Alameda City Council
June 2, 2026

Alameda Aquatics
Center Parking
Action Plan
City of Alameda, California

Prepared by

FINAL DRAFT
January 14, 2025
EXHIBIT 1

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 2 of 48 Contents
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3 Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 3 Background ...................................................................................................................... 3 Parking Demand and Impact Analysis ................................................................................ 6 Overview ........................................................................................................................... 6 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 6 Impact Analysis Findings ................................................................................................. 7 Mode Choice Impacts and Considerations.................................................................... 8 Overflow Parking Impacts .............................................................................................. 11 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 13 Parking Management Recommendations........................................................................ 14 Parking Supply and Demand Management ................................................................. 14 Technology Integration & Implementation Recommendations ................................. 23 Sustainability and Alternative Modes ........................................................................... 27 Managing Spillover ........................................................................................................ 28 Implementation Checklist ................................................................................................. 31 Appendix A - Parking Availability Modeling .................................................................... 33 Appendix B - Financial Modeling ..................................................................................... 34

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 3 of 48 Introduction
Purpose
This Alameda Aquatics Center Parking Action Plan (Plan) was prepared a t the request of the City of Alameda (City) to evaluate parking demand and impacts for the proposed Alameda Aquatics Center development. The City’s Recreation and Parks Department engaged Dixon Resources Unlimited (DIXON) to prepare the Plan to evaluate paid vs. time-limited parking environments and identify strategic parking management recommendations to address the current and future parking needs of the location, with an emphasis on strateg ies aimed at reducing potential parking spillover. The City is encouraged to adjust the implementation approach as needed to best fit the ever - changing needs of the Aquatics Center and the community.

DIXON’s recommendations are designed to maintain a balance between community needs while minimizing financial impacts, efficient use of limited parking resources through effective supply and demand management and promoting accessibility for all residents. To summarize, the recommendations of this Plan are designed with the following parking management guiding principles in mind:
 Inclusivity: Build a program that provides equitable access for all community members, including residents and visitors.
 Balance: Establish a balanced approach that prioritizes the needs of the community while minimizing the financial burden on residents.  Utility: Strive for a balance between parking supply and demand to maximize utilization of limited parking supply.
 Accessibility: Ensure accessible solutions for all residents, including accommodations for low-income residents.

Included later in the Plan is an implementation checklist, which divides the recommended actions into four stages: near-, mid-, and long-term and ongoing.

Background
In May 2025, Fehr & Peers provided a draft site plan review and transportation impact analysis memorandum for the proposed Alameda Aquatics Center project. The draft memo provided comprehensive analysis of estimated trip generation, traffic operations, site access and circulation, parking demand for vehicles and bikes, and access for pedestrian, transit and emergency vehicles.

Parking Demand Modeling
The draft memo evaluated parking demand using information from the site plan and a proposed program schedule developed in coordination with the City’s Recreation and Parks Department. The site plan identified 71 on -site parking spaces, including 4

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 4 of 48 accessible spaces, 1 accessible EV charging space, and 6 additional EV charging spaces. For overflow needs, the modeling assumed that 125 spaces in the adjacent College of Alameda Science Annex lot would be available during weekday evenings from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and on weekends. The site plan also provided ample bicycle accommodations, including 10 long-term bike lockers and approximately 100 bicycle parking spaces across racks located in both the north and south areas of the site.

For the supply analysis, the model assumed that most staff parking would occur off-site, especially during peak periods. The staffing assumptions included 3 full-time staff year- round, supplemented by 5 –10 part -time employees with variable schedules on weekdays and weekends throughout the year. During peak periods such as summer camp season, an additional 15 –20 part-time employees were assumed to be on -site throughout the day and would require parking on summer weekdays.

Demand calculations were based on trip generation analysis using various travel behavior assumptions for different user types. Adults, including staff, were assumed to require parking regularly throughout the week. Main activities involving children were assumed to generate parking demand only 50% of the time, indicating a n equivalent likelihood of parents/guardians dropping-off and pick ing-up, rather than parking.

Considering some of the age groups that will attend lessons and activities at the Aquatics Center, this rate of drop-off and pick-up may not adequately reflect the actual parking demand for main activities involving children , and the actual rate of parking may be higher than in the modeling. Summer camp activities were divided into two groups: full-day camps, which were assumed to generate no parking demand (100% drop-off/pick-up), and shorter camps lasting 90 minutes or less, which were assumed to result in some parked vehicles.

The model identified three general categories for analysis: Weekday (non -Summer), Weekday (Summer), and Weekends.
• Weekday (non-Summer)
o Peak demand was identified between 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. (highest at 3:00 p.m.) resulting in up to 12 vehicles requiring off-site parking on a typical non-summer weekday.
• Weekday (Summer)
o Peak demand was identified at various periods throughout the day, including mornings at 9:00 a.m., midday between 12:00 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. (highest at 1:00 p .m.), and in the evenings between 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. (highest at 6:00 p .m.), resulting in up to 19 vehicles requiring off-site parking at the highest midday period on a typical summer weekday.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 5 of 48 • Weekends
o Peak demand was identified between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. (highest at 11:00 a.m.) resulting in up to 19 vehicles requiring off-site parking on a typical weekend day.

Special event parking demand was also discussed . The analysis assumed a limited number of large special events, with up to 800 total visitors per day and approximately 150 visitors on -site at any given time for most events. The modeling further assumed an average vehicle occupancy of two attendees per car, which helps reduce the total number of parking spaces required. Based on these assumptions, the memo concluded that the proposed 71-space on-site lot would be sufficient to accommodate events with approxi mately 150 concurrent attendees. However, larger events would exceed the on -site capacity and therefore require the use of overflow parking areas, such as the College of Alameda Science Annex lot.

Summary of Memo Recommendations
Based on the evaluation of the site plan, Fehr & Peers determined that the project would provide adequate access and circulation for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit users. In addition, the memo identified four recommendations intended to further improve multimodal access and on -site circulation. Recommendation #2 focused specifically on parking management strategies, which are summarized below:
 Monitor parking demand at the Project site and implement one or more of the following strategies if demand begins to exceed capacity during regular operations or special events:
 Promote non -automobile travel by communicating available transportation options for visitors and staff. This may include providing information on the Project’s website, incorporating travel options into event materials, sharing details in regular communications, and posting wayfinding or informational signage at the main entrance.  Encourage staff to park off-site in the College of Alameda Science Annex parking lot or other nearby lots during periods of high demand to preserve on-site spaces for visitors.
 Limit most on-site parking spaces to a 2-hour duration to maintain steady turnover and ensure consistent availability for short-term visitors.  Verify that nearby off -site parking facilities, including the College of Alameda Science Annex lot and other adjacent lots, can reliably accommodate overflow demand from the Project.

