Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 11795 City of Palo Alto (ID # 11795) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/1/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Transportation and Traffic Title: Approve Modifications to the University Avenue and California Avenue Parking Policy to Expand Eligibility for City Garage Parking Permits and Update Feeds; Adopt an Ordinance to Amend the FY 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule Increasing Parking Permit Fees; Adopt Three Resolutions Modifying the Downtown, Evergreen Park Mayfield, and Southgate Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Programs to Reduce Employee Parking in the RPP Districts and Allow for Monthly Employee Permits; and Direct Staff to Develop a Program to Alleviate Parking Requirements in the California Avenue Area (Continued From October 26, 2020) From: City Manager Lead Department: Transportation Department Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following, in accordance with Finance Committee’s unanimous approval, October 5th support of the following recommendations (video): 1) Refer to the PTC the development of measures to alleviate parking requirements on businesses in the California Avenue area, by establishing a subscription parking in-lieu fee program for that area. 2) Adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) amending the FY 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule to adjust employee parking permit fees, as follows, to better align parking prices with City transportation and mobility goals as outlined in detail in Table 7 and summarized below: a) Increase the price of Employee Parking Permits in the Residential Preferential Parking Program for Downtown, Evergreen Park-Mayfield, and South Gate district; b) Increase the price of Reduced-Price Employee Parking Permits in the RPP programs for RPP Downtown, Evergreen Park-Mayfield, and South Gate districts; 11 Packet Pg. 248 City of Palo Alto Page 2 c) Increase the price of Employee Parking Permits in both All Downtown and SOFA Lots and Garages Parking Permit (aka University Avenue Garage Permit) and California Avenue Area All Garages and Lots (aka California Avenue Garage Permit); d) Establish a Reduced-Price Employee Parking Permit in both All Downtown and SOFA Lots and Garages Parking Permit (aka University Avenue Garage Permit) and California Avenue Area All Garages and Lots (aka California Avenue Garage Permit); and e) Eliminate first free annual residential permit in all RPP programs without employee subsidies, consistent with RPP districts in College Terrace, Crescent Park, and Old Palo Alto that do not provide for employee permits. 3) Adopt three resolutions (Attachments B, C, and D) and direct the City Manager to authorize modifications to the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program and commercial district employee permit allocations, as follows: a) Reduce employee RPP permits in the Downtown RPP by setting a cap at issuance of 580 Downtown Employee RPP permits. b) Reduce employee RPP permits in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield (EPM) RPP by eliminating permits in residential zones A-F, retaining employee parking permits in employee Zone G along El Camino Real, and: i) Employee permits in Zone G shall be available only to employees/employers that are located on or near to El Camino Real; and ii) Authorize staff to pursue expansion of Zone G to the West side of El Camino Real, between Park Boulevard and Stanford Avenue, if necessary, including seeking approval by Caltrans and review by Stanford University. c) Allow RPP employee permits to be issued in monthly durations, in addition to six-month versions; eliminate single-day employee permits; and allow for the use of virtual permits. d) Maximize the parking capacity utilization in University Ave. garages/lots by increasing the caps of employee parking permits in the public garages/lots by approximately 500 in the commercial district (to a total of 3,326). e) Maximize the parking capacity utilization in California Ave. garages/lots by increasing the caps of employee parking permits in the public garages/lots by approximately 490 in the commercial district (to a total of 1,075). 4) Direct the City Manager to expand the current boundaries for the Downtown and SOFA Lots and Garages Annual Parking Permit (aka University Avenue Garage Permit) and California Avenue Area All Garages and Lots (aka California Avenue Garage Permit) to include and align with the existing Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) boundaries for the Downtown and Evergreen Park-Mayfield districts, except for garages R and S/L). 5) Should Council approve recommendations 1 through 4, direct staff to include the necessary budget adjustments in the FY 2022 Mid-Year Budget Report to align revenues and expenses 11 Packet Pg. 249 City of Palo Alto Page 3 in the University Avenue, California Avenue, and Residential Preferrential Parking Permit Fund. These actions follow a series of parking management strategies identified over the past two years intended to better align current ordinance provisions and permit pricing with City parking program goals. This topic was previously discussed by the City Council on November 9, 2020 where no action was taken so that staff could further refine the proposals. Since then, the City Council adopted and approved an Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Survelliance Policy and a contract amendment to purchase ALPR devices for parking management data collection and enforcement (staff report 11492). A progress update was provided to Council on June Executive Summary Parking management strategies, targeted parking supply investments, and transportation demand management programs allow the City to utilize a variety of tools and strategies to address parking and traffic issues prioritized by the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and to pursue Sustainability and Environmental goals with parking management tools outlined in the Transportation Element section of the Plan. The recommended pricing and employee allocation adjustments address current administrative feasibility and financial sustainability concerns, accommodate demand for employee and visitor parking while decreasing impact of businesses on local RPP districts. Reducing parking requirements in the California Ave. commercial parking district for retail and restaurant uses encourages new businesses and the use of alternative modes. These planned programmatic changes and actions address the City’s goals for encouraging attractive, convenient, efficient and innovative parking solutions for all users, while also protecting residential areas from parking impacts of nearby businesses and uses. Additional changes to commercial parking policies are expected and will be developed with stakeholder input via an RFI for commercial pilot options, separate from the actions here. Background In the context of community and economic recovery from the pandemic and the evolving climate into the future, staff recommends Council direct staff to develop a subscription parking in-lieu program for California Avenue. This commercial district rarely experiences new development in part due to parking requirements, the size of parcels, and limited opportunities to provide private off-street parking. Several years ago, the City had an active parking assessment district and property owners that participated in this program were able to meet parking requirements through this program. The proceeds from that assessment were dedicated toward paying bond obligations that were used to finance the building of a 2-story garage (Ted Thompson garage, Lot C3). This debt matured 11 Packet Pg. 250 City of Palo Alto Page 4 several years ago and so the assessment district was retired. Since that time, any new use or business intensification cannot proceed if the proposed use has any parking requirement higher than the previous use allowed. For instance, a restaurant, which requires a higher parking requirement, cannot occupy a former retail storefront space, which has a lower parking requirement, unless the owner of that space is able to provide additional parking. These requirements have constrained changes in the California Avenue, especially in the current environment with COVID-19 which has called for changes in behavior including social distancing. Tenants and property owners may find it beneficial to allow a business to locate or expand into adjacent storefronts. With incentives the City has already implemented, an in-lieu parking program, and consideration of other factors, some individuals may find opportunity in vacant storefronts. Parking Funding Background Parking management strategies enacted in the City of Palo Alto have included the establishment of both commercial and residential parking programs. Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) programs established via Ordinance No. 5294 are intended to restore and enhance the quality of life in residential neighborhoods by reducing the impact of parking associated with nearby businesses and institutional uses. Parking programs established to form the University Avenue (Resolution No. 8034) and California Avenue (Resolution No. 7230) Parking Assessment Districts provided funding for parking structure construction in their respective commercial areas via issuance of debts and levying assessments on local business in both. These provide parking supply for both visitor use, and district employee use via reserved spaces. Separately, the City currently has three funds that track the following parking programs: the University Parking Permit (Fund 236), California Avenue Parking Permit (Fund 237), and the Residential Preferential Parking Program (Fund 239). The financial accounting of the collection of revenues, payment of expenses, and funding of parking related Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) is managed in these funds. Historically, the parking funds have been financially insolvent with expenses exceeding revenues, when the fund is running in a deficit position, a transfer subsidy from the General Fund is adopted by the City Council as part of the annual budget process. Full price employee parking permits and daily permits sales generate the main source of revenue in both the University and California Avenue Parking Permit Funds. Low income employee permits are not currently available in these commercial areas. In the Downtown, Evergreen Park-Mayfield, and Southgate RPP districts, in which the City currently offers employee permits, the City offers both full price and reduced-price (low-income) employee parking permits. In addition, resident, guest, and daily permits are sold throughout the RPP districts. Any fund balances in the commercial districts has historically been planned for capital investment and start-up costs of new program such as the potential infrastructure for paid 11 Packet Pg. 251 City of Palo Alto Page 5 parking. Historically the RPP Program Fund only operates in