HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4153
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
October 3, 2013
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Discussion of Palo Alto Transportation Demand Management Plan
(continued from September 16, 2013)
On September 16, 2013 the City Council discussed the Colleague’s Memo regarding Palo Alto
Transportation Management Plan that was authored by Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd
and Council Members Kniss and Price.
After much discussion, the Council approved a Motion to Continue and directed the Mayor to
form a Committee of two Council Members, to draft a resolution with respect to a
Transportation Demand Management plan and bring back to Council by the first meeting in
October.
Attached please find a proposed motion by Council Member Klein that was discussed with
Mayor Scharff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Council Member Klein Letter (DOCX)
Colleagues' Memo Report #4087 Dated September 16, 2013 (PDF)
September 16, 2013 CCM Excerpt TDM Minutes (DOC)
Department Head: Donna Grider, City Clerk
Page 2
Proposed Motion from Council Member Klein
Subject: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Districts
In order for the City Council to determine whether one or more
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Districts as proposed on
the Colleagues’ memorandum or as reasonably modified would be
legal, effective, practical and economic for any or all of the University
Avenue, California Avenue, East Meadow Circle and Stanford Research
Park Business District, the City Council hereby directs the City
Manager and the City Attorney as follows:
City Attorney – Advise the Council whether such TDM Districts would
be legal and if so what laws and legal procedures and processes would
apply to them;
City Manager – 1) Prepare a preliminary report on the proposed TDM
Districts, at a cost of not more than $100,000 in staff time, (a) setting
forth staff’s initial views on TDM Districts, (b) outlining the steps
necessary for an in-depth study of TDM Districts and its timeline, (c)
identifying any local or regional governments that have TDM Districts
comparable to that proposed in the Colleagues’ memorandum and (d)
advising whether the services of a consultant would be needed for a
more detailed, in-depth study of such proposed TDM Districts and if so
what the consultant would be expected to do and his/her expected
cost.
2) Organize one or more Study Sessions on TDM Districts with (a)
appropriate speakers with relevant experience in TDM programs such
as Stanford’s and Contra Costa County’s and (b) outreach to various
stakeholders including but not limited to adjacent residential
neighborhoods and potentially effected business interests to attend
and participate in such Study Session(s)
3) Advise the Council on other possible solutions to the City’s traffic
and parking problems
Schedule – The reports from the City Attorney and the City Manager
shall be due not later than January 20, 2014 and the initial Study
Session shall take place not later than February 03, 2014
City of Palo Alto
COLLEAGUES MEMO
September 16, 2013 Page 1 of 3
(ID # 4087)
DATE: September 16, 2013
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Council Member Price, Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd,
Council Member Kniss
SUBJECT: PALO ALTO TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Recommendation: Direct staff to develop a comprehensive Transit Demand Management
(TDM) plan for the California Ave and University Ave Downtown Districts and the Stanford
Research Park with the goal of reducing solo car trips by at least 30% and return to the full
Council for further policy direction prior to initiating CEQA review, soliciting contracts, or
proposing new fees, ordinances or resolutions. If appropriate, the City Manager may wish to
consider retaining a consultant to assist in the expeditious development of a rigorous TDM plan.
The TDM plan should:
1) Create a defined TDM boundary area for the University Avenue TDM District, the California
Avenue TDM District and the Research Park TDM District;
2) Provide a funding mechanism for the TDM districts (such as, for example, assessments on
existing businesses, impact fees on new developments, or a combination of both) that will fund a
robust TDM plan with measurable outcomes based on identified goals;
3) Develop a request for proposals (RFP), based on identified goals to contract out ongoing TDM
services which would include, but are not limited to, using revenue offsets for subsidizing public
transit, parking strategies and management, carpooling incentives, biking, car sharing services,
etc. for the purpose of reducing car trips into, out of and within Palo Alto, and supplementing
existing services provided by Caltrain, SamTrans, VTA, Margarite Shuttles, AC transit and links
to surrounding transit systems such as Bart, ACE and the Capital Corridor express;
4) Outreach to Stanford's TDM director for the purpose of collaboration and integration of
services;
5) Develop tools to monitor, evaluate and measure utilization of the various TDM elements and
progress towards the overall goal of reducing solo car trips throughout the city. Enforcement
could include penalties for applicants not meeting approved TDM criteria.
6) Return to full City Council for discussion and approval.
September 16, 2013 Page 2 of 3
(ID # 4087)
Background: Parking and traffic are one of the toughest challenges facing the City at this time
and a major concern for our residents. The twin challenges of parking and traffic are being dealt
with in a multi-pronged approach. The infrastructure committee is working on using a funding
mechanism such as a Mello Roos district to create new parking garages both downtown and on
California Ave. The City Manager advises that staff is developing a framework for a
Comprehensive Residential Parking Permit system for Council to consider in the next 90 days to
deal with the substantial issues of parking intrusion into our neighborhoods. In the next 45 days,
staff will also bring to Council proposals to suspend parking exceptions so that new
developments provide an appropriate amount of parking spaces.
However, a Residential Permit Parking program, new parking garages and requiring new
developments to be parked appropriately will not alone solve the issues of parking and traffic.
The City needs a comprehensive TDM program that will reduce trips by at least 30%. Stanford
has reduced trips by 40% or more through a comprehensive TDM program, and with the right
focus and attention Palo Alto could have similar results.
Comprehensive TDM ordinances and policies cover a range of areas and use various types of
management models in the public and private sectors. Over the past 30 years, numerous cities,
counties and states have successfully developed comprehensive TDM programs specifically
designed to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. During that period, a number of TDM
specialists and consultants have prepared plans for both the public and private sectors. In
general, the key elements of these comprehensive TDM programs focus on reducing use and
reliance on single-occupant vehicles through a combination of regulation, incentives and demand
pricing. Ultimate solutions have included transportation options (walking, biking, pedestrian,
transit), promotion of the use of alternative transportation modes and parking
management/pricing.
The key elements of a TDM program should focus on reducing use and reliance on single-
occupant vehicles through the promotion of various strategies such as improving transportation
options (walking, biking, transit); promotion of alternative transportation modes (ridesharing,
vanpools, shuttles), parking management of various types and mass transportation (i.e Caltrain,
BART, etc.).
Palo Alto now finds itself experiencing significant economic development and prosperity.
Although the City has existing Municipal Code provisions that address TDM measures, they are
not comprehensive, mandatory or current in nature or consider these districts as a unit.
Furthermore, the Municipal Code includes several “by right” parking reductions for new
commercial buildings. These provisions, in combination with nearby, unrestricted (free)
residential neighborhood parking, have encouraged the use of single-occupant vehicles, while
affecting the quality of life in residential neighborhoods. Finally, the workplace itself has
changed. The tech and start-up industry have abandoned cubicles and offices in exchange for
collaborative rooms that hold more people per square foot. For these and many other reasons
traffic and parking demands are currently unmanageable, and a comprehensive, district-wide
TDM program needs to emerge in our jobs intensive areas.
September 16, 2013 Page 3 of 3
(ID # 4087)
In August, Vice Mayor Shepherd, Councilmembers Price and Kniss, and Interim Planning
Director Aaron Aknin, took a field trip to the Contra Costa Transit Center to see firsthand how
its TDM program has successfully reduced single car trips by more than 30%. The program
emerged as BART ridership expanded in the 1980s and large and small companies brought jobs
into the area. Palo Alto could have a similar experience as both Contra Costa and Stanford have
shown with the right TDM policies and focus in place.
The Contra Costa Transit Center offers on-site services for commuters employed by companies
of anywhere from 2 to 1,000 employees. The Center’s initial capital came from new commercial
development of 50 cents per square foot, grants, and now a voluntary transit district assessment.
BART fare subsidies, gas cards and special parking for carpools are examples of their TDM
strategies. Car share services are available for mid-day errands or emergency trips home, and a
contract with the local taxi company gives the commuter vouchers for final leg journeys if
needed. This is all being done in conjunction with a mandatory TDM ordinance that applies to
this entire district, thereby creating the regulation that is necessary to create the critical mass of
employers participating in the program. This approach actually created a Transportation
Management Agency (TMA) to manage these programs. Palo Alto’s review of TDM options
should consider a TMA and also explore ways to capture funding and participation related to
existing development and existing traffic, in addition to new projects.
One emerging trend in terms of demographics is that young adults are choosing not to own a car
if there are viable alternative transportation options. A significant percentage of young workers
want to live in San Francisco and commute via Caltrain to work in Palo Alto As this trend
matures, commute options into, out of and within Palo Alto also need to reflect what is called a
"shared economy" where people borrow, rent or pay for the short time use of vehicles and
equipment. A TDM program could support and encourage this new trend.
Conclusion: Alternative transportation models are not a new idea in Palo Alto. Many of our
policy documents have identified the importance of alternative modes as a means of reducing
greenhouse gas reductions. The City, employers and transit agencies have already promoted trip
reduction and alternative transportation options. Yet, these initiatives are not comprehensive in
nature, and have not been effective from a district wide standpoint. The idea of considering
downtown districts as a unit, with an experienced TDM contractor, working directly with
employers and commuters is a smart, and proven strategy to address the City’s traffic and
parking issues.
Staff Impact: The implementation of this program will take a considerable amount of staff time
in the short term during the RFP and consultant selection process. In addition, an ongoing
connection with the TDM contractor will be necessary, and take additional staff time. To some
extent, however, this will be offset in the long run. As the more comprehensive strategy takes
effect, staff will not have to tackle individual issues to the same degree. A new position in the
department, Parking Manager, will soon be hired and will provide needed support in the above
mention efforts, under the direction of the Chief Transportation Official.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 1 of 7
Special Meeting
September 16, 2013
12. Colleague’s Memo From Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd, Council
Members Kniss and Price Regarding Palo Alto Traffic Demand
Management Plan.
Vice Mayor Shepherd noted Palo Alto had 65,000 residents and those
numbers doubled during the day. A Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Program was intended to reduce solo trips throughout the downtown
area it was never intended to burden those who reside in the City from being
able to accomplish day-to-day errands. The purpose of the Colleagues Memo
was directed toward creating better corporate citizenship and a smoother
process for those entering the City from neighboring communities. Staff was
instrumental in writing the Colleagues Memo and she felt some of the
information needing to be included the future Staff Report; 1) The
Infrastructure Committee was looking into a mechanism for parking garages
called the Mello-Roos District, 2) The City Manager had introduced the
concept of a residential parking permit system, and 3) Council would be
reviewing the proposal to suspend parking exemptions for new
developments. The recommendation of the Colleagues Memo was for Staff to
develop a comprehensive TDM Plan for the California Avenue, Downtown
Districts, and Stanford Research Park for the goal of reducing solo car trips
by a minimum of 30 percent. During a Bay Area Council Regional meeting
she met someone who had been involved in similar processes over the past
30-years for the Contra Costa Transit Center (Center). She visited the
Center with Council Member’s Kniss and Price and Acting Director Aaron
Aknin. They were pleasantly surprised to see what had been crafted was a
system that was not waiting for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) System
but rather working with other transit systems and businesses to create a
program that was able to subsidize upward of 50 percent of their own
ridership.
Council Member Price stated TDM was not a new concept; it began in the
1980’s both, in the public and private sectors. Within the region there were a
number of sophisticated corporate campus TDM systems; although, Stanford
was the poster child for such programs. The concept of the program included
climate change and greenhouse gas reductions.
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 2 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
Council Member Kniss noted the Contra Costa and Stanford areas were
contained; however, she believed Palo Alto could do very well with the
program. She expressed a program of this extent had not been undertaken
by Palo Alto and it was ambitious. She strongly suggested the
recommendation incorporate a consultant.
Arthur Keller, Planning & Transportation Commissioner, felt the Planning &
Transportation Commission (P&TC) should be involved in the effort. The
P&TC was currently finalizing the transportation element which was
scheduled to be reviewed by Council soon. He noted Google had inquired
whether there was a TDM for the East Meadow Circle area so he suggested
considering widening the areas of TDM consideration. He spoke with a
number of startup companies in the downtown area and they agreed to
participate in a shuttle program for their employees.
Neilson Buchanan stated the TDM program was a positive idea for the City.
He requested proper funding, tracking, and staffing of the effort in order to
accomplish it in a timely manner.
Herb Borock stated the future development of the types of transportation in
the City was important. He did not believe the road network in the region
could satisfy any further growth. It was important the issue being presented
to the public matched the objective for achievement. He felt the future
intent of the TDM needed a link between the program and the amount of
development.
Adina Leven noted Stanford had reduced the amount of parking
development necessary by $100,000,000 because of their TDM program’s
success. When their program began there was 72 percent of employee’s
driving and now, a decade later, there was 42 percent. She urged Council to
engage the consultants to determine an aggressive and achievable goal.
Omar Chatty asked the Council to recognize the value of a single occupied
vehicle. He mentioned San Francisco had a TDM program and the city was
continuously in a state of gridlock. The High Speed Rail advocates higher
density and more growth while the Supreme Court has upheld growth
control since the early 1970’s.
Stephanie Munoz spoke about Stanford providing housing for their hospital
employees and encouraged the Council to promote that type of TDM. She
requested the Council suggest the County of Santa Clara eliminate a transfer
fee on the bus schedules. She suggested the High Speed Rail train could be
more useful in a TDM program.
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 3 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
Mayor Scharff understood the realization of the parking and traffic issues in
Palo Alto becoming the number one concern for the City. The issues need to
be resolved and the community needed to see there is a comprehensive plan
to accomplish a resolution. The Colleagues Memo was a step in laying out
the vision on how to accomplish the end result; 1) suspend the parking
exemptions, 2) institute a residential parking permit system, and 3) a plan
to build parking garages. He believed items 1 and 2 were in play and being
returned to Council soon while building garages would take significantly
more time. Palo Alto was a terrific City and deserved to be highly functional;
a reduction in transportation was necessary.
MOTION: Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Price to
direct Staff to develop a comprehensive Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) plan for the California Avenue and University Avenue
Downtown Districts, the Stanford Research Park, and East Meadow Circle,
with the goal of reducing solo car trips by at least 30 percent and return to
the full Council for further policy direction prior to initiating CEQA review,
soliciting contracts, or proposing new fees, Ordinances or Resolutions. The
City Manager shall retain a consultant to assist in the expeditious
development of a rigorous TDM plan.
Council Member Price encouraged her Colleagues to move forward with the
Motion on the table.
Council Member Klein believed there needed to be dramatic action taken in
the community. He noted he was familiar with one of the cities mentioned
earlier with respect to their TDM program and he did not see it made a
positive difference. He believed the entire community residential and
business needed to be involved before such a program was implemented.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council
Member Burt to direct Staff to organize one or two Study Sessions with
outreach to various stakeholders, to have appropriate speakers including
representatives from Stanford and Contra Costa County and anyone else
identified as an expert or critic, and Staff will report to the City Council at
the same time as to the cost of any such study and its feasibility at an
appropriate timeframe to come forward. Also to have the City Attorney
identify and speak to any legal issues. Identify an outline for proposed ideas
of financing such a program. Identify possible other solutions to the traffic
and parking problems. Such report and Study Sessions to take place no later
than January 2014.
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 4 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
Council Member Klein did not feel the current recommendation of Staff
developing a comprehensive TDM was sufficient. There was not a clear
understanding of the time or cost implications. He questioned whether there
was Staff with ample expertise to accomplish the lofty goal. He stated he
was not advocating for any specific solution although he felt casting a wide
net to capture any relevant solutions for the issues including but not limited
to parking garages, a more sophisticated shuttle system, and additional
parking lots east of Bayshore should be considered.
Mayor Scharff clarified a TDM consultant was to be hired.
Council Member Klein stated it was not the normal practice for the Council to
authorize Staff to hire a consultant and the City Manager had a limit to his
spending account. He was unclear as to what precisely the consultant was
being asked to study.
Council Member Burt was enthusiastic with the perspective of a TDM
program. He agreed the normal practice was not to move from a Colleagues
Memo to an authorization of a significant expenditure. The purpose of a
Colleagues Memo was to discuss an important concept to agendize a more
meaningful discussion after feedback from Staff. A TDM program was a
complex process needing a great deal of work, commitment, significant
community engagement, and P&TC involvement. The Colleagues Memo
discussed solo car trips and car trips which were not the same issue. He
agreed the solo car trip was an important metric but did not believe the best
metric for a TDM discussion. If the solo car trips were reduced by 30 percent
by two single drivers commuting in one car it would not be a true 30 percent
reduction.
Council Member Holman stated the topic of transportation affects every
person who lived and worked in the community and it was an important
topic to be brought forward. She agreed because of the importance of the
matter she did not feel rushing into a resolution was beneficial. She asked
the Maker of the Substitute Motion whether the Motion was to route through
the P&TC.
Council Member Klein noted although he neglected to mention the P&TC
involvement he agree it should be included.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH CONSENT OF MAKER AND
SECONDER for Staff to consult with the Planning and Transportation
Commission during the time period between now and January 2014.
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 5 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
Council Member Holman mentioned the Motion talked about traffic and
parking problems, if the Council was looking for solutions with community
support she felt the Motion should include a reference to the Residential
Parking Program (RPP) specifically.
Council Member Klein agreed and would consider altering the Motion
language prior to the vote.
Council Member Kniss asked who would be the intended audience and
participants for the Motioned Study Sessions.
Council Member Klein stated the City Council and Staff would identify the
various stakeholders.
Council Member Kniss noted she was not in support of the Substitute Motion
but asked for clarification on the goal of the Substitute Motion. She felt the
original Motion clarified a comprehensive TDM program.
Council Member Price mentioned she would not be supporting the Substitute
Motion. She felt if additional study and investigation were to be accepted the
TDM program would lack the focus which would result in delaying
incremental changes.
Mayor Scharff agreed there needed to be Study Sessions although without
hiring a consultant to determine what direction was best for Palo Alto there
was not a subject to study.
Council Member Berman asked the number of employees in the downtown
business district.
Aaron Aknin, Acting Director of Planning and Community Environment,
stated an exact number would be difficult to determine but the last
conversation with the Economic Development Manager the estimation was
between 10,000 to 15,000 and the same for California Avenue.
James Keene, City Manager, noted there was not an accurate matrix system
for tracking all employees throughout the City with varied shifts and
schedules.
Council Member Berman stated for a comprehensive TDM there needed to be
accessible data whether through a business registry or a business license tax
that was revenue neutral. He did not see a clear difference in the end result
between the Motion and Substitute Motion with the exception of a
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 6 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
comprehensive process in the Substitute Motion. He noted his support for
the Substitute Motion.
Council Member Schmid asked if there were continued plans to move
forward with a comprehensive parking plan in the downtown area.
Mr. Keene recognized the Colleagues Memo tried to identify some tracks that
were concurrent with TDM. Some of the concepts could be partly identified
as TDM such as an RPP.
Council Member Schmid suggested changing the language after Study
Sessions to include Transportation Demand Management; so the Motion was
specific.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH CONSENT OF MAKER AND
SECONDER to add “on transportation demand management” after “direct
Staff to organize one or two study sessions”
Mr. Keene agreed with the thought process of Council Member Berman that
there was unification between the two Motions with a matter of emphasis
separating them. The question was to what extend did the Council see a
TDM program happening and to necessity. He reiterated once the process
began Staff would be returning to the Council regarding updated timelines.
Council Member Kniss expressed bringing both the Motion and Substitute
Motion together. Traffic and parking have been a point of debate for the
community for many years. She suggested Staff attempt to combine the
Motions to a suitable and agreeable product for the entire Council.
MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Price
to Table the item.
Vice Mayor Shepherd clarified Council Members’ Kniss and Price were
electing to have Staff return to the Council with a combined effort of the
Motions but she did not feel tabling was the proper method to accomplish
that goal.
Council Member Klein asked Councilmember Kniss to withdraw her Motion to
Table and replace it with a Motion to Continue. He felt the creation of a
Committee with one Council Member from each side of the argument,
appointed by the Mayor, to resolve the differences.
MOTION TO TABLE WITHDRAWN
DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES
Page 7 of 7
City Council Meeting
Draft Excerpt Minutes: 9/16/13
MOTION TO CONTINUE: Council Member Klein moved, Mayor Scharff
seconded to form a Committee of two Council Members, to be appointed by
the Mayor to draft a Resolution with respect to a Transportation Demand
Management plan and bring back to Council by the first meeting in October.
Council Member Burt supported the Motion to Continue. He believed the
entire Council was in agreement on the issue and on embracing an
aggressive and comprehensive TDM program. It was well advised to not rush
in to something that was going to be a multi-year project. He acknowledged
input from experts and the community would be an important part on how to
frame the direction to the consultant.
Vice Mayor Shepherd saw the merit of the Substitute Motion and had some
of the same views in developing the Colleagues Memo. Her understanding as
a participant of the Colleagues Memo was there would be community and
expert involvement and outreach prior to moving forward with the TDM
program.
Council Member Kniss stated the four Council Members who brought the
Colleagues Memo forward had been more than accommodating to the
suggested changes.
MOTION TO CONTINUE PASSED: 9-0