These strategies are consistent with current industry best practices and align closely with the parking management recommendations included in this Plan.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 6 of 48 Parking Demand and Impact Analysis
Overview
The parking demand modeling prepared by Fehr & Peers evaluated expected attendance and staffing levels throughout the year to understand how parking supply and demand would vary over time. Using program schedules, seasonal activity patterns, and operationa l needs, the model identified when on -site congestion and overflow were most likely to occur. The analysis used a 71 -space lot configuration as the baseline for assessing parking supply and overflow conditions.

As program activity increases, parking demand grows correspondingly, both from visitors and the additional staff needed to support expanded operations. In response to City direction, two reduced on -site parking configurations were evaluated: a 67 - space lot and a smaller 50-space lot. The City requested that DIXON assess how each option could affect spillover parking in nearby commercial and residential areas.

The primary concern is that a smaller on -site lot increases the likelihood of overflow, particularly when staffing levels rise. While up to 10 employee vehicles are expected to be accommodated off -site through a proposed shared parking agreement at the College of Alameda Science Annex, the modeling showed that any staff parking beyond this allowance would place added strain on the on -site supply. This challenge is more pronounced for the 50 -space lot, which has less capacity to absorb spikes in employee presence or higher program attendance. Additionally, the City plan to allocate up to 10 on-site parking spaces for a planned community garden to be located to the south of the Aquatics Center, further stressing parking availability at the facility.

A key goal of this impact analysis was to compare the two reduced lot configurations under realistic operating conditions (based on the Fehr & Peers parking demand modeling) to understand their ability to meet projected demand. Evaluating both scenarios will allow the City to quantify potential spillover impacts and identify operational trade-offs.

Methodology
The analysis assessed parking demand and potential spillover parking impacts across three key time periods: Weekdays (non-Summer), Weekdays (Summer), and weekends, to capture seasonal and weekly variations in site activity. Special events were excluded due to their variable attendance and may require separate, event-specific review.

Each period was divided into morning (7:00 a .m. – 12:00 p.m.), midday (12:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.), and evening (5:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.) segments to reflect changing demand throughout the day. Average parking availability within these segments was used to identify when overflow conditions are most likely.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 7 of 48 To test system sensitivity, the analysis incorporated two added constraints: the reservation of ten spaces for community garden users and increased employee parking demand. These constraints reduce available supply and provide a more conservative assessment of potential impacts.

Parking demand estimates were based on the Fehr & Peers model and evaluated for both the 67 -space and 50 -space lot configurations. The methodology assumed that overflow would be directed to the Science Annex lot during weekday evenings (after 5:00 p.m.) and throughout weekends. Special events, given their distinct and higher demand patterns, will require tailored parking management strategies developed in partnership with the College of Alameda to accommodate overflow parking.

Impact Analysis Findings
Impact analysis was conducted for the two potential on -site lot configurations (67 spaces and 50 spaces) under these three scenarios:
• Typical Operations: the standard parking demand and staffing levels. • Community Garden : additional allocation of available parking to community garden users, resulting in 10 less spaces available to Aquatics Center users. • Employee Parking: additional staff parking demand resulting in an average of 10 less spaces available to Aquatics Center users (e.g. staffing not accommodated off-site, such as in the Science Annex lot).

Figure 1 depicts average parking availability ra nges for both potential lot configurations and parking supply scenarios.

Each data point depicts the range of parking spaces available based on the lot size, scenario, and time period. For example, the left-most data point corresponds to the 67- Figure 1. Average Parking Availability Ranges

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 8 of 48 space lot configuration, evaluated under the anticipated parking demand during the Weekday (non-Summer) Morning time period , in which approximately 20 spaces are occupied, resulting in an approximate availability of 47 spaces available under typical operations, or 37 spaces available when accounting for the 10 community garden spaces, or only 27 spaces available when on -site employee parking is also included (see Table 2 in Appendix A).

The modeling demonstrates that both the 50 -space and 67 -space configurations will experience overflow conditions (e.g. the availability range drops below “0” threshold) at various times of the year. The 50-space configuration is particularly vulnerable, with regular overflow expected throughout the year except during non -summer weekday morning, evening, and weekend evening periods , even when accounting for 10 additional employee parking spaces and 10 spaces for community garden users.

By contrast, the 67 -space configuration experiences overflow less frequently, with greater availability during non -summer weekday midday periods and summer weekday morning periods. These results reflect the combined influence of visitor demand, program sch eduling, employee parking needs and community needs, emphasizing the limitations of the smaller lot under both typical and peak operating conditions and the relative operational flexibility offered by the 67-space configuration.

Mode Choice Impacts and Considerations
The evaluation of parking demand also considered potential impacts on mode choice, recognizing that the availability and convenience of on-site parking can influence how visitors choose to travel to the Aquatics Center. Adequate on -site parking supports visitor access for a wide range of user groups, but limited parking capacity or overflow conditions may encourage or, in some cases, require visitors to seek alternative transportation modes, such as biking, walking, or transit. Promoting these modes can help reduce parking demand and mitigate spillover impacts on surrounding streets and neighboring commercial areas.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Connectivity
The nearby Jean Sweeney Open Space Park features a network of multi -use trails that extend through the park and connect to Atlantic Avenue, including the Cross Alameda Trail (CAT) (see Figure 2). These trails create a safe and convenient corridor for bicyclists to reach the Aquatics Center from surrounding neighborhoods and regional trail systems.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 9 of 48

Source: Bike Walk Alameda (2025)
Transit Availability
AC Transit provides several routes that connect the project site to Alameda and the greater Bay Area from Atlantic Avenue (see Figure 3 ). These routes offer frequent service throughout the day and provide a reliable alternative for both visitors and employees who might otherwise drive and park on-site.

Sources: ELS Architecture + Urban Design conceptual plans and AC Transit Service Map (2025) AC Transit stops are located approximately 0.2 miles from the Project site to the east and to the west (see Figure 4 ). To the east, Line 19 can be accessed from stops at Atlantic Ave and Challender Drive. To the west, Lines 20, 51A, 96, 851, O and W can be accessed from stops on Webster Street at Atlantic Avenue.

