Discussion of Downtown Parking Improvement PlanTOWN OF LOS GATOS
TOWN COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION AGENDA
110 EAST MAIN STREET
COUNCIL CHAMBERS (DOWNSTAIRS)
APRIL 29, 1996 -- 7:00 P.M.
Randy Attaway, Mayor
Joanne Benjamin, Vice Mayor
Steven Blanton, Council Member
Linda Lubeck, Council Member
Patrick O'Laughlin, Council Member
► Discussion of Downtown Parking Improvement Plan (continued from 2/20/96)
ADJOURNMENT
MGRO95 A:ITCAGENDAI4-29.SS
In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, If You Need
Special Assistance to Participate in this Meeting, Please Contact Patsy
Madrid, (408) 354-6832. Notification 48 Hours Before the Meeting Will
Enable the Town to Make Reasonable Arrangements to Ensure
Accessibility to this Meeting. [28 CFR §35.102-35.1041
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: 4/29/96
STUDY SESSION REPORT
April 22, 1996
MAYOR AND TO COUN IL
TOWN MANAGER
DISCUSSION OF DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN
This item was continued from February 20, 1996. Please refer to attached report.
PREPARED BY: DAVID W. KNAPP
Town Manager
DWK:pm
MGRO98 A:\CNCLRPTSI4-29-1
Reviewed by: Attorney Finance Revised: 4/22/96 12:55 pm
Reformatted: 10/23/95
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
February 15, 1996
MAYOR AND TOCOUN
TOWN MANAGER
MEETING DATE: 2/20/90
ITEM NO.(.4
CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND
PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider report on Downtown Parking Improvement Plan and provide direction to staff as appropriate.
Staff recommends in favor of the following items or concepts:
1. Development of 180 new parking spaces in the Downtown over the next 5 years is desirable. The new spaces
would come from the construction of one new structure and increasing efficiency in existing lots.
2. Parking Lots # 2 and 13 are top candidates for a new structure pending further study and analysis.
3. Parking Lots # 1, 3, 6 and the Park & Ride Lot should be immediately improved for pavement maintenance
striping efficiency and night safety.
4. An In -Lieu parking option is acceptable to allow for modest intensification of use.
5. The preferred revenue generating method to fund the contemplated new structure and the ongoing maintenance
of all lots is the computerized pay -on -foot technology providing multiple payment options. Develop RFP
specifications and solicit proposals.
6. A parking credit for Town residents with a valid California drivers license will be included in the parking plan,
for example, a no cost debit card with a $15 credit balance could issued on a annual basis.
7. Certain areas of parking will be designated for day parking (employee/owners) subject to monthly or annual
pass and a corresponding fee structure.
8. Consider a temporary installation of the pay -on -foot system for a 8 month period.
a) Standardize all Preferential Parking Districts:
i.) Parking restrictions shall be enforced 24 hours a day
ii.) No grace shall be allowed (currently some have a two hour parking limit)
9. Substantial increases in development are not desired; however continuation of retail continuity would
be acceptable suet} as a store front on a parking structure(s).
10. Private development of new parking spaces should be encouraged by providing a fee structure for newly
developed public parking.
I 1. Instruct the Planning Director to initiate proposed nevi -wry amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan and
Zoning Ordinance as appropriate.
PREPARED BY: - Scott R Baker
Director of Building and Engineering Services
N:1B&EICNCLRPTS\PARKING2.TCR
Reviewed by: Atto Finance Revised: 2/15/96 2:52 pm
Reformatted: 10/23/95
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: - CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
ACKGROUND:
On September 11, 1995, the Town Council and the Parking Commission conducted a study session to discuss various
items related to improving parking in the Downtown Central Core (Attachment 1). Staff submitted a report (available
at the Permits Counter) and many of the items found in the report are reiterated herein with more current or additional
modifications. Because this is such a complex issue with numerous possibilities and considerations, staff
recommendations are made to direct the focus of fiuther action and maximize the productivity of staff time.
INTRODUCTION
Finding a parking solution for Downtown is a challenge facing many older communities The Los Gatos' Downtown
was laid out with the horse and buggy in mind Existing streets and sidewalks are narrow bymodern standards and on -
site parking is almost nonexistent. Some financial experts hold the opinion that the municipal costs to support an older
downtown exceed revenue potential and represent a bad investment The Los Gatos Downtown, to the contrary, is an
excellent investment. The premise of this report is that a solution is attainable.