a positive financial position when sufficient employee permits are sold. Historically, parking pricing for employee permits was determined by the commercial or residential areas and relative to business traffic and parking demand: the price for employee permits in California Avenue geographic area is currently approximately half the price of a University Avenue permit. As RPP programs were established, employee permit pricing mirrored that of the nearest commercial district. Original allotments of employee permits were established upon an assessment of apparent need established by a planning process. TABLE 1: CURRENT (ACTIVE) FY2022 EMPLOYEE AND RESIDENTIAL ANNUAL PERMIT PRICING PARKING DISTRICT EMPLOYEE PERMITS (FULL PRICE) EMPLOYEE PERMITS (REDUCED PRICE) RESIDENTIAL PERMITS NUMBER OF EMPLOYEE PERMITS AVAILABLE University Avenue $806 None N/A 2,826 California Avenue $403 None N/A 585 RESIDENTIAL PREFERENTIAL PARKING (RPP) PROGRAMS College Terrace None None $50 None Downtown $806 $100 $50 (first one free) 1,000 (+200 in reserve) Crescent Park None None $50 None Evergreen Park/Mayfield $403 $50 $50 (first one free) 250 for Zones A- F; 40 for Zone G Southgate $403 $50 $50 (first one free) 25 Old Palo Alto None None $50 None Parking citations for infractions in the University and California Avenue commercial parking districts are issued by Police Department’s Community Service Officers (Parking Enforcement) and the expenses for enforcement and citation revenue collected is accounted for in the general fund. Parking citations and enforcement in the RPP districts is done primarily by a contracted service provider, LAZ Parking, and both the expenses and revenue is accounted for in the RPP fund (the exception is the Crescent Park No Overnight Parking Program, which is enforced by Palo Alto Police Department, and revenues go to the general fund). Due to the pandemic, parking enforcement was suspended March 16, 2020 (resumed October 1, 2021) allowing the public to park on- and off-street without time restrictions. As a result, all permit sales revenues and citation revenues have been severely reduced during the pandemic. 11 Packet Pg. 252 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Discussion The following report details recommendation considerations in four main parts: 1. California Avenue In-Lieu Parking Program Proposal Since the 1970s until a few years ago, property owners within the California Avenue Assessment District paid an annual assessment to pay off bonds used to finance parking improvements in the area. Development within this assessment boundary benefit from reduced parking requirements (compared to the rest of the City) and owners were allowed to buy into the program when a new use required additional parking. This ‘in-lieu’ payment concept is akin to the downtown in-lieu program but regulatorily different. Where the Downtown in-lieu program continues, the California Avenue program ended when the bond was paid. The California Avenue Assessment District is simply no longer extant. Accordingly, there is no mechanism in place today for the City to receive payment for – or for property owners to request – in-lieu parking on California Avenue. The inability to offset parking requirements for new uses or development through fee payment has frustrated some property managers and owners and essentially freezes in place a baseline level of land use and land use intensity along California Avenue. For instance, similarly parked land uses can only replace similarly parked land uses and not land uses that require more parking spaces. Retail can replace retail, but restaurant cannot replace retail because it has a higher parking standard1. The table below provides a summary of permitted and conditionally permitted uses in the California Avenue area and their associated required parking requirements: TABLE 2: CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA PARKING REQUIREMENTS EXCERPT Land Use Typical Parking Requirement (not including Downtown) California Avenue Assessment District Boundary Commercial recreation (>5K=CUP) 1 space / 4-person capacity same Personal Service 1 space / 200 square feet 1 space / 450 square feet Retail (intensive: i.e.; shoe store) 1 space / 200 square feet 1 space / 240 square feet 1 The former California Avenue Parking Assessment District’s parking requirements addressed a variety of land uses, including financial institutions and offices. For the purpose of this memorandum and the associated parking policy program, staff will focus on ground floor, retail and retail-like land uses on California Avenue; commercial office is not the focus or intent of the discussion points in this memorandum. 11 Packet Pg. 253 City of Palo Alto Page 7 Land Use Typical Parking Requirement (not including Downtown) California Avenue Assessment District Boundary Retail (extensive: i.e.; furniture store) 1 space / 350 square feet same Restaurant 1 space / 60 square feet (plus 1 / 200 SF for other areas) 1 space / 155 square feet If the Council finds the existing mix and intensity of land uses sufficient and appropriate for California Avenue, then no changes are needed to these parking requirements. The current policy will limit any significant changes in the type or intensity of land uses and discourage redevelopment or new construction in California Avenue. Lot consolidation is challenging and would likely be required for any significant redevelopment to meet off-site parking requirements. If there is no change to the status quo, the Council’s deliberation on the City’s parking policies as provided in the October 5th staff report can continue without consideration of any intensification on California Avenue. However, if the Council is interested in some allowance for a change in land use intensity on California Avenue, there are some policy considerations that should be factored in the broader parking policy discussion. The Finance Committee considered the following options and recommend that the Council direct staff to further explore option C. Subscription In-Lieu Program: Land Use and Parking Options – Former California Avenue Assessment District A. Blended Parking Rate. This approach would establish the same parking requirement for a certain set of land uses in order to allow for continued interchangeability of uses, such as retail, restaurant, personal service. For example, the parking requirement for all these uses could be changed to 1 space / 200 square feet. This policy would facilitate timely land use conversions enabling property owners and managers to respond more quickly to economic market conditions and reduce tenant space vacancies; however, the implications of this policy could be profound in the California Avenue area without an aggressive and comprehensive parking policy program. A blended parking rate for California Avenue could result in many more restaurant conversions and expansions, which typically required more parking space and may strain parking resources during peak periods. Staff does not recommend this policy option at this time. B. Formal Parking In-Lieu Program. Downtown (University Avenue) has an in-lieu parking program that creates an opportunity for a property owner to pay an in-lieu fee instead of providing parking spaces otherwise needed onsite for a new development or change in land use. Payment is made through an in-lieu parking fee that adjusts annually through changes in the construction index and set at the completion of any City parking 11 Packet Pg. 254 City of Palo Alto Page 8 garages. The current fee is approximately $116,000 per space. The owner paying for an in-lieu parking space does not get dedicated access to parking spaces in any City garage and is not guaranteed any parking space will be available. The fee satisfies the zoning requirement for required parking and the money is used to help pay for public parking within the district. Establishing an in-lieu parking program for California Avenue is feasible and requires considerable City resources for stakeholder engagement, analysis, legal support and administration. Understanding existing and future parking demand based on the desired number of new parking spaces anticipated and the effectiveness and commitment to parking policies for the California Avenue would factor into a study that would begin to define the program, its regulatory structure and ultimate fee. There are many details that would need to be understood and addressed before establishing a formal program. Moreover, if the cost for an in-lieu fee is similar to the cost for the Downtown program, it is not anticipated a similar program would be successful in California Avenue. The ability to pay over $100,000 for one parking space for a typical restaurant owner is not feasible given the relatively low margins associated with the industry. Also, retail to restaurant conversions likely require several parking spaces further increasing the fee. Property owners would similarly be less motivated to pay the in-lieu parking expense as their return on cost would likely be too low. If there were Council interest in advancing this program, an initial understanding would be needed on the proposed parking requirements for the various land uses in the California Avenue area. At this time, staff does not recommend this option. C. Subscription In-Lieu Program. Information on this option is provided in the October 5th Finance Committee report and is an option that staff conceptually supports, though a considerable amount of research is needed should the Finance Committee and Council support this alternative. In summary, the subscription in-lieu program would apply to existing buildings and land uses on the ground floor with frontage or access to California Avenue. The program could be used to off-set the zoning standard parking requirement. Similar to the in-lieu parking program for University Avenue, participants would not be guaranteed or assigned any public parking spaces and there would be a fee required. However, unlike University Avenue, the fee, conceptually, would be set at a more attainable level such that a restaurant tenant or property owner could sustain an ongoing subscription for required parking spaces to accommodate a change in land use. If the more intense use gives way to a less intense use, the entity paying for the subscription could cancel relieving the party of future payments. As noted in the staff report, depending on other parking strategies the Council ultimately adopts, staff anticipates the new parking garage could potentially accommodate up to 100 parking spaces in this subscription program. The principal reason for adopting this policy is to facilitate or encourage more restaurants on California Avenue. However, the Council may have 11 Packet Pg. 255 City of Palo Alto Page 9 other policy interests where such a program combined with other policy changes, such as encouraging other activities on California Avenue such as educational, community center, or entertainment uses, may warrant continued consideration. Importantly, there is not a model for