Figure 2. AC Transit Stop Walk Distances
Figure 3. Nearby AC Transit Routes

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 10 of 48 Sources: ELS Architecture + Urban Design conceptual plans and Google Earth (2025) Mode Shift Incentives and Challenges
Promoting the use of public transit options and well -connected multi-use trails can significantly reduce pressure on the on-site parking supply, especially as demand increases with expanded programming and the opening of new facilities, such as bike parking lockers. These factors highlight the importance of a balanced parking management strategy that provides adequate parking supply to meet on-site demand as well as supports infrastructure and programs that encourage alternative modes where feasible.

However, several challenges may limit the effectiveness of alternative mode adoption.

First, under-parking conditions, particularly in the smaller 50 -space lot configuration, can create congestion and reduce overall accessibility to the site. Limited or uncertain parking availability can reinforce car-dependent travel patterns for some user groups, especially those with young children, increasing overall reliance on driving and exacerbating congestion on -site and increasing spillover parking impacts. Second , many visitors bring bulky equipment or materials, such as swim gear, water toys, or recreational supplies, which can make biking, walking, or transit less practical and convenient. Finally, advertising and promoting the availability and convenience of alternative transportation options, such as safe pedestrian pathways, bike lanes, or transit connections, is critical to ensuring safe access to the facility, influencing the feasibility of alternative modes.

To further support mode shift away from vehicles , the City may consider transit fare incentives and bus vouchers for employees and for customers during high -demand Figure 4. AC Transit Stop Walk Distances

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 11 of 48 periods, bike -to-work rewards for employees , or targeted promotion al campaigns during peak demand summer season s. These measures can help offset anticipated parking overflow and encourage sustainable travel choices among both employees and visitors. By addressing these challenges, the City can better manage parking demand, reduce spillover, and support sustainable and equitable access to the Aquatics Center.

Overflow Parking Impacts
Potential parking spillover impacts were evaluated to understand how on-site parking capacity would shift parking demand into nearby parking areas. The surrounding land use varies, including residential streets, commercial areas, and adjacent privately owned properties. This creates a complex parking environment where some areas already have posted restrictions while others remain unregulated and vulnerable to overflow. As on-site congestion increases, Aquatics Center visitors and employees may seek the most convenient parking options within walking distance, heightening the risk of conflicts with nearby property owners and residents.

Private Parking Areas
Northeast of the project site, The Research Park - Marina Village contains several business campuses with off -street parking areas , including the College of Alameda Science Annex lot, accessed from Atlantic Avenue. These lots are close and convenient to the Aquatics Center and are likely spillover destinations when on -site parking fills.

Existing s ignage is limited or inconsistent, creating an opportunity for the City to partner with property owners to strengthen messaging about private parking restrictions and discourage unauthorized use.

To the north of the project site, the California Heritage Bay community is accessible via Bartlett Drive from Atlantic Avenue. This neighborhood includes private streets within the boundaries of Marina Village Parkway, Wilma Chan Way, and Atlantic Avenue.

Although “no trespassing” and 24 -hour parking restriction signs are posted at the Bartlett Drive entrance, increased parking pressure from Aquatics Center visitors may result in unauthorized use of these roads, adding enforcement burdens for residents.

To the west of the project site, commercial parking lots that serve Starbucks, FedEx, and Walgreens already post 2 -hour customer -only parking with 24 -hour enforcement.

These lots may experience added pressure from Aquatics Center visitors, particularly during peak morning and midday periods. Close coordination with business owners will help ensure signage remains clear, restrictions are well communicated, and customer parking is preserved.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 12 of 48 Unregulated Parking Areas
The most vulnerable areas for spillover parking, however, are located south of the project site, where several nearby residential streets offer the closest unregulated on - street parking and are easily accessible to Aquatics Center visitors via multi-use trails in Jean Sweeny Park.
• 8th Avenue, extending toward Buena Vista Avenue, lacks posted restrictions and offers a direct pedestrian connection to Jean Sweeney Park. Its proximity and convenience make it particularly susceptible to spillover parking from Aquatics Center visitors.
• Stewart Court contains a mix of regulated and unregulated spaces, including an unrestricted portion adjacent to 8th Avenue and a private section of spaces clearly marked with “1850 Thau Way Reserved” . This combination increases the potential for confusion, unauthorized use of private spaces, and enforcement challenges for both the City and the property owner.
• Thau Way has no posted time limits or restrictions, making it a convenient and highly attractive option for overflow parking during peak periods. • Eagle Avenue, between 8th Avenue and Thau Way, allows parking without time limits aside from scheduled street- sweeping hours, creating another potential destination for overflow activity.

Together, these conditions highlight the need for proactive parking management strategies, such as residential time limits, neighborhood permit zones, and coordinated signage improvements, to reduce spillover impacts on nearby residents.

Spillover Mitigation Considerations
Given limited on-street parking options in the area surrounding the Aquatics Center and the mixture of private parking and unregulated public parking conditions, our analysis highlights the need for the City to consider proactive parking management strategies to mitigate spillover. These may include:
 Establishing partnerships with nearby private property owners to install clearer signage, coordinate enforcement, and communicate parking restrictions to Aquatics Center patrons.
 Implementing time -limited parking on key residential streets to discourage long-term visitor parking while maintaining reasonable access for residents.  Evaluating the potential introduction of a Residential Parking Permit Program (RPPP) to protect neighborhood access and prevent overflow from shifting into residential blocks.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 13 of 48 By taking a coordinated, multi- stakeholder approach, the City can balance Aquatics Center operations with neighborhood quality of life, ensuring that parking impacts are minimized even under high-demand conditions.

Conclusion
Overall, the parking impact analysis demonstrates clear differences in performance between the two potential on -site parking lot configurations. Results indicate that the 50-space lot is considerably more vulnerable to congestion and overflow conditions throughout the year. This susceptibility becomes more pronounced when additional employee parking is required during peak programming seasons or when the allocation of spaces for community garden users reduces the effective supply available to Aquatics Cente r visitors. Under these constraints, the smaller lot provides limited capacity to absorb daily fluctuations in demand, resulting in more frequent spillover into nearby residential streets and adjacent commercial or institutional parking areas.