Improving economic conditions Downtown depends upon solving the parking problem. The Town is very fortunate to
have acquired the Southern Pacific Right -of -Way (i.e. Station Way) and other properties for Downtown core parking
The funding for the lots has been accomplished by a 'Downtown Parking Assessinent District" (DPADY raid Town
general fund contributions. DPAD monies are collected from the property owners in the district and general fund monies
come from many sources with property tax and sales tax providing a substantial share. Operating expense for the
Downtown lots is estimated at S60,000 per year and comes entirely from the Town's general fund. The DPAD and the
general fund have already made substantial contributions to the parking solution. It seems only fitting that the users (i.e.
the occupants of the parking spaces) should be called upon to pay their share of the parking solution.
Parking Lot 4 (IV) provided the first multi -level parking structure Downtown and completed the parking enhancements
specified in the 1987 DPAD. Under the current assessment, property owners will be making payments until the year
2007. Casual observation and occupancy surveys confirm that parking demand is greater than current capacity at peak
occupancy times (Attachment 2). The municipal Downtown parking lot spaces are predominantly 3-hour limited parking
with some unlimited parking spaces for employees and long term needs. By early morning these long term spaces are
filled and the overflow spills into the 3-hour spaces, reducing the number of spaces available for customers. Customers
overstay the time limits and get angry when they are ticketed, and later arriving employees use 3 hour parking then must
move their cars every 3 hours.
In a 1994 Memo to the Parking Commission the Assistant Town Manger identified (Attachment 3):
• Cost to enforce parking control was almost S7,000 greater than the revenue generated by parking citations
• A new parking space generates about S 120 per year in sales tax revenue to the Town
• Cost to construct a parking space is S 10,000-50,000 which would require a debt service payment of about S800
to S2,400 per year for 20 years
Parking Lot 4 cost approximately S3,000,000 to construct and accommodates 320 spaces. This equals S9,375 per space.
Since the property was already owned by the Town, land acquisition did not add to the cost per space. Also, the cost
per space does not reflect that about half the 320 spaces existed as surface parking spaces before constriction of the bi-
level parking structure.
If the full cost of construction is applied to the number of net new spaces created (i.e. Total number of spaces in the new
structure minus the number of space in existing or previous lot), the S9,375 figure would double to S18,750 per net new
space.
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
This report discusses a parking solution which could meet the challenges and present a constructive set of possible
alternatives. This report will pay particular attention to revenue potential and construction of new spaces in the
Downtown central core including municipal Lots_ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 and 13 (Attachment 1). Lot 5 is a private lot for 'Old
Town' and some possible considerations which may encourage development on private lots will be introduced.
A comprehensive long term parking solution should:
• Provide an ongoing funding source for new lot construction, operation, and naintrnArrj
• Establish flexibility and control to provide for employee and customer parking options
• Eliminate or minimi7r the need for Parking Control Enforcement and parking-eitations
• Encourage economic development and better land uses
Charging a fee for street parking built being considered because:
• Street spaces cannot be fully automated and would require parking control and individual meters
• Current fiscal needs can be satisfied from municipal lot revenue
• The Town should provide for some limited "free" parking in the Downtown which is mostly likely a benefit
to local patrons
• There is no practical potential for substantially increasing net new spaces on the street
We will explore the challenges and opportunities for economic development within the proposed parking plan. A
conceptual framework for financing and constructing new parking spaces is presented. Finally, the conclusions and
recommendations suggest a course of action that will lead to a comprehensive, long term parking solution.
DISCUSSION:
The following are staff comments on the recommended items from Page One of this report The recommendation are
generally consistent with; Economic Development Principles, the Downtown Specific Plan and the Commercial Specific
Plan Committee Report A copy of the pertinent spread sheet data from the staff report of January 6, 1996 is included
(Attachment 4).
Item 1- New Spacer
The Town Council has indicated that consideration of one new parking structure in the Downtown is desirable.
Depending on various factors and final site selection it is likely that a new structure could produce approximately 150
net new spaces. An additional number of net new spaces could be realized by restriping the older lots tothe current stall
standards. Some other increases could be achieved with adjustments to some planter areas, walkways and driveways.
Item 2- Lot Priority —
Staff recommends that if one lot is to be considered for construction, that it should be either Lot #2 or 13. Both lots have
a high rate of occupancy and are likely to produce a maximum number of spaces at the most reasonable cost. Lot # 6
due to its size and configuration would only provide about 50 net new spaces at a cost of about S50,000 per space. A
multi level structure on Lot # 2 or 13 could provide approximately 150 net new spaces at a cost of S25,000 to S30,000
per space. The potential for the development of Lot # 6 might be feasible through a public/private joint venture.
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
It could be practical to allow a private developer to construct the lot, collect parking revenues for some term (i.e. 20
years) then return control of the lot to the Town. Naturally, this option would be more feasible if the developer was
constructing a similar lot of their own. Staff will assess various design options for Lots # 2 and 13 and submit a report
evaluating development potential once a finding source is approved.
Item 3- Lot Maintenance
The current pavement and general maintenance condition of Lots # 1, 2, 3, 6, 13 and Park"N' Ride are in need of
immediate attention. Surface conditions are such as to cause concern for pedestrian safety due to the potential for
"trip/fall" accidents. Since the municipal parking lots are not eligible for "gas tax" funds, the only viable funding source
for maintenance is from the general fiord or economic uncertainly reserves. Staff has developed cost figure estimates
to bring the lots in the Downtown Core to an acceptable standard at about S250,000.
Item 4 - In Lieu Fees
Staff recommends that an In Lieu Fee Program be considered. Businesses that want to intea4ify their 'use" could
purchase In Lieu credits to meet parking deficiencies. The number of parking space credits available to the program
would be equal to or less than the number of net new spaces developed. For example, if resurfacing and restriping the
existing lots created 30 net new spaces, staff would suggest issuing the same number of parking space credits Staff
suggests that S10,000 per space credit would be acceptable and economically viable to the business community. An
In -lieu Program would be more likely to allow uses more in keeping with the character of the Town. "Fait food"
establishments have lesser parking requirements than 'white linen" restaurants and many other retail uses. Therefore,
without an option to increase parking credits, "fast food" and similar uses are currently favored due to their less stringent
parking requirements. This option would assist property owners that did not maximize the purchase of parking credit
when the Assessment District was formed
Item 5 - Source of Revenue
The Downtown property owners and the general fund have funded and continue to fund the municipal parking lot
construction and ongoing maintenance. If a parking revenue source is established, new spaces on existing municipal
lots could be constructed which would improve the economic vitality of the Downtown. Some of revenue issues include:
Meter vs. Central Pav
Automated parking control systems can issue pass stubs and collect fees from central stations. The initial coat
is on a par with,ipdividual coin only meters; however, the difference in on -going operation and maintenance
is dramatic. Imagine. the time to remove coins from 800 meters compared to eight to ten central locations.
Accountability and security are enhanced by handling less cash due to non -cash- payment options. Cash is
collected in a security box separately keyed so the collection attendant does not have access to bills or coins.
Additional accountability is provided by remote posting of revenue totals Finally, multiple payment options
make pay -on -foot vastly more flexible and customer friendly than coin meters.
No More Parking Tickets
With gated entry control, and automated collection systems, the need to enforce parking time limits is
eliminated. This would also reduce the work load of parking enforcement staff and allow those resources to
be used to patrol the lots for increased security and preservation of peace and quiet. Parking revenues could
be used to offset losses in parking ticket receipts. Parking tickets generated S 148,000 in 1993-94. About 15%
of all parking tickets are issued in the municipal lots. Staff estimates that loss of ticket revenue would be about
S30,000 annually. Pay -on -foot revenues would be redirected to the Police Department to offset the fiscal loss
of ticket revenue. With the computerized pay -on -foot concept, there would be no parking tickets issued or
angry letters of protest because of a few minutes overstay. The concept is simple and fair and you only pay
for the time you actually use. This is even better than meters, where sometimes you leave early and lose "time
on the meter." The central pay station can accept coins, bills, credit cards, and debit cards. Merchants can
provide special debit cards which could be given to preferred customers.
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT— CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
Specific areas (not in the prime customer locations) could be designated for monthly passes tailored to the needs
of employees and business owners. Using the computerized central pay concept, the fee schedule could allow
the first half hour of parking at no charge. This would benefit deliveries and very short term errands. Also,
it would allow the motorist to exit the lot at no charge if all the spaces were occupied. With the first half hour
free, a fee of S.35 per each half hour is recommended. This is a program by which the user pays based on the
actual time used with a half hour grace period San Jose Arena event parking is S10.00 whether Mike Tyson
knocks his opponent out in the 1st or 15th round. In Los Gatos, under this proposal, a dinner and a movie (for
four) might cost you S 150.00, but the four hours of parking would only cost S2.45 and the Brewing Company
may be inclined to pay for your parking.
Revenue Potential
Assuming 14 boons of peak parking between 8 AM and 10 PM with 3 turnovers (i.e. 1.5 hours free) equals 12.5
hours subject to fee. With 8 hours at 80 percent occupancy (6.4 hours) and 6 hours at 50 percent occupancy (3
hours) this equals 9.4 hours of fee parking, which generates over S6.54 per space per day. Dedicating 160
spaces (for monthly pass only) out of the 800 spaces under consideration leaves 640 at the S6.54 rate for a daily
revenue of S4,185 or S 1,306,000 annually assuming Sunday parking is free. (Add S221,800 annually if Sundays
are not free and the same parking occupancy and fee rate are assumed). 1f 160 spaces were offered at S75 per
month, S 144,000 annually, this brings the total estimated gross annual revenue to S 1,450,000. The central pay
equipment cost is approximately 62% of the gross revenue or just less than eight months of revenue.
Initial installation costs for the central pay equipment would run about S900,000. The purchase price of this
equipment (like most other computerized equipment) is currently coming down in cost and increasing in power
and flexibility. The actual purchase price may be less in the near future. Using the conservative figure of
S900,000, if the equipment was acquired by a 10 year lease/purchase agreement, annual payments would be
about $ 100,000 per year.
A preliminary estimate of annualized revenues and expenses for central pay:
Gross Annual Revenue: S1,450,000
Estimated Expense:
1. Loss in Parking Citation S30,000
2. Operation and Maintenance (general) 60,000
3. Operation and Maintenance (Central Pay) 50,000
4. Lease Payment Central Pay 100,000
5. Downtown Business Promotion 75,000
6. Downtown Capital and Beautification Projects 400,000
7. New lot Construction - Debt Service (S5 million) 500,000
8. Loss of revenue during construction (115 spaces maximum) 235.000
S 1,450,000
It should be noted that Item 2 is currently funded in the Town Operating Budget Items 5 and 6 are optional
and could. -be reduced or increased as appropriate. However, pay parking could be a funding source for the
"Downtown Street Scape Plan" estimated to be in the S2,000,000 range. It is generally agreed that one of the
best ways to encourage economic development is by providing a sound in a beautiful setting.
Item 8 Revenue Loss would occur only during the time a lot was out of service and would increase revenues
due to existing and newly created spaces coming online once the lot is completed.
While no parking solution can come without some cost, a modest fee with convenient payment is a small price
compared to negative impacts of insufficient parking space and issuance of parking citations.
PAGE 8
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
Funding Via In -Lieu Fee*
An In -lieu Fee Program would be valuable mechanism to improve Downtown business activity. This option
would also provide a partial funding source for new parking lot construction. It would be a substantial finding
source to recoup deferred maintenance and efficiency increases in the existing lots. The "market potential" for
advanced purchase of in -lieu parking space/credits is currently unknown. This potential revenue sauce seems
worthy of Bother investigation. If sufficient interest exists, then the concept could be developed with standards
and guidelines as to how space/credits would be allotted and with possible Parking Improvement District (PID)
or other financing options.
Other Funding Option
Staff has considered other funding options which would provide additional parking. Assessment Districts have
been used in the past. They are expensive to create and require detailed engineering analysis. Further, they
are already a burden on Downtown property owners which will be making payments until 2007 on the existing
District To achieve a parking solution would require about a four fold increase over current assessments
The Town could provide a long term lease (or sale) of the municipal lots to a private firm which would collect
fees, operate existing lots, and construct new spans as per an agreement Private firms are in business to make
a profit and pay dividends to their shareholders.. This option would be less likely to be sensitive to the needs
of the "user" and business community resulting in "market" parking rates similar to those found in San Jose.
Doubling the business license tax in the Downtown would raise about $256,000 per year. To equal the central
pay revenue estimates would require a increase equal to 5.7 times the current fee. This would shift the burden
of payments to the merchant (unless the space is owner occupied).
Parcel taxes or utility user taxes are a funding alternative. However, widespread support far theses options is
not likely because they are borne by many that would claim no benefit or interest in a Downtown parking
solution.
Increasing the business license tax, parcel tax, or utility user tax specifically for parking purposes would require
a two-thirds approval by the electorate. Without at least a nominal payment, parking control and the ability to
influence parking behavior is left to time limits and parking citations. For the reasons above, staff reds
consideration of a program that looks to the "user" for a contribution to the parking solution.
Item 6 - Parking Credit For Town Reside nb
In an effort to encourage local residents to shop in Town, staff is recommending that a S15 parking credit be provided
for Los Gatos residents with a valid driver's license. Under the pay -on -foot concept, a debit card could be inserted into
a machine to pay for parking. The cards could be renewed annually. At the recommended rate of S.35 per half hour,
the card would provide 20 hours of free panting. With the first half how free, this would equal eight 3 hour parking
adventures, (or thirteen for 2 hours or forty at 1 hour) at no cost to the resident A married couple would have double
the time and so on. Local residents will also be more likely to take advantage of the first half hour free to do "hit and
run" types of shopping.
Item 7 - Designated Employes and Long Term Parking
Some areas should be designated for long term parking. Currently a number of spaces are without limits for the benefit
of employees and business owners. In the Downtown; all of Lot # 9, lower level of Parking Lot #4, the rear sections
of Lots #13, 2, 1 and all of the Park "N' Ride lot are long term parking. The best opportunity to enhance the efficient
use of existing spaces would be to cause a migration of long term parking users from Lot #1 (high occupancy rate) to
the Park"NRide (low occupancy rate). Early arriving employees park in the Lot #1 unlimited spaces which are the first
in the morning to fill up.
PAGE 7
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: CONSIDER REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
Since everyone has equal conditions (i.e. all spaces are free) they naturally seek out the closest space to their place of
employment. If there is a fee for parking, the long term parking user now has an economic consideration... Do I park
close and pay or do I park in the Park "W Ride Lot for free and endure the walk. Staff used a monthly rate of $75 for
long term parking, however, an AM and PM pass is possible. Since very few employees work more than twelve hours,
passes could be split: for example daytime i.e. 6 AM to 6 PM could be S50.00 and 6 PM to 6 AM could be S2S. The
regular parking rate would cost about $ 120 per month assuming 5 days per week at eight hours per day.
Item 8 - Alternative Interim Plan For Lang Term Parking
Staff has considered various "Trial or Interim" test plans for pay parking. Some options will be presented below.
However, staff could not devise a "partial test" plan that provided the full range of anticipated benefits as those
contemplated in the comprehensive Downtown Parking Plan. The first concern is that of sample area. If only a
relatively small area such as one lot is effected, it is likely that "users" will simply avoid the small test -area and
exacerbate parking problems in adjoining lots or residential neighborhoods. Therefore, the staff recommendation is to
install the full pay -on -foot parking system for an eight month trial period. Eight months is the estimated time to fully
pay for the system. This assumes that no other uses of parking revenue other than to pay off the system will occur in
the first eight months.
If a pass is issued for long term parking in the existing lots, then the method of enforcement is the parking citation. If
a parking attendant is used then the test is likely to be limited to cash only transactions. The major staff concern is that
a well intended trial plan may produce negative results which would not have materialized in the comprehensive plan.
This could diminish the chances to develop or implement the comprehensive plan.
Variations
1. At the regular Town Council Meeting of June 6, 1994 staff presented a report on night time attendant parking.
The plan was rejected by Council due to the marginal profitability of the proposal. Assuming that profit is not
an issue for the purpose of a test, then this proposal could be implemented in relatively short order_ If daytime
hours were included, profitability could increase slightly.
2. Installing the pay -on -foot equipment on Parking Lot # 4 would provide a good test with the one exception of
limited area. Both levels could be gated and computerized for about S 120,000. The lower level for day parking
and the upper for short term parking. Estimates of revenue are difficult because it is hard to estimate how
many users will choose to park in the adjoining lots or neighborhoods. However the theoretical revenue could
approach S400,00 annually based on the proposed rates and the current occupancy. Staff opinion is that many
office workers in the area would like the day parking and accept the rate. The merchants close -in would not
like the fact that their patrons would pay for parking, while in the next lot over it was free.
2a. One variation on the above alternative would be to only gate the lower level for day parking. The
equipment cost would run about S40,000 and generate $144,000 annually. This would give a good
test on the day user market but would not give indications as to actual conditions for short term
pig.
Item 9 - Development and Condnxity
The Town Council has indicated that substantial increases to development is not desirable, such as constructing a full
level of retail space .to gain one level of parking. However, if continuity of retail space can be maintained through a
store front in a parking structure, this would be acceptable.
Item 10 - Private Development of Parking
Currently the Zoning Ordinance prohibits charging a fee for parking in privately owned parking lots. Staff would
recommend in favor of a provision which allows for newly developed private parking structures to collect a fee for
parking. The fee structure could be the same as for municipal lots.
PAGE 8
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT:---CONSIDER-REPORT ON _DOWNTOWN_ PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION TO STAFF AS APPROPRIATE
February 15, 1996
CONCLUSION:
This report is not intended to achieve every answer to every possible question related to a Downtown parking solution.
It is intended to take the next step toward a parking solution. The task is formidable but the potential rewards are great.
The Town of Los Gatos is extremely fortunate to have a thriving and active Downtown when so many downtowns are
in decay. A parking solution is necessary to improve the economic health of the Downtown.
Staff makes the following observations:
• The Los Gatos Downtown is in need of a parking solution
• Parking demand exceeds parking availability
• Increased parking is the key to enhancing and sustaining the economic viability of the Downtown
• Issuance of parking citations are counter to Downtown economic growth
• A finding source that is sustainable and on -going is desirable
• The concept of uses fees and central pay is reasonable
In order to influence human behavior nominal parking fees are necessary. When parking is free there is no incentive
to carpool, use mass transit or do anything but find the parking space closest to the door you want to enter
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS:
Environmental assessment would occur at the time a actual project is identified.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None at this time.
Attachments,
1. Parking Map
2. Occupancy Rates
3. Memo from Mark Linder
4. Spread Shed
DOWNTOWN LOB DATOS sAAK1NQ
01167 YOC*An. 667{Aa/
'03
9J
PPER LEVEL I5 3 HOUR
LOWER LEVEL IS 24 HOUR LI
s•
LEGEND
1 HOUR STREET PARKING
NUMITED PARKING
(NO OVERNIGHT PARKING)
3 HOUR PARKING
30 MINUTE PARKING
IMPS MAP NOT MWISE. PLEASE
NOTE POSTED SIGN UNIT RESTRICTION&
CADO1!YA 040.Or'O C.C.C. 9/6/95
ATTACHMENT 1
AMPCO
III PARKING
April 6, 1994
Scott Baker, CBO
Director of Building
and Engineering Services
Civic Center
110 E. Main St.
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Dear Scott:
500 Howard Street, Suits 200
San Francisco, CA 94105
To (415) 247-9500
Fax (415) 247-9599
Julio oe Gr.godo
ohmor of Summon o.Mdogm.nt
Enclosed is the survey that we did at your lots. Please call me if
you need further information.
Sincerely,
A6Af ,d
lie D Jl e ecrel9g orio
a subsidiary of ABM American Building Maintenance Industries. Inc.
ATTACI-BENT
cnr--rccrrr13
-400000o
-' <0 Ca N3 .
CJ
0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
CO -.I CO CO W ▪ • CO to -•
-+CCO o
• Q C5)
i N v CO A CO -• CO i3
00 o0ojoo
-,cCoocn op mCMOCOOCO
Wd3I -LAN 8
Wd 9-VVd Zl
Wd 6-Wd 9
rrr CArrcCrrr10
000-100��000Qo
CD�m Ica°' coN3
D2
r
0
A
0 0-,o 0 0 0 0
o'cc o oCJ7-. 'co 'co P
co co CJ1 -+ CA C17 C7) CJ7 CO
00000000
OCo'co 'co 'al V CD co W
co co A j CD CA CO A A
O O o 9 0 9 0 0 9
CD CD CO CO COCJC)CT) -+
NCACJ1C)C)V CJ1CDV
Wd 5-1% Z l
Aid 6-Wd 5
AVOSHflHl-AVONOIN
AONddf1030 JO %
% OF OCCUPANCY
M- W -F - SA
APRIL 1994
•sir•.
1
LOT 1
0.90
0.76
0.75
2
LOT 2
0.84
0.82
0.73
3
LOT 3
0.63
0.60
0.52
4
LOT 4 (UP)
0.72
0.72
0.72
5
LOT 4 (LOW)
0.78
0.81
0.70
6
LOT 6
0.90
0.90
0.79
?
µ LOT 13
0.93
0.89
0.75
Black Shade: 8 AM - 12 PM; White Shade: 12 PM - 5 PM; Grey Shade: 5 PM - 9 PM
1.00 -
0.90
0.80 -
0.70 -
0.60 -
0.50 -
0.40 -
0.30 -
0.20 -
0.10
0.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
OFFICE OF THE TOWN MANAGER
TO: PARKING COMMISSION
FROM: MARK LINDER, ASSISTANT TOWN MANAGER
SUBJECT: PARKING FINANCIAL INFORMATION
DATE: August 31, 1994
You requested the following:
1. PARRKING CKET REVENUE VS EXPENS S
1993-94 Parking Ticket Revenue = $147,867.63
1993-94 Parking Program Expense = $155,821.25
2. SALES TAX REVENUE VS. CAST OF PARKING SPACE CONSTRUCTION
A parking space costs between $10,000 to $30,000 per space depending on the cost of
land.
A parking space is worth approximately $12,000 per year in sales which translates to $120
in sales tax revenue.
t.AISED IF BUSINESS LICENSE DOUBLED
FOR RETAIL?
$255,916.51 based on 1994 revenues.
4. WHAT IS DEBT SERVICE ON $3 MILLION?
Based on the current $2,960,000 COPS for Parking Lot #4, the total cost with interest over
the 20 year period is $4,937,050. This is based on a 59% interest rate with annual
payments of $253,960.
ML:pm
MGR074 A:\MEMCSlPARKING
ATTACHMENT 3
r
•
ATTACH LENT 4
COMMERCIAL SPECIFIC
PLAN COMMITTEE
REPORT
k. Develop a program to allow property
owners to buy additional parking spaces.
1 Subsidize the cost of parking ? s
through the Redevelopment Agen. ,
12. A parking management plan shall be m. Work with the Chamber of Commerce
developed to include incentives and and the Downtown Merchants Association
disincentives for appropriate employee to encourage shopping dating, off-peak
parking including parking credits for the periods.
use of public transit and/or rideshanng.
14 Provision shall be made for bicycle
parking in the downtown area.
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
PLAN
8. To the extent possible, parking facilities
shall be located in relation to the primary
approach direction of users in order to
minimize internal circulation within the
CBD/last Main Street area
9. Parking structures may be acceptable in
downtown Los Gatos with no more than
two levels and with the surface of the top
level no more than four feet above grade at
any point.
GENERAL PLAN
•
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PRINCIPLES
10. Additional parking capacity (continued)
l
kn
,01
s O -g Q u s,5 y' e o g
2' 8 12 •o c1 "8k.pI2
v O m 4 chi u 3 .5 q C a:
m> ` Soyw iQCQ co to
.ix c
,u c. o .�g :at o .c y . a u ,
4
�o
C.. (-•• c� . ... Ot N �O rn C.) < tr;Q 7 7S Z 3 Is n. L 'C — eb
10. Additional parking capacity (continued)
r
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: 4/29/96
ADDENDUM
STUDY SESSION REPORT
April 26, 1996
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN MANAGER
DISCUSSION OF DOWNTOWN PARKING IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The attached letter was received today. Mr. Matteoni asked that we forward to Council for review.
PREPARED BY: DAVID W. KNAPP
Town Manager
MGRO98 A:ICNCLRPTSI4-29-1.ADD
Reviewed by: Attorney Finance
Revised: 4/26/96 4:29 pm
Reformatted: 10/23/95
APR-26-1996 15:43 FROM LAID OFFICES
TO 3548431 P.02
Matteoni
Saxe
Nan
LAWY
SENT BY FAX
t
April 26, 1996
Town Clerk
Town of Los Gatos
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
ApR 2 51996
�...�
TOv"'iv OF LOS GA OS
OFF':CE OF TO'1,V CLERK
Re: Study Session Agenda, April 29, 1996
Concerning Parking Improvement Plan
Dear Clerk:
Please give the Councilmembers, as a desk item, a
copy of this letter for the study session scheduled for April
29, 1996.
The original of the letter is being forwarded by
regular mail.
NEM:md
enc.
An ,y,xienrn fn.hding a ProJessanaf Corp,
Kodak Center
1740 Technology Rive
Suite 250
San Jose, CA 95110
408 441-7800
FAX 408 441-7302
Norman E. Ma=oni
Allan Robert Saxe
Margarcc Ecker Ncmda
AliaM.U'Lazghln
Judy C. Tsai
&ad►ey M. Maueo+n
Parton G. 1-lodunnrm
notsak
APR-26-1996 15:43 FROM LAID OFFICES
TO 3548431 P.03
Matteoni
Saxe&
Nanda
AWYER
3
April 26, 1996
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Town of Los Gatos .
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
TOWN OF EOS G:V OS
OFFICE OF TO` .,'N ['LED(
cc L
Re: Downtown Parking Improvement Plan for
North Santa Cruz Avenue as it Affects
Walgreens
Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council:
Our firm represents Walgreens which has a store
located at 444 North Santa Cruz Avenue.
The Town Staff has indicated that there is a
deficiency in parking at the Walgreens store of 21 spaces.
However, Walgreens has operated wellwi.th the existing parking
and recognizes that there is other public parking available to
the east of the store.
Walgreens has been attempting to work with Staff to
submit an application for interior remodeling and improvement
of the store. Because of the deficiency in parking, it has
not been able to proceed.
Walgreens notes, however, that one of the
recommendations from the Parking Commission is an in -lieu
parking space fee. Walgreens would be willing to participate
in sucha fee arrangement, but the Town has to adopt a
"Parking In -Lieu Fee Program" that would allow parking credit
for the use of the Saratoga Avenue public parking lot located
behind Walgreens.
Walgreens has served the Town of Los Gatos well and
desires to continue to do so. It needs action on the in -lieu
fee in order to proceed.
NEM:md
cc: Garrick J. Hodge
an A6s9ci[ttfon i'cir�¢ a RnfK<4�na( Cure.
Kodak Center
1740 Technology Aire
State 250
San lose, CA95110
408 441-7800
FAX 408 441-7302
Norman E. Matreoni
Allan Robert Saxe
Margaret Ecker Nanda
Pew M. O .27egllin
Judy C. Tsai
Bradley M. Maroon
Barvm Ci. HorAs+nnn
TOTAL P.03
aiesn
•
Matteoni
Saxe
Nan
L A W
Y ER S
SENT BY FAX
April 26, 1996
Town Clerk
Town of Los Gatos
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
iLfAPR 2 9 1 d
i` e-:
T0t',N OF COS U+TOS
OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK
Re: Study Session Agenda, April 29, 1996
Concerning Parking Improvement Plan
Dear Clerk:
Please give the Councilmembers, as a desk item, a
copy of this letter for the study session scheduled for April
29, 1996.
The original of the letter is being forwarded by
regular mail.
NEM:md
enc.
An Association Including a Professional Corp.
Kodak Center
1740 Technology Drive
Suite 250
San Jose, CA 95110
408 441-7800
FAX 408 441-7302
Norman E. Matteoni
Allan Robert Saxe
Margaret Ecker Nanda
Peggy M. O'Laughlin
Judy C. Tsai
Bradley M. Matteoni
Barton G. Hechtrnan
matteoni
Saxe
Nan
L A W YER 5
April 26, 1996
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Town of Los Gatos
P.O. Box 949
Los Gatos, CA 95031
TOWN OF LOS GROS
OFFICE OF TOWN CLERK
Re: Downtown Parking Improvement Plan for
North Santa Cruz Avenue as it Affects
Walgreens
Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council:
Our firm represents Walgreens which has a store
located at 444 North Santa Cruz Avenue.
The Town Staff has indicated that there is a
deficiency in parking at the Walgreens store of 21 spaces.
However, Walgreens has operated well with the existing parking
and recognizes that there is other public parking available to
the east of the store.
Walgreens has been attempting to work with Staff to
submit an application for interior remodeling and improvement
of the store. Because of the deficiency in parking, it has
not been able to proceed.
Walgreens notes, however, that one of the
recommendations from the Parking Commission is an in -lieu
parking space fee. Walgreens would be willing to participate
in such a fee arrangement, but the Town has to adopt a
"Parking In -Lieu Fee Program" that would allow parking credit
for the use of the Saratoga Avenue public parking lot located
behind Walgreens.
Walgreens has served the Town of Los Gatos well and
desires to continue to do so. It needs action on the in -lieu
fee in order to proceed.
NEM:md
cc: Garrick J. Hodge
An Associanon Including a Professional Corp.
Kodak Center
1740 Technology Drive
Suite 250
San Jose, CA 95110
408 441-7800
FAX 408 441-7302
Norman E. Matteoni
Allan Robert Saxe
Margaret Ecker Nanda
Peggy M. O'Laughlin
Judy C. Tsai
Bradley M. Matteoni
Barton G. Hechtman
ument