this program in the City’s current regulatory framework and significant staff analysis is required, including legal review, land use analysis and determining how to set the subscription fee in compliance with Proposition 26. Because of the significant work effort and potential implications for California Avenue specifically, and the City’s overall approach toward a parking policy generally in this area, staff would need Council direction to further explore this option. If the Council is not interested in land use policy changes for California Avenue, then the deliberation on the City’s parking policy solutions for the California Avenue area does not need to consider allocating 100 or so spaces to facilitate more intense uses (restaurants) on California Avenue. If there is interest to accommodate some land use intensification on California Avenue, the subscription based in-lieu parking program may provide a way to meter those conversions in a manner that supports other parking policy interests in the neighborhood without negatively impacting parking resources. This effort is consistent with Policy T5.1.2: Consider creating new ways of meeting parking requirements for retail, restaurant, and other types of business uses as a means to encourage new businesses and the use of alternative modes. Existing parking requirements for the California Avenue area are found at PAMC 18.52.040. Establishment of an in-lieu parking program would be a valuable economic development and sustainability tool. 2. California Avenue Garages/Lots and the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP The California Avenue Business District, immediately adjacent to the Evergreen Park and Mayfield neighborhoods, has regularly attracted business visitor and employee parkers, who, for lack of the right incentives offered, utilize residential blocks for trips that could be better suited by parking facilities in the main commercial area, especially to avoid commercial time- based restrictions. Commercial time restrictions, when needed, prioritize turnover and ease of parking space discovery to facilitate customer and employee trip satisfaction. Residential on- street curb parking, in turn, with RPP programming, prioritizes longer stays and facilitates short visitor trips. The RPP program design in Palo Alto facilitates flexibility and adaptability in meeting parking demand while centering resident experience and quality of life. Discussions amongst City staff and community stakeholders regarding parking availability in the California Avenue commercial district and its surrounding neighborhoods led in recent years to Council decisions to increase parking supply in the California Avenue Business District by constructing a new parking garage at 350 Sherman Avenue (as part of the Public Safety Building project), and to establish the EPM RPP district in 2017. The EPM RRP program provides both 11 Packet Pg. 256 City of Palo Alto Page 10 residential and employee parking permits in the area, while the California Avenue Business District (California Avenue parking facilities) provides visitor and employee parking in surface lots and garages. Again, the current design of these programs prioritize commercial district parking facilities for higher turnover uses and employee parking; and, residential parking for convenient access for residents and resident visitors (EPM RPP program information). Together, the new California Avenue Parking Garage (as part of the California Avenue Business District) and the EPM RPP program provide City staff the ability to effectively manage parking impacts in both residential and commercial zones in the area, especially with the regular parking occupancy monitoring being implemented. City Council has previously recognized the need to be flexible with the number of employee permits made available in the Evergreen Park- Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program. After establishing the EPM as an RPP district (Resolution No. 9739), Council approved a district redesign by creating additional zones, including a new Employee Parking Zone G (staff report 8893) on El Camino Real. The completion of 350 Sherman Avenue Garage adds approximately 316 new parking spaces (its ~626 total spaces replace 310 pre-existing spaces) to the California Avenue commercial district, as well as opportunities to utilize a new Parking Guidance System (PGS) to manage the City’s parking facilities more efficiently. The PGS is equipped with optical sensors to detect parking occupancy, as well as software capabilities for managing visitor parking stays and payments. Light-emitting diode (LED) lights indicate availability and other information to parkers. The additional parking supply provided by the new garage allows the City to reduce the number of employee permits made available in the EPM RPP A-F zones, in line with expectations of residential stakeholders outlined in the City’s parking management work plan (prioritized Parking Work Plan). Staff will evaluate the impact of the recommended permit reduction and phasing and consider additional reductions each year. Staff believes, at this time, that the existing garages and lots along with the new California garage on Sherman provides sufficient space for shifting, thus reducing, approximately 250 of the 290 EPM RPP, Zones A-F, employee permit holders and all garage waitlisted employees/ employers (pre-pandemic the waitlist was 228). The remaining 40 employee permits are located on or near El Camino Real and would be best accommodated as they are now in Zone G. In the past, a 60% show rate for permit spaces has been typical (not all permit holders arrive each day), such that the added supply should be sufficient to accommodate both permit and visitor uses, including spaces proposed in the potential in lieu program described in staff report 11702 and above. Note that in the California Avenue parking district, employee garage and lot permits are valid in any public garage/lot in the district (California Avenue parking facilities). Currently, there are 453 garage and lot permits that have been sold in the California Avenue parking district, and the cap is 585 permits (pre-pandemic), which typically sells out. Using our 60% show-rate, allocating 490 additional permits in the new parking garage will sufficiently 11 Packet Pg. 257 City of Palo Alto Page 11 provide parking spaces in the district new and waitlisted employees to purchase permits, as well as new uses allowed via the to be developed in-lieu fee program. Staff will monitor demand for these permits and recommend decreasing availability as reasonable. If there is additional demand for employee permits in EPM/Zone G, staff will coordinate with Stanford University and Caltrans on the possibility of expanding Zone G to the West side of El Camino Real on the block between Park Boulevard and Stanford Avenue. Staff will be reviewing parking occupancy over the next year to evaluate garage/lot parking capacity to further maximize usage. While future usage trends are especially uncertain in the current economic context, the technology systems installed provide staff the ability to monitor usage trends over time, and to make future recommendations based on more complete usage and parking availability data. TABLE 3: Expanded Parking Supply in the California Avenue Business District Previous total parking supply in the California Avenue Business District (including Lots 6 and 7) 922 Previous parking lot supply at Lots 6 and 7 (removed) (310) New 350 Sherman Avenue parking supply (replacement + new) 626 New total parking supply in the California Avenue Business District 1,238 NOTE: Additional parking supply in the California Avenue Business area provided by the new garage at 350 Sherman Ave. (net 316 new spaces) TABLE 4: Parking Demand, FY 2020-21 Total waitlisted California Avenue Business District employees (pre-pandemic to current, a significant number are expected to no longer need permits) ~370 Total employee RPP permits currently in the EPM District (40 in Zone G, adj. to ECR) 290 3. Increased Price of All Employee Permits and Expand Commercial District Boundaries Staff recommends implementing Council approved employee permit pricing rate increases throughout the City in sync with new permit sales cycles coming online throughout Fiscal Year 2022. This action consolidates demand for on-street spaces into the RPP program’s permit sales, enabling parking occupancy rates and availability to be understood more fully, before any future pricing adjustments or parking enhancements to be considered in light of future documented demand for street space (via LPR enabled parking occupancy monitoring). Staff also recommend allowing employee permits to be issued on a monthly basis for added flexibility for employees, eliminate single-day employee permits, and to allow for virtual permits in the RPP programs. Additionally, if, as a City, it is a goal to have long-term employee parking occur in the garages 11 Packet Pg. 258 City of Palo Alto Page 12 and lots, the financial incentives through permit pricing for that behavior should not cost less to park in the residential zones than in the parking garages and lots. Similarly, as the City strives to meet GHG reduction goals and minimize the environmental impacts of single-occupancy vehicles, parking pricing should be closely considered with comparative pricing of transit and other peer parking pricing. The proposed price increases, as demonstrated in the table below, compare reasonably with other monthly and annual City parking rates in the region, and Caltrain pricing. TABLE 5: Caltrain, Garage & Lot Parking Monthly Pricing Comparison Table * Travel to Palo Alto assumes 1-3 zones fare Staff relatedly recommends the City eliminate the first free annual residential permit in all RPP programs, to remain consistent with RPP districts in College Terrace, Crescent Park, and Old Palo Alto that do not have employee permit subsidization. TABLE 6: PROPOSED FY 2022 Changes to Employee and Residential Annual Permit Pricing and Employee Permit Availability Parking District Employee Permits (Full Price/yr) Employee Permits (Reduced Price/yr) Residential Permits (price/yr) Number of Employee Permits Available University Avenue $806 $900 N/A $225 N/A 2,826 3,326 RPP – Downtown $806 $1050 $50 $262.50 $50 (first one free) 1,000 580 (+200 in reserve) California Avenue $403 $650 N/A $162.50 N/A 585 1,075 RPP – Evergreen Park/Mayfield $403 $750 $50 $187.50 $50 (first one free) 250 0 for Zones A-F; 40 for Zone G (+10 in reserve; expand) Monthly Costs Palo Alto (current) $33 - $67 Palo Alto (proposed) $54 - $84 Mountain View $61 Redwood City $40 - $100 San Jose $50 - $125 San Francisco $100 - $530 Caltrain* Monthly Costs $38.40 - $92.40 11 Packet Pg. 259 City of Palo Alto Page 13 Parking District Employee Permits (Full Price/yr) Employee Permits (Reduced Price/yr) Residential Permits (price/yr) Number of Employee Permits Available RPP – Southgate $403 $750 $806 $187.50 $50 (first one free) 30 Other Residential Preferential Parking Programs College Terrace