In contrast, the 67 -space configuration offers a more balanced and adaptable operational environment. With its larger supply, this layout better accommodates variations in visitor attendance, seasonal staffing increases, and competing user needs without co nsistently exceeding capacity. As a result, the 67 -space lot reduces the likelihood of overflow parking, minimizes potential impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, and supports more predictable and manageable site operations.

Taken together, these findings indicate that the 67 -space configuration provides a more resilient long-term parking solution. It affords the City greater flexibility to support evolving programming demands at the Aquatics Center while maintaining a higher level of service for visitors, staff, and adjacent community facilities.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 14 of 48 Parking Management Recommendations
The following section outlines strateg ies intended to maximize the efficiency of the project’s proposed parking resources while reducing the potential for impacts on the adjacent commercial and residential neighborhoods. These recommendations emphasize the need for dedicated parking resources and technologies to effectively meet the anticipated parking demand and provide a positive user experience. These recommendations focus on parking management policies, technologies, and practices that will provide a sustainable revenue source for program cost recovery , promote parking turnover, and encourage compliance through seamless integration with the City’s existing parking technology and enforcement ecosystem to support the City’s evolving parking needs.

Parking Supply and Demand Management
Customer Parking
Recommendation 1-A: Utilize a larger configuration for the facility parking lot to provide adequate customer parking and reduce parking spillover.

Parking demand and impact analysis indicates that a 67 -space lot configuration will minimize parking spillover into nearby business and residential areas. Under this configuration, parking demand is expected to exceed on -site supply only during the midday period on summer weekdays, with an estimated average overflow of approximately 4-5 vehicles under standard conditions (see Appendix A).

Additional pressure on the lot will result from increased employee parking needs throughout the year , which supports the recommended larger lot configuration .

Increased o n-site employee parking would decrease turnover in the lot, potentially triggering parking spillover due to reduced on-site supply, and represents future loss of revenue in a paid parking scenario. Securing all-day off-site employee parking (see Recommendation 1-B) and providing incentives for carpooling or alternative transportation use by employees (see Recommendation 1 -C) should help to reduce these impacts.

Additionally, the potential allocation of 10 spaces from the lot for community garden use represents a substantial reduc tion of on-site parking suppl y for Aquatics Center visitors, which further supports the recommended larger lot configuration . It is recommended that the community garden spaces be posted with the same time limits or paid parking regulations for ease of enforcement and to promote turnover , if implemented in the rest of the lot (see Recommendations 1 -E and 1 -F). However, additional community input may be necessary to evaluate community willingness of paid parking requirements for community garden spaces.

Timeline: Near-term

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 15 of 48 Implementation Items:
 Provide a recommendation to City Council to proceed with the larger configuration for the facility parking lot to meet the anticipated parking demand and reduce potential parking impacts to adjacent businesses and residents from additional use by employees and the community garden.

Employee Parking
Recommendation 1-B: Establish designated employee-only parking spaces in the College of Alameda Science Annex parking lot.

The City should coordinate with the College of Alameda to designate employee parking spaces in the Science Annex lot, ensuring year -round access for Aquatics Center staff. These spaces would meet most employee parking needs throughout the year. During high- attendance classes or special events, which occur primarily on weekends, additional staff parking may be accommodated off -site through shared parking agreements, such as at the Science Annex lot or a nearby business park (see Recommendation 1 -C). Establis hing designated off -site employee parking will help maintain reliable access for staff while preserving on -site parking availability for customers.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Coordinate with the College of Alameda to designate 10 spaces in the Science Annex lot for Aquatics Center employee use through a shared parking agreement.
 If using private lots, pursue shared parking agreements with property owners.  Post signage to reflect designated employee-only areas.  Monitor utilization and adjust as needed to balance employee and visitor access.

Recommendation 1-C: Provide employee incentives programs for carpooling and alternative transportation mode use.

The City should develop or utilize existing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce employee reliance on single- occupancy vehicle trips and ease pressure on the limited on-site parking supply. To support alternative mode adoption among Aquatics Center employees, the City should implement targeted incentive programs. These may include preferential carpool parking, dedicated staff bike lockers, tune-up vouchers from a local bike shop, small rewards for regular bike commuters 1,

1 Refer to the California Department of Human Resources Commute Programs page for more information on the Bicycle Commuter and Mass Transit Commute Programs:
https://benefits.calhr.ca.gov/state-employees/work-resources/commute-programs/

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 16 of 48 subsidized or discounted transit pass es, parking cashout subsidies 2, and seasonal promotions that encourage biking or walking, especially during the high- demand summer months.

Offering targeted incentives and rewards for using alternative modes helps gamify the process and can shift a meaningful share of employee trips away from driving. These strategies support more efficient use of parking resources, reduce spillover impacts in nearby neighborhoods, and align with broader mobility and sustainability goals while maintaining reliable access for visitors during peak periods.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Consider trip-reduction strategies for employee parking, including carpool parking, transit passes, and other rewards.
 Monitor utilization and adjust as needed to balance employee and visitor access.

Public-Private Agreements
Recommendation 1-D: Pursue shared parking agreements with property owners to reduce unnecessary parking impacts.

In addition to securing designated employee parking (see Recommendation 1 -B) the City should continue to pursue options for customer parking in the College of Alameda Science Annex lot on weekday evenings and all-day on weekends. The Science Annex lot will provide adequate overflow parking supply for customers for most weekday and weekend peak parking demand periods.

Swim competitions and other large, high-impact special events at the Aquatics Center that occur during weekday business hours may require additional consideration and negotiation with the College of Alameda. If a paid parking program is adopted for the Aquatics Center (see Recommendation 1 -F), the City should conside r special event pricing models such as congestion pricing (e.g. increase the price for a specific date/time of high parking demand) or flat -rate pricing to encourage customers to utilize alternative transportation options.

The City should also consider pursuing shared parking agreements with nearby commercial property owners , including The Research Park - Marina Village to the northeast. These periphery parking locations are great locations for employee parking to ensure that the on-site parking spaces remain available for Aquatics Center visitors and customers during peak demand periods . These locations may also provide additional overflow customer parking options during high-impact special events. Key

2 Refer to the California Air Resource Board Parking Cashout Information page here:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/californias-parking-cash-out-law

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 17 of 48 terms and conditions may be outlined in the shared parking agreement , including usage, maintenance, operations, finances, and enforcement responsibilities.

