Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 13 2019 BPC Minutes Final BOZEMAN PARKING COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, June 13, 2019 @ 7:30 AM A. Call to Order - 7:30 AM – City Commission Chamber, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Mayor - Cynthia Andrus: Absent Committee Member - Ben Lloyd: Present Committee Member –Paul Neubauer: Present Committee Member - James Ness: Present Committee Chair - Pamela Bryan: Present Committee Member - Shasta Winston: Present Committee Member - Kelly Wiseman : Present Committee Member - Mark Egge: Present Staff - Ed Meece: Present Commissioner Bryan Called the meeting to order at 7:30am, and welcomed the newest member of the BPC Commissioner Paul Neubauer. B. Changes to the Agenda 07:34:35 AM (00:03:58) Commissioner Bryan confirmed there were no changes to the agenda. Commissioner Bryan advised that the May 2019 minutes will be approved at the July 2019 meeting due to the reschedule of the May meeting, it was pushed back a couple weeks, therefore not enough time for the BPC Secretary to publish them. C. Public Comment – Members of the audience or their agent may be invited to present testimony or evidence. To be recognized, each person desiring to give testimony or evidence shall step forward and, after being recognized, give their name and address for the record. The presiding officer may establish a time frame for each public comment but in no case shall such timeframe be less than three (3) minutes per speaker. The presiding officer may lengthen or shorten the time allotted for public testimony. 07:35:43 AM (00:05:05) Commissioner Bryan stated it was time for public comment. Carolyn Boyd 1314 S 3rd- Carolyn stated that she is a member of Una Neighborhood group and was at today’s meeting to bring forward concerns and questions she has in regards to the new system for monitoring the district. She feels like the visitor pass portion of the district is an issue. Carolyn expressed concerns about the online management of the permits and stated that she has had difficulty navigating the site. She also expressed concerns about the complexity of trying to get people attached to the virtual passes in a timely manner so avoid the $60.00 citation. Carolyn feels that several others particularly those who are not computer savvy will have many issues with trying to manage their visitor passes and will in turn lead to frustration towards the city. Carolyn stated that her relations with the City have been great and wants to still feel good about her interactions with the City of Bozeman. Carolyn made the Suggestion to not launch the online portal until everything has been tested and all the complex details have been worked out and also suggested that a focus group be put together to test all aspects of the online parking portal. She is aware of the revision to the form and that there is now a video being created to help folks but thinks a focus group comprised of different ages would help to work out all the issues of navigating through the portal. Kathy Powell 1215 S 3rd Ave. Kathy expressed similar concerns about the online portal and managing the visitor passes. Kathy showed concerns for folks who might have disabilities, no computers, or do have a computer but don’t know how to use it., or maybe someone else in the home set up the account but they are gone, she asked what are these folks supposed to do? Kathy advised she is aware of the virtual training, however she feels it is still a challenge. Kathy and another neighbor, Tim Arsinco met with Tanya Andreasen and Brit Fontenot in February to show the amount of steps it takes to get into the system, she stated there were between 26-36 clicks. Brit agreed it was challenging and said he would take the issue to the vender. Kathy said she hasn’t heard back on the issue yet, but learned that Missoula also uses the T2 system, so she called the Missoula Parking Administrator and she said that they have not been able to figure out the virtual visitor passes either and continue to issue hang tag permits. Kathy encouraged the commissioners and staff to re-look at the visitor part of the virtual passes and maybe beta-test it, and think it through again as renewals are approaching in August. Jill Davenport and her spouse Jim Goetz (not present at meeting) 1019 S 3rd Ave. Jill stated that she supports and agrees with the concerns both Carolyn and Kathy have expressed. Jill said that she knows three different neighbors all over the age of 70 who couldn’t even get to the first click, including her husband. Jill advised that she know folks who are also sight and hearing impaired and is worried that if they live in the district will have complications with the virtual permits. Jill expressed that the City needs to be careful about discriminating people with disabilities or don’t have the money for the internet. Jill also brought up the amount of patience it takes to work through the online portal, and stated most people in her neighborhood do not have the patience to navigate through it. Jill reiterated that they just need the hang tags. Commissioner Bryan asked for further public comment. None. D. Ex Parte Disclosures of Parking Commissioners 07:44:38 AM (00:14:01) Commissioner Bryan asked if there are any Ex Parte disclosures of parking commissioners for any item on the agenda. There were none. Action Items 1. Discuss Parking Program Manager’s report on the April/May 2019 public engagement sessions regarding the creation of Parking Permit Districts, as well as ‘next steps’ for this initiative. (Exhibit 