None None $50 None Crescent Park None None $50 None Old Palo Alto None None $50 None Note: The employee permit prices are shown in annual terms for ease of comparison; however, employee permits are currently sold in six-month versions in these RPP districts by pro-rating the fee. Current Parking Context Due to the pandemic, parking enforcement was suspended March 16, 2020 (resuming October 1, 2021) allowing the public to park on- and off-street without time restrictions. As a result, all permit sales revenue has been severely reduced during this time. Reduced-Price Employee Parking Permits in Commercial Districts Recognizing the economic constraints of low wage earners, the City reduced the cost of parking permits in the RPP zones for qualified individuals. An individual qualifies as low-income if total annual income is equal to or less than $50,000, or if they earn a pre-tax hourly wage equal to or less than double the greater of the City or State minimum wage. An applicant must provide proof of income. There is no cap on the number of reduced-price permits that are issued (within the employee permit maximum). To accommodate the shift of permit allocation from residential parking districts to commercial garages and lots, staff recommends establishing a reduced-price permit for low-income workers, which currently only exists for employees in the RPP districts. Modifications to RPP and Commercial District Employee Permit Allocations In early 2014, the City began significant efforts to address the parking and traffic challenges, particularly in the Downtown core, through a strategic multi-pronged approach of parking management, parking supply and transportation demand management programs. The strategy includes implementation of the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program, which went into effect in September 2015. The introduction of this program has required the development and launch of a new online permit sales website and sales support, installation of signage in any new permit areas, negotiation and oversight of an enforcement contract, and extensive community outreach and data collection. Phase 1 of the program regulated non-resident parking around the Downtown commercial core by introducing Resident and Employee Parking Permits and restricting non-permit holders to 11 Packet Pg. 260 City of Palo Alto Page 14 two-hour parking between the hours of 8:00am and 5:00pm on Monday through Friday. Resident Parking Permits are for residents who live within the Downtown RPP program area while the Employee Parking Permits are for any individuals who are employed within and commuting to the Downtown area. Phase 2 of the program, which went into effect on April 1, 2016, capped the number of Employee Parking Permits at 2,000 and established ten Employee Parking Zones in an effort to better distribute non-resident parkers. Eligibility Areas, which can petition to join the program administrative, were also created as part of Phase 2 of the program. Over time, the employee RPP permit caps have been reduced, both naturally and through a reduction in cap. In February 2016 the City Council directed that the number of Employee Parking Permits be reduced by 10% per year. In 2016, the cap was 2,000 permits and in 2021 the cap, as set by Resolution 9782 is 1,000 employee permits with 200 held in reserve. RPP permit sales have consistently decreased, and the most recent permit sales (pre-pandemic) was approximately 760 permits. In the Downtown commercial parking district, there are 11 parking garages/lots that are utilized for permit parking. In these garages, there are 1,758 permit spaces and 1,790 permits currently sold, however the permits typically sell out (pre-pandemic). Pre-pandemic, there was also a waiting list for 354 permits. At this time, however, garages have sufficient capacity available to accommodate the additional recommended employee permits and accommodate waiting list permits. Staff recommends setting a Downtown RPP cap of 580. This recommendation will be re-evaluated post-pandemic using parking occupancy data in the garages/lots and RPP districts. 4. Expanded Commercial District Employee Eligibility Boundaries Finally, the eligibility boundaries to purchase an off-street parking permit are determined based on an business assessment district boundary map for the University Ave. and California Ave. commercial corridors. Staff recommends expanding the current boundaries to match the existing Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) boundaries for the Downtown and Evergreen Park-Mayfield districts. Expanding eligibility allows new and smaller businesses residing beyond the traditional commercial core access to the City's parking facilities, relieving on-street parking demand. The eligibility expansion will not include the use of the Downtown garages R and S/L, which are use restricted under the financing arrangements still in place for those garages. Resource Impact The Parking Fund Balances table below compares two scenarios and estimates parking fund solvency from FY 2022 through FY 2025 for University Avenue, California Avenue, and the RPP parking districts. Fund balance actuals are presented for FY2021 and fund balance estimates for FY 2022 through FY 2025. • Scenario A assumes that no adjustments are made to any parking permit policies related to any of the parking districts. The projected impact is a continuing decrease in the 11 Packet Pg. 261 City of Palo Alto Page 15 ending fund balance of all parking funds through FY 2025. Notably, the University Avenue Fund could no longer support operating expenses starting in FY 2024. • Scenario B assumes that the recommendations presented in this staff report are implemented in FY 2022. All funds would remain solvent through FY 2025. Further details for each scenario are located after the table below. TABLE 7: PARKING FUNDS PROJECTED FUND BALANCES FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Scenario actuals estimates estimates estimates estimates University Avenue A: No Changes 1,501,000 1,026,000 322,000 (412,000) (765,000) B: Recommendations 1,569,000 1,409,000 1,217,000 995,000 California Avenue A: No Changes 422,000 360,000 290,000 212,000 127,000 B: Recommendations 408,000 387,000 358,000 321,000 RPPs A: No Changes 133,000 202,000 257,000 148,000 25,000 B: Recommendations 268,000 388,000 344,000 287,000 In Scenario A, University Avenue fund balance is projected to decrease by 32% from FY 2021 to FY 2022 and would decrease by another 69% in the following year. In FY 2024 it is projected that the fund would require a subsidy to meet operational costs. Both the California Avenue and RPP fund balance will decrease over time through FY 2025 by 70% and 81% respectively (compared to FY 2021). Future increases in the cost of labor, consultant contracts and programmatic parking improvements will accelerate the projected downward trend. Under Scenario B, all fund balances are still projected to decrease annually, but at a much slower rate, and would remain solvent through FY 2025. Recommended reductions of available employee permits in the Downtown and EPM RPP districts would significantly reduce cost recovery mechanisms in the RPP fund. As the table indicates, the RPP program fund balance would continue to decrease through FY 2025 but still meet its operation obligations. TABLE 8: SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PRICING ADJUSTMENTS & TIMELINE FEE CURRENT RATE PROPOSED RATE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 11 Packet Pg. 262 City of Palo Alto Page 16 FEE CURRENT RATE PROPOSED RATE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE All Downtown and SOFA Lots and Garages: Annual Parking Permit (University Ave.) $806/yr $900/yr 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) All Downtown and SOFA Lots and Garages: Annual Parking Permit - Reduced None 75% off Annual Permit (currently $225) 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) California Avenue Area All Garages and Lots: Annual Parking Permit $403/yr $650/yr 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) California Avenue Area All Garages and Lots: Annual Parking Permit – Reduced None 75% off Annual Permit (currently $162.50) 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) Downtown RPP: Full Price Employee Parking Permit $806/yr $1,050/yr 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) Downtown RPP: Reduced-Price Employee Parking Permit $50/yr 75% off Full Price Annual Permit (currently $262.50) 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) Downtown RPP: Annual Resident Parking Permit $50/yr 1st one free $50/yr 4/1/2022 (sales begin 3/1/22) Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP: Full Price Employee Parking Permit $403/yr $750/yr 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP: Reduced-Price Employee Parking Permit $25/yr 75% off Full Price Annual Permit (currently $187.50) 1/1/2022 (sales begin 12/1/21) Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP: Annual Resident Parking Permit $50/yr 1st one free $50/yr 4/1/2022 (sales begin 3/1/22) Southgate RPP: Full Price Employee Parking Permit $403/yr $750/yr 5/1/2022 (sales begin 4/1/22) Southgate RPP: Reduced Price Employee Parking Permit $25/yr 75% off Full Price Annual Permit (currently $187.50) 5/1/2022 (sales begin 4/1/22) 11 Packet Pg. 263 City of Palo Alto Page 17 FEE CURRENT RATE PROPOSED RATE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Southgate RPP: Annual Resident Parking Permit $50/yr 1st one free $50/yr 5/1/2022 (sales begin 4/1/22) No budget amendments are required at this time. However, budget alignments will be needed in the various parking fund in order to implement changes recommended for consideration by this report. Finance Committee’s endorsement of staff’s recommended changes to the City’s permit parking program aligns with the City’s parking pricing incentive goals and will move the program toward continuing financial viability. The specific timeline and resource impacts depend on the actions taken by the City Council based on staff recommendations in this memorandum. As noted in the recommendations, should Council approve recommendations 1 through 4 in this report the following budget adjustments are needed. Staff expects to bring these appropriation actions as part of the FY 2022 Mid-Year Budget Report: • Increase FY2022 adopted permit revenue amounts for the University and California Avenue Parking Funds due to increased permit prices and permit capacity • Decrease FY2022 adopted permit revenue amount for the RPP Fund due to reduced available employee permits • Expenses are not expected to increase as permit and enforcement service contracts are in place and funded to carry out the recommended program changes. In addition, as an employer in the City, the City purchases employee permits for its employees at a cost of approximately $392,522 annually. With the proposed increase in permit pricing in the University Parking District, the cost to the City would increase to approximately $438,300 annually. This is