A shared parking agreement also provides an opportunity for monetization if the City proceeds with developing a paid parking program for the Aquatics Center. Private property owners are often incentivized to participate in a shared parking agreement as they benefit from added revenue from parking fees , municipal support for insurance and enforcement, and improved signage as a result of the agreement.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Reach out to local property owners, including The Research Park - Marina Village, and discuss interest in a potential shared parking agreement.  Create a shared parking agreement template that identifies responsibilities for each party (private lot owner and City), including maintenance, enforcement, liability, and insurance requirements.

Parking Regulations
Recommendation 1-E: Establish time limits for parking within the Aquatics Center lot and install appropriate signage.

Enforcing time limits in the Aquatics Center parking lot will help maintain turnover and ensure reliable parking availability. Time limits should align with typical facility use. For example, if most classes or activities last about one hour, a time limit between 90 minutes to 2-hours would meet customer needs while still encouraging turnover.

Enforcement hours should match the Aquatics Center’s operating hours unless overflow parking in the nearby Science Annex lot is secured for weekday evenings and weekends (see Recommendation 1 -D). If overflow parking is available between 5:00 p.m. and 10:00 p .m. on weekdays and all -day on weekends, time limits should focus on weekday daytime hours (e.g. 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday) to promote parking space availability in the Aquatics Center lot. This approach encourages visitors to use the on -site parking supply first and prevents unnecessary parking in the Science Annex lot.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Determine appropriate hours of enforcement and time limits for on-site parking.  Coordinate installation of signage with Public Works.  Collect and monitor utilization data post-implementation to inform potential adjustments.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 18 of 48 Paid Parking
Recommendation 1 -F: Implement p aid parking in the Aquatics Center lot to manage parking demand and provide greater flexibility for customers.

If desired, the City may consider implementing paid parking in the Aquatics Center lot.

The hourly rate should balance affordability with cost recovery for equipment, installation, and ongoing operational expenses. Preliminary financial modeling evaluated revenues and costs for two pay stations, a mobile payment solution, a parking permit solution, enforcement and related operations resulting in an estimated Year 1 net program deficit of approximately $4,000 and estimated ongoing annual net revenue ranging between $26,000 and $28,000 beginning in Year 2.

The analysis identified that an affordable hourly parking rate, set at $0.50 per hour during non- peak seasons and $1.00 per hour during peak summer season and on weekends could fully provide cost recovery for the program. By comparison, the City currently charges $1.00 per hour in the Webster Street area, $1.50 per hour in the Park Street area, and $0.75 per hour in the Civic Center Garage. Additionally, the City recently launched paid parking at the Harbor Bay Ferry T erminal, enforcing $3.00 per day parking rates Tuesdays through Thursdays to manage parking congestion. This was enacted as part of the recently revised Alameda Ferry Terminal Parking Pricing Strategy3 establishing a dynamic pricing model for daily parking rates ($3.00 to $7.00 per day) and hourly rates ($0.75 to $2.50 per hour).

Financial modeling also provided separate pricing structure s for special events.

Routine, low -impact special events such as summer camps and competitions were assumed to utilize an hourly rate differential of $1.00 per hour , to be charged in addition to the normal hourly rate during peak periods , while larger events were modeled using a $ 5.00 flat fee pricing structure. These rates align with comparable aquatics and recreation facilities , as summarized in Table 1 below. Estimated special event parking revenue ranged from $35,000 to $37,000 per year, reflecting a limited number of programmed events each year.

The paid parking system can also be customized to support low -income visitors and improve accessibility. The City’s parking technology and mobile payment provider offers a configurable coupon program that can be utilized to provide Aquatics Center customers free or discounted parking coupons upon class registration . In addition, these coupons can be utilized to incentivize alternative transportation or transit use (see Recommendation 3 -A), providing enhanced access while helping the City manage parking demand more effectively.

3 Refer to the revised report here:
https://www.alamedaca.gov/files/assets/public/departments/alameda/transportation/parking/draft_fer ryterminalparkingpricingstrategy_updated12-8-2022.pdf

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 19 of 48 Additional information , including breakdowns of upfront and capital costs, paid parking and permit revenues, as well as staffing costs are provided in Appendix B.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Determine appropriate rate structure.
 Coordinate with the City’s existing paid parking technology providers to set up new paid parking zones and explore voucher programs for free or subsidized parking for low-income visitors.
 Purchase and install pay station hardware.
 Install signage to reflect paid parking requirements.
 Develop a community outreach and education campaign.
 Implement enforcement protocols for the new paid parking lot.

Table 1. Summary of Comparable Aquatics and Recreation Facilities Facility Location/Operator Parking Fee Notes
Don Castro
Swim Lagoon
Hayward – East Bay
Regional Park
District (EBRPD)
$5 per vehicle
(weekends/holidays,
kiosk collection)
Fee applies during open
season for vehicle entry
and parking.

Jack London
Aquatic Center
Oakland – City
Facility
Free City and ParkMe pages
indicate free guest
parking for two hours.

UC Berkeley
Golden Bear,
Spieker, and
Strawberry
Canyon Pools
Berkeley – UC
Berkeley Recreation
& Wellbeing
Variable parking fees:
$2.50 per hour on-
campus
$3.50 per hour off-
campus (City
metered parking)
Free on-street parking is
available near Golden
Bear and Spieker Pools.

Temescal
Regional
Recreation Area
Oakland – EBRPD $5 per vehicle
$4 per trailered
vehicle
Fees charged April
through October, when
kiosk is attended.

East Bay
Regional Park
District
(General)
Multiple Parks –
EBRPD
$5 per vehicle (flat
rate, some peak
variations)
Flat parking fee at parks
with kiosks; some sites
charge higher peak rates.

Nimbus Flat
State Recreation
Area (Sac State
Aquatic Center)
Folsom – California
State Parks
$10 per vehicle State Parks vehicle day-
use fee collected at
adjacent lot.

Spring Lake
Regional Park
Santa Rosa –
Sonoma County
Regional Parks
$8 per vehicle (fall–
spring), $10 -$12
(summer)
Seasonal rate structure for
day-use parking.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 20 of 48 Clear Lake State
Park
Lake County –
California State
Parks
$8 per vehicle ($7 for
seniors)
Standard day-use/vehicle
entry fee.

