement Efforts Downtown Pudic Parking System Efficiency Study r " B8 STUDY GOALS Maximize today's parking supply Maximize current investments Build on past studies Identify low-cost/high-benefit solutions Downtown Pualic 'ar<ing System Efficiency Study DEFINING OUR USERS Who is the biggest usPr7 Parking User Typical Turnover/ Examples of User of Time Limit Public Spaces Parcel delivery Pickup/Drop-off(Uber, Lyft, Childcare) On-Stop-Shop Dry Cleaner 2% User 15 30 minutes Convenience Store 40 on-street spaces + loading zones Take-Away Food/Coffee Business Delivery EV Charging 1 Stop Shopping Fast/Casual Food (eat in) 29% Short-Term User 1 - 2 hours Grocery Store 572 off-street spaces Sit down restaurant/bar/brewery 2 to 4 hour max EV Charging Sit down restaurant /bar/brewery Multi-Stop/Window shoppers 34% Long-Term User 2 - 4 hours Tourists 667 on-street spaces Trailhead users 3 hour max or no restriction EV Charging Employees Residents 35% Daily User 4 to 8+ hours Events 675 off-street spaces Trailhead Users all day EV Charging Downtown Public Parkinc System E'Iciency Study I.: 141111 USERS EXPECTATIONS How should we balance expectations? User User Standards Expectation Time Location Price Parking TypeRestrictions On-Stop- Shop User 15 - 30 minutes Front Door Free On-street Short-Term 1 - 2 hours 1 - 2 blocks Free On-street User from front door Off-street Free + Long-Term Convenient 2 - 4 blocks Nominal User Front-Door) 2 - 4 hours from the front Fee Off-street door On-site (Residents) Daily User 4 to 8+ hours 2-4 blocks or Nominal • Off-street/site (Employees) Park & Ride Fee Off-site (Events) 110121DowntownPublic 'arking System Efficiency Stucy UTILIZATION On-street parking is heavily 7 go i 7.4, ' ' 7utilizedthroughouttheweek. coometa31 , lick 11110, t...... , stost g., „ ,..,..... ••:••••• • 1,165° tle150 St Generalized On-Street Parking Utilization OW 10,I ..,... v., Downtown 111121juDiicJar<ing System Efficiency Stucy IIMII Ti iz 1 NL Friday Evening igExample Off-street parking is at or approaching capacity: Summer/Fall - Saturday & Sunday Afternoons , - Summer/Fall - Friday & Saturday Evening R aa\me \ 5 coo' 6 t:,. , •••. Lai Pwl Off-street parking is underutilized during: wpt‘est AtMornings Weekday Afternoons (VI-TH) tiN st v • Winter Months 14 15 ‘Aes " st 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93-100% el 0 10,,,,,, Downtown Ah i i t DiNcitalJublic 'ar<ing System :fficiency Stucy 4: ,4 77 .........., MI ULU F 4. Utitlerutilizeda 7:.:.....011eSHIFTINGDEMAND 1 , 4' Excess.Clizec 11 ., 4, z,... 50 spaces) 4 10 Sending Zone 12 8 9 Zone Off-street Peak Utilization Parking Shift to Spaces Utilization Goal Meet Goal 7 Zone 1 383 100% 85%31 p Zone 2 157 100% 85%13 R cooll'`‘ a 6 5 Total 540 100% 85%44 s13 s 4 Takes into consideration a 93% parking utilization threshold est 3 RerP!v n Zone chest° utst 2 Zone Off-street Peak Utilization Excess 14 Spaces Utilization Threshold Capacity vvesc Ramp 248 64% 93%72 Ne\s°"`'' Lot 12 101 39% 93%55 15 Nos09. Total 349 127 1 16 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93-100% 17 Zone 2 m 4, Downtown Public Parkinc System E'Icienc Stuc MI 13 Underutilized SHIFTING DEMAND 1-,. - Capa-ity: ko spaces) 1 ii Zone 1 r , , io Goal 12 tShift40userstotheRampand5•c0 9 Lot 12 7 5 R toe' 6 k_....„. r.C° OP i-.13 4 Undo callot"- s xces Ld i',, Tweak the System 50 spaces)' 3 \\\ Strategies) astokcwasto 2 Adjust Time Restrictions 14 Redirect Users to Underutilized Lots tqhmeS V1 kle\s°Adjust Parking Rates 15 kos°" st Collaborate with Businesses 1,. 1 i 16 18 0-75% 75-85%85-93% 93-100% 17 Zone 2 Downtown )ublIc Par<ing System Efficiency Stucy 31.111\ rci" Efi ' 7 'i 8,..., , ' ; - - -\ ..'!".• A 6" .STRATEGIES i i 2 Time Restrictions In general, off-street time 7restrictionsarebalancedf ei(%a\Pie 5 ' accordingly for the long-term R coo` 6 and daily user. st 1 3 4 imtt" st Signage and way finding still 3 needs to be addressed. 4tst 2 14 A* io owe St 00 Nets°11 t 15 18 4 Hr 3 Hr After Office Hours Only Downtown )uDlic Dar<Ing System Efficiency Stucy c_s,.....ffil\::!..iliz,` , 1.71E'L STRATEGIES Time ki ....,,1 -......00 Time Restrictions On-street time restrictions could be adjusted to better accommodate the one-stop-shopper and short-term user .. 1,.. 1 4 Creating Turnover). tela\tolecovoeOn-Street TimeExamples Restriction (Max) e 7. ,., Anoka 2 hours olltIgSt Bemidji 2 hours Duluth 2 hours witHopkins1houroes Mankato 2 hours i 4 Fargo/Moorhead 2 hours 4.-stOVVeRedWing2hours e\solii"`e' 30 MinRochester0.5 - 2 hours q„, vI\so,eSt. Cloud 2 hours di • i. Wayzata 2 hours White Bear Lake 2 hours Winona 2 hours Unrestricted 3 Hr 15 Min P. rkin I Downtown Juplic par<ing System :fficiency Study ft,1 kA,.; t 41 111E1 Is. STRATEGIES i Ex es Capa sty.:`' 4'.: l':50 paces) P rkin s Rates 12 f Parkingrates could be ad'usted to h' r 8 gsift the long-term and daily user to the fringe (2 to 4 block walking radius).7 CoM` e"at ple 6 5 Where should parking be priced? R s.13 4`, Hourly On-Street StExamplesDailyRatesMyrteRateMaxTime 3 '.Stillwater 0 3 hours 3-$5 Anoka 0 2 hours 8 n'ChQS Bemidji 0 2 hours NA Duluth 1 2 hours 4-$10 14 Hopkins 0 1 hour 3 Mankato 4* 'OW el02hours3yNe\so Fargo/Moorhead 0 2 hours 8 15 NQ\SonSt Red Wing 0 2 hours 0 Rochester 1.5 0.5-2hours 14+ 1 St. Cloud 1 2 hours 8 Wayzata 0 2 hours 0 tj White Bear Lake 0 2 hours 0 16 i ' : Winona 0 2 hours 0 01 t- 17 A Downtown 'pooh( Jar<inc System =fficiency Stucy 1`IC ., OUR Underutilizec, STRATEGIES Capacity_ lA Zone a)spaces) 11 10 Employee Parking Employees are s 9 currently allowed to parkin 4 hour 7 r lots with a business R Co0,0,000 6 ° S permit. 0 13" a - 4 Where should Inc MVr-- St ExcessLapauty: employees be parking spdCes)3 or other known users? caesi°utst 2 a Q14Whatshouldthe employer's role be est l Ne\sod in helping facilitate 150 esonst employee parking? 1 16 18 17 Zone 2 Downtown JU Iic -arcing System Efficiency Study STRATEGIES Event Parking 3(Illwaler,(:ityf-1aIIt Off-site parking should be explored. ssx . A------" t Can we explore the Government Center 4, 3 7 as a potential park-and-ride? 4„.,.„,„.. ,t4,,, . 40. "1144",.. N S # f x 4 µg s."VI} t/1y.Y , 'x 4. aA4, e 6 y` pA.. ,i, M x ma' ik .b ' it, kw i arc 1 , Iaat,s St E ' Su ny,,I Port-Bunn side . ji: 011::: 41r61111..: 4 ,.....,,,: 111,' ..,,,,,' ' ,,' ..,, ,' :4\ _.. 46. 4° lit. a. i—stir . aw k w Family u i'C'Co Downtown 'ualic Parking System Efficiency Study ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS Proposed Approach One-on-one stakeholder interviews vs. an online survey Benefits to the Approach Much more personal We can control the message We can test the waters on potential strategies A survey can come later on in the planning process Can we proceed in this direction? Downtown Public Parking System Efficiency Stucy p),' • THANK YOU Next Steps Schedule Engagement Efforts Finalize Plan in February/March 2020 Downtown Public Parkinc System Efficiency Stucy i,..._,,,,,„ t.,,.._:,,,_..4„,..,,,,,,,i N.- - .44:- .----...,,,.:-..'''_ , Ivili. 14f,,,,f , r$ g amZ ill 4 TTV_ I cam, a n., yy 4 1 i 7 - . i rt- i 2e-.------....._-,- l';'..., ET1iTI k a 0.GbWL kf'K! itft...- ------- . ffi, L,‘''.k\ , vtzi,.::::.:. Asrq'J iir, , • 1 '.;;;-v--,f, - '', .‘ ' •tAT.,,, 't ;"1-___-___L.- _ y. Y PROPOSAL FOR PLANNING SERVICES AWN PUBLIC PARKING SYSTEM ANT STUDYEFFICIENCY Pre arec by Hoisirigton Koegfer Group Inc. ©© June 28, 2019 ©® n^ g - v'!,5.' fx 1,,,, , < "yy,M ,,, l:.=,,-, 4 . q ,Sy' "Sv.„ : .. ,•;=''': } q d t s,, l 'em'- s' n1:°`4's , ":::: % , xp "',, S i x rt 4 , t ,;. g .. , 5$v. iu ... ti y ; ra 3,r da' Z' ,`.. IIth is F +. DOWNTOWN VICTORIA y 41 rim'.-. 4,\\ --;'-. - itt)iIl ii IL— r4taR Ear..;r,::'r, w r a. v L VICTORIA v ' O c,„pB„ c„..) i4z, s gutr Syx3 a ra ft I. Iin 3 CONTENTSFki, 01 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING 1 02 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 2 03 RELEVANT EXPERIENCE 7 ems- 04 FEE QUOTATION 17 sue-2" i ARNNG EIC E Y SIvfY ?ROP0SA1 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.June 28,2019 Landscape Architecture Planning Bill Turnblad,Community Development Director Urban Design City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater,MN 55082 123 N.3rd Street,Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Re: HKGi Proposal for the Parking System Efficiency Study-Downtown Public 612-338-0800 Parking System Dear Mr.Turnblad, We are pleased to submit this proposal to lead a downtown parking study withtheassistanceoftheStillwater's Downtown Parking Commission.We understand this study will need to discover innovative parking solutions and strategies.We also understand the study will need to focus on low-cost/high-benefit solutions that balance today and tomorrow's parking needs for all users(e.g.,employees, customers,residents,and eventgoers). HKGi will build on our past experience in the community(e.g., Downtown Stillwater Plan&2040 Comprehensive Plan)to help streamline this effort.This effort will be led by Lance Bernard,who has over 15 years of planning experience COLLABORATE and parking expertise.Lance has been recognized as a leader in developing LISTEN district-wide parking models by sharing his experience at local and national speaking engagements.We've also had the opportunity to share our experience EXPLORE and examples of today's emerging parking practices with the Stillwater Parking CREATE Commission in January of 2019. Lance will be supported by a team of professional planners and landscape architects who specialize in parking studies,multimodal plans,and urban design principles.Bryan Harjes will serve as the Project Principal ensuring Lance has the staff and resources available to complete this project on-time and within budget. Bryan will provide additional support in developing parking solutions that will enhance the urban form,while protecting Downtown Stillwater's historical context and environmental features. Our Project Team and qualifications are highlighted in the attached materials. Combined,our team and experience touch on all aspects(e.g.,parking management,urban design,wayfinding,zoning code development,and public HKGi believes that design, when engagement)that need to be considered when developing a parking study that inspired by the character of the people leads to realistic and achievable results. and the land,can create a unique and We look forward to the opportunity to work with Stillwater on this important identifiable sense of community.project.Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.Lance can be reached at 612.252.7133 or via email at lance@hkgi.com. Sincerely, Lance Bernard Bryan Harjes Planner-Project Manager Vice President Hoisington Koegler Group,Inc. Hoisington Koegler Group,Inc. NNEjO?A II 01 . PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Project Understanding We understand this project will need to address current and future parking demand, while setting the stage for long-term parking initiatives that minimize major capital Project Scope and Deliverables expenditures.Through this planning process the HKGi team and the City will focus HKGi understands and recognizes on opportunities for efficiencies and future parking needs associated with events the prescribed scope and and employee parking (Task 4.1 &4.2).Balancing these needs will require a district- deliverables listed in the RFQ: wide parking approach.A district-wide parking approach uses a combination of Task 1 -Project Coordination strategies to maximize the existing parking supply,while reducing the demand to involving weekly check-ins with build additional spaces.This approach is commonly applied in downtown settings to City Staff encourage walkability,foster economic growth,and strengthen the urban form. Task 2-Engagement with the The HKGi team will compare Downtown's Stillwater's current district-wide parking Parking Commission consisting of approach to other peer communities(Task 3.3).Findings from this assessment will three meetings help identify any changes to Downtown Stillwater's parking requirements,pricing structure,and financing mechanisms(Task 3.2&4.4).This review will help determine Task 3-Exploration including: if there are any changes that need to occur with the City's Enterprise Fund to better data collection; align with industry standards(Task 4.3). review of current regulations and We also understand this study will need to balance the current parking demand financial policies;with future development initiatives(Task 3.5).An initial review of the City's review of peer community utilization counts(Task 3.1)demonstrate areas of potential surplus,which presents downtowns;employee survey; an opportune time to determine its ability to support economic development creation of a parking generation initiatives.For example,a surplus can be used to help address a development's model. parking needs,offsetting their development costs that would be required to build Deliverables additional parking.This can result in significant cost savings as construction costs Base maps have risen in recent years.A new parking structure can range between $20,000 and Findings memorandum 30,000+ per stall,and $100 to $150 per stall to maintain and operate on a monthly On-line survey basis.These costs help further demonstrate the importance of maximizing the Parking generation model in existing parking supply before building a parking facility to solely accommodate a Excel new development. Task 4-Strategies