1) Mr. Meece noted the short memo in the packet. Most the people on the board attended at least one of the sessions at the various places around town. The sessions were held on April 30th, May 16th and May 30th. He stated that the turnout at each session was good. He said that the purpose of the sessions were to discover and fine tune the process of creating and managing residential districts. Mr. Meece stated that most of the questions and concerns were related to the 8-9 topics in the memo. Mr. Meece asked the BPC if they would like him to go into detail on each of the topics or if the BPC would like to just have a discussion on what to do going forward. Commissioner Bryan opened the discussion by asking the BPC if there were any questions for Mr. Meece about the memo or the sessions. Commissioner Egge stated he had two questions. The first was if Mr. Meece had a sense for the distribution or breakdown of residents or property owner’s vs potential downtown parking users? Mr. Meece stated yes, he did gather some information at the sessions by asking the folks who attended the sessions to sign in and if they are a resident within the district or a resident in a potential district. Mr. Meece advised 30% of folks that attended were folks who lived in the current residential districts and 50% were folks who lived in potential district north or south of downtown area. Mr. Meece stated that there were 2 or 3 folks who attended that lived downtown and were interested in purchasing a permit in one of the districts. Commissioner Egge asked if there was any feedback throughout the sessions that would lead to changes to the current policy. Mr. Meece stated that the parking staff and the BPC should look at the comments made from the public at the sessions and look at what the existing policies state to determine how to address those comments. Mr. Meece advised that he does not have a final policy recommendation for the BPC at this time, but does think the areas outlined in the memo should be discussed, and if it’s the consideration of the BPC that something is not going to change or be done. Mr. Meece thought the folks who attended brought great input that the BPC can consider. Commissioner Bryan asked what he thinks the next steps are. She asked if his staff will prepare a marked up version of the initial concept paper with changes what were raised. Mr. Meece stated he could certainly work on that. He also stated that there are topics that will Commissioner Lloydefit most from BPC discussion, because they have to do with how the BPC wants to approach the districts from a policy standpoint. Mr. Meece stated he can take what he has already done and bring a revised version the BPC for more markup. Commissioner Bryan asked the other commissioners what they think about doing that. Commissioner Winston asked Mr. Meece if there is anything specific he is concerned with at this time that he would like the BPC to address. Mr. Meece stated any input would be Commissioner Lloydeficial, either now or in an email. Mr. Meece stated one area that came up several times was the pricing scenario, in terms of do we differentiate between residents of the district and non-residents. It was suggested at a session that non-residents should have a higher cost to permits that would then subsidize the rates for residents in the district. Someone else thought they should be even costs. Mr. Meece was surprised to find folks preferred to keep number of permits per residents and businesses lower. Commissioner Bryan asked if other points jumped out for other BPC members. Commissioner Winston stated that there seems to be a relation between what was prepared in the manager’s report talking about the overall solvency of these districts and the efforts, so she feels it would be Commissioner Lloydeficial to just look into the potential districts. She stated that the goal is for these districts to pay for themselves eventually, but at this time knows we are still heavily subsidizing permits. Mr. Meece stated that was correct. Commissioner Winston continued to state that as we address the question of how much parking we allow and at what price, we create something long term. She suggested taking that on sooner rather than later. Commissioner Winston stated she thinks it is also important to look at the business permits and the allocation of these permits, are they actual business employees or people going to the business. She asked if they are allocated by address. Mr. Meece stated that is a great point, and clarified that when he mentioned a business, he is talking about a business that is physically in the district, so it would be eligible for “X” number of permits like a residents. Mr. Meece also stated that we have people who work downtown who purchase a temporary parking permit to park downtown, so they are two separate things. Commissioner Bryan asked for other questions or thoughts, and what the next steps are? Commissioner Egge made a suggestion to have a progressive pricing structure. For example the first permit would be $20.00, a second permit would be $30.00 and a third would be $50.00. He stated he would like to see a copy of the policy in the form of a resolution to consider passing. Commissioner Wiseman added that this is a complicated idea to do a district downtown. If a district is created that businesses and employees can’t use, it will lead to a big parking problem downtown because of the heavy use of those streets. Commissioner Wiseman went on to say that if we allow B3 people to use the district to buy permits, then we have no reason to