San Diego
County Parks &
Recreation
(General)
San Diego County –
County of San
Diego
~$5 per vehicle (day-
use)
Seniors/disabled may
park free; applies to most
county-run parks.

Kennedy Grove
Regional
Recreation Area
Richmond / Contra
Costa County –
EBRPD
$5 per vehicle
(weekends &
holidays, April–
October)
Seasonal day-use fee for
vehicle entry; regional
park model.

Recommendation 1 -G: Develop a policy to periodically update parking rates based on parking utilization data.

Ongoing analysis of parking utilization will be essential to ensure that regulations and pricing remain appropriately matched to actual demand. The City can use its existing license plate recognition (LPR) technology to routinely collect occupancy and turnover data, allowing staff to proactively identify emerging patterns and make timely adjustments to time limits, rates, or permit allocations (see Recommendation 1 -H).

Regular monitoring , including during peak seasons and special events , will help maintain on-site availability, reduce spillover into surrounding neighborhoods and businesses, and support the long-term operational sustainability of the Aquatics Center parking program.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Collect and monitor utilization data post-implementation.  Determine appropriate rate structure and/or time limits.  Adjust rates and/or signage to reflect new policies.
 Provide community outreach and education as necessary.  Implement enforcement protocols for the new policies.

Recommendation 1-H: Implement virtual parking p ermits in the Aquatics Center lot to provide long-term parking options for regular customers and residents.

If the City implements paid parking at the Aquatics Center, it should also consider creating a parking permit program to prioritize access for local residents and frequent users. Permit options could include discounted monthly, quarterly, or annual passes, or season-specific permits designed to manage peak-period demand.

Additionally, the City should consider creating time-specific parking permits that align with weekly swim classes or other recurring programs. These permits would allow participants and families to park during designated time windows that match their

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 21 of 48 scheduled activities, helping to manage demand more efficiently. The program should be administered virtually, either through a separate permit management system (PMS) provider or the City’s existing citation management system (CMS) vendor, Turbo Data.

By leveraging PMS services through Turbo Data, the City will benefit from seamlessly integration between both services on the backend, which will greatly improve enforcement efficiency. Furthermore, by integrating both services, the City can place restrictions on certain permit applications, if necessary, including restricting permit applications for vehicles with an outstanding parking citation balance. Another benefit is that residents and visitors applying for permits can manage the process online and can upload all the required documentation from their computer or smartphone.

Permit pricing should remain affordable while still supporting cost recovery for program operations. Preliminary financial modeling evaluated several permit types: a $30 monthly permit and $15 discounted monthly permits for seniors (over 65) and low- income individuals.4 Additionally, a discounted “season pass” permit, priced at $81 per quarter (approx. 10% discount) may be utilized to incentivize permit use for regular Aquatics Center users.

Annual permit r evenue is estimated to be approximately $19,4 40, with initial startup costs of roughly $3,000 and ongoing annual management costs of about $ 12,188.

Offering parking permits also provides greater flexibility for customers and can reduce wear and maintenance costs on physical parking equipment.

Additional information, including breakdowns of upfront and ongoing costs for parking permits and related revenues are provided in Appendix B.

Timeline: Mid-term
Implementation Items:
 Draft business rules for the program that establish the following components:
o Eligibility requirements (e.g. proof of residency, vehicle registration) o Methodology for payment (e.g. monthly, quarterly, or seasonal options) o Pricing structure and rates
 Coordinate with City’s existing vendors to set up permit program.  Develop communication plan to launch and promote the program.  Consider a small pilot phase to test system functionality and gather initial feedback before full rollout.

4 The City may work with the permit vendor to establish low -income thresholds for permit eligibility determination. An example policy may restrict eligibility to individuals or households earning 80% or less of the area median income (AMI) for Alameda County . Refer to the California Department Of Housing and Community Development’s 2025 State Income Limits report here:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/grants-and-funding/income-limits-2025.pdf

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 22 of 48  Monitor program usage and adjust parameters as necessary.  Evaluate program performance annually to ensure financial sustainability.

Operational Staffing and Enforcement
Recommendation 1-I: Consider hiring a part -time employee to provide enforcement duties.

Consistent enforcement during posted operating hours is critical to the success of the Aquatics Center parking program. Without regular enforcement from the outset, compliance with parking policies is unlikely. To ensure adequate coverage, the City should coordinate across departments to allocate enforcement personnel for routine monitoring of the Aquatics Center lot. If needed, this may be the ideal opportunity to hire additional part-time enforcement staff that can provide the necessary coverage for the Aquatics Center lot while simultaneously providing coverage for other parking enforcement needs in the City, benefiting multiple departments and programs.

While assessing the need for additional parking enforcement support, the City should conduct a cost analysis to determine if it would be more cost-effective to contract a turnkey enforcement vendor to provide staff and equipment according to the City’s schedule. Typical vendor costs range from $45–$60 per hour, plus monthly fixed fees, which can run between $5,000- $8,000 per month depending on the level of implementation, which covers labor, uniforms, office space, supplies, and may include enforcement equipment. Third-party enforcement may be limited to local municipal code violations, in accordance with State and local regulations.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Collaborate with Public Works to d etermine the necessary staffing levels to accommodate enforcement of the Aquatic Center lot.
 If needed, hire part-time staff to provide shared enforcement duties.  Periodically review enforcement staffing levels to ensure resources meet current demand and align with community needs.
 If outsourcing:
o Consult with City attorney to assess City’s legal authority to outsource. o Initiate an RFP for a parking enforcement vendor.
o Select a vendor based on qualification criteria.
o Ensure selected vendor utilizes LPR for enforcement.
o Verify integration requirements between vendor’s LPR technology and City’s existing parking and enforcement solutions.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 23 of 48 Recommendation 1-J: Implement proactive enforcement during special events.

For planned special events at the Aquatics Center, the City should establish dedicated enforcement protocols to manage peak parking demand. Event organizers and enforcement staff should coordinate in advance, and temporary signage should be posted to clear ly communicate event- specific regulations. Overflow parking needs should be anticipated, with partnerships secured for nearby lots such as the Science Annex and other Research Park – Marina Village locations. Special events at Jean Sweeney Park and the future community garden should also be incorporated into long- term event parking planning. These measures will help maintain parking availability, limit spillover and promote safe, orderly operations during high-demand periods.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Develop a special events enforcement protocol to streamline planning for special events, including a list of identified events, placement of temporary signage, outreach methods, and clear enforcement guidelines.  Coordinate across departments and any outsourced enforcement personnel to establish consistent standard operating procedures for managing parking during special events.