approximately a 23% increase in expenses to the General, Utility Administration and Technology Funds, funds which cover the cost of these City employee permits. This additional cost would be factored into the next FY 2023 annual budget process should these increased fees be approved. If staff receive direction to design an in-lieu program, additional staff resources will be needed. Stakeholder Engagement The recommended action is a result of expectations of residential stakeholders outlined in the City’s parking management work (prioritized Parking Work Plan), reflecting outreach and community engagement processes documented at the outset of the planning processes that created the citywide RPP program as well as subsequent RPP planning study (Residential Preferential Parking Program Review). Policy Implications 11 Packet Pg. 264 City of Palo Alto Page 18 The following Comprehensive Plan programs and policies are relevant to parking management policies: Policy T5.1.2: Consider reducing parking requirements for retail and restaurant uses as a way to encourage new businesses and the use of alternative modes. Policy T-5.5 Minimize the need for employees to park in and adjacent to commercial centers, employment districts and schools Policy T-5.11 Work to protect residential areas from parking impacts of nearby businesses and uses, recognizing that fully addressing some existing intrusions may take time. Policy B-1.2 Promote Palo Alto’s image as a business-friendly community. Assume an active role in fostering businesses, including small start-ups, entrepreneurs, and innovative businesses. Policy B-1.3 Engage with all stakeholders in the community, including businesses of all sizes, local retailers, the public, and City decision-makers in order to understand the challenges businesses and employers face. Policy B-2.3 Recognize that employers, businesses and neighborhoods share many values and concerns, including traffic and parking issues and preserving Palo Alto’s livability, and need to work together with a priority on neighborhood quality of life. Policy B-3.3 Develop strategies for promoting businesses and employers that generate revenues that will support a full range of high-quality City services, including retain and attract revenue- generating businesses. Policy B-4.2 Attract and support small businesses, start-ups, non-profit organizations, and professional services, which are vital to a diverse and innovative economy. Environmental Review The recommended action is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 in that the program modifications will have a minor impact on existing facilities. Attachments: • Attachment11.a: Attachment A – Ordinance to Amend the FY22 Municipal Fee Schedule to Amend Parking Permit Prices • Attachment11.b: Attachment B – Resolution to Amend the Downtown RPP District to Amend the Number and Duration of Employee Permits • Attachment11.c: Attachment C – Resolution to Amend the Evergreen Mayfield RPP District to Amend the Number and Duration of Employee Permits • Attachment11.d: Attachment D – Resolution to Amend the Southgate RPP District to Amend the Duration of Employee Permits 11 Packet Pg. 265 *NOT YET APPROVED* 1 240_20211019_ts24 Ordinance No. ___ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Fiscal Year 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule to Add and Amend Parking Permit Fees for Business District and Residential Parking Permits The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The City has various paid parking programs as authorized by Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 10.46 (College Terrace Residential Parking Permit Program), Chapter 10.50 (Residential Preferential Parking Districts), and Section 10.60.070 (Permit parking in city lots), among others. B. The fees for parking permits authorized by these ordinances are set in the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule. C. Based on recommendation from the Finance Committee, the City Council desires to increase certain parking permit fees as described in this Ordinance. SECTION 2. The Council of the City of Palo Alto amends the Fiscal Year 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule by amending and restating the Office of Transportation’s parking permit fees as set forth in Exhibit “A” and incorporated here by reference. All fees not listed in Exhibit “A” remain unchanged. SECTION 3. The fees in this Ordinance are a charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not changed, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege; or for voluntary entrance and/or use of government property. Pursuant to Art. XIII C, Section I(e)(2) and (4) of the California Constitution, these fees are not a tax. SECTION 4. The Council finds that this Ordinance is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) per section 15301 (Existing Facilities). // // // // 11.a Packet Pg. 266 *NOT YET APPROVED* 2 240_20211019_ts24 SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective thirty-one days after the date of its adoption or on January 1, 2022, whichever is later. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Deputy City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Chief Transportation Official ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 11.a Packet Pg. 267 *NOT YET APPROVED* 3 240_20211019_ts24 Exhibit A Fiscal Year 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule Office of Transportation Parking District Full Price Employee Permit Reduced Price Employee Permit (eligibility required) Annual Resident Parking Permit (price per year) Parking Permit – Business District (These fees replace the annual parking permit rates) University Avenue $75/month $900/year (Permits may be issued in one-month or longer durations as determined by the City Manager by pro-rating the yearly fee) $18.75/month $225/year (Permits may be issued in one-month or longer durations as determined by the City Manager by pro-rating the yearly fee) N/A California Avenue $54.17/month $650/year (Permits may be issued in one-month or longer durations as determined by the City Manager by pro-rating the yearly fee) $13.54/month $162.50/year (Permits may be issued in one-month or longer durations as determined by the City Manager by pro-rating the yearly fee) N/A Parking Permit – Residential College Terrace None None $50 Downtown $87.50/month $525/six-months $21.88/month $131.25/six-months $50 Crescent Park None None $50 Evergreen Park/Mayfield $62.50/month $375/six-months $15.63/month $93.75/six-months $50 (no first free permit) Southgate $62.50/month $375/six-months $15.63/month $93.75/six-months $50 (no first free permit) Old Palo Alto None None $50 11.a Packet Pg. 268 *NOT YET APPROVED* 4 240_20211019_ts24 Fees deleted Downtown RPP - Daily Employee Parking Permit Evergreen Park - Mayfield RPP Daily Employee Parking Permit Southgate RPP - Daily Employee Parking Permit All fees not amended or deleted in this Exhibit “A” remain unchanged from the FY 2022 Municipal Fee Schedule. 11.a Packet Pg. 269 *NOT YET APPROVED* 1 241_20211019_ts24 Resolution No. ____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending and Restating Resolution 9782 that Regulating the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking District (RPP) Program to Modify the Number of Employee Parking Permits Available and to Make Clarifying and Other Minor Modifications R E C I T A L S A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by city council action, of permit parking programs in residential neighborhoods for residents and other categories of parkers. B. A stakeholders group comprised of Downtown residents and business interests was convened to discuss the implementation of Residential Preferential Parking Districts (RPP Districts). C. On December 15, 2015 the Council adopted Ordinance No. 5294, adding Chapter 10.50 to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Chapter establishes the city­wide procedures for RPP Districts in the city. D. On December 1, 2014, the Council adopted Resolution No. 9473 implementing the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Pilot Program in two phases, and on February 23, 2016, the Council adopted Resolution No. 9577 updating the process for implementing the second phase. E. On March 6, 2017 the Council adopted Resolution No. 9671 to end the pilot phase and implement the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program as a continuing program. F. It is the goal of the City to reduce the impacts of non­resident overflow parking from the Downtown Commercial District on the surrounding neighborhoods. G. On June 25, 2018, the Council adopted Resolution 9782 to reduce the number of employee parking permits that may be issued and to make other clarifying and minor modifications. H. The Council now desires to amend Resolution 9782 to reduce the number of employee permits that may be issued, to allow for virtual permits to be issued, and update titles that reflect that this program is run by the City’s Office of Transportation (and not by the former Planning Department). NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows: 11.b Packet Pg. 270 *NOT YET APPROVED* 2 241_20211019_ts24 SECTION 1. Findings. The criteria set forth in Section 10.50.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code for annexing the areas described in 3.A of this Resolution as part of the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District have been met as follows: (1) That non­resident vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of on­street or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents, in that, based on observation, there are few available parking spaces available midday, while the streets are relatively unoccupied at midnight, thus demonstrating the parking intrusion is largely by non­residents. (2) That the interference by the non­resident vehicles occurs at regular and frequent intervals, either daily or weekly, in that the parking intrusion is contained to the daytime hours during the regular workweek. (3) That the non­resident vehicles parked in the area of the proposed district create traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking spaces for residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life, in that based on information from residents and other city departments the vehicle congestion is interfering with regular activities. (4) Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical in that the City has implemented a series of alternative parking strategies in the past and concurrently and there is still a shortage of parking available SECTION 2. General Provisions. The following provisions shall apply to the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District: A. Temporary Work Parking Permits. In addition to the permits described in this Resolution, the City may issue Temporary Work Parking Permits for contractors or construction workers completing work for households located within the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District. Prices and duration of the Temporary Work Parking Permits will be determined by the Municipal Fee Schedule. B. Permanent Regulations. The Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program shall remain in force until the City Council takes action to modify or rescind. SECTION 3. Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District Boundaries. A. Annexed Zones. The areas shown on Exhibit B as “Downtown RPP Program Area” are included in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District. B. Eligibility Areas. The areas shown on Exhibit B as “Approved Eligibility Areas” are eligible for administrative annexation, as provided in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.085. 11.b Packet Pg. 271 *NOT YET APPROVED* 3 241_20211019_ts24 C. Employee Parking Zones. The area within the District Boundaries (which includes both the Annexed Zones and the Eligibility Areas referenced in subsections A and B, above) is divided into several Employee Parking Zones as listed in Exhibit A and shown in Exhibit B. SECTION 4. Hours and Days of Enforcement, Parking Restrictions, and Exemptions. A. Hours. The Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program parking regulations shall be in effect Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, except holidays as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.08.100. Outside of these enforcement hours, any motor vehicle may park in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District, subject to other applicable parking regulations. B. Two­Hour Parking Limit; Re­parking Prohibited. During the regulated days and hours of enforcement, the following parking prohibitions shall apply: i. No person shall park in the same Employee Parking Zone within the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District for more than two continuous hours without a valid parking permit. ii. No person shall re­park on the same day in the same Employee Parking Zone within the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District so as to be parked within the same zone more than two hours after initially parking without a valid parking permit. C. Exemptions. A vehicle lawfully displaying a valid Resident Parking Permit or Employee Parking Permit in the proper fashion shall be exempt from the two­hour time limit. Electric vehicles parked at and using an electric charging station within the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District shall be exempt from the two­hour limit. Other vehicles exempt from the parking regulations are identified in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.070. SECTION 5. Residential and Employee Parking Permits. A. Duration. Resident Parking Permits shall be available on an annual basis. One­day Resident Parking Permits shall also be available. Employee Parking Permits shall be available on a one­month and/or six­month basis. B. Purchase of Permits. Requirements and eligibility for purchase of both Resident Parking Permits and Employee Parking Permits shall be listed in the Residential Preferential Parking Administrative Guidelines, as approved by the Chief Transportation Official. 11.b Packet Pg. 272 *NOT YET APPROVED* 4 241_20211019_ts24 C. Parking Permit Sales. 1. Resident Parking Permits. a. Annual Resident Parking Permit. Each residential address may obtain up to six (6) annual Resident Parking Permits. These permits may be in any form as the City may decide. Physical permits shall clearly indicate the date through which it is valid. b. Daily Resident Parking Permits. Each residential address may purchase up to 50 Daily Resident Parking Permits per year. These permits may be in any form as the City may decide. Physical permits shall clearly indicate the date through which it is valid. 2. Employee Parking Permits. The City may issue Employee Parking Permits for use by employees working in the Downtown area as specified in Exhibit A. Employee Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Duration. Employee Parking Permits shall be available for one­month and/or six­month durations (as determined by the Chief Transportation Official). b. Commuting Only. Employee Parking Permits are for the exclusive use by employees working for businesses within the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program District boundaries while commuting to work. c. Employee Parking Permit Cap. The City shall issue Employee Parking Permits on an iterative basis to ensure that the issuance of Employee Parking Permits does not adversely affect parking conditions for residents and merchants in the District in accordance with Section 22507(b) of the Vehicle Code. Notwithstanding the above, the City shall issue no more than 580 Employee Permits at any given time, with an additional 200 held in reserve. The Employee Parking Permits are to be allocated among the existing, annexed, and eligible Employee Parking Zones according to the authorized maximums annually determined by the City’s Chief Transportation Official. Only streets participating in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program may be allocated permits. d. Employee Parking Permit Priority for Low­income Employees. Preference will be given in the sale of Employee Parking Permits to employees who qualify for reduced price permits based on hourly or annual income. e. Employee Parking Zones. Each Employee Parking Permit shall be issued for only one of the Employee Parking Zones as shown in Exhibits A and B and shall 11.b Packet Pg. 273 *NOT YET APPROVED* 5 241_20211019_ts24 entitle the permitholder to park only in that zone. f. Daily Employee Parking Permits. Daily Employee Parking Permits shall not be issued beginning January 1, 2021. SECTION 6. Cost of Parking Permits. The cost of Parking Permits described in this Resolution shall set by the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule, as may be adjusted from time to time. SECTION 7. CEQA. This resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this resolution may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed ordinance will have a minor impact on existing facilities. SECTION 8. Supersede. To the extent any of the provisions of this Resolution are inconsistent with the regulations set forth in Resolution 9782, this Resolution shall control. SECTION 9. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect on December 1, 2021. Enforcement shall commence, pursuant to Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the California Vehicle Code, when signage is posted. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: _________________________ ___________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________ _____________________________ Deputy City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Chief Transportation Official 11.b Packet Pg. 274 *NOT YET APPROVED* EXHIBIT A Table 1. Downtown RPP Program Employee Parking Zones and Current Allocations1 Employee Boundaries Parking Zone Permit Allocation 1 Lytton Avenue between Alma Street and Webster Street (where RPP restrictions are in place) 300 blocks of: Alma Street, High Street, Emerson Street, Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Kipling Street, Cowper Street Everett Avenue between Alma Street and Webster Street 60 2 200 blocks of: Alma Street, High Street, Emerson Street, Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Kipling Street, Cowper Street Hawthorne Avenue between Alma Street and Webster Street 90 3 100 blocks of: Alma Street, High Street, Emerson Street, 50 Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Kipling Street, Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue between Alma Street and Webster Street Poe Street Ruthven Avenue Tasso Street 4 Palo Alto Avenue between Webster Street and Guinda Street 600 block of Hawthorne Avenue 600 and 700 blocks of Everett Avenue, Lytton Avenue, University Avenue 100­500 blocks of Webster Street, Byron Street, Middlefield Road, Fulton Street 50 5 600 and 700 blocks of Hamilton Avenue 200­700 blocks of Forest Avenue and Homer Avenue 700 blocks of Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Cowper Street 600­700 blocks of Webster Street, Byron Street, Middlefield Road, Fulton Street 100 6 800 blocks of Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Kipling Street, Cowper Street, Webster Street, Middlefield Road Channing Avenue between Ramona Street and Guinda Street 80 7 900 blocks of Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Cowper Street, Webster Street, Middlefield Road Addison Avenue between High Street and Guinda Street 100 8 1000 and 1100 blocks of High Street, Emerson Street, Ramona Street, Bryant Street, Waverley Street, Cowper Street, Webster Street, Byron Street, Middlefield Road, 50 11.b Packet Pg. 275 *NOT YET APPROVED* Employee Boundaries Permit Parking Allocation Zone Fulton Street Lincoln Avenue and Kingsley Avenue between Alma Street/Embarcadero Road and Guinda Street Embarcadero Road from Alma Street to Kingsley Avenue 9 1200 block of Bryant Street 1200­1300 blocks of Waverley Street 1200­1400 blocks of Cowper Street, Webster Street, Byron Street 1300­1400 blocks of Tasso Street 1200­1500 blocks of Middlefield Road 1200­1300 blocks of Fulton Street Melville Avenue between Embarcadero Road and Guinda Street Kellogg Avenue between Cowper Street and Middlefield Road Embarcadero Road between Kingsley Avenue and Middlefield Road 0 10 Guinda Street between Palo Alto Avenue to Melville Avenue Palo Alto Avenue between Guinda Street and Hale Street 500 blocks of Chaucer Street and Hale Street 600 block of Hale Street 800 blocks of Lytton Avenue, Homer Avenue and Palo Alto Avenue 800 and 900 blocks of University Avenue, Hamilton Avenue 800­1100 blocks of Forest Avenue Boyce Avenue between Guinda Street and Hale Street 1000­1100 blocks of Fife Avenue 800­900 blocks of Channing Avenue and Addison Avenue 800­1000 blocks of Lincoln Avenue 800 block of Melville Avenue 1000­1100 blocks of Hamilton Avenue 0 Total Employee Parking Permits 580 (780) 2 1 The permit allocations within each zone may be modified annually through administrative action of the Chief Transportation Official, so long as the 580 (or 780 as applicable) maximum is not exceeded. 2200 additional Employee Parking Permits are held in reserve and only released (in whole or in part) as approved by the Chief Transportation Official. The number in parenthesis is the total maximum number of permits if all permits held in reserve are released. Source: Office of Transportation, November 2021. 