and To help achieve a better understating of Downtown Stillwater's parking surplus, Recommendations for: a customized"Parking Generation Model"will be created for evaluating future Event Parking; redevelopment scenarios(Task 3.5).This tool will also help the City evaluate the Employee Parking; district's parking demand and the thresholds for when additional parking is needed. Enterprise Fund; Overall,this effort will be organized as a collaborative process involving Stillwater Parking Framework staff and the Parking Commission (Task 1 &2).We also understand the study process Deliverables must lead to a plan that is embraced and supported by the business community.In Strategies and that respect,we will foster our existing relationships with community members from recommendations past planning efforts(e.g.,Stillwater Downtown Plan,Comprehensive Plan,and day- memorandum to-day planning services)to reach a consensus on recommendations and strategies. Financial model in Excel The end product will include an action plan and tools(Task 4.4&5)for Stillwater staff Task 5-Final Deliverables and the Parking Commission to manage and monitor Downtown Stillwater's parking consisting of over time.At the end of this process,we will work with City staff and the Planning Final report Commission to scope a second phase of the study that focuses on next steps. Presentation of study's findings to City Council N PkOP0' di 02 . PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Key PersonnelTheHKGiteambringsawide variety of planning experience to this project,and the staff members we have assigned to this project bring a complementary blend of skills,talents,and interests that will enrich the planning process and deliverables. Lance Bernard-Project Manager F, Our diverse team will be led by Lance Bernard,Planner&Project Manager.Lance brings over 15 years of planning experience,and recently led the Stillwater's Comprehensive Plan Update.Beyond his comprehensive planning experience,Lance has been recognized as a leader in developing parking studies,asset management I d,''. plans,and financial plans for various agencies.His approach has embraced district- wide parking solutions that maximize parking efficiencies,while balancing parking needs with redevelopment initiatives.Lance will be the day-to-day point of contact 1 f and will ensure that the City of Stillwater receives outstanding client service.r, Bryan Harjes,PLA,LEED AP-Project Principal I, , As Vice President of HKGi,Bryan will serve as the Project Principal,ensuring that Lance has the staff and resources available to complete this project on time and within budget.Bryan will provide additional support in developing parking solutions DOWNTOWN OSSEO that will enhance the urban form,while preserving Downtown Stillwater's historical context and environmental features. Bryan is familiar with Downtown Stillwater's planning and design context through his work on the recent Downtown chapter oftheComprehensivePlanUpdateandthroughhisparkconceptplanningworkfora parcel just north of downtown. Bryan has also contributed urban design expertise to downtown planning projects in Red Wing,Victoria,Chaska,Osseo,Hutchinson,j and many other communities. a , s_, Jesse Thomsen,AMCP,LEED Green Assoc.-Transportation Planner Jesse will be leading the research efforts and providing the project team with m _ __, data collection and GIS mapping support. Jesse is interested in mobility and transportation issues and has recently provided planning expertise to a parking a 4t ordinance in St.Louis Park,the new Bike Ped Plan for Farmington,and a pedestrian 1 W€ and bicycle funding evaluation for the Metropolitan Council. He is familiar with Stillwater's planning context through his contributions to the Comprehensive Plan Update. Jesse will bring a user-friendly approach to ensuring that the study helps the City meet the mobility and access needs for all of downtown's users(e.g., vehicles,delivery trucks,pedestrians,and bicycles). Of Beth Richmond-Planner Beth will lead the evaluation of the City's zoning code and ordinance to determine if any modifications need to be made based on the study's findings.Beth provides general planning services and is involved in zoning ordinance revisions in several r— communities. From this experience she will be able to offer insight on how similar DOWNTOWN BUFFALO communities are approaching their parking ordinances. We have included full resumes for each staff member assigned to this project on the following pages. Lance Bernard Project Manager 612.252.7133 I lance@hkgi.com With a broad portfolio of planning experience,Lance brings a passion for community and transportation planning to HKGi,as well as established relationships with communities and agencies. The breadth of Lance's work has touched on all aspects of planning,including comprehensive plans,long-range transportation plans,parking studies,and downtown master plans. For several years Lance has worked to develop an outstanding portfolio of parking- and transportation-related planning projects. His depth and breadth of knowledge has enabled him to provide clients with unique planning services that integrate transportation-related practices with urban and land use planning methods. Years of Experience: 15 Lance's perspective and understanding about the interaction between community and transportation planning enables clients to pursue transportation strategies Education that can enhance both livability and economic development initiatives. B.S.Community Development) Urban Affairs,St.Cloud State In recent years,Lance has been recognized as a leader in developing grants,asset University management plans and financial plans for various agencies.His approach has helped his clients recognize their asset management needs,while aligning those Memberships/Affiliations needs with innovative funding mechanisms.In the last five years,Lance has helped Legislative and Law Co Chair his clients secure over$250 million in grant dollars. Minnesota Chapter of the American Planning Association Parking Studies Experience Past President for the Minnesota Historic Walker-Lake District Parking Study,St.Louis Park,MN Chapter of the American Downtown Victoria,MN Planning Association Parking Ordinance Revisions,St.Francis,MN Past Treasurer for the Minnesota Development Review,Lindstrom,MN Chapter of the American Downtown Duluth and Canal Park,Duluth,MN Planning Association Past Conference Chair for the Hagfors Center for Science,Business and Religion,Augsburg College Minnesota Chapter of the Chemistry and Advanced Materials Science Building (UMD Parking Study), American Planning Association University of Minnesota Duluth Selby-Western Neighborhood,Saint Paul,MN Key Note Speaking Residential Parking Permit Review,Saint Paul,MN Engagements Shared Parking:How Does Towerside Innovation District(TOD Parking Framework),Metro Transit it Work?-Railvolution Downtown Prior Lake,MN Conference,Denver,Colorado Downtown Willmar,MN 2017) Fort Snelling,Minnesota Historical Society TOD and Districtwide Parking Forum_Metro Transit(2016) Other Relevant Planning Experience Comprehensive Planning and Comprehensive Plan I Stillwater,MN Public Health Community Before and After Study(Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding Evaluation) I Workshop-City of Eau Claire,Metropolitan Council Wisconsin(2013) Regional Solicitation Impact Study I Metropolitan Council Balancing and Managing Local Road Research Board System Preservation Guide I MnDOT Your Parking Needs-APA MN Comprehensive Plan (Multimodal Elements) ( Richfield,MN Conference (2019) Comprehensive Plan (Multimodal Elements) I Waukee,Iowa Long Range Transportation Plan I Stearns County,MN Complete Streets Check-List)Wadena,MN ho R0 Ft)SA Bryan Harjes PLA,LEER AP Vice President ( 612.252.7124 I bryan@hkgi.com t As a principal with HKGi Bryan has provided leadership on a broad range of 1 planning and design projects for public sector clients,including a wide range E jf 'j( ` ;14 of downtown redevelopment planning and design projects. His involvement in 1IVlif $ iugii i li numerous award winning projects attests to his expertise and creativity as an urban f, ) x){ i 'i ) $ f ® t designer,and his leadership consistently results in design solutions that incorporate g r Ali i '° j '.41 client and community needs,enhance connectivity,promote sustainability,and are r e` i economically viable. 47..1 ,ji( 7° ,ij +.1°! 1, Bryan has worked with the City of Stillwater on recent downtown planning initiatives and is familiar with some of the new opportunities and challenges that Years of Experience:20 Downtown Stillwater faces due to recent infrastructure changes. He will be able to augment his knowledge about Downtown Stillwater with lessons he has learned Education from his downtown planning and urban design experience in communities such as Master of Landscape Architecture Chaska,Excelsior,Onalaska,Victoria,and Red Wing,among others. University of Minnesota Bachelor of Environmental Design University of Minnesota Downtown Redevelopment Planning and Design Experience Downtown Planning ( Stillwater,MN Registration Downtown Vision Update I Chanhassen,MN Landscape Architect,Minnesota, License No.42954 Downtown Master Plan I Chaska,MN City Square West Redevelopment Plan I Chaska,MN Memberships/Affiliations East Town Small Area Plan I Excelsior,MN Urban Land Institute(ULI) Sensible Land Use Coalition Downtown Redevelopment Plan, Farmington,MN Minnesota Design Team Marketplace Redevelopment Concepts(Hermantown,MN Houston,MN) Downtown Revitalization Master Plan I Hutchinson,MN Awards a Downtown Action Plan ( Hutchinson,MN 2015 ACEC-MN Engineering Downtown Development Guide I Lakeville,MN Excellence Honor Award-Buffalo Highway 7&101 Village Center Study I Minnetonka,MN Commons,Buffalo,MN Redevelopment Master Plan I North St.Paul,MN 2010 Preservation Award-Redevelopment Area Planning I Onalaska,WI Minnesota Preservation Alliance Downtown Revitalization Master Plan I Osseo,MN Red Wing Downtown Action Downtown Action Plan I Red Wing,MN Plan Penn Avenue Revitalization Plan I Richfield,MN 2003 APR-MN Award for an Outstanding Plan-Hutchinson Downtown Master Plan I St.Francis,MN Downtown Revitalization Downtown Revitalization Master Plan I Victoria,MN Master Plan Downtown Commons Plaza and Streetscape Design I Buffalo,MN Federal Reserve Parking Facility Site Planning and Design I Minneapolis,MN Complete Streets Study I Red Wing,MN Downtown West Infrastructure Improvements Victoria,MN Wayfinding and Signage Master Plan ( Hutchinson,MN Gate,Wayfinding and Signage Plan I Duluth,MN 4 Jesse Thornsen AICP,LEED Green Assoc. ilkPlanner ( 612.252.7129 I jesse@hkgi.com Ai Jesse is a certified planner whose broad project experience includes comprehensive planning,transportation planning,roadway reconfiguration,master planning, subdivision platting,and planned development ordinance creation. Jesse's professional interest in transportation and mobility planning has enabled him to build a strong base of knowledge that he can draw on in his related planning f, work. He emphasizes a user-friendly approach and strives to ensure that streets and communities can meet their mobility and access needs while providing safe, inviting,economically productive,and healthy transportation systems. Jesse also brings advanced graphic design and communication skills to his project Years of Experience:6 work. He seeks to reduce the communication barriers between local government Education and community stakeholders through his ability to translate ideas,data,and B.S.Community and Regional processes into visually compelling graphics. Planning-Iowa State University, Transportation Planning Experience 2012 Historic Walker Lake District Parking Ordinance I St.Louis Park,MN Registration Bike-Ped Plan ( Farmington,MN American Institute of Certified Metropolitan Council Before and After Study(Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding Planners-Cert.