Technology Integration & Implementation Recommendations Pay Stations
Recommendation 2-A: Install pay stations at convenient locations within the lot.

To minimize infrastructure for implementing paid parking at the Aquatics Center, the City should carefully plan pay station placement. Industry practice recommends installing one pay station near each exit of an off -street lot, close to pedestrian access points. For the Aquatics Center, it is recommended to install at least one pay station near the main walkway to the facility and another near the northeast exit toward the Science Annex lot (see Figure 5 ). A second pay station near the walkway may be considered to accommodate higher customer demand during peak periods and to accommodate future utilization by community garden visitors, if necessary.

Alternatively, emphasizing mobile payment options (see Recommendation 2-B) allows greater flexibility in pay station placement. This approach reduces the total number of pay stations required, which lowers installation and maintenance costs while enabling strategic placement in high-visibility, convenient locations to improve user compliance.

The City should coordinate with its paid parking vendor to ensure pay stations are installed with adequate power and communications for uninterrupted service.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 24 of 48

Source: ELS Architecture + Urban Design conceptual plans (2025) A Pay-by-Plate configuration is recommended for the lot. This method reduces the potential for policy abuse, enables enforcement using the City’s existing LPR technology, and integrates seamlessly with virtual plate -based parking permits (see Recommendation 1-H). Together, these features support a more efficient and user - friendly parking operations system.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Determine the necessary number of pay stations and appropriate placement for the lot.
 Coordinate with the City’s paid parking vendor to install pay station hardware in accordance with the designated placement.
 Install additional signage as needed to direct parkers to each pay station.  Coordinate installation and programming of meters, including any customized features (e.g., escalating rates, special events, flat rates).  Monitor effectiveness in achieving turnover goals and adjust meter settings or locations as needed.

Figure 5. Proposed Pay Station Locations

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 25 of 48 Mobile Payment
Recommendation 2-B: Encourage mobile payment for parking for additional user convenience and promote compliance.

In addition to installing pay stations (see Recommendation 2 -A), the City should implement mobile payment options in the Aquatics Center lot to provide greater convenience for customers. Adequate signage should be provided to clearly communicate this option, integrated with existing regulatory signage. The City should work with the mobile payment vendor to develop sign designs and determine optimal placement to encourage use. Mobile payment will also reduce cash handling, reducing staffing and resources needed for collection and counting.

Additionally, to incentive the use of mobile payment, the City could provide a discount code for customers attending swim classes or other short-term activities. For example, when a parent enrolls in a 5:00 – 6:00 p.m. swim class, they can receive a coupon valid for a 1-hour free or reduced-rate session valid only during that class time . When they park near the Aquatics Center, they enter the code in the mobile payment app , which is directly integrated with the City’s parking technology for enforcement. This promotes mobile payment adoption, supports timely turnover, and provides a flexible way for the City to offer financial accommodations for low-income program participants.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Coordinate with the City’s mobile payment vendor to configure the mobile payment zone and develop sign placement and design recommendations.  Install additional signage as needed to promote mobile payment use.

Parking Enforcement & Citation Management Technology
Recommendation 2-C: Utilize the City’s existing License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology for license plate-based parking enforcement and data collection.

The City should utilize existing staff and infrastructure to provide parking enforcement within the Aquatics Center lot. U tilizing a Pay-by-Plate configuration for paid parking (see Recommendation 2 -A) and mobile payment (see Recommendation 2 -B), a customer’s license plate serves as their receipt, allowing enforcement officers to verify payment through LPR technology directly integrated with the City’s parking systems.

LPR can also support enforcement of time -limited, paid parking, and plate -based virtual parking permit programs (see Recommendations 1-E, 1-F, and 1-H).

In addition to enforcement, the City should use LPR systems to collect ongoing parking utilization data to inform data -driven parking policies. This data can help assess congestion levels, turnover rates, repeat parking patterns, enforcement coverage, and compliance, which supports the development of evidence -based management

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 26 of 48 strategies and identifying areas where policies may need adjustment. The City should consider partnering with a vendor that provides parking analytics software to process and analyze utilization and turnover data effectively.

Timeline: Near-term
Implementation Items:
 Coordinate with the City’s enforcement technology provider and CMS vendor to configure equipment for enforcement of the Aquatics Center lot.  Ensure any new parking technologies are integrated with the City’s LPR technology.
 Ensure that LPR is activated whenever a vehicle is out for enforcement to capture as much data as possible.
 If needed, create a schedule specifically for data collection needs, ideally in the morning, afternoon, and evening time frames.

If conducting manual analysis, create standardized reporting formats for ease of sharing data.

What is plate-based Enforcement?

When all active parking sessions are associated with a license plate, this enables “plate-based enforcement.” Plate- based enforcement leverages LPR technology, which involves cameras mounted on patrol vehicles or fixed poles that read and record the licens e plates in their view. LPR technology is synchronized in real time with parking technology systems, such as paid parking, citation management, and permit management systems. When an LPR camera captures a plate, the system compares license plate numbers ac ross other systems to recognize whether the vehicle has a valid parking session and alert enforcement personnel if a citation should be issued. LPR cameras also have “digital chalking” capabilities to enforce time limits. Plate -based enforcement is much mo re efficient than manual forms of enforcement, e.g., chalking tires or “Pay and Display” methods.

LPR cameras can also benefit law enforcement agencies with the ability to spot hotlist and scofflaw vehicles whose license plate numbers have been added to the system.

Plate-based enforcement can also provide drivers with added flexibility including diverse payment options and the opportunity to remotely extend parking sessions via a mobile app.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 27 of 48 Sustainability and Alternative Modes
Incentives for Alternative Mode Use
Recommendation 3-A: Promote and incentivize alternative transportation use.

The City should expand its efforts to promote non -automobile access to the Aquatics Center by partnering with local bicycle and pedestrian advocacy groups, such as Bike Walk Alameda. Through coordinated outreach, the City can share information on safe bike routes, walking paths, transit connections, and on-site amenities such as bike racks and lockers. These partnerships can amplify public awareness of active and sustainable travel options, helping reduce reliance on on-site parking and minimizing spillover into surrounding neighborhoods.