11.b Packet Pg. 276 EXHIBIT B MEN L O PA R K 10 4 3 2 1 5 6 7 8 9 S T ANFO RD 11.b Packet Pg. 277 *NOT YET APPROVED 1 242_20211019_ts24 Resolution No. ____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending and Restating Resolution 9739, Continuing the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking District (RPP) Program and Adjusting the Number of Employee Permits Available and Allowing Virtual Permits R E C I T A L S A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by city council action, of permit parking programs in residential neighborhoods for residents and other categories of parkers. B. On December 15, 2014, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 5294, adding Chapter 10.50 to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which established the city-wide procedures for (RPP) Districts in the city. C. On May 9, 2016, the City Council directed City staff to implement a Residential Preferential Parking program in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield area. D. In July 2016, a stakeholders’ group comprised of Evergreen Park residents and business interests met two times and made its recommendations to the City on the particular rules to be applied to the Evergreen Park-Mayfield RPP District. E. On December 14, 2016, the Planning and Transportation Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed Evergreen Park-Mayfield residential preferential parking program. F. On January 23, 2017, the Council adopted Resolution No. 9663, which established the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program pilot and rescinded existing parking restrictions that conflicted with the restrictions established by this RPP district. G. In October and November 2017, the City conducted a parking occupancy study in the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program District and met with residents and stakeholders to receive program feedback. The study found occupancies below 60% in Employee Parking Zones A and B, with areas of higher occupancy closer to businesses. In addition, some businesses were unable to receive Employee Parking Permits under the current limits. H. It is the goal of the City to reduce the impacts of non-resident overflow parking from the commercial areas on the surrounding neighborhoods. I. On February 5, 2018, the Council adopted Resolution 9739, which continued the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program as an ongoing program with modifications to address issues identified in the pilot. 11.c Packet Pg. 278 *NOT YET APPROVED 2 242_20211019_ts24 J. The Council now desires to amend and restate Resolution 9739 to eliminate employee parking permits in certain zones, allow the use of virtual permits, and update outdated procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The criteria set forth in Section 10.50.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code for designating a Residential Preferential Permit Zone have been met as follows: A. That non-resident vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of on-street or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents in that based on observation there are few available parking spaces available midday, while the streets are relatively unoccupied at midnight thus demonstrating the parking intrusion is largely by nonresidents. B. That the interference by the non-resident vehicles occurs at regular and frequent intervals, either daily or weekly, in that the parking intrusion is most severe during daytime hours during the regular workweek. C. That the non-resident vehicles parked in the area of the District create traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking spaces for residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life in that based on information from residents and other city departments the vehicle congestion is interfering with regular activities. D. Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical in that the City has implemented a series of alternative parking strategies in the past and concurrently and there is still a shortage of parking available. SECTION 2. Definitions. A. “Dwelling Unit” shall have the same meaning as it is defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.020. B. “Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking Program District” or “District” shall be that area as shown in Exhibit A to this Resolution. C. “Parking Zones” shall be those areas within the District as shown in Exhibit A to this Resolution. SECTION 3. Parking Restrictions within the District. A. Two-hour Parking Limit and No Re-parking. In the areas within the District listed in Table 1, no person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any curb for more than two hours. Re- parking a vehicle more than two hours after initially parking on the same day in the same 11.c Packet Pg. 279 *NOT YET APPROVED 3 242_20211019_ts24 Parking Zone is prohibited. These restrictions shall be in effect Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, except holidays as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.08.100. Vehicles properly displaying a valid Parking Permit as described in Section 4 of this Resolution are exempt from these restrictions. TABLE 1 STREET BLOCKS Park Blvd. 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2200- 2211, 2555-2599, 2600 Park Ave. 100 Leland Ave. 200, 300, 400 Stanford Ave. 200, 300, 400 Oxford Ave. 200, 300, 400 College Ave. 200, 300, 400 Birch Ave. 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2200-2288, 2518-2575, 2600 Ash St. 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, 2502-2599, 2600, 2700 Grant St. 100, 200, 300, 400 Sheridan Ave. 200, 300, 400 B. Exempt vehicles. Vehicles exempt from parking restrictions as described in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.070(d) are exempt from the restrictions in this section. SECTION 4. Parking Permits. A. Employee Parking Permits. The City may issue Employee Parking Permits for use by employees working in the District. Employee Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Duration. Employee Parking Permits shall be available in the form of monthly and/or six-month permits (as determined by the Chief Transportation Official). b. Form of Permit. The City may issue Employee Parking Permits in any form it deems practicable. c. Commuting Only. Employee Parking Permits are valid only when used by employees who are working within the District on the day the permit is used. d. Zones. Employee Parking Permits shall be specific to one of the Parking Zones as specified in Exhibit A and shall entitle the permit holder to park only in the Parking Zone designated on the Employee Parking Permit. e. Maximum Number of Permits Issued. A maximum of 40 Employee Parking Permits shall be granted at any given time to employees who work within the Evergreen Park-Mayfield Residential Preferential Parking District, and these Employee 11.c Packet Pg. 280 *NOT YET APPROVED 4 242_20211019_ts24 Parking Permits shall be valid only in Zone G. An additional 10 Employee Parking Permits shall be held in reserve, and may be released for sale, in whole or in part, upon approval of the Chief Transportation Official, in accordance with this subsection e. f. Daily Employee Parking Permits. Daily Employee Parking Permits shall not be issued beginning January 1, 2022. B. Resident Parking Permits. The City may issue Resident Parking Permits to residents of dwelling units within the District. Resident Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Duration. Resident Parking Permits shall be available in the form of annual permits and one-day permits. b. Form of Permit. The City may issue Resident Parking Permits in any form it deems practicable, including stickers, hangtags, and/or virtual permits. c. Zones. Resident Parking Permits shall not be restricted to a specific Parking Zone. Resident Parking Permits shall be valid only in the areas listed in Table 1. d. Maximum Number of Permits per Dwelling Unit. Each dwelling unit within the District shall be limited to five Annual Resident Parking Permits at any given time. These permits may be used by residents or guests within the District. e. Daily Resident Parking Permits. Each dwelling unit shall be limited to 50 Daily Resident Parking Permits annually. These permits may be in the form of scratcher hangtags, an online issuance system, or such other form as the City determines. Physical permits will state the date through which it is valid. SECTION 5. Parking Permit Fees. The fee for Parking Permits in the District shall be set by the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule. SECTION 6. Existing Parking Restrictions. A. Section 2 of Resolution 4051 is repealed and replaced with the restrictions in this Resolution. B. 2 Hour Parking. The 2 Hour Commercial Area parking restrictions as identified in Exhibit A shall remain in effect. C. Conflicting Restrictions. In the event City staff should, at a later time, discover conflicting parking restrictions within the District that conflict with the restrictions of this resolution, but are not expressly rescinded, the RPP restrictions of this resolution shall control. However, existing parking restrictions indicated by painted curbs and 11.c Packet Pg. 281 *NOT YET APPROVED 5 242_20211019_ts24 implemented pursuant to Vehicle Code section 21458 are not superseded by this Resolution and remain in effect. SECTION 7. Supersede. To the extent any of the provisions of this Resolution are inconsistent with the regulations set forth in Resolution 9739, this Resolution shall control. SECTION 8. CEQA. This Resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this resolution may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities. SECTION 9. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect on January 1, 2022. Enforcement shall commence, pursuant to Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the California Vehicle Code, when signage is posted. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ __________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: _______________________ ___________________________ Deputy City Attorney City Manager ___________________________ Chief Transportation Official 11.c Packet Pg. 282 G 2 -H R C om m er c i a l A r e a FEDCB A COLLEGEAVENUE YALE STREET CAMBRIDGEAVENUE CALIFORNIA AVENUE WILLIAMSSTREET CALIFORNIA AVENUE GRANT AVENUE ELCAMINOREAL EL CAMINOREAL ELCAMINO REAL SHERMAN AVENUE SHERMANAVENUE JACARANDALANE ASHSTREET NEW MA YFIELD LANE NEW MA YFIELDLANE ELCAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL CALIFORNIA AVENUE CALIFORNIA AVENUE PERALLANE MIMOSALANE SEDROLANE CAMBRIDGE AVENUE COLLEGEAVENUE D ASHSTREET OXFORD AVENUE RD AVENUE ELCAMINOREAL STANFORD AVENUE E CASTILLEJAAVENUE TAAVENUE SEQUOIAAVEN UEVENUE NOREAL PARKAVENUE ELCAMINOREAL OREAL ELCAMINOREAL ASH STREET LELAND AVENUE PARK BOULEVARD STANFORD AVENUE BIRCHSTREET OXFORDAVENUE BIRCH STREET STANFORDAVENUE MARIPOSAAVENUE SEQUOIAAVENUE PARK BO ULEVARD BIRCH STREET LELANDAVENUE LELANDAVENUE ASH STREET BIRCH STREET NEW MAYFIELDLANE CAMBRIDGEAVENUE BIRCH STREET BIRCHSTREET COLLEGEAVENUE COLLEGEAVENUE PARKBOULEVARD CALIFORNIA AVENUE ALMA STREET PARK BOULEVARD SHERMAN AVENUE JACARANDA LANE PARKBOULEVARD PARKBOULEVARD PARKBOULEVARD OXFORD AVENUE A LMASTREET CO LORA DO ALMASTREETALMA STREET O R E G O N E X P R E S S W WA S NORTH STANFORDAVENUE WILLIAMS STREET YALESTREET GRANT AVENUE SHERMAN A VENUE SHERIDAN AVENUE SHERIDANAVENUE ASH STREET BIRCH STREET BIRCHSTREET GRANT AVENUE PAGEMILL ROAD PAGEM IL L ROAD A STAUNTON COURT PAGE MILL ROAD PAGE MILL ROAD PAGEMILL ROAD NOGAL LANE JACARANDA LANE PENINSULACORRIDOR J OINTPOWERSBOARD PENINSULACORRIDOR J OINTPOWERSBOARD PENINSULACORRIDOR J OINTPOWERSBOARD PENINSULACOR OXFORD A VENUE ABRAMS COURT BARNES COURT E COURT E D R O A D O L M S TED R O A D O LM S T E D R O AD S T ED RD D U D L E Y L A N E YALE ST ELCAMINOREAL ELCAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL ELCAMINO REAL OLMSTEDROAD Legend Zone A Zone B Zone C Zone D Zone E Zone F Zone G 2 Hour Commercial Area abc RPP Zone Labels Exhibit A 11.c Packet Pg. 283 *NOT YET APPROVED* 1 243_20211019_ts24 Resolution No. _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending and Restating Resolution 9859 To Continue the Southgate Residential Preferential Parking District (RPP) Program with Minor Modifications R E C I T A L S A. On December 15, 2014, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 5294, adding Chapter 10.50 to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which established the city-wide procedures for Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Districts in the city. B. On May 9, 2016, the City Council directed City staff to implement a Residential Preferential Parking program in the Southgate area. C. In July 2016, a stakeholders’ group comprised of Southgate residents and business interests met and made its recommendations to the City on the particular rules to be applied to the Southgate RPP District. D. On April 26, 2017, the Planning and Transportation Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed Southgate Residential Preferential Parking program. E. On June 19, 2017, the Council adopted Resolution No. 9688, which established the Southgate Residential Preferential Parking program pilot and rescinded existing parking restrictions that conflicted with the restrictions established by this RPP district. The pilot program was twice amended in 2018 by Resolution Nos. 9742 and 9756. F. On October 7, 2019, the Council adopted Resolution 9859 to continue the Southgate Residential Preferential Parking program as a permanent program with modifications as detailed in that Resolution, including increasing the number of employee parking permits in Zone S1 to twenty and limiting the number of daily parking permits available to employees to twenty-four per six-month period. G. The Council now desires to make minor modifications to this RPP program: to allow monthly employee parking permits and to clarify that the permit fees are set by the Municipal Fee Schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The criteria set forth in Section 10.50.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code for annexing the areas described in this Resolution as part of the Southgate Residential Preferential Parking Program District have been met as follows: 11.d Packet Pg. 284 *NOT YET APPROVED* 2 243_20211019_ts24 A. That non-resident vehicles do, or may, substantially interfere with the use of on-street or alley parking spaces by neighborhood residents, in that, based on observation, there are few available parking spaces available midday, while the streets are relatively unoccupied at midnight, thus demonstrating the parking intrusion is largely by non-residents. B. That the interference by the non-resident vehicles occurs at regular and frequent intervals, either daily or weekly, in that the parking intrusion is contained to the daytime hours during the regular workweek. C. That the non-resident vehicles parked in the area of the proposed district create traffic congestion, noise, or other disruption (including shortage of parking spaces for residents and their visitors) that disrupts neighborhood life, in that based on information from residents and other city departments the vehicle congestion is interfering with regular activities. D. Other alternative parking strategies are not feasible or practical in that the City has implemented a series of alternative parking strategies in the past and concurrently and there is still a shortage of parking available. SECTION 2. Definitions. A. “Dwelling Unit” shall have the same meaning as it is defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.020. B. “Southgate Residential Preferential Parking Program District” or “District” shall be that area as shown in Table 1 to this Resolution. Exhibit B is a supplemental map depicting the District. In case of conflict, Table 1 shall control. C. “Employee Parking Zones” shall be those areas specified in Exhibit A to this Resolution. Exhibit B is a supplemental map depicting the Employee Parking Zones. In case of conflict, Exhibit A shall control. Table 1 Area of the Southgate Residential Preferential Parking Program District STREET BLOCKS ENFORCED Castilleja Avenue 1500 and 1600 Churchill Avenue 12 to 100 El Camino Real East Side of El Camino Real, starting 190 feet North of Park Boulevard and ending at Churchill Avenue El Camino Real West Side of El Camino real between Park Boulevard and Churchill Avenue 11.d Packet Pg. 285 *NOT YET APPROVED* 3 243_20211019_ts24 Escobita Avenue 1500 and 1600 Madrono Avenue 1500 and 1600 Manzanita Avenue 200 and 300 Mariposa Avenue 1500 and 1600 Miramonte Avenue 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 Portola Avenue 1500 and 1600 Sequoia Avenue 200, 300, and 400 SECTION 3. Parking Restrictions within the District. A. Two-hour Parking Limit and No Re-parking. Within the District, no person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any curb for more than two hours. Re-parking a vehicle more than two hours after initially parking on the same day in the District is prohibited. These restrictions shall be in effect Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, except holidays as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.08.100. Vehicles properly displaying a valid Parking Permit as described in Section 4 of this Resolution are exempt from these restrictions. B. Exempt vehicles. Vehicles exempt from parking restrictions as described in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.50.070(d) are exempt from the restrictions in this section. Electric vehicles parked at and using an electric charging station within the District are also exempt from the restrictions in this section. Official vehicles belonging to the State of California are exempted when parked on that section of El Camino Real that is within the District. SECTION 4. Residential and Employee Parking Permits. A. Duration. Resident Parking Permits shall be available on an annual basis. One-day Resident Parking Permits shall also be available. Employee Parking Permits shall be available on a one-month and/or six-month basis. B. Purchase of Permits. Requirements and eligibility for purchase of both Resident Parking Permits and Employee Parking Permits shall be subject to the provisions of this Section 4 and also to any administrative guidelines, as approved by the Chief Transportation Official. C. Parking Permit Sales. 1. Resident Parking Permits. Resident Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Annual Resident Parking Permit. Each dwelling unit within the District may obtain up to six (6) annual Resident Parking Permits. 11.d Packet Pg. 286 *NOT YET APPROVED* 4 243_20211019_ts24 b. Daily Resident Parking Permits. Each dwelling unit within the District may purchase up to 50 Daily Resident Parking Permits annually, which may be used on any vehicle including household visitor vehicles. 2. Employee Parking Permits. The City may issue Employee Parking Permits for use by employees working in the District. Employee Parking Permits shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Commuting Only. Employee Parking Permits are for the exclusive use by employees working for businesses within the District while commuting to work. b. Duration. Employee Parking Permits shall be available in one- month and/or six-month permits (as determined by the Chief Transportation Official). c. Employee Parking Permit Cap. No more than thirty (30) Employee Parking Permits shall be granted at any given time, and shall be allocated between the Employee Parking Zones as specified in Exhibit A. d. Employee Parking Permit Priority for Low-income Employees. Preference will be given in the sale of Employee Parking Permits to employees who qualify for reduced price permits based on hourly or annual income. e. Employee Parking Zones. Employee Parking Permits shall be specific to one of the Employee Parking Zones shown in Exhibit A and shall entitle the permit holder to park only in the Employee Parking Zone designated on the Employee Parking Permit. f. Daily Employee Parking Permits. Daily Employee Parking Permits shall not be sold beginning January 1, 2022. SECTION 5. Fees. The fee for Parking Permits in the District shall be set by the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule. SECTION 6. CEQA. This resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the adoption and implementation of this resolution may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this proposed ordinance will have a minor impact on existing facilities. SECTION 7. Supersede. This Resolution supersedes Resolution 9859. 11.d Packet Pg. 287 *NOT YET APPROVED* 5 243_20211019_ts24 SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect on January 1, 2022. Enforcement shall commence, pursuant to Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the California Vehicle Code, when signage is posted. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: _________________________ ___________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________ _____________________________ Deputy City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Chief Transportation Official 11.d Packet Pg. 288 *NOT YET APPROVED* 6 243_20211019_ts24 Exhibit A EMPLOYEE ZONES AND PERMIT ALLOCATION Zone Name Maximum Number of Employee Permits STREET BLOCKS ENFORCED S 10 permits Castilleja Avenue 1500 and 1600 Churchill Avenue 12 to 100 Escobita Avenue 1500 and 1600 Madrono Avenue 1500 and 1600 Manzanita Avenue 200 and 300 Mariposa Avenue 1500 and 1600 Miramonte Avenue 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 Portola Avenue 1500 and 1600 Sequoia Avenue 200, 300, and 400 El Camino Real East Side of El Camino Real starting 190 feet North of Park Boulevard and ending at Churchill Avenue S1 20 permits El Camino Real West Side of El Camino Real between Park Boulevard and Churchill Avenue 11.d Packet Pg. 289 11.d Packet Pg. 290 City of Palo Alto (ID # 13703) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/1/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: SECOND READING: Adopt Ordinance to Establish Fire Department Ambulance Subscription Program Fees (FIRST READING: October 18, 2021 PASSED: 6-1, Tanaka no) From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk This was heard by the City Council on October 18, 2021 for a first reading and was approved 6- 1, Tanaka no. No changes were made to the Ordinance; it is now before you for a second reading. Attachments: • Attachment12.a: Attachment A: Fire Department Ambulance Subscription Program Fees Ordinance 12 Packet Pg. 291