have these districts because it doesn’t serve a purpose at that point. Commissioner Wiseman stated there are many layers that need to be considered. Commissioner Ness stated that he agrees with a lot of the comments, and that this is going to take a couple meetings to discuss. He looks forward to the public comment. He stated he is in favor of reviewing a mockup policy so we have a working document to go through and begin building upon. Commissioner Bryan asked for Public comment. Kathy Powell 1215 S 3rd Ave. Kathy wanted to make some comments about the PPD concept. Kathy stated she has comments from the University neighbor association board and the UNA Parking working group. Kathy said that at one of the public sessions, the Parking Manager stated that the PPD concept is for North and South of downtown to be separate from the parking districts, she said that makes sense because downtown its primarily residential impacted by commercial and mixed use, whereas RPPD is impacted by places like school and hospital. Kathy suggested including a concept that if any revisions or changes are to be made that they have the approval of at least 60% of the residents before making any changes. Kathy said that the concept of the PPD as a Parking Permit Commissioner Lloydefit District (PPBD) would be more-clear to public rather than just PPD. Kathy went on to say that the current ordinance refers to more than just parking spots, but also what is involved with parking, including tranquility between commuters and residents and also reducing noise, traffic, hazards and litter. She mentioned that the Supreme Court in 1993 or 1994 approved this kind of ordinance which in turn allowed Missoula to create a parking district, and she encourages the BPC to include that in the concept. Finally, Kathy encourages the BPC to indicate it is for commercial use and mixed use. Commissioner Bryan acknowledged that the district created a letter that was sent to the BPC and is now on the public record, summarizing Kathy’s comments. Commissioner Bryan asked for any other public comment. There was none. Commissioner Bryan restated to have Mr. Meece come back to the next meeting with a mocked up version or with points that need to be addressed for further discussion. Mr. Meece agreed. He stated he will put it in form of a resolution, however it will not be ready to be passed. He stated that the biggest unanswered question is the boundaries of the potential districts. He said he would take a swing at that and allow it to be the starting point for the BPC, and would have it ready for the August meeting. Commissioner Bryan stated August would be fine, and went on to thank Mr. Meece for holding those public sessions, and feels they were really helpful. Mr. Meece said it was a team effort by many. Commissioner Winston asked Mr. Meece if we are currently collecting data adjacent to downtown. Mr. Meece stated they are not in a way that would be helpful for this. She asked if it would be something that they will be doing. Mr. Meece stated they do have the resources, and that’s why he is pushing for August to allow time to collect the data. 2. Discuss/Deny/Approve BPC Resolution 2019-04, A RESOLUTION OF THE BOZEMAN PARKING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RECOMMENDING A CHANGE TO THE ANNUAL FEES FOR NEW AND RENEWING PARKING PERMITS ISSUED IN THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT DISTRICTS (MSU & BHS). (Exhibit 2) Mr. Meece stated that Resolution 2019-04 is something the BPC goes over annually to look at the parking permit districts relative to the revenues and expenditures of those districts. He stated that the Municipal code states that residential parking permit fee revenues should pay the cost of administering and enforcement in those districts. Mr. Meece stated he provided a breakdown in today’s packet to show where administration makes an effort to isolate the cost and revenue of the two districts, he has combined the two districts into one because the high school district is so small. Mr. Meece clarified the same officer enforces both districts on a route system, so again they are combined for that purpose. Provided in the packet are historical revenues for residential, employee and visitor permits for both districts and where we are at in 2019. Mr. Meece pointed out that as of May 2019 the Finance department has issued a total of 2557 permits, for a total revenue of $56,602.00. He said the cost of administering and enforcing those two districts at this time is $100,970.00 which leaves a deficit of $44,000.00. Mr. Meece stated that on the right hand side of the sheet the BPC will get an idea of how he broke down the cost, the pro-rating of expenditures. Mr. Meece stated he worked with the assistant controller to make sure they were in line with how the costs were allocated. Mr. Meece stated at the bottom of the sheet shows many columns showing $30, $35, $40 and the net effect based on permit sales and expenditures this year that an increase to those fees would have. Mr. Meece stated that in the $30 column is the staff recommendation column, and would still leave a $30,000.00 deficit. Mr. Meece stated that parking enforcement issues approximately $100,000.00 a year in citations within the districts, and while the code does not elude to consideration to citation revenue, he still did not want to ignore the $100,000.00 revenue. Mr. Meece stated it is a little bit of a blended recommendation, and he wants to address the fact to keep moving towards self- sustainability, and at a gradual pace, not all at once. Mr. Meece asked for any questions from the commissioners. Commissioner Wiseman asked if he is missing the amount of citations issued. Mr. Meece stated it wasn’t included in the packet. Mr. Meece re-stated again it is about $100,000.00 a year just within the districts, with the vast majority being in the MSU district due to the size of the district and the cost difference between citations in each. Citations in the BHS district are $20.00 and in MSU they are $60.00. Commissioner Winston asked if the only way to get them to pay for themselves is to keep raising the cost of the permits. Mr. Meece stated that was correct, because he doesn’t see that more citations can just be issued, and since we have raised the fees in the two districts, there has been a noticeable decline in permit sales, so it does become a balancing act. If less permits are being sold it will take larger increases to cover that ground, which is different than the concept proposed for the new districts, where we would sell permits at a far more market type of rate. Commissioner Ness asked if the $100,000.00 was included in calculation to determine if it is self-sustaining, Mr. Meece replied no it is not. Commissioner Ness also asked Mr. Meece to walk the BPC through the allocation/proration. Mr. Meece advised that on the spreadsheet if shows the Parking Clerk, Parking Manager and operating and the way it is set up is that the parking districts are charged 25% of the cost of the parking clerk for labor and Commissioner Lloydefits, then they are charged 10% for labor costs of Parking Manager, and another 10% of the total operating costs. Mr. Meece clarified they are charged 10% minus the capitol gained. Mr. Meece said the idea is to use rough approximation of the time required of the staff and 25% of enforcement budget. Commissioner Ness asked Mr. Meece if it is relative to the time they spend on enforcement, Mr. Meece stated yes, if anything it’s a low percent. Commissioner Lloyd asked if Mr. Meece reviews these numbers from time to time and asked Mr. Meece if those numbers have changed over the years, specifically this year. Mr. Meece stated no, they have been about the same in terms of the percentages. Commissioner Egge stated that if he understands the report, that the current fees only cover about 55% of the total administration enforcement costs. Mr. Meece stated that is correct. Commissioner Egge also asked if the suggested rate of $30.00 permit would increase that amount covered to 70%. Mr. Meece stated yes. Commissioner Egge also asked what rate would be necessary for the parking fees to cover 100% of admin and enforcement costs. Mr. Meece stated you would have to be pretty close to $40.00 a permit. Commissioner Egge read the code, it states that the amount of fees establish shall cover the cost of residential enforcement. Commissioner Egge asked Mr. Meece with his knowledge of the code, what would give the BPC the latitude to choose to set fees at a rate that was lower than what would cover the cost of admin/enforcement of the permit program. Mr. Meece stated there is nothing in the code that would give you that. Mr. Meece added that his only answer would be that prior to the BPC adopting their principle and philosophy in reviewing the permit fees on an annual basis. Mr. Meece also stated that the permits were $10.00 for decades, and it is easy for him to say that the amount of revenue compared to the costs were minimal, and there is a couple decades history of not following the code strictly in regards to this particular language, and stated that Commissioner Egge’s point is very well taken. Mr. Meece stated he is trying to play catchup in a more gentle fashion, but stated he respects that if the BPC would like move faster he would respect that with a larger amount. Commissioner Bryan wanted to restate that the BPC passes the resolution and then it would go to the City Commission for approval, because the BPC does not have rate setting authority. Commissioner Neubauer asked about fiscal years between 2017 and 2019 because there is a 30% reduction in permits sold. He wants to know if there are any other contributing factors that he is aware of that might have added to the reduction in permits sold. Mr. Meece stated no, not that he was aware of. Commissioner Neubauer went on to state that with that in mind the code states the program should be revenue neutral, and wants to know if there are any other folks within the City that might interpret to suggest that the citation revenue should be included in the calculation on if its revenue neutral. Mr. Meece stated that he cannot speak to the fact that someone else might interpret the code differently. Mr. Meece stated that the code is pretty clear the permits are supposed to cover the cost of the district. Commissioner Neubauer asked what the cost of the permits were in 2017. They were $10.00. Commissioner Winston stated does this mean we have 30% less parking on the street, that there was alternate parking? Mr. Meece stated if we are seeing 30% less permit sold, then that means less vehicles parked on the street. Commissioner Bryan asked for public comment. David Fine, Economic Development with the City of Bozeman. David wanted to add in regard to policy, a good reason not to consider citation revenue in this policy is the goal of any enforcement is to have total compliance, he acknowledged we are a long way from there, but it is a good reason for the policy stated in the municipal code. Mr. Meece stated that Laurae Clark pointed out that if you look at “Employee permits and visitor permits” for actual May 2019 you will see 792 for Employees and 221 for visitor permits, those number were transposed, it should be 792 for visitor permits and 221 for employee permits. Commissioner Bryan restated the resolution of the BPC to recommend the changing to annual fees for new and renewing permits in the residential parking permit districts (MSU & BHS), now therefore be it resolved that the BPC recommends that the City Commission set the fees for residential, employee and visitor parking permits within the residential parking permit districts at $30.00 per permit annually, and that service permits within the residential parking permit districts at $10.00 per permit annually. Commissioner Bryan asked for public comment. Cory Lawrence 4510 Morning Sun Dr. Cory stated that within the code it would be a good idea to meet with the City attorney to get cost of enforcement, is it net of enforcement of revenues? He stated it’s a curiosity that the revenue is set to the side, and he thinks it would be a good question, because there could actually be a surplus in cost of enforcement, if he is reading the numbers correctly. Commissioner Bryan asked for further public comment. Jill Davenport-1019 S 3rd. She advised that she agrees with what Cory Lawrence said. She reiterated that it’s money. She stated that we do have a different type of enforcement, we have the cars with the computers, and she doesn’t know if there is money in there that takes care of that business. She stated that it’s an expense and she understands that, but she thinks the $100,000.00 needs to be included into the calculations. She advised she is okay with raising the permit fee. Commissioner Bryan asked for further public comment. There was none. Mr. Meece stated he wanted to make a few clarifications. He stated that he understands and respects all the comments about “does enforcement mean net, etc.”, he said he has never seen that mean “net”, it’s always done that way so you know you’ve paid your cost and enforcement. No matter if you issue a single citation or not. Mr. Meece stated there was a good point made in public comment about not seeing the cost for the LPR equipment. He reminded the BPC is was paid for by the TIFT district, and the costs are not in that calculation because the 10% admin was minus the capitol costs, so if the districts were picking up any pro-rated portion of the new technology, this number would be a much larger gap. Mr. Meece stated that the code specifically does not address revenues, what the BPC has done before is take a blended approach that allows the BPC to be aware there are those revenues, but to be open-eyed about this and say per the code the districts aren’t paying for themselves. Commissioner Ness asked for clarification on what a service provider permit is. Ms. Clark advised that those are permits purchased by businesses who don’t have a business inside the districts, but who will be doing work inside the district, like a realtor or plumber. She stated if their vehicles are clearly marked they do not need a permit, but if they are not, than they can get a service provider permit. Commissioner Ness asked how they are going to be made aware of the change. Ms. Clark stated that we send out renewal notices that remind residents of the time-line to renew, the requirements for purchasing permits, and any changes to the district. Commissioner Bryan asked for a motion to approve the Resolution. Commissioner Wiseman motioned to approve BPC resolution 2019-04. Commissioner Ness seconded the motion. Commissioner Bryan asked if that in favor of increasing to $30.00 annual for residential and $10.00 for service providers annually. Commissioner Wiseman stated yes. Commissioner Bryan called for vote in favor. Resolution passed 5 to 1, with Commissioner Neubauer voting no. ***************************** 3. Discuss/Approve/Deny the Parking Program Manager’s recommended modifications to the Lease Limit Calculator; with Rick Williams (consultant) on conference call. (Exhibit 3) Commissioner Bryan stated that we are going to discuss/approve/deny the Parking Managers recommendation to the lease limit calculator with the consultant Rick Williams who’s on a conference call. Commissioner Bryan advised the BPC to please see Exhibit three for the updated calculator. Commissioner Bryan advised that there was only 30 minutes to try to discuss this item. She reminded the BPC that the lease calculator was created in 2017 to give the BPC a tool to determine how many monthly permits to lease in the downtown parking garage. Commissioner Bryan stated in December 2018 meeting the BPC discussed a calculator based on December 1 2018 peak occupancy, and at that time it was decided to wait for improved data with the implementation of the T2 systems. Commissioner Bryan said that today with direction from Mr. Meece, the Parking Manager, and additional advice and perspective from Rick Williams, we can make a decision on how to use the calculator going forward. Mr. Meece stated that with Rick Williams help, what the BPC has in front of them is what continues to be an evolving document, the lease limit calculator. Mr. Meece stated that how the calculator works is using what is considered the 50% rule, which recaptures 50% of the unoccupied spaces during peak times. The formula at the top of the document gives a breakdown, it shows 435 stalls in the Bridger Park garage currently with 604 total number of leases sold as of 5/14/19, combined both UDC and non-UDC. Mr. Meece gave a breakdown of peak occupancy times for April 4, 2019 as an example. The breakdown shows that 90% of the time, peak hours occur between 12 and 2pm, with 219 vehicles in the garage. Mr. Meece stated that 15 of those vehicles were hotel UDC lease permits, 72 vehicles were non hotel permits and remaining 132 were transient parkers. The calculator takes into account that we still have 46 leases that have been sold but not activated, and tells us that the peak occupancy was at 50%. This leaves the garage with 108 potential new leases, which is then subtracted from the leases sold but not activated to make sure we are not double selling permits and according to the calculator there is an opportunity to sell 62 new permits/leases. Mr. Meece stated the language in this document still needs to be cleaned up, the word leases should be replaced with permits. The combined total leases authorized for sale as of April 4, 2019 is 666. Mr. Meece said there was a new item added to the calculator, just below the top graph to show number of hotel leases for sale, but to keep in mind those leases are UDC related, so they come through a specialized processed, and wanted to reiterate that he is not asked the BPC to authorize 124 hotel leases at today’s meeting. This is just to help start the conversation on how hotel leases count due to the overnight stays. Mr. Meece mentioned that he and Mr. Williams studied previous data from 2017, at this time there was a correlation of almost 5 hotel spaces to 1 day time space. So for the purpose of this calculator, and to stay conservative, what is being presented to the BPC is if they approve a request, the BPC could be comfortable to go to the number around 124 based on the 2 to 1 ratio. Mr. Meece asked Mr. Williams if he had other clarifications. Mr. Williams stated that Mr. Meece did a great job with the break down and feels we can move on to take any questions from the BPC. Commissioner Bryan clarified that for today’s discussion we are only looking at non-hotel permits. Commissioner Neubauer stated that if we look at the number of non-hotel leases for sale (62) and the number of hotel leases for sale (124), but we already have 256 UDC leases sold, are we suggesting that we allow 186 new leases? Mr. Meece stated no, that in the past the BPC dealt with just the top number (62) based on occupancy. Mr. Meece went on to say the BPC has had many conversations about what is the ratio of overnight vs daytime leases based on the fact they are frequently there at different hours of the day. Mr. Meece stated the second line is not to be made operational at this time, it’s just a data point to potentially be used for future discussions. Mr. Williams paraphrased it as; non-hotel permits are likely going to be used in the middle of the day at a high rate, so if we sell 62 non hotel leases, that is a conservative number. If we sell 124 hotel leases, using that same conservative estimate, it would probably also translate to 62 vehicles parked during the day. He stated what we are trying to figure out is if we sell a non- hotel lease, what is the probability it will be in the garage in the middle of the day during the peak hours, competing with other customers. He also stated they are trying to figure out the same thing with the hotel leases. Commissioner Wiseman asked if there are concerns with picking the slowest month downtown for peak occupancy calculations. It’s not ski season, Yellowstone Park’s roads aren’t opened yet, and downtown tourism isn’t happening yet, so he is concerned that the data used doesn’t reflect the peak of summer or December usage. Mr. Meece advised he and Mr. Williams had that same conversation. Mr. Williams stated that due to the new plate reader system, so we are starting to get good data. Mr. Meece can collect data on a regular basis and he can bring that data to the BPC every 6 months or so and he can use a number different of approaches to find the peak hours. He stated his recommendation is to use the rule of 50%, and remember it is a conservative number with the empty space available. This gives the BPC the flexibility to sell permits. Mr. Williams said using the LPR system, Mr. Meece will be able to track how decisions play out. Reviewing decisions every 6 months or a year will allow for fluxuations or anomalies that may happen. Mr. Meece stated there have been concerns at the last several meetings regarding the availability of data. He thinks the BPC can come to an agreement about this calculator in terms of its current structure, and with the amount of data we currently have, though the BPC could wait even another quarter before we operationalize this. Mr. Meece suggested he could continue to collect data and come back to this decision in September perhaps, and then there would be more data at that time, and from there go on a 6 months cycle if the BPC would like to review additional data. Mr. Williams added that even though the calculator shows one peak day, every day the data will get better, so waiting another quarter like Mr. Meece suggested would work well because it would give several months of data at a time. But, he stated that given the flexibility the BPC has now and the 50% peak hour occupancy data recorded, they could make a decision today and let it play out. He emphasized again the data will get better as time goes on. Commissioner Bryan asked the BPC for comments. Commissioner Ness stated that there is still a lot of assumptions the BPC has to make, we know we have 113 monthly permits that Andy Hollern has that we don’t know how active they are being used, as well as UDC permits that we don’t know how active those are being used. Commissioner Ness stated he looks forward to the day the BPC really understands how those permits will be used and how they are going to function in the garage. Commissioner Ness said he is interested in getting those folks who are on the waiting list in the garage. He went on to state that if things change in the future and we see more vehicles coming in like more guests staying at one of the hotels, there needs to be a place for them to park as those hotels have leases. Commissioner Ness asked if we did issue the monthly permits and we find out there is more demand, can we pull some of those permits back? If we did have to retract some leases to provide for the UDC people, what is the ability to retract those leases? Mr. Meece stated we cannot retract those leases. Mr. Meece stated in the past we have always been able to meet the goal of reduction through attrition. He stated there are certainly improvements in the language that he is going to make soon, that will talk about the ability to pull those permits backs if need be. Commissioner Ness asked what the impact would be on the permit holder. Would there be 30 or 60 days’ notice? Mr. Meece stated there is no language that states “x” days’ notice, the language on the application states that the permits is governed by the lease policy and the lease policy addresses the ability of the City/Parking Commission to manage the monthly permits. Mr. Meece stated he has been in conversation with the legal department about how to strengthen the policy and make the language more clear. Commissioner Ness stated the BPC needs a policy on how this will work, like last in, first out. Ms. Clark added that since we have moved to T2, all of the new permit holders have not filled out any kind of lease agreement. People on the waiting list are notified through email and they complete the process electronically, so there is no documents currently signed and received by anyone. Commissioner Bryan asked for public comment. Cory Lawrence, Etha hotel. Cory stated that he reviewed the data and took all the non-hotel leases (398) and level of use on peak numbers and found 18% use rate. Mr. Lawrence found for hotel permits there are a total of (206) leases and of those there were 15 used which is 7.3% use rate. He feels those numbers are low and in thinking about the ratio of the factor of 5X for hotels vs non-hotels, you don’t see that between the 7.3% and 18%. He stated effectively with this 50% factor, lets hold 108 spaces for transient parkers patronizing businesses downtown, and for those 108 spaces we have 132 transients, so that is 122% of stated use and that is worrisome. He feels it is something to really think about. He stated that he pulls hotel statistics regularly though smith travel report and he would be happy to provide that to the BPC. Cory stated lastly the answer to all this is simple, more spaces, and he encourages the BPC analysis of that with this data. Ashley Ogle- 5 E Lamme, Kenyon Noble, Element Hotel. She agrees with Commission Wiseman about the data taken in April. It is a slow time for downtown and she worries about that from a hotel perspective. She stated that the Element leases their back lot, and there is a lot of parking that occurs back there both from employees and guests. She stated the employees get to park for free, so they have issued 50 permits alone, just for them. They have a high number of guests who park back there as well. She added that downtown sees a lot of mid-day parkers who stay for long periods of time and worries about that in the summer months. Chris Naumann- Downtown Bozeman Partnership. He stated one thing that hasn’t been discussed about the data and how it is used in the current version of the calculation, which we keep hearing we all of a sudden have data, yet data from December is being used. The data collected in December is sound, but his point is, with his limited knowledge of practices in parking management, there is very few instances, aside from perhaps a mall or big box store that manages parking for the peak hour of the year, which is how the garage is currently managed. It is based on Christmas stroll as a peak hour at the garage. He stated that as a representative of the Urban Renewal district (URB) which is looked upon to primarily fund parking, the URB cannot build out to a peak hour in the year for parking demand. He said while the April data, is April data, there is a case to be made that the data being used currently being December 1st during Christmas stroll is not a good data point either. Chris stated as the BPC moves forward in deciding on how to use what data, he would also like to propose that when looking at peak hour of any month, that if that coincides with a huge community event, you throw that data piece out. He said would like love to hear Rick Williams’s thoughts on that as well. Allen McCollum- 1849 E Cameron Bridge Rd. Mr. McCollum asked if Mr. Williams could share what he learned when he was here doing his research and was interviewing with the hotels (Element and the Lark). He feels it would be helpful if he shared what he learned about stay patterns from the management from those hotels. He feels that would be good information for the BPC to understand. Mr. Meece stated he wanted to make just a couple quick clarifications. He advised that he knows they have had a lot of comments made today, but he wanted to reiterate the fact that he is not going to base the number of permits sold on an entire year or a quarter or 6 months or on one particular day, but he does have to start somewhere. We now have a good data point for April, and going forward he and Mr. Williams discussed several different methods on how to balance the data. Mr. Meece stated it will continue to evolve. Mr. Meece stated the other clarification goes back to Mr. Lawrence’s comments. He stated we had 132 transient vehicles parked in the peak hour on that one day in April and the 108 are a potential for 108 new permits that could be issued, so they are not the same thing. Mr. Meece advised he will get together with Mr. Lawrence and talk about that further. Mr. Williams stated we are going to have 7 days a week, 12 months a year of data moving forward, so he thinks each month can be evaluation in and of itself and then they can be evaluated in relation to the rest of the year. He thinks that if the BPC reviews quarterly or bi- yearly, the BPC will see the patterns themselves. He reiterated this data will evolve and he likes Mr. Meece’s point about the potential to average. Rick stated the key is to manage those 206 stalls in the peak hour, and fill those with revenue producing stalls with the flexibility to change in the future. Commissioner Bryan asked is there anyone on the BPC willing to suggest and offer some number of new permits now, perhaps not 62, knowing that the data is going to evolve over time, or to hold off on making any decision until the July meeting. Commissioner Winston asked if the staff would feel comfortable if we release a number of permits now that we could we re-adjust if we end up having a very different summer pattern then we have noted here. Mr. Meece stated that he does feel comfortable with that scenario. He stated we could pull some permits back. Commissioner Ness made a motion to release 62 new permits in the parking garage. Commissioner Ness advised that because there is availability in the garage and we have people on a waiting list, and as the data comes in and the BPC learns more, they can make some adjustments, he is comfortable selling those permits as the garage has room for them. Commissioner Lloyd stated that it is his goal to maximize the use of the parking garage. He feels like we are over selling right now and he doesn’t want to take permits away from anyone. He wants to see a smaller number than 62. Commissioner Neubauer stated that it looks like we are struggling to get the 62 through so asked if Commissioner Ness would consider suggesting a new number. Commissioner Ness questioned if there were more than 46 people interested in parking in the garage that clearly aren’t on the list because of the amount of people already on the list. He stated he doesn’t want to create a bad experience in the garage, so that’s the reason he suggested 62 because he feels there are more than just 46 people who want to use the garage. Commissioner Winston stated she hopes the BPC can move towards using the data because she feels it is going to be very important for our management,. Ms. Clark stated that since December the Finance office has seen at least 15 permits attrition down. Mr. Ness stated that he thinks it will be easier to issue more permits than its going to be to roll them back, even as we lose some to attrition. Commissioner Neubauer stated that he supports issuing permits, he is even tempted with the 62. Commissioner Winston asked if the permits expire. Mr. Meece stated yes, and advised that even if we do issue the 62 permits, it doesn’t have to be tomorrow, and he will make sure the language on the permit would allow the BPC to recall them before we even issue them. Commissioner Winston asked if the language is there. Mr. Meece stated the language is there but it could be stronger. Commissioner Winston asked Mr. Meece if we could change that without the BPC. Mr. Meece stated he thinks he can, but that if he cannot, than he would not issue permits. Commissioner Bryan asked if any permits sold now would have to renew at the 1st of the year? Ms. Clark stated people have the option to pay through the end of the year, or pay month to month. She also stated that permit holders are sent and invoice, and if they pay they are automatically renewed for the next month or year. Commissioner Bryan stated if there are no further comments or concerns she would like to call for a vote on the motion, and have Commissioner Ness restate the motion. Commissioner Ness stated the motion is to increase the number of leases to sell as per the calculator, a number of 62. Commissioner Winston seconded the motion. Motion carried with Commissioners Wiseman voting against. Committee Member - James Ness: Motion Committee Member - Shasta Winston: 2nd Mayor - Cynthia Andrus: Absent Committee Member - Ben Lloyd:Dispproved Committee Member – Paul Neubauer: Approve Committee Member - James Ness: Approve Committee Chair - Pamela Bryan: Approve Committee Member - Shasta Winston: Approve Committee Member - Kelly Wiseman : Disapprove Committee Member - Mark Egge: Absent Staff - Ed Meece: N\A Commissioner Bryan adjourned the meeting. 4. Update on new parking capacity initiatives from the Economic Development Department: a. Bridger Park Downtown Garage Expansion Study b. Multi-Site New Downtown Parking Facility Study BPC decided to table this discussion to continue at the July meeting. G. Parking Program Manager Report (Exhibit 4) H. New Business I. Adjournment. J. Upcoming Issues (Tentative): July 2019: *Election of new office The next Bozeman Parking C transietommission meeting will be held July 11, 2019, 7:30 am, at City Hall. Bozeman Parking Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance please contact our ADA Coordinator, Chuck Winn 582-2307.