To support alternative mode use by Aquatics Center visitors, the City should consider discounted parking sessions for those arriving by alternative modes, such as time - limited promo codes or a one -time use discount coupon f or a future parking session (see Recommendation 2 -B) that promotes mode shift during peak demand periods.

Pairing these incentives with secure bicycle facilities will further strengthen user confidence and support long -term behavior change. Collectively, these strategies reinforce sustain able mobility choices, reduce parking pressure, and enhance accessibility for all Aquatics Center users.

Timeline: Ongoing
Implementation Items:
 Determine appropriate incentives that will encourage alternative mode use, including discounted rates, one -time-use codes, or promo codes for future parking sessions for customers and employees arriving via transit, bike or on foot.
 Create outreach materials, including social media posts, signage at the Aquatics Center, and website content, to communicate the incentive program.  Work with the City’s paid parking and mobile payment vendors to issue, track, and redeem codes.
 Encourage participation through special events or “bike/walk days” to introduce the program and gather feedback.
 Track participation, mode choice changes, and impacts on parking demand to evaluate success and refine incentives.

Alternative Uses of Parking Resources
Recommendation 3-B: Identify potential alternative uses for the parking resources in coordination with different City departments.

The City should identify potential alternative uses for the Aquatics Center parking lot in coordination with other City departments to maximize the utility of the facility and

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 28 of 48 the parking resources. During non- peak seasons or periods of low demand, portions of the lot could be repurposed to support general park access, special events at the park, or food trucks and outdoor dining. Promoting these alternative uses not only enhances community engagement and recreational opportunities but also ensures the parking lot remains active and functional year -round. The City’s Recreation and Parks Department can coordinate interdepartmentally to plan for flexible, temporary uses that complement the primary parking function while supporting broader community goals.

Timeline: Long-term
Implementation Items:
 Coordinate across departments to identify potential alternative uses for the parking lot.
 Analyze parking utilization data to determine non -peak seasons or times when lot demand is low.
 Develop temporary uses such as:
o General park visitor parking.
o Parking for special events hosted at the park.
o Food trucks, outdoor dining, or pop-up markets.
 Advertise alternative uses through the City website, social media, newsletters, and on-site signage.
 Track participation, revenue (if applicable), and community feedback to refine and expand alternative use programming over time.

Managing Spillover
Residential Neighborhood Parking Time-Limits
Recommendation 4 -A: Consider parking time limits for the residential neighborhood South of the Aquatics Center.

The City should closely monitor curb occupancy on nearby residential streets south of the Aquatics Center , including on Thau Way, Stewart Court, 8th Avenue, and Eagle Avenue, and consider time -limited parking if spillover activity negatively impacts parking occupancy in the area. Occupancy data (see Recommendation 2 -C) should guide the selection of appropriate time limits —whether applied during morning, midday, or evening periods, or only during the peak summer season. Time limits can help discourage long -term visitor parking, protect residential access, and reduce circulation impacts. If conditions warrant additional tools beyond time limits, the City may also evaluate establi shing a preferential parking restrictions to further secure residential parking in the area (see Recommendation 4-B).

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 29 of 48 Additional enforcement staffing may be necessary to adequately enforce th is time- limited parking area and should be evaluated in coordination with proposed time limits and/or paid parking regulations for the Aquatics Center lot (see Recommendations 1- E and 1-F).

Timeline: Long-term
Implementation Items:
 Collect parking occupancy data throughout the surrounding residential area.  Develop time-limited parking regulations (e.g., 1– or 2-hour limits) that balance residential needs with short-term visitor access.
 Install clear signage defining hours of enforcement and any seasonal variations, as needed.
 Coordinate enforcement staffing to ensure consistent compliance once time limits are implemented.

Residential Preferential Parking (RPP)
Recommendation 4-B: Consider establishing an RPP area in the residential neighborhood South of the Aquatics Center.

To protect neighborhood access and manage spillover from the Aquatics Center, the City should evaluate establishing residential preferential parking restrictions on nearby streets if parking is routinely impacted, pursuant the guidelines described in Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) Sections 12 -17.6-12-17.7. The City of Alameda currently has one residential preferential parking program in effect, however it is focused on parking near the Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal and was established in response to a petition b y the nearby Homeowner’s Associations, who continue to manage the program.

Occupancy data (see Recommendation 2-C) will help determine when restrictions are most needed near the Aquatics Center (e.g. morning, midday, evening, or only during the peak summer season). An RPP Zone would limit long-term or non-resident parking, helping ensure that nearby residents maintain consistent access to on -street spaces.

Resident permits can be administered through the same parking management system described in Recommendation 2 -A, reduci ng administrative workload and allowing enforcement officers to manage all permit types through a single, integrated platform for greater efficiency.

Timeline: Long-term
Implementation Items:
 Collect parking occupancy data throughout the surrounding residential area.  Develop appropriate restriction windows (e.g., specific hours or seasonal timeframes) based on observed demand patterns.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 30 of 48  Engage residents to share findings, gather feedback, and build support for preferential parking restrictions.
 Prepare required findings and documentation consistent with Chapter XII , Article III of the Alameda Municipal Code.
 Adopt the Residential Preferential Parking Zone and install signage clearly outlining permit requirements and enforcement hours.
 Coordinate enforcement staffing to ensure consistent and visible compliance once restrictions are in place.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 31 of 48 Implementation Checklist
This Alameda Aquatics Center Parking Action Plan was designed to be realistic and achievable, however the actual implementation steps may vary depending on the City’s priorities, budget, staffing, and other factors. It is recommended that the City take an incremental approach to implementing the strategies listed in this Plan. This section summarizes the implementation steps in estimated near-term (1-2 years), mid-term (2- 3 years), and long-term (3+ years) timeframes. There is a separate section for strategies in this Plan that are meant to inform the City of ongoing best practices. Actual timing will be dependent on City Council prioritization, funding availability, staff and consultant resources, and the ongoing evaluation of initial implementation steps. The City is welcome to adapt the following phasing to best suit its processes, as most recommendations can work to achieve multiple priorities.

Near-term Implementation Checklist
Category Action
Customer Parking  Recommendation 1-A: Utilize a larger configuration for the facility parking lot to provide adequate customer
parking and reduce parking spillover.

Employee Parking  Recommendation 1-B: Establish designated employee- only parking spaces in the College of Alameda Science
Annex parking lot.
 Recommendation 1-C: