No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-25 91-142 ORDERDate w1113-025-91 Item No. 91-142 Item/Subject: ORCEIRr matin] Uo ]asaaatlatiore of Ue City Rall Parking Heeds Sbdy Camdttee Responsible Department: City> - Commantnrype City Rall Parking beetle Stody CamdCT ora eatablisled m review City Hall p1ik11 g reerls, id tt£1• asrl ev rIuaf£ Qrtiona W ivFaw= larking, axial to mare W the City ganepr aM City cwrcu. xha Camlittee vet on several occaeiala during Dcr a and Jarmazy. With 11a asalatmre of sn elgaloyee survey aM Sia cmjaction with Ue zecenrly ahapterl Ovnslnwr Parking Management Plan, Le Caooit[x preprsal a seeriares of remnoadetioro asrbinaat in the artarbaci rep5rt. nine Parking Crnmitree met with the Mudcipl Operatiwls Caadttee can mbrian y 26, 1991 aM that at a Caaeil Workehop Sazsims Morris 6, 1991. Ave a result of tie latter sreetfvg, it as xecPsearsl Uot tlo report aM ire recnaresdatiore be plead before the Co u for rmleftlaation. Saaetl uWas diaruasials ami at Disease seetings, it 9alera1ly appeared thst support enure for ravimadatials 1, 2, 3 mitl 5 (subject W a cost eetboate). Support for xaaaeMation 4, establishing a severs spam zserved arae on laser Park Street Hill, appsred 9ueationable. If xecametdatiao are approved, a 115, 1, 1991 effative dare Is suggasbad. trivia esi11 allow tine for tie developreM s isgsl®entrtion of the reagu adainis- trative policies and int®m1 prvicestissee that world ba 7 ,,17' ra Manager's Comments: CiIYMvwg �' Assoclatel Information: Oak/ kepr� Budget Approvd: e ni¢ Legal Approval ck Solieim, Introduced For Passage First Reading Page _ of — ❑ Referral 91-142 Am ped to Cwneibr Sael, M rch 25, 1991 ;u CITY OF BANGOR (TOLE.) (arb= Nb1. pLing ctt11 y H,,, Perking BeBie Study O wittw By CBy COyn of W C1ty OfBanyor: ORDERED, THAT the City Csyail dewy adopts xecanvemlatimia rvmiba one thrnup £tux as dei tlsl to the Report of the City Hall Park Hie Sbtly CUMuittee, dabadl Jmaexy 28, 1991; and B6 M E91a}ffit , 91P.T tle City Manama' da hereby autlaeim and ddxetted to inQlemnc to t ef£a no later than May 1, 1991. In City Council Womb 25,1991 Amendment Item #5 Subject W Cast eabSyte Delete Aecomerdation Establishing a seven ape Ce reserve area on lower park at hill area FAiled passage by the following Vote 4 yea 5 no voting yes Cohen,Sewyer,Sosnaud Stone voting no galdacM,O<'agg, PraNcel, Seal, Sullivan AM®TMENT #5 Review by finance CarmSttee subject to approval by full council Withdrawn �T TO DELETE ITFM #5 PASSED VOTE 5 yes 4 no Voting Yes Bragg, Cohen, Sawyer, Sasneud. Stone Voting No Beldacci, FTankel,5avl, Sullivan Vote for Passage as amended 8 Yes I No Voting Yes Beagg,Cohen,FCankel,9awyer, Saxl, Soeeaud,Stone, Sullivan Voting No Baldacci ( a— ty Clerk 91-142 LARDER Title, Adopting the AecweMetiom of the City Aqu YV WE meG4.flv& ...................................... ......... Aerignedw Councilman S 1 OF 1fffi HNiOJR cm IPLi. T3'ii"H� aanY.v l ii'1i5 l l Co , lupi DWu t John YAU#y, Engi,m.uig lest Annette Stover, CeM.ia1 Services Fuger Hootly, Sc l Oel�t Sslly 1Rvifson, Ihmun Fasaucee Richard Stnok£otd, 111 Cep� Fen Gi , Gam.ndty 6 Fmnrnuc D logre l+rbext Fe , City Mmia Is G£££ce 91-142 Jmmexy 28, 1991 �y For a significant nuo of years, the situation regarding p rking at City Hall for m; l�, grinners and visitors las been a difficult problen. Pre to The sensitivity of the issue and a lack of reaiily apparent solutions, there has baso ro focused effort to �s the problem. Ibxe'mr, ttase have been several rav>rlt d cisioa aM events, which, when mnbired, have resultsl in a clear neeci to wtlartals a study and predre a series of mamvdatio s. T ese inelude tie following: 1. 19e Preiaration, consideration and adoption by the Bangor City Couail of a cmmprehensive mwntown Parking Manageoent Plan wduich au,npasses the parking space,. surxvund^g City Fall. 2. The n to achieve nmaxvmm pn d tfvfty aM efficiency from emplapsas who now spend valuable ttom wing their vehicles to avoid larking tiul . 3. mhe orad to addroms the issue of providing larking oppkutunities to the p l>lic and customers w visit City Hall, within a reasonable proximity to the building. 4. g rontirnring belief ami re- tion egg senioi City Runa9eient staff ttat enploles parking is a problem and that as an esploy=, we have a joint xespmsi lity with our aiployses to atteapt to resolve the problem to the Lest of our capabilities. 5. 'uta need to lead by �le. If the City's goal through the Parking Ma a�t Plan is to mudmise effployse park£ g fn on -street parking sp , then the_ city should tale tte initiative aM set an mrmmple for other rksmHrm esployars by providing off-street parkv opporNmities for its ® Icyees. with these pressing issues at hand, a representative employes ca minae was establisisl with the following chards: 1. To re.dew w all City Nall perking neads: 2. 1b identify aM evaluate options to improve parking; and 3. 1b make apprcpiimte rsvimerations to tie City Manager for his consideration and action by a City Council Cmmittee and City Courcil, if so required. In an effort to din a colplete wdexstardi g of the parking probleu at City Hall, a hrief parking naris survey was prepared and distributed to City Hall �lbyeea. All but three City Hall employees responded to the questioraaire, a a y of which with sueeiiml data is attached as Appedix A. As well as asking certain gawstlons that pmvlded the Comdttee with necessary infomatiol, there was also an opportunity for employees to express their corcwma and to mals suggestions for fupruvaments. -1- in smmary fops of 104 egbloyeea at City Pall, tin vast majority (86) use t it for al vehicle W travel to work. 1Tn reit closest m of tcanspart tion wee ridezi by (6) a walkiW (5). Mavloyces lath t = vehicles in the followitg loo ii : On -sheet, tine limiter (36) On -stint, no tine limit (19) Ossigm parking space (19) City o parking lots (13) Otter locations (6) Over half of the eployees who drive their personal vehicle to work stated that they use t ca[ for city bueiress during the day (46). Of that nuo , 31 used their vehicle heWSPn one and five times per week. afie miainim 15 near their vehicles between six and fift times per week or mote. When asked if a 1� wind ba willing w I y for parking if the City rare to dssityiate parking within a reesonble alking distance to city Hall and were guaranteai a parking apace, 60 eplq said they would not pay m costs, 23 indica they would he willing W pry a portion of the cost, voile 3 intlicacal they would he willing W foy all of the ccet. a4nis question woes peedica upon t ct¢ient parking lot charge of $30 ler mrnvth. Pirelly, aiployees v ask to ranf a variety of established for" lot cptfow. Of thmse respordbg, the order of pnafereaa woos: TTn Spring Sties[ ]ot lobar AFtOtt Square afie Parkug Garage fge Street lots ane lot behind tin lobos Station Pegarding the section of the questtosaim desigretwl for aipleyee axanants ani suggestiore, the foll g tivoss appeared W be the most oomistent. (mhcse kava not baa lis in a Particular order). 1. RVIparking should W as close to tin buildvg es lwssible. 2. currant fneonsistart City Hall policy on caz shuffling. 3. More Parking spaces ere nod for the public, visitors and custorers visiting City Hall. 4. Unfair parking situation whereby t Iain �loyees nave desigratei p king spaces while others W rot. S. share si be a ravish of the tlesignated parkix spaces. 6. aba uWloleas should not nave to pay for fork". if there was a charge (strong objection), rinse with designated parkiW should pry as well. I. lhplcyees shrmld h parking pmvidsd sfmilaz W otSnr outlying City facilities w g rkv is not an issue. Within the Pazkfng Menagerent Plan termly considerer and adopted by City Cascil, one teal rs clesrly evident: to strongly dLsmu w ai 1perking in on-stiast parking a es. outli d by that Plan the concept rs W creat tuirover and par" opportunities for cus[oreis aM others vdm may he visiting tlese busiresses of est oliskrenta. -2- N. 1 t sane concept applies to the parking erase in the general vicinity of City Hall including Harlow Street, Park Street hull sed, ChM Street Hill. As indicated by tM Ierkbg suxmy, at least 55 of our aployam ern tly lark in on -street spaces, either with or wftheut time lomlts, code preosed parkdrg plan raosasods that all on -street spaces where aployeas are now parkirg becme tome lomfted spaces. nus, if no action is talwn, a plaq es will he foaeal to Centime their Current rar slwfflirg efforts, and valuable space„ which should have tuner for custnmrs and visitors, will continue to he utilized by eignloyees. Clearly this is out desirable aM is to the Parking Manegment Plan. 11e Comite believes that if the City council is going to afpmve arch dnplesat the Parking Maompe ent Plan then the City ought to strongly consider developing provisions for eaqAcyse parkdrg. M that ead, the Condttee has pxefaxed a series of rcoanreMatiore for consideration teat address virtually all of the problem, issues and concerns noted aloes. 1. the Caunitom vicamenm flmt three City owneroff-street ki facilities be denforetsi for use by City Hall mplovess. m9pae include ewer Abbott Square (up to 15 spices), Pickering Square Parking Garage (up to 30 spaces) and the Street lora (ere xareLtlar of medeii spaces). Also, available to ecloyees on a ron-pernit, first care first served basis, continue to be the City moa i lots belied the Baptist Ciwxch on Spring Street arch heh1M tee Police station en C t Street. It is InnIesed that the £ollc v pxwdsdons apply: A. ledtWIV, tmes mould be w chores to EUVIDIMeS Usloo merit lots. Ae tM_re currently axe slecm that axe rot being used, the City os not losing any revenue by providing parking to its eployees. Iurther, the taneraI Fad is pommdly subsidizing the Parking Fud in the anbunt of $171,500 and weds hguxe will en ae acyl year. An heseent msld ba envie that the (SLYyis already la}dn9 for these spaces. B. A deFemdnotitn uaald be vada aermally remrdina 40ther am chane would be lwded for these earkina soeces (partial or full rare). At such tine that it was determined that Potential payoag custowers vete being tanned away froa City owned permit lots, due to use by City anployam, then a decision would have to be vada regarding the continuation of non,charge feakdag for City oTloy . . If a charge were w be levied, these a ployees with denigrated spss� axouM the building w be charged an identical rate. C. Tm fttv wculd sternest torecessets for srecific yarkdnw area omfexerces, within xeamn. Pativn selection could occur if requests could not be filled fairly. B. ®mlovaaa wild be rawidei a rurndt for ore off street reenit oarkiaa area only if so desired. mhos would allow for control over t nub of femurs actually issued. 5gployees udc wdshei to dark on any of tyre present roe-. ^".t lots would ba free to do so. All other conditions regarding pemdt larking would alply w City mployem. -3- 2. With de ted parking 1' lad 7vMvnistrative Policy auld be � arca lnmleren[etl orohdbitire car shuffl" L r2sultinq In the foll hive effa2s, A. An irctease effic"r would not be M,n time florins the day vehi 1 Violation Gild be subject to dfsciplinty action. B. W on streets BaaNnid city ll currmRly used by City eiplov�. Ilse spacras can then be utilizsl by costa ars, visitors and others with tusdress at City Ball, era other businesses in the general vicinity which addresses a major problem previously identifial. 3. Prize all exigam dssianatell arvmd c1tv Ball. (Refer to map labeled as Appendix B). Ivry sfaces that berzre vacant through attrition will he evaluated bassi open predeternd i criteria to tlecide r that parkL sp're sh d be given back W that position, to s..,tta. position or left vacant. It would net auumatioally pas to the next eaplo in that positlon as has been custaeary practice. afia current Data f3 Sing space, located on tha Center Street Bill perpesAicular parkvg arae has berm elbdnated as the position is v ant and it was generally agreed that it as a position that would not score high for a denigrated space. The ParkL Cmmittee further rsnimeMs Hut it W charged with developing the evaluation criteria for approval by the City Manager. Given the rressd to moue forward with this o all plan on a t nely Weis, the difficulty of quickly pmp ring the evaluation criteria to which all could agree, the sensitivity of ren of employes w have h ci spaces and the creation of ra„larking areas for all other mployees, the Crandttee felt that this issue would be best aditessed through attrition rather than imrediate action. 4. That a series of seven Sm folease refer to Ammdix B. 032-038) to reserved specifically for Horse atteMira W Citv ab Schrol Denarboent husine n a shorttenn basis. Given flat there will te dime limital forkingi azwrcl City Mall, there is a class reed W provide sore psskL for tbose cmung W City Hall W att W earendei City or School tvwiness. Ex Ies would iLc1We: A. City Courcil ant Scdeol Camdttee rtatbers: B. City and Scb of eaplolmP win most core to City Hall fry outside Dia= or facilities W Wrduct City or Scicol business. C. Others wtn may come to City}tall for specific official tusiness such as euployee candidates, xelaiman, mnsdtanu, media representatives, etc. -4- The^_ spaces would be Postai soul signed as rs ry and parking would ba infernally controlled Uuvugh winishield pernuts dispensed through a Central City Hall location. Final details mould be arranged through the City Maa9cr"s Office. 5. 11nt ndnor rtodifications be made to the 'ramp" area i cludiM whore 9, 410-4151, A. That two varallolleft hand side of the rmp, currently siert-d as tow-aav core. Those mould he designated as 15 mupte limited spaces for rffiliveries mail, drop off etc. for those amployses on official City or School Business. B. That Cesia ate d spaces 410415 m the richt had aide of the rasp he neves furthar into the bankiaw. This would allw, for better accessibility for those vehicles which uwst use spaces #149, including large delivery trucks utilising the loading dock area. Sore arlitimal grading, stuns n nor pamu g, soul perp a small metinvg wall would be reyuirol to accmplish this recmure�tlation. With the curzent problems as outlined shove, the recent m to increase ver fees from $5.00 to $7.50 along with the resantly increased enforcement activities and the realistic appro to date Of May let for the actual posting/signing of the rn time limited zones, it seine logical that these xecmnreMatlons be ivplmentsf as soon as possible. With review of this report by the City Manager sod Mmicipsl operations CmmlGtm in February, and possible Co uuil review in late Pebvvaxy or early Yerch, it would emu an April let start up date would be reasonable. This would allow time for the plan to be enplafr®d to employees, decisions to be reached on parking area assigansot, a Policy to be written excluding car coming, and for the Parking Cmmittee t further peep=.o xavmedations for evaluatug the continual use of the designatod parking spaces (41418). QMMR U2 In cmclusfon, it is readily appuent that There has been and continues W he a major parking p blen for enployms, residents, cretirs and visitors to Bangor City Mall. This problen will be only further laatctl by the recent approval aM pvuling ivplarentatim of the Downtown Parking Plan, increased waiver fees and stepped-up enfmceoe2 of enisthg time sones arrnmd City Hall. The Parking Ca eAttee hes given careful soul serious consideration to all of the issues and concerns that have been brought to the attention through contact with the public, City enploy • the questionnaire, and others who have mmentd upon the p rkiug situation at City Mall. We strongly believe we have prepared a series of m:anm dations that, if adopted and tnplarentsi, will bring logic, rationality arrd i.cressed fairness to the parking Problem. If drNhing else, It certainly will be an gusp vent over the esistiug caditfms which are apparently unsatisfactory to suer ever M. -5- gffewly A Results of City Hall Parking Ouestionnaire Method of transportation used to get to work Personal car 86 Car pool or ridesharing 6 Bicycle/motorcycle 3 Walk 5 Public transportation 2 City owned/provided vehicle 1 Other 1 If personal vehicle is brought, where is it parked: On street space, no time limit 19 On street space, time limit 36 Parking garage 3 City -owned parking lot 13 Designated space le Other 4 Is personal car used for city -related business during the day, excluding lunch: Yes 46 No 38 How many times during normal work week: 1-5 31 6-10 6 11-15 4 +15 5 How much of coat paid by employee: None 60 Some 23 All 3 Alternative parking spots: Parking garage - 3 Lower Abbott Square lot 2 Spring Street lot I Lot behind Police Station 5 Various lots on lower Exchange Street 4 Ffnelly, t Perking C ttee fl y helieves that this is an ex 11a opgJrtawty for the City, m tte d oretep of ispla tip a ncw, ca gnehensive WwMwn ParkUq Policy to take a lead Mp mle and set a positive exmple for o[her DJNniOnT1 eiployers to foll . wa hope that this opp�ty mrbired with the other b fats aM solutims to existing pablaie, will pxovitla a caipellvg arg�sent in support of this study. In closiN, the Parkbg C ttee L 1ywr review of the report. Ola look far to a detailed dfayssfm of its merits and s�ly hope to pin your crnmiuxe`v^a for accept and ill ntat on. AV CITY Ho i1.