#028951 Evaluation)1 Minneapolis-St.Paul Region,MN LEED Green Associate-Cert. Redevelopment Master Plans I Onalaska,WI 10733040 Downtown Master Plan I St.Francis,MN Professional Development Uniform Development Code/Zoning Ordinance Update I Onalaska,WI Transportation Research Board SH 146 Corridor Subregional Transportation Initiative l Baytown,TX Annual Meeting-2018 Houston Bike Plan I Houston,TX MnDOT Complete Streets US 290 Value Capture Study I Houston Region,TX Workshop-2018 H-GAC Pedestrian Evaluation Tool I Houston-Galveston Region,TX H-GAC Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation I Houston-Galveston Region,TX H-GAC Regional Parking/Mobility Study( Houston-Galveston Region,TX White Oak Village Trail Oriented Development I Houston,TX SH 249 Access Management Study I Houston,TX West Houston Mobility Study(Houston,TX Parking Variance Application I Houston,TX Comprehensive Planning Experience Comprehensive Plan Stearns County,MN Comprehensive Plan Columbia Heights,MN Comprehensive Plan White Bear Lake,MN Comprehensive Plan Johnston,IA Comprehensive Plan Lindstrom,MN Comprehensive Plan Inver Grove Heights,MN Comprehensive Plan Kasson,MN Comprehensive Plan Maplewood,MN Comprehensive Plan Red Wing,MN Comprehensive Plan South St.Paul,MN Comprehensive Plan Stillwater,MN Beth Richmond Planner 1612.252.7127 ( beth@hkgi.com Beth is a planner and a recent graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison's f Department of Planning&Landscape Architecture.As a graduate student,Beth worked for the University of Wisconsin-Extension's Local Government Center. Some of her project-related experience there included analyzing survey results and Census data for several comprehensive plan updates,completing a land use analysis for the Sauk Prairie region's Water Street Visioning Plan,and creating best practice guidelines for infill and redevelopment in the City of Middleton.At HKGi, she provides general planning services to several municipal clients.In addition to general planning services,Beth assists with comprehensive planning,grant writing, and zoning ordinance writing and amendments. Education Master of Urban and Regional In her planning services work,Beth frequently reviews development proposals and Planning-University of has to understand how zoning ordinances and development impact or influence Wisconsin-Madison one another. Parking and urban design guidelines are typically issues that she B.A.,Political Science-College of has to address and interpret in her work. She has provided planning services for St.Benedict(MN) Stillwater in the recent past,and her downtown planning experience includes work in Victoria and St.Francis. Planning Project Experience Comprehensive Plan I Benton County,MN General Planning Services I Bondurant,IA Active Living Grant Writing I Dakota County,MN Comprehensive Plan I Gaylord,MN Housing Study I Grand Marais,MN Comprehensive Plan j Greenfield,MN General Planning Services I Greenfield,MN Zoning Ordinance Update I Kasson,MN General Planning Services( Lindstrom,MN General Planning Services Medicine Lake,MN General Planning Services I Mound,MN Uniform Development Code/Zoning Ordinance I Onalaska,WI Comprehensive Plan I South St.Paul,MN Comprehensive Plan I St.Francis,MN Shape Stearns 2040 Comprehensive Plan I Stearns County,MN General Planning Services I St.Francis,MN General Planning Services I Stillwater,MN General Planning Services I Victoria,MN Comprehensive Plan I White Bear Lake,MN 03 . RELEVANT EXPERIENCE HKGi has an in-depth understanding of the parking issues and concerns in Downtown Stillwater.This understanding stems from our recent work in preparing the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Stillwater Plan.These efforts have helped us build trusted relationships between our team,downtown stakeholders,and community members. Beyond our recent work in Stillwater,we have developed similar projects that align with this study's objectives.These projects have helped balance parking needs in similar environments that must embrace the downtown's unique charm,walkability, and historical context.More importantly,these projects have applied multiple solutions(e.g.,public-private partnerships,funding mechanisms,and wayfinding) that work together in order to maximize the downtown's parking supply.Recent experience has included downtown parking studies for the cities of Chaska,Duluth, St.Louis Park,Osseo,and Victoria. A j ' sx •rr , "! +. 1 ",____::::,:-<.,, . 7:_.,,,:,, , i ,, , I.^A,,.... rj 1'111: 44''''; ': '-. /''''i''' ''', : w u as .. iv' `a V, s.«k"'.,.„-- a aJ v ';, T1i._ RIVERFRONT CIRCULATION CONCEPT A a _ '7.. a ,.5 FRAMEWORK PLAN t HKGi will begin this project with a strong 1,-- sue'' 7' r base of knowledge about Stillwater's ii.. ---_, downtown based on past experience. r r yew-- ° Graphics HKGi has produced for downtown planning efforts include a ri.a r parking location map(above),riverfront c circulation framework(topright),and an i urban design framework(bottom right). I t r 1 ,"r r: RAEsK jai• ,) V . F Y_ t" C , _ D\ 5PDi0'.,AF Downtown Parking Study Victoria,Minnesota HIGHER END USES VS. PAVEMENT ti p,n VwlrW wr a' ...., t Over 50%of the I i.. downtown's land r A'use coverage includes roadways or parking lots. 44''-'1 '' t-14-,4 ita Ar'''.'', , ,,,,L I cCf xt Weekend Utilization(Max Finding) LegeM 100% pass s,,, .7 800 71% 6i% 5.. . ,„.,,, nM, 160Yf 53% 53% 5016 58% 58% 58% z:.:. r., 50% a, yrtiO ap "`- 3 ,,, n.,,..r on Stteet GeSt<crt on StreN ox 5tteet tl F tit aA noanaes+ District Utilization(Evening):78%-85% i a wK.rrrar.nm, 9 The study included parking surveys at key times during both weekdays and weekends in order to establish parking utilization rates in the downtown. HKGi worked with a Task Force consisting of councilmembers,commission members, residents,and business owners to study the downtown parking environment in Victoria and identify strategies to help address potential or perceived parking issues in Victoria's rapidly redeveloping downtown area. The study included an inventory of public and private,on-street and off-street parking facilities in the downtown area,including the core downtown as well as an area on the eastern fringe of the downtown. Parking utilization surveys were conducted during three key timeframes for weekdays and for Saturdays. The surveys indicated that during the highest utilization period,Friday and Saturday evenings after 6pm,parking in the two core blocks are at 85%of capacity or higher and that private parking is at capacity. Based on the findings,HKGi and the Task Force collaborated to develop a list of thirteen recommendations that range from immediate strategies such as improving wayfinding and signage systems downtown and addressing employee parking,to next phase strategies such as revising parking requirements in the city's development code and making improvements to the urban form to better accommodate pedestrians so some of the underutilized existing parking becomes more attractive. The study also recommends studying the feasibility of building a parking structure and addressing parking on a district-wide basis. Nti s Downtown and Canal Park Parking Study Duluth,Minnesota p f*:aitR- 7P _,. t._ y /.: y` t-~ ,,, r-f"t '` (3 l,i, y am•' wawa t' #.- *I rt 4- " l%. 1r tom`/ a't a c f gy, g q 1 s - la _ :'T s s w,a z„ z a,. t tit J—L a c .. .. 33i4. Y.eaa3aa nwru .“214,xmrm:l x>.Wt.1,1aa,.ru3.urt maaro ylx.^am-..y Downtown Duluth Parking Study IN ,_ / HKGi recently conducted a parking study of Downtown Duluth and the highly u popular Canal Park area. The objective was to study and implement a district- wide parking approach for the area,to include the use of innovative solutions and strategies to address a variety of challenging issues currently facing the City. Parking utilization surveys demonstrated that parking is readily available across downtown Duluth,although it is at 85%capacity or higher at a couple of key locations during business hours. Parking at Canal Park is utilized at a much higher rate on the weekends and in the afternoon and evening hours. At its peak,6 of 14 lots at Canal Park are at capacity with one other lot above 85%capacity. Because parking in the two areas is still generally available within walking distance, the study does not point to any immediate steps that need to be taken. Instead, the City should continue to focus on monitoring utilization rates. The surplus of parking in the district should be leveraged to attract new development. As new development begins to consume existing parking,the City can begin to implement a district-wide parking model. A survey of district-wide parking strategies is included in the project memo and will provide insight for the City when it is ready to move to the next phase of planning for parking needs. ARC ` C, T '; C ENC i ST1JD\ PROPOSAL Wayfinding Signage System Chaska,Minnesota fi 1Apr j Legend. I 'I CYW•. F t w,r d o ., .•, Downtown Sign Types: j ram a a'_, ai:17bwn DIrMSi6nVenxular r- . Wit ra4 Downtown 46n TYOes01, HKGi conducted a citywide analysis to identify Chaska's wayfinding needs for I signage targeted towards vehicular traffic,trail users,and signage needs specifically in the downtown area. After conducting an analysis of current conditions,HKGi identified key destinations,specific locations throughout the community for new signage,and also identified what type of signage(Gateway,Directional,primary, 717 t, r secondary,Trailhead,Trail)would be most appropriate for each location. HKGi also designed signage concepts and sketches for each type of sign as well as potential thematic concepts to help organize the signage system. Information delivered to the City by HKGI also included unit cost estimates for each sign type,design guidelines,and phasing for implementation. T. JI.'v' _. _ . Downtown Streetscape and Public Space Design Chaska, Minnesota Parking Analysis Fir bA a rc, 7 p77p r r' t t .: t r"-'' 1 . -: r- fk .i' 3( 5445 e fish 6 y r Curr ces:14 " tt fFe,iSpa a 1- 1 71R Wn.27 4. 3SpacesShov`I -; +.y toa ` ,e•o- F-1 + zr v' J o0 p _ 1 Ili 7 r _ _ i _ - -•connnen<al 0,41.4 Travel......T,ee61 MQee Corns, mow. w...,.. t_- 8u kJog rwr PaI"{ L..ne Lane Parking sr ulidlry a pt k ti s ' i' r , r. p *f 1. Street section illustration for 2nd Street at F aseo Plaza Commercial M ai 6 s "fit Heritage Street ngrr 1,-;,...,-.*:?, G y it`` i- ift#, t a f f j i i l , , ,, p i NFF sir° i.,. .'f Y'~ tomz F e 3 .r Current SPacesa e I es, s I rh, ..kow'4 1 aBAs`llp 6f.h wn 22 N I 11. r- y,`1 } r''' Illk12 FFent S aat€s:22 COrre'Kt pacesn aces chtw, 2t a bows i I _. 1— S , ,• 1' '', I. ovF_ ,o mot_ o'o; -3 .. l F r Street Character Types s P i o'. 1 ` w„ _ un Square seam1ind 5..,A 1er0. •. 0 e t5pacet l8 O(4n•• airri3 t'ki 9 '------js -sft w .18_.< 4 3( 4' p x q • 4 DST {}l _ y 1r ro C epra" € s ceeamn Weer Mire es t.1 g Brick clnvwaevme Maras a-- S.,.':' I'},' ,Pr nt Spa ces.l.2/Spates , - HKGi led the community through the schematic design process to create a streetscape and public space improvement plan for Chaska's historic downtown core,which includes City Square and City Hall Plaza,two important outdoor public spaces. The design process established a materials palette that can be used on future streetscape improvements throughout downtown Chaska. A parking analysis was also conducted as an important part of the planning process. The streetscape analysis included identifying character types for each of the downtown's streets as well as a character analysis of City Hall Plaza and City Square Park. These analyses provided streetscape design,parking,and furnishing directions for each street segment. The parking analysis indicated a surplus of parking in the downtown core and was conducted in order to provide support for the elimination of spaces in some locations and a switch to angled parking in other locations. The changes to the parking model resulted in an overall increase in parking spaces,but a reduction in one quadrant that had an excess of 150 spaces. AK+{,Nc ‘,/'S, 1. _. E,ENC( . DY i) ()"0cAi Comprehensive Plan Stillwater, Minnesota 66) i71, p* f‘,..... 101,3 1106,100011001.01,0105,.... ____w„ .411.4..,,1046i.4„...4,40„,„..,40, : 7'. —-'-----''''''''-'' "'''''''':-:''''' Atillialle114165:i.P-T ! G oiyi+iik 6 as r gas : F 1 Lk D _ 9 k1- 1 t,+ 1 F 1 ¢' kE7- k u'r1 -.yt, t ram. a ..1 111111 .01 .'- Nt - it,'pus+ P.fl + DOWntt 1',x 1 t z "Al At°a e s -1 a , aS s a 4r alr3 aLak eview J Ae a m a i .= a-i HosptaO ' A r I A itc ' „ i 3il ,,- The comprehensive plan for Stillwaterwtisfg r I tF addressed several issues including 1-7 i_,a7 e44 redevelopment concepts for focus areas I""''-" '.'1--,i! t t05. ,;,' r54, i - ._, R I'l r throughout the city(left)and policies and Q l HigI ay36 Mized.Use Q , r' strategies to protect historic resources y{_, 4 ;si; :, 1, t * ; such as the public stairwell downtown and natural resources such as the many bluffs The City of Stillwater marked its 100th year of planning by completing its 2040 that give the city its unique character and Comprehensive Plan,which will see the beginning of a new era in the city's history. extraordinary viewsheds. The Stillwater Lift Bridge,which in recent years has been a source of remarkable traffic congestion,particularly for Stillwater's well-preserved and well-loved downtown,closed to automobile traffic in 2018 and will become a pedestrian and bicycle bridge in the near future. The closing of the Lift Bridge to automobiles will usher in new opportunities for downtown as the traffic that once clogged Main Street decreases,freeing up the streets for weekend shoppers,outdoors recreation enthusiasts,and potentially new downtown residents who might be attracted to live, work,and shop in Stillwater's compact,walkable downtown. In addition to the Downtown Plan chapter,which was developed in a separate project,the Comprehensive Plan emphasizes redevelopment and development opportunities elsewhere in the city,particularly along the edges of the community and along the Highway 36 corridor. The need to identify additional housing opportunities,as well as mixed uses in selected areas,resulted in a future land use plan that will enable appropriate housing and commercial growth without disrupting Stillwater's established low density residential areas. The Comprehensive Plan also identifies room for business park and industrial growth along the southern edge of the city,along the Highway 36 corridor. A' R k;F ,A .- Downtown Action Plan Red Wing, Minnesota W I ...- 14 R ___ °R:$: , 1 G N -- Sii:iu-}_!, ok Tr, h. ri -n E ,Tr I I! 'orate L. At a ii, 4. A r 4i •2,,sgym. i d , x . .. 4=- '--- t .: .,,,...,„, k. il •'..p r v , 6' Ass 6` 1 ' t <• : rr:1 r, A u ;<- 03 r iii. t r 1..- 1 iotii.i.) ,I,.....m., „_. uplw - i y i = T Lea# 8.., fro t a r Downtown Red Wing enjoys a wealth of historic and natural amenities including bluffs and parkland along the banks or the,Viississippi River HKGi provided strategic planning and urban design services for Red Wings historic , ..\ Preservation Alliance of Minnesota downtown,which resulted in the creation of a downtown action plan rooted in the vision of community members and the Mayor's Downtown Action Plan Task Force. 2010 Preservation Award The action plan targets and embraces a core set of six main community values to 1)create vibrant gatheringplaces,2)attractive housingoptions,3)thriving S ( E:K'cA: Fps<->citry of i_ANoscAE rcommerce,and 4)strong connections that 5)celebrate the experience and 6)foster ARCHITECTS sustainability. MINNESOTA A hallmark of the plan is a tool kit designed to facilitate smooth and ongoing 2010 Merit Award for Planning&Research implementation.The plan includes a creative"Decision Principles Checklist"and an Actions Matrix" -identifying the key questions the plan implementer should ask when evaluating an action or project in downtown Red Wing. Since adoption of the Action Plan,HKGi has worked with the City to implement important streetscape improvements,create a master plan for He Mni Can-Barn Bluff Park,and begin planning work for a pedestrian bridge and redevelopment in the Old Main area of downtown. Downtown Signage and Wayfinding Master Plan Hutchinson,Minnesota 5. 8• j rt 1-g: A 4" N 42 2 C:E 1 11 If II i`I'I ' [ISt , 8" r 0 ST.ATETHEATER ; 3" H z C + U 1,,,:.,,......,.: 2-8 J LH[I\1 PARK CEes(iIRI.SCOUT PARK H x I , L. 1 j TCHINSON 35 4' Final Entry and Interpretive Signage Concepts d 4 4-r- t":: River Cistrirt Directiu,al5igtz LEGEND I.iP xw t . 1 f, v.. ...r.... e... Y I' • E.103.4,_ i 1 rt, ; Y 1 ry''. i Yµ1;iii' R Districts and Destinations Map 1. 1 ° is As part of Hutchinson's ongoing downtown revitalization,the City retained HKGi to focus on designing a master plan to emphasize identity,place making and wayfinding. The master plan lays out a framework for the implementation of 4,' a unified signage and wayfinding system designed to aid,educate,and orient local residents and incoming trail users to downtown Hutchinson's history and destinations. x . The plan establishes two districts around downtown and the Crow River and identifies key park,downtown,and historic destinations within each district. Key to ems. the success of the project was the establishment of a design aesthetic for signage Crow River Trait System Map Kiosk elements which unified the city's existing system of streetscape elements with the historic and architectural features of the downtown and Crow River districts. The plan specifies critical sign design details,sign location and orientation,and provides a phasing plan enabling a timely and cost effective roll out of the system. Following the creation of the master plan,HKGi created construction documentation and conducted construction administration for the implementation phase of the project. STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 14 Heritage Landing Parking Facility - Federal Reserve Bank Minneapolis,Minnesota iI r. y A. s ak ` i I 4 .r gam e ii'...1.. r;^ N. v 11 HKGi is currently working with a multi-disciplinary team,led by BWBR Architects,Site design improvements include: to design and construct a parking ramp and associated site improvements for expansion of their downtown Minneapolis campus. The project,known as Heritage Pedestrian Promenade Paved plaza spacesLanding,is located in Minneapolis's North Loop neighborhood,near the Mississippi _Flexible/open central lawn area River. The proposed Heritage Landing parking ramp will complete the Federal River overlook and pergola Reserve Bank's campus master plan and provide parking for employees as well as Native plantings/landscaping North Loop area businesses and visitors.Trail improvements Public art The Heritage Landing site design concept is in support of planning principles Special site lighting established by North Loop area planning initiatives,including the provision of safe,attractive,and publicly accessible green spaces in the North Loop neighborhood;improved pedestrian and bicycle connections between the North Loop neighborhood,the Cedar Lake Trail,and the Mississippi River;enhanced view corridors to existing landmarks and the Mississippi River;flexible outdoor spaces that can be programmed for formal and informal community gathering events throughout the year;reduced hard space and the introduction of native plant materials;and the incorporation of best management practices(BMPs)for managing stormwater runoff to improve water quality and reduce runoff. The planned expansion is scheduled for construction beginning in fall 2019 and completed by fall 2020. 4uv, N,C F .c C ;DC ROF0/Ai- City Square West Redevelopment Concept Chaska, Minnesota 01,,,,.. .it, s. •. 1,..*.. :,1_.:.. 'f t l.,._ .. bo-n...s iY- f7!v. per y !- 7. ti tls i,11_ n r w Cam— i ' a r Exploration of development concepts included 3D renderings to to help stakeholders and the project team explore buildingtimassingandsitenavigationscenarios(left). The planning process also had to consider potential parking solutions for the redevelopment. Sketches of various concepts illustrated underground parking configurations. HKGi is providing leadership for a multidisciplinary team exploring redevelopment concepts for a key parcel in downtown Chaska. The team includes an architect, and a real estate developer,who is providing expertise related to commercial and residential market conditions and feasibility. HKGi is also leading the team in conducting a site study for a new downtown library that the City is planning on constructing. The project team,representatives from the City,key stakeholders,and current property owners have explored a variety of redevelopment scenarios and assessed each scenario for its economic feasibility as well as for its ability to contribute to the vision established in Chaska's Downtown Master Plan. A key element emphasized in the redevelopment concepts is the Paseo Connection,an attractive, safe,north-south mid-block connection that uses alleyways as premier pedestrian thoroughfares. Exploration of the redevelopment concepts for this block have focused on ways to activate the Paseo with alley-facing businesses and placemaking elements. An on-site library has been part of the concepts being explored. A more expansive library site study will enable the City's leadership to compare and test the feasibility of an on-site library with the costs and feasibility of building a library on other sites in the downtown area. 04. FEE QUOTATION HKGi has prepared a fee that aligns with the prescribed scope of work and deliverables listed in the Request for Proposals&Qualifications.We also understand this study will occur in two phases(Phase I and Phase II).In that respect,we will work closely with Stillwater staff and the Stillwater Downtown Parking Commission z to ensure the first phase leads towards realistic implementation measures that can be evaluated as part of the second phase.At that time,HKGi and Stillwater staff will scope the second phase within an agreed upon budget.We anticipate the first phase of work to be completed by the end of January 2020 and within the proposed fee 1111 listed below: iikft4RY J S , J+. x B4SEUAtl } - EstimatedTask FeeIHours 11i 1 a .- a ., , • 1.Project Coordination 20 2,300i 4 17 :CI' " 2.Engagement 20 3,100 t T 3.Exploration Phase 90 8,900 4.Strategies&Recommendations j 70 7,700 DOWNTOWN RED WING 5.Final Deliverables 30 2,800 1 Subtotal 230 24,800 Reimbursable Expenses 200 1,, Not-to-Exceed Total 25,000 Additional Meetings We anticipate any additional meetings outside of those listed in the scope providedvt. in the RFQ would be led by the project manager,Lance Bernard. His hourly rate for x, additional meetings will be billed at$130/hour. I If additional time is required for preparation of materials,the rate for staff support e: ' ` time would be billed at a rate of$75-$85/hour,depending on the type of staff support needed. N. If additional meetings are required,HKGi will work with the City in advanceQ1,to identify the necessary resources and provide an anticipated meeting cost. Additional meetings will be billed on an hourly basis. DOWNTOWN CHASKA PARKING SYSTEM EFFICIENCY STUDY PROPOSAL f. ' ' Creating PLACES that enrich PEOPLE'S lives MI t a *.' i,/,‘',k 4,. i 7,7 777.7 t , s 7.4 Atill s INV- i.et:/.a t 4. lili —i rk' I z t- e ec_< 41I . 1 : L z i- i A- 1._i__-- lor-- 1 x r 3 sue. Bill Turnblad From: Lance Bernard <lance@hkgi.com> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2019 8:49 AM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: Parking Commission Agenda Hi Bill, As requested, I've pulled together agenda items for the November 21 meeting. We will have plenty to cover. Let me know how much time we will have on the Parking Commission's agenda (assuming they have other business to cover), so we can plan accordingly. Much appreciated, Lance Agenda Items Reaffirm Study Goals and Objectives Summary of Existing Conditions Confirm Known Issues Discuss Preliminary Strategies for Further Investigation o Parking Fees (Comparison of precedent examples will be provided) o Employee Parking o Event Parking Discuss Downton Engagement Efforts o Online Survey o One-on-One Interviews Lance H. Bernard Planner—Project Manager 111121 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. MilCreating Places that Enrich People's Lives Planners Landscape Architects Urban Designers Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 123 North Third Street,Suite 100 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Direct:612.252.7133 Fax:612.338.6838 Iance@hkgi.com www.hkgi.com 1 RESOLUTION 2019- RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT WITH HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP,INC FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT A DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY WHEREAS, on July 30, 2019 the City Council of the City of Stillwater approved the selection of Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc (HKGi)to assist the City with the a parking capacity study for Downtown Stillwater; and WHEREAS, HKGi has submitted a contract letter dated August 27, 2019,which fairly represent the scope of services as requested by the City, as well as contractual terms and conditions, schedule, and other details as found acceptable to both the City of Stillwater and HKGi. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Stillwater City Council hereby approves the August 27, 2019 contract letter. Adopted by the Stillwater City Council this 3rd day of September, 2019. Ted Kozlowski,Mayor ATTEST: Beth Wolf, City Clerk Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. min August 27, 2019 Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater,MN 55082 Subject:An Agreement between the City of Stillwater and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.for services pertaining to the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study Dear CLIENT; This letter outlines a Scope of Services,Fee Schedule and other elements which together constitute an agreement between the City of Stillwater hereinafter referred to as the CLIENT, and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.,hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT for the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study,hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT. The CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree as set forth below: A. BASIC SERVICES The CONSULTANT'S basic services for the PROJECT are as provided in Attachment A Work Program. B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT and the CLIENT may agree in writing to amend this Contract for additional services related to the PROJECT and compensation for such services. The following services have not been requested by the CLIENT but are available upon written authorization. 1. Meetings in addition to those specified in Paragraph A above. 2. Services or Deliverables not specifically identified in Paragraph A above. C. FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT agrees to complete the scope of work contained in Paragraph A in exchange for professional fee compensation as noted below. The CLIENT agrees to pay the CONSULTANT for PROJECT services rendered as follows: 1. For the CONSULTANT'S Basic Services described in Paragraph A above,a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule(see Attachment B)not- to-exceed$25,000 inclusive of expenses as noted in Paragraph A. 123 North Third Street,Suite 100,Minneapolis,MN 55401-1659 Ph(612) 338-0800 Fx(612)338-6838 Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 27,2019 Page 2 2. For the CONSULTANT'S Additional Services described in Paragraph B,a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule plus incidental expenses or a negotiated fee. 3. Invoices will be submitted electronically(PDF form)to the CLIENT via email on a monthly basis as work is completed and shall be payable within 30 days in accordance with this Agreement. 4. The CONSULTANT reserves the right to suspend services if the CLIENT is delinquent in making payments in accordance with this Agreement. D. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY The CLIENT shall be responsible for the following: 1. Assembly of background information including,but not limited to digital copies of all files,pertinent plans,aerial photographs,base maps,inventory data,available GIS mapping, limited to those that are reasonably available. 2. Arrangements and notification for public meetings and stakeholder meetings. 3. Reproduction and distribution of Project reports as deemed necessary and not otherwise specified in paragraph A. 4. Participation in team workshops as needed. 5. Presentation of draft materials to stakeholder groups as required. 6. Provide traffic and municipal engineering support to the project as needed. E. INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall maintain insurance of the kind and in the amounts shown below for the life of the contract. Certificates for General Liability Insurance should state that the CLIENT, its officials,employees,agents and representatives are Additional Insureds.The CLIENT reserves the right to review CONSULTANT's insurance policies at any time to verify that contractual requirements have been met. 1. Commercial General Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per occurrence 3,000,000 general aggregate 300,000 damage to rented premises 15,000 medical expenses 2. Umbrella Liability 1,000,000 per occurrence 1,000,000 general aggregate 10,000 self-insured retention Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 27,2019 Page 3 3. Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability a. Worker's Compensation per Minnesota Statutes b. Employer's Liability 500,000 per accident; 500,000 per employee; 500,000 per disease policy limit. 4. Professional Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per claim 4,000,000 annual aggregate F. COMPLETION SCHEDULE The services of the CONSULTANT will begin upon CLIENT approval and will,absent of causes beyond the control of the CONSULTANT,be completed within eight months of the date that the CLIENT issues a notice to proceed. The notice to proceed shall come from an authorized representative of the City. G. NONDISCRIMINATION The CONSULTANT agrees not to discriminate by reason of age,race,religion,color,sex, national origin,or handicap unrelated to the duties of a position,of applicants for employment or employees as to terms of employment,promotion,demotion or transfer, recruitment,layoff or termination,compensation,selection for training,or participation in recreational and educational activities. H. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY During the performance of this Contract,the CONSULTANT, in compliance with Executive Order 11246,as amended by Executive Order 11375 and Department of Labor regulations 41 CFR Part 60,shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,color,religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants for employment are employed,and that employees are treated during employment,without regard to their race,color,religion,sex or national origin. Such action shall include,but not be limited to,the following: employment, upgrading,demotion,transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation;and selection for training,including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment notices to be provided by the Government setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. The CONSULTANT shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race,color,religion, sex,or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work,and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 27,2019 Page 4 I. INDEMNIFICATION CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree to indemnify and hold the other harmless,and their respective officers,employees,agents,and representatives,from and against liability for all claims,losses,damages,and expenses,including reasonable attorneys fees,to the extent such claims,losses,damages or expenses are caused by the indemnifying parry's negligent acts, errors,or omissions. In the event claims, losses,damages or expenses are caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of the CLIENT and CONSULTANT,they shall be borne by each party in proportion to its negligence J. TERM,TERMINATION,SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS 1. The Term of this Agreement shall be concurrent with the work authorized and shall be in accordance with the schedule to be established between the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT. 2. Either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the other party at its address by certified mail at least ten(10)days prior to the date of termination. 3. Neither the CLIENT nor the CONSULTANT shall assign,sublet or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 4. The time schedule shall not apply and/or time extensions will be allowed for any circumstances beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. 5. This Agreement shall be governed by all applicable laws. 6. Upon termination,Consultant shall be entitled to fees earned through the effective date of termination. K. DISPUTES In the event the CLIENT and CONSULTANT are unable to reach agreement under the terms of this contract,disputes shall be resolved using alternative dispute resolution(ADR). L. REVOCATION If this agreement is not signed and accepted by both parties within 90 days of the contract date,it shall become null and void. M. AUTHORIZATION IN WITNESS WHEREOF,The CLIENT and the CONSULTANT have made and executed this Agreement for Professional Services, This day of 2016 Downtown Parking Efficiency Study August 27,2019 Page 5 CLIENT City of Stillwater Name Title Name Title CONSULTANT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Name: Title Name: Title ATTACHMENT A— WORK PROGRAM Phase One Tasks Task 1: Project Coordination One or two check-ins per week with City Staff via phone or email Task 2: Engagement Consultant will attend and facilitate up to three meetings with the Parking Commission. City staff will be responsible for coordinating and scheduling the meetings. The purpose and intent for each meeting is described below: o Meeting #1: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to discuss key findings from the utilization counts and peer review research (see Task 3). o Meeting #2: Consultant will present draft recommendations to the Parking Commission for their consideration. The purpose of this meeting is to reach a consensus on the study results. o Meeting #3: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to review the final deliverables and scope Phase II activities. Task 3: Exploration Phase Task 3.1: Data Collection and Mapping Data collected under this task will determine parking utilization rates by parking facility and provide a baseline for confirming parking concerns. Consultant will utilize existing utilization counts (provide by the City) to build base maps depicting the study area's parking attributes and utilization rates. Findings will help identify potential parking reservoirs that are underutilized. The parking reservoirs may present opportunities for employee parking or mitigate the parking needs/requirements for new uses or redevelopment initiatives. Task 3.2: Review existing regulatory structure and fundinq strategies Zoning ordinance Funding/financing policy o Capital expenditures c Ongoing operations and maintenance Task 3.3: Peer Review Consultant will research up to five comparison downtowns for comparing their parking requirements, district-wide parking models, pricing structure and financing mechanisms. Findings from this task will help inform potential modifications to the City's parking requirements, pricing and district-wide parking approach. Task 3.4: Employee Survey Consultant will work with City Staff to prepare an online survey to better understand the number of employees working in Downtown Stillwater during specific days and times. The survey results will help inform Task 3.2 and 4.2. The City will be responsible for distributing the survey. Task 3.5: Parkinq Generation Model Data collected under Task 3.1 will be integrated into a customized "parking generation model."The purpose of the model is to help determine the parking needs for new uses or future redevelopment efforts. Model assumptions will utilize the city's parking requirements and policies to determine the study area's current and future parking demand. The model will be used to run future parking scenarios based on future land use and redevelopment assumptions and parking reduction factors (e.g., parking demand rates that reflect current utilization, best practices, or multimodal goals). The "parking generation model" will help determine when a new use or redevelopment initiative is unable to meet parking demands without building new off street parking supply. Task 3 Deliverables Base maps depicting the study area's parking utilization and attributes. Memorandum documenting existing conditions and findings from the peer review. Development of an on-line survey for the City's use. Parking generation model developed in Microsoft Excel. Task 4: Strategies and Recommendations Task 4.1: Event Parkinq Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs during large events (e.g., Lumber Jack Days and Harvest Fest). Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities, shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.2: Employee Parkinq Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs for downtown employees. Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities, shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.3: Enterprise Fund Evaluation Consultant will develop a funding tool that compares Downtown Stillwater's Enterprise Fund (fee-in-lieu payments for parking requirements) against other models. The model's assumptions will be based on findings from Task 3.3. Task 4.4: Parkinq Framework The main objective throughout the planning process is to focus on an action/phasing plan that outlines recommendations and strategies that maximize downtown's parking supply. The recommendations and strategies will focus on the following: 0 Employee parking o Event parking o Parking solutions for new uses or redevelopment initiatives o Modifications to the parking ordinance (i.e., requirements and Enterprise Fund model) Task 4 Deliverables Memo documenting the proposed parking strategies and recommendations. Financial model developed in Microsoft Excel. Task 5: Final Deliverables Task 5.1: Draft Report Consultant will provide a technical memorandum documenting the study's process and findings. Supporting materials used throughout the process (e.g., GIS files, spreadsheets, maps, and power points) will be provided as part of the final deliverables. Task 5.2: City Council Consultant will attend one City Council meeting and present the study's findings and recommendations. Task 5Deliverables Consolidation of the Task 3 and 4 memorandums into a final report. Preparation and attendance at one City Council meeting. Phase Two Tasks Once Phase I activities are complete, consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work and budget for Phase Two which will focus on implementation measures, while formalizing a preferred district-wide parking approach. This will be done in close collaboration with City Staff and the Parking Commission. Potential activities may include: Stakeholder engagement to reach a consensus on the study's recommendations Zoning amendments Wayfinding and signage plan Cost estimates for the recommendations Shared parking agreements Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Fen July 31, 2019 Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Subject:An Agreement between the City of Stillwater and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.for services pertaining to the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study Dear CLIENT; This letter outlines a Scope of Services, Fee Schedule and other elements which together constituteanagreementbetweentheCityofStillwaterhereinafterreferredtoastheCLIENT, andHoisingtonKoeglerGroupInc.,hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT for the Downtown Parking Efficiency Study, hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT. The CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree as set forth below: A. BASIC SERVICES The CONSULTANT'S basic services for the PROJECT are as provided in Attachment A Work Program. B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT and the CLIENT may agree in writing to amend this Contract for additional services related to the PROJECT and compensation for such services. The following services have not been requested by the CLIENT but are available upon written authorization. 1. Meetings in addition to those specified in Paragraph A above. 2. Services or Deliverables not specifically identified in Paragraph A above. C. FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT agrees to complete the scope of work contained in Paragraph A in exchange for professional fee compensation as noted below. The CLIENT agrees to pay the CONSULTANT for PROJECT services rendered as follows: 1. For the CONSULTANT'S Basic Services described in Paragraph A above, a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule(see Attachment B)not- to-exceed$25,000 inclusive of expenses as noted in Paragraph A. 123 North Third Street,Suite 100,Minneapolis,MN 55401-1659 Ph(612) 338-0800 Fx(612) 338-6838 Downtown Parking Efficiency Study July 31,2019 Page 2 2. For the CONSULTANT'S Additional Services described in Paragraph B, a fee based on the CONSULTANT'S current hourly rate schedule plus incidental expenses or a negotiated fee. 3. Invoices will be submitted electronically(PDF form)to the CLIENT via email on a monthly basis as work is completed and shall be payable within 30 days in accordance with this Agreement. 4. The CONSULTANT reserves the right to suspend services if the CLIENT is delinquent in making payments in accordance with this Agreement. D. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY The CLIENT shall be responsible for the following: 1. Assembly of background information including,but not limited to digital copies ofallfiles,pertinent plans,aerial photographs,base maps, inventory data,available GIS mapping, limited to those that are reasonably available. 2. Arrangements and notification for public meetings and stakeholder meetings. 3. Reproduction and distribution of Project reports as deemed necessary and not otherwise specified in paragraph A. 4. Participation in team workshops as needed. 5. Presentation of draft materials to stakeholder groups as required. 6. Provide traffic and municipal engineering support to the project as needed. E. INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall maintain insurance of the kind and in the amounts shown below for the life of the contract. Certificates for General Liability Insurance should state that the CLIENT, its officials,employees, agents and representatives are Additional Insureds.The CLIENT reserves the right to review CONSULTANT'S insurance policies at any time to verify that contractual requirements have been met. 1. Commercial General Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per occurrence 3,000,000 general aggregate 300,000 damage to rented premises 15,000 medical expenses 2. Umbrella Liability 1,000,000 per occurrence 1,000,000 general aggregate 10,000 self-insured retention Downtown Parking Efficiency Study July 31,2019 Page 3 3. Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability a. Worker's Compensation per Minnesota Statutes b. Employer's Liability 500,000 per accident; 500,000 per employee; 500,000 per disease policy limit. 4. Professional Liability Insurance 2,000,000 per claim 4,000,000 annual aggregate F. COMPLETION SCHEDULE The services of the CONSULTANT will begin upon CLIENT approval and will,absent of causes beyond the control of the CONSULTANT,be completed within eight months of the date that the CLIENT issues a notice to proceed. The notice to proceed shall come from an authorized representative of the City. G. NONDISCRIMINATION The CONSULTANT agrees not to discriminate by reason of age,race,religion, color, sex, national origin,or handicap unrelated to the duties of a position, of applicants for employment or employees as to terms of employment,promotion,demotion or transfer, recruitment, layoff or termination,compensation, selection for training,or participation in recreational and educational activities. H. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY During the performance of this Contract,the CONSULTANT, in compliance with ExecutiveOrder11246,as amended by Executive Order 11375 and Department of Labor regulations 41 CFR Part 60, shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,color,religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants for employment are employed,and that employees are treated during employment,without regard to their race,color,religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include,but not be limited to,the following: employment, upgrading,demotion,transfer;recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall post in conspicuous places available to employeesandapplicantsforemploymentnoticestobeprovidedbytheGovernmentsettingforththe provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. The CONSULTANT shall state that all qualifiedapplicantswillreceiveconsiderationforemploymentwithoutregardtorace,color,religion, sex,or national origin. The CONSULTANT shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of itssubcontractorsforsuchworktoincorporatesuchrequirementsinallsubcontractsfor program work. Downtown Parking Efficiency Study July 31, 2019 Page 4 I. INDEMNIFICATION CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree to indemnify and hold the other harmless,and their respective officers,employees,agents, and representatives, from and against liability for all claims, losses,damages,and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees,to the extent such claims, losses,damages or expenses are caused by the indemnifying party's negligent acts, errors,or omissions. In the event claims, losses,damages or expenses are caused by the joint or concurrent negligence of the CLIENT and CONSULTANT,they shall be borne by each party in proportion to its negligence J. TERM,TERMINATION,SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS 1. The Term of this Agreement shall be concurrent with the work authorized and shall be in accordance with the schedule to be established between the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT. 2. Either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice to the other party at its address by certified mail at least ten(10)days prior to the date of termination. 3. Neither the CLIENT nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet or transfer its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 4. The time schedule shall not apply and/or time extensions will be allowed for any circumstances beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. 5. This Agreement shall be governed by all applicable laws. 6. Upon termination,Consultant shall be entitled to fees earned through the effective date of termination. K. DISPUTES In the event the CLIENT and CONSULTANT are unable to reach agreement under the terms of this contract,disputes shall be resolved using alternative dispute resolution(ADR). L. REVOCATION If this agreement is not signed and accepted by both parties within 90 days of the contract date, it shall become null and void. M. AUTHORIZATION IN WITNESS WHEREOF,The CLIENT and the CONSULTANT have made and executed this Agreement for Professional Services, This day of 2016 Downtown Parking Efficiency Study July 31, 2019 Page 5 CLIENT City of Stillwater 4IIJ l5T7 2../4-TLC Name Title Name Title CONSULTANT Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Name:Title Name:Title ATTACHMENT A— WORK PROGRAM Phase One Tasks Task 1: Project Coordination One or two check-ins per week with City Staff via phone or email Task 2: Engagement Consultant will attend and facilitate up to three meetings with the Parking Commission. City staff will be responsible for coordinating and scheduling the meetings. The purpose and intent for each meeting is described below: o Meeting #1: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to discuss key findings from the utilization counts and peer review research (see Task 3). o Meeting #2: Consultant will present draft recommendations to the Parking Commission for their consideration. The purpose of this meeting is to reach a consensus on the study results. o Meeting #3: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to review the final deliverables and scope Phase II activities. Task 3: Exploration Phase Task 3.1: Data Collection and Mapping Data collected under this task will determine parking utilization rates by parking facility and provide a baseline for confirming parking concerns. Consultant will utilize existing utilization counts (provide by the City) to build base maps depicting the study area's parking attributes and utilization rates. Findings will help identify potential parking reservoirs that are underutilized. The parking reservoirs may present opportunities for employee parking or mitigate the parking needs/requirements for new uses or redevelopment initiatives. Task 3.2: Review existing regulatory structure and funding strategies Zoning ordinance Funding/financing policy o Capital expenditures o Ongoing operations and maintenance Task 3.3: Peer Review Consultant will research up to five comparison downtowns for comparing their parking requirements, district-wide parking models, pricing structure and financing mechanisms. Findings from this task will help inform potential modifications to the City's parking requirements, pricing and district-wide parking approach. Task 3.4: Employee Survey Consultant will work with City Staff to prepare an online survey to better understand the number of employees working in Downtown Stillwater during specific days and times. The survey results will help inform Task 3.2 and 4.2. The City will be responsible for distributing the survey. Task 3.5: Parking Generation Model Data collected under Task 3.1 will be integrated into a customized "parking generation model." The purpose of the model is to help determine the parking needs for new uses or future redevelopment efforts. Model assumptions will utilize the city's parking requirements and policies to determine the study area's current and future parking demand. The model will be used to run future parking scenarios based on future land use and redevelopment assumptions and parking reduction factors (e.g., parking demand rates that reflect current utilization, best practices, or multimodal goals). The "parking generation model" will help determine when a new use or redevelopment initiative is unable to meet parking demands without building new off street parking supply. Task 3 Deliverables Base maps depicting the study area's parking utilization and attributes. Memorandum documenting existing conditions and findings from the peer review. Development of an on-line survey for the City's use. Parking generation model developed in Microsoft Excel. Task 4: Strategies and Recommendations Task 4.1: Event Parking Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs during large events (e.g., Lumber Jack Days and Harvest Fest). Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities. shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.2: Employee Parking Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs for downtown employees. Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities, shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.3: Enterprise Fund Evaluation Consultant will develop a funding tool that compares Downtown Stillwater's Enterprise Fund (fee-in-lieu payments for parking requirements) against other models. The model's assumptions will be based on findings from Task 3.3. Task 4.4: Parking Framework The main objective throughout the planning process is to focus on an action/phasing plan that outlines recommendations and strategies that maximize downtown's parking supply. The recommendations and strategies will focus on the following: 0 Employee parking o Event parking o Parking solutions for new uses or redevelopment initiatives o Modifications to the parking ordinance (i.e., requirements and Enterprise Fund model) Task 4 Deliverables Memo documenting the proposed parking strategies and recommendations. Financial model developed in Microsoft Excel. Task 5: Final Deliverables Task 5.1: Draft Report Consultant will provide a technical memorandum documenting the study's process and findings. Supporting materials used throughout the process (e.g., GIS files, spreadsheets, maps, and power points) will be provided as part of the final deliverables. Task 5.2: City Council Consultant will attend one City Council meeting and present the study's findings and recommendations. Task 5Deliverables Consolidation of the Task 3 and 4 memorandums into a final report. Preparation and attendance at one City Council meeting. Phase Two Tasks Once Phase I activities are complete, consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work and budget for Phase Two which will focus on implementation measures, while formalizing a preferred district-wide parking approach. This will be done in close collaboration with City Staff and the Parking Commission. Potential activities may include: Stakeholder engagement to reach a consensus on the study's recommendations Zoning amendments Wayfinding and signage plan Cost estimates for the recommendations Shared parking agreements 2r/A s --1-u-06) P S012-P _t2t4,z,Le 4.-eD I . 1.---oc-(.. 2_ I-' Lg i4r 4 (Z,A-4 f, .s( iv '5 e S-PAJCE- g F F 4-6 '• I . fL.“4 Zec- na, wl, 2, E 4-L E l i t c)-±- Cr a.Vaud 0( Su6*If inif24 t4 Kevar-a ~; c a L 1 ( d„,1 ' wl ( w:1 01- le, sw w.1 rio s..J11o1HLtl 04x Qy--, wJq N1 r , L_F--413 illwater THEE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS QUALIFICATIONS PARKING SYSTEM EFFICIENCY STUDY DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING SYSTEM Release date: May 24, 2019 SECTION I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this project is to assist Stillwater's Downtown Parking Commission identify means to more efficiently use existing parking capacity in the downtown public parking system. It is the Downtown Parking Commission's goal to better serve the needs of its customers without the major capital expenditures associated with construction of new parking facilities. B. INQUIRIES The City staff member listed below will be the contact for all inquiries related to this RFP. All questions or requests for information should be sent by email to: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director, bturnblad(cr ci.stillwater.mn.us All inquiries received by email before 1:00 p.m. on June 20, 2019 will receive responses. Responses which involve an interpretation or change to this RFP will be issued in writing by addendum and e-mailed to all parties recorded by the City as having received a copy of this RFP. All such addenda issued by the City shall be considered part of the RFP. Any addenda will be issued in writing by email by 4:30 PM on June 21, 2019. This is one week prior to the proposal submission deadline. Only additional information provided by formal written addenda will be binding. Oral and other interpretations or clarifications will be without legal effect. C. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS To be considered, each firm must email one complete pdf copy of their proposal. The subject line of the email is to be: "Proposal for Downtown Stillwater Parking Study". Email the proposal to Bill Turnblad (bturnblad(a ci.stillwater.mn.us). All proposals must be emailed by 3:30 PM, Friday, June 28, 2019. Proposals sent after that time cannot be considered. D. ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF PROPOSAL CONTENT In submitting this proposal, it is understood that the right is reserved by the City to reject any and all proposals. The contents of this RFP and the proposal will become contractual obligations if a contract ensues. E. SELECTION CRITERIA The proposal selected for award of the contract will not necessarily be from the lowest bidder. Rather, the selection will be based upon the proposal that is most responsive and advantageous to the City, as determined by the City. The City intends to award a contract, subject to the terms of this RFP, to the firm that offers the best overall value. Proposals will be evaluated based on past experience and performance, current performance capability, fees and other criteria as outlined in this document. a of? I Downtown Parking Study RFP F. ISSUANCE OF RFP AND AWARD PROCESS Issuance of this RFP does not compel the City to award a contract. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals wholly or in part and to waive any technicalities, informalities, or irregularities in any proposal at its sole option and discretion. The City reserves the right to request clarification or additional information. The City reserves the right to award a contract or to re-solicit proposals or to temporarily or permanently abandon the procurement. G. DISCLOSURE All information in a proposal, except fee analysis, is subject to disclosure under the provisions of Minnesota Statute Chapter 13 "Minnesota Government Data Practices Act". H. COST LIABILITY The City of Stillwater assumes no responsibility of liability for costs incurred by the consultant prior to the signing of a contract for this project. Total liability of the City of Stillwater is limited to the terms and conditions of this agreement. SECTION II. WORK STATEMENT A. PROJECT SCOPE Phase One Tasks Task 1: Project Coordination Consultant coordination of study tasks with City Staff One or two check-ins per week with City Staff via phone or email Task 2: Engagement Consultant attends Parking Commission meetings Consultant will attend and facilitate up to three meetings with the Parking Commission. City staff will be responsible for coordinating and scheduling the meetings. The purpose and intent for each meeting is described below: o Meeting #1: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to discuss key findings from the utilization counts and peer review research (see Task 3). o Meeting #2: Consultant will present draft recommendations to the Parking Commission for their consideration. The purpose of this meeting is to reach a consensus on the study results. o Meeting #3: Consultant will meet with the Parking Commission to review the final deliverables and scope Phase II activities. Task 3: Exploration Phase Task 3.1: Data Collection and Mapping 3 of 7 I Downtown Parking Study RFP Data collected under this task will determine parking utilization rates by parking facility and provide a baseline for confirming parking concerns. Consultant will utilize existing utilization counts (provide by the City) to build base maps depicting the study area's parking attributes and utilization rates. Findings will help identify potential parking reservoirs that are underutilized. The parking reservoirs may present opportunities for employee parking or mitigate the parking needs/requirements for new uses or redevelopment initiatives. Task 3.2: Review existing regulatory structure and funding strategies Zoning ordinance Funding/financing policy o Capital expenditures o Ongoing operations and maintenance Task 3.3: Peer Review Consultant will research up to five comparison downtowns for comparing their parking requirements, district-wide parking models, pricing structure and financing mechanisms. Findings from this task will help inform potential modifications to the City's parking requirements, pricing and district-wide parking approach. Task 3.4: Employee Survey Consultant will work with City Staff to prepare an online survey to better understand the number of employees working in Downtown Stillwater during specific days and times. The survey results will help inform Task 3.2 and 4.2. The City will be responsible for distributing the survey. Task 3.5: Parking Generation Model Data collected under Task 3.1 will be integrated into a customized parking generation model." The purpose of the model is to help determine the parking needs for new uses or future redevelopment efforts. Model assumptions will utilize the city's parking requirements and policies to determine the study area's current and future parking demand. The model will be used to run future parking scenarios based on future land use and redevelopment assumptions and parking reduction factors (e.g., parking demand rates that reflect current utilization, best practices, or multimodal goals). The "parking generation model" will help determine when a new use or redevelopment initiative is unable to meet parking demands without building new off street parking supply. Deliverables Base maps depicting the study area's parking utilization and attributes. Memorandum documenting existing conditions and findings from the peer review. Development of an on-line survey for the City's use. Parking generation model developed in Microsoft Excel. 4 of 7 Downtown Parking Study RFP Task 4: Strategies and Recommendations Task 4.1: Event Parking Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs during large events (e.g., Lumber Jack Days and Harvest Fest). Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities, shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.2: Employee Parking Consultant will develop recommendations for managing parking needs for downtown employees. Various parking strategies may include shared parking opportunities, shuttle services, and travel demand management strategies. Task 4.3: Enterprise Fund Evaluation Consultant will develop a funding tool that compares Downtown Stillwater's Enterprise Fund (fee-in-lieu payments for parking requirements) against other models. The model's assumptions will be based on findings from Task 3.3. Task 4.4: Parking Framework The main objective throughout the planning process is to focus on an action/phasing plan that outlines recommendations and strategies that maximize downtown's parking supply. The recommendations and strategies will focus on the following: o Employee parking o Event parking o Parking solutions for new uses or redevelopment initiatives o Modifications to the parking ordinance (i.e., requirements and Enterprise Fund model) Deliverables Memo documenting the proposed parking strategies and recommendations. Financial model developed in Microsoft Excel. Task 5: Final Deliverables Task 5.1: Draft Report Consultant will provide a technical memorandum documenting the study's process and findings. Supporting materials used throughout the process (e.g., GIS files, spreadsheets, maps, and power points)will be provided as part of the final deliverables. Task 5.2: City Council Consultant will attend one City Council meeting and present the study's findings and recommendations. Deliverables Consolidation of the Task 3 and 4 memorandums into a final report. Preparation and attendance at one City Council meeting. s of 7 I Downtown Parking Study RFP Phase Two Tasks Once Phase I activities are complete, consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work and budget for Phase Two which will focus on implementation measures, while formalizing a preferred district-wide parking approach. This will be done in close collaboration with City Staff and the Parking Commission. Potential activities may include: Stakeholder engagement to reach a consensus on the study's recommendations Zoning amendments Wayfinding and signage plan Cost estimates for the recommendations Shared parking agreements B. PROPOSED TIMETABLE: Deadline for submission of questions 1:00 pm, June 20, 2019 Final issuance of any RFP addenda 4:30 pm, June 21, 2019 Proposal submittal deadline 3:30 pm, June 28, 2019 City Council selection of consultant team July 16, 2019 City Council approval of contract July 30, 2019 Project kick-off meeting. Consultant Week of August 5, 2019 receives project input from key City staff and commences planning process Completion of plan January 2020 SECTION III. INFORMATION REQUIRED FROM ALL PROPOSALS A. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS State the full name and address of your firm, and the branch office or other subordinate element that will perform or assist in performing the work hereunder. Indicate whether it operates as an individual, partnership, or corporation; if as a corporation, include the state in which it is incorporated. If applicable, state whether it is licensed to operate in the State of Minnesota. Include the number of executive and professional personnel by skill and qualification that will be employed in the work. Show where these personnel will be physically located during the time they are engaged in the work. Indicate which of these individuals you consider key to the successful completion of the study or project. Identify individuals by name and title that will do the work on this project. Identify the project manager and the primary contact for the project. If they are different individuals, please explain why. Resumes or qualifications are required for proposed project personnel. of 7 Downtown Parking Study RFP History of the firm, in terms of length of existence, etc. B. PAST INVOLVEMENT WITH SIMILAR PROJECTS List specific types of experience your firm has had in the following areas: Preparing public parking system improvement plans, including financing strategies for the improvements Preparing plans for improving efficiencies within a parking system Wayfinding planning Public engagement C. FEE QUOTATION Submit as part of proposal packet: Firm name and contact information Fee proposal for the parking study, which includes your firm's "not to exceed" fee for the total project. The quoted fee must include estimated reimbursable fees. The quoted fee must also include sales tax, if applicable. Also include a per-meeting cost for any meetings that are held beyond those specified in the proposal. Signature of authorized firm negotiator/expeditor. D. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR/EXPEDITOR Include the name and phone number of person(s) in your organization authorized to negotiate/expedite the proposal contract with the City of Stillwater. E. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMMENTS Include any other information that may be pertinent, but not specifically asked for elsewhere. 7 of 7 Downtown Parking Study RFP Item 5.02 fl 1 1wa ter H ' N °_ A _ 0 P M N h F , 0 f A DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMISSION DATE: January 10, 2019 SUBJECT: Parking capacity study - scoping discussion FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director BACKGROUND This year the Parking Commission will undertake a parking capacity study. The goal of the study is to discover and implement ways to increase capacity in our Downtown public parking system without the expenditure of significant capital dollars. The first phase of the study is to create a scope for the study so that we can write an RFP for a consultant to help us with the study. Staff has engaged a transportation planner, Lance Bernard from HKGi, to facilitate a discussion that is intended to narrow our focus and begin defining the scope of this project. Prior to joining HKGi's staff, Lance worked with SRF as a transportation planner. His downtown parking system clients have included such cities as Duluth, Northfield and Minneapolis. COMMENTS The goal of the discussion at the next Commission meeting will be to begin scoping the study outcomes. What is it that we want to accomplish with this study? Based on the discussion, staff and our consultant will draft a scope and develop and RFP for consulting services. Attachments: Presentation slide deck bt 1/16/2019 I1 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS Meeting Agenda 1. Discussion on District-Wide Parking Models 2. Discussion on Potential Strategies for Moving Forward 1 1 1/16/2019 EXISTING CONDITION o.®tr ==t12=27afMla2=M Past studies have shown heavy parking o©-- sc:r = oo 00," m utilization during: a®M . M E om s M Dinner hours(year round) o•11 ami Lunch hours(fluctuates year round) omMI 00MWeekends(May-October) matiomosi Special Events M' 0omumn©i. - o: ©moo amemwmm Competing Demand smmomI r- ®rn 11.111 Employees Residents Patrons and Visitors 399%h3i 507494 0-246 dM124%fug EXISTING CONDITION tws Spam Ca$4 Count Count Count Cm. Count Court Comet Court 069469. .142/99494 099144ne u.,nMe Dretnne 19ryft6ne 041/6rc 09A6ne Drynlm< 41'n Maims 7f4v205 7(31/2015 V11/MRS 7n1/2015 7/12/M5 7/121045BestPractices4:30PM 70066/ 9M AM 12.194 niN PM 6.PM 1'00 PM 330 PM 96 VIMNoCapacityIssues(0%-74%Occupied) 3 3329 24 Monitor Capacity(75%-84%Occupied) 5 7 16 13 At or Approaching Capacity(854'0-92%Occupied) 5 1367 9 30 10 .301 At Capacity(93°6+Occupied) 12 101 29 32 13 23 8I 10 4 9 3 11.111113 15 13 •4® Parking utilization should be viewed at a 6 R as 17 97 904,4Y districtwide-level,while recognizing the pressure g ]6>e 95 6 1:4anp2.. 1i points and areas of opportunity. Total 57 6s ° '°I 69` Open SP.,. 4361 203 776 2661 250 17203t8 330 Yxryan 42 13.96 26 1931 26612 17516 34.256 33A% FW MIN 399%6Jf 25-49%3u11 0}4%E 2 1/16/2019 EXISTING CONDITION Potential Parking Challenges Maximizing every space(on-street 1 and off-street) a rt --" Accommodating new uses and t ..' I‘ redevelopment initiatives Protecting the urban form ca Li Maintaining a walkable and pedestrian friendly environment f--'"'":.=` Adapting to changing economies and ems-' ?` technology Making everyone happy MOVING FORWARD 1. Maximize the existing supply through low-cost/high-benefit solutions. 2. Establish strategies and recommendations that support a district-wide parking approach,while fostering economic development initiatives. 3. Identify roles and responsibilities in implementing strategies(public and private). 4. Minimize adverse land use patterns to protect the urban form. 3 1/16/2019 POTENTIAL FRAMEWORK f , 5;c Establish a District-Wide Parking Approach 1. Uses a combination of strategies to maximize i the existing parking supply,while reducing the demand to build additional spaces. O ,.-",, 2. Commonly applied in downtown settings to Iltlit` 5S r ;'c q encourage walkability,foster economic f , LEST* ' growth,and strengthen the urban form. f i:. t I. ,°"1, s 3. Formalizes roles and responsibilities f ` fit, ownership,operations and maintenance). 9' ti`s t 4 4. Emphasizes low-cost/high-benefit solutions ilik 71 before large capital investments are made iEsrw. ` • ` e.g.,parking structure)L DISTRICT WIDE r .. MODELo tH g ELEMENTS 4 1/16/2019 DISTRICT-WIDE PARKING MODELS 1. Downtown Development Authority (DDA): A typical downtown development authority oversees infrastructure projects,including parking facilities,roadway projects and physical buildings.Their overall purpose is to also increase the quality of life for residents and businesses through economic and physical revitalization of the downtown. Example:Thief River Falls 2. Enterprise Funds:An Enterprise Fund is primarily a self-supporting program that requires developers to pay a fee in lieu to fulfill their parking requirements.Collected funds go back into maintaining and operating the City's parking supply and other infrastructure projects. Example:Wayzata&Stillwater 3. Parking Benefit District: A parking benefits district is a designated area in which the parking revenues raised are then reinvested back into the district for a wide range of improvements.The funds may be used to purchase smart parking meters,walking and biking infrastructure,or to pay for improvements to the public realm,such as street trees,benches,and lighting. Example:Minneapolis DISTRICT-WIDE PARKING MODELS 4. Improvement Districts:Improvement districts are often responsible for maintaining parking operations and services in designated districts.These districts are often partnerships between municipal departments,local organizations,private developers,and private businesses.Improvement districts are financed through parking revenue,property taxes paid by property owners,or member fees. Example:Northfield NDDC 5, Public-Private Partnerships:The configuration and management of public-private parking partnerships varies by the specific parking needs and demands within the district,along with the adjacent land uses.These partnerships are created to maximize the sharing of parking spaces by various users.Financing for public-private partnerships is provided through developer payments,user fees,common area maintenance charges,and the payment of a fee in lieu of providing parking spaces required by a zoning ordinance. Example:Duluth(moving towards this model) 4. Transportation Management Association(TMA):A TMA is an organization that carefully applies selected approaches to facilitate the movement of people and goods within an area.Also called Transportation Management Organizations(TMOs)and other names,they vary widely in size,organization,membership,and services offered. TMAs allow businesses to pool their resources to support commuter transportation strategies and can act in an advocacy role with local government on behalf of its membership. Example:Rochester(exploring approach) 5 1/16/2019 COMMON APPROACH Formalizes Roles/Responsibilities District-Wide Approaches Revenue stays within the district to offset parking costs or other Public/Private Partnership downtown investments Enterprise Fund Establishes parking requirements or Improvement or Benefit in lieu of fees District Establishes a financing structure for capital investments and ongoing O&M DISTRICT-WIDE PARKING STRATEGIES 6 1/16/2019 WAYFINDING/SIGNAGE r1F6''' llii Establish and implement a wayfinding s% ir, TE 4 4 PH Wayfinding elements,such as Q 10 monuments,directional systems, 0 directories, interpretive,and even Nil regulatory signs can enrich and 1 enhance the users experience. Signage can help direct people to underutilize or unknown areas available for public parking. PARKING RESTRICTIONS Adjust/balance parking time restrictions to encourage turnover` 13 Service oriented district (e.g., dry Pr. cleaner, post office,and coffee shop): 5. ' STA. 15 minutes - 1 hour J Entertainment district (e.g. retail PARK'NG1- shopping and restaurants): i w or , Gras,2 -4 hours J Office and business districts: F 4-8+ hours 7 1/16/2019 PARKING REQUIREMENTS Modify and adjusted parking requirements for new uses and redevelopment projects Minimizing the consumption of land for parking provides. opportunities for more productive development,greenspace or infill. Minimizing the consumption of land for parking helps increase the property tax base through higher end uses. Reducing the amount of parking required for a development can provide a developer more flexibility to build at a higher density or provide other amenities on-site (e.g., open space or public gathering places. LOCAL COMPARISONS Stillwater 1.5 5.0 3.0 to 5.t. City Code Willmar 1.0 1.0to3.5 3.5 Downtown Parking Study Prior Lake 1 to 1.5 2.5 to 5.0 2.5 to 3.5 Downtown Parking Study Red Wing City Code Wayzata 1 2.0 to 4.0 2.0 to 4.0 Downtown Parking Study Minneapolis&Saint Paul 0.50 to 1.0 1.0 to 3.5 1.0 to 2.5 8 1/16/2019 Regional/National Findings Land use Min Reg- Max Reg. Multifamily 0.50 spaces per 1.5 unit Office 1 space per 1,000 sf 3.39 spaces per 1,000 sf Commercial and Mixed Use 1 space per 1,000 sf 1.52 spaces per 1,000 sf Makerspace 0 to 1 space per 1,000 sf s,000 3,000 Industry t1t1 City District Standards 8,500 Parking to Model to Reg. 10,000 4,250 LIQUOR LICENSES Limit the number of Liquor Licenses Establishments that provide liquor can generate higher peak parking demands during the evening hours. Establishing regulations that limit the number of liquor licenses helps manage the current parking supply and demand with existing land uses. Typically applied in areas that have a high number of entertainment uses and parking is at capacity(short-term solution). 9 1/16/2019 VALET SERVICE Provide a valet service (Privately Driven) tem tore e" ;rt ... A valet service provides downtown At\ patrons a convenient option for parking. ski. If managed accordingly,this strategy can PPPPIML` 4 STOP help elevate the parking pressures being experienced throughout the downtown. it:0 Ai This strategy is an effective means to helping manage parking,while providing a customer service. EMPLOYEE PARKING EMPLOYEE Designate areas for employee parking only PARKING The number of employees may account for a large number of vehicles parking in the area, contributing to the heavy utilization. ONLYDesignatedareasforemployeeparkingwillhelp maintain a healthy supply of parking for customers. Typically,employee parking is located in underutilized areas or along the fringe. 10 1/16/2019 Stir water,C;}v r131Y. OFF-SITE PARKING 1 Identify off-site parking t, J Finding an off-site parking facility will t depend on the property owner's N <, ;gar willingness to enter into a shared parking r t- '1 agreement.f : 1/44 1.I 0 . t J The location must be convenient and F w within proximity to Downtown to ensure g4itAE yti Port=Sunh utilization. A shuttle service is needed. et_ J This is an effective means to addressing parking needs during special events. ENFORCEMENT & TECHNOLOGY Install License Plate Recognition (LPR) Software Enforcement routes can be completed faster and more frequently Every vehicle is checked for compliance U Repeat violators are caught on daily patrols Automation removes the potential for human error J Customers take notice,complying with rules and paying fines Can be use to implement parking permits 11 1/16/2019 ENFORCEMENT & TECHNOLOGY V Develop mobile applications and message boards Deck P1 ljb 1 IJProvidesopportunitiestoeducateDeckP28 patrons on where avaible parking is Deck P4 15 Deck P5 380 k‘,located Surface Lot Fl_ILL Requires the implementation of Employees 1438 sensors fl Lt5 INNOVATION t4eir -Prepare for the future 4j AmmonJAutonomousVehicles Shared Economies (Uber and Lyft) J Changing Economies (online shopping) J Adaptable Parking Structures (reuse)I C11 1, i 1114%1 A f 12 1/16/2019 PARKING STRUCTURE Develop a new parking structure(should be viewed as a last resort) Cost Per Stall Attached Structures Stand Alone Structure Monthly Operations/Maintenance 30 000+costs: 100- $1 5 0 per stall Recent developments in the Twin Cities have demonstrated cost savings when developing a site that includes an attached parking structure into the building footprint. Cost savings are typically achieved through larger developments at higher densities. FINANCIAL STRATEGIES 1. Fee in Lieu:Establish a policy that requires developers to pay a fee in lieu to fulfill their parking requirements.Collected funds go back into maintaining and operating the City's parking supply and other infrastructure projects. 2. Downtown Business District:Establish a parking district(e.g.,Parking Benefit District of Downtown Improvement District)in which most or all uses within the downtown would be eligible for accommodation of their required parking in a municipal lot by paying for permits in those lots. 3. Municipal Bonds:Municipal bonds are the most common way to pay for public parking facilities.These can be general obligation bonds,which are backed by a community's general taxation revenues,or revenue bonds,which are typically paid off through revenues from parking fees. 4. Parking Enforcement:Revenue generated from parking enforcement provides a general fund that can be used for downtown improvements of the on-going operations and maintenance of municipal parking facilities. 13 1/16/2019 FINANCIAL STRATEGIES 5. User Fees:Users fees are typically generated through metered parking or off-street parking lots that require a fee.The benefits of metered parking help increase turnover rates and produce fees for reinvesting back into the downtowns.On-street parking is typically priced at a higher rate to encourage vehicles to park off street. 6. Special Assessments:Public improvements are often financed using the power to levy special assessments Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429).A special assessment is a means for benefiting properties to pay for all or part of the costs associated with improvements,and to spread the impact over a period of years.This tool can be applied to both the construction of new improvements and the rehabilitation of existing improvements. 7. Special Service District:A special service district is a tool for financing the construction and maintenance of public improvements within a defined area(Minnesota Statutes,Sections 428A.01 -428A.10).A special service district provides a means to levy taxes(service charge)and provide improvements and service to a commercial area. 8. Tax Increment Financing:TIF is the primary development finance tool available to Minnesota cities(Minnesota Statutes,Sections 469.174 through 469.179).TIF is simple in concept,but complex in its application.Through tax increment financing,the property taxes created by new development(or redevelopment)are captured and used to finance activities needed to encourage the development. 1. What resonated with you? GROUP2. What other strategies have you been considering? DISCUSSION3. How do we improve the Downtown Stillwater Enterprise Model? 4. How does the group want to move forward? 14 1/16/2019 POTENTIAL STUDY GOALS 1. Maximize the existing supply through low-cost/high-benefit solutions. 2. Establish strategies and recommendations that support a district-wide parking approach,while fostering economic development initiatives. 3. Identify roles and responsibilities in implementing strategies(public and private). 4. 'Minimize adverse land use patterns to protect the urban form. 15 CY cya u gitdrL r") 4,1 9+1 c S C- r ? c; ut-trZ__ 1 pccp12;45 1 Ad I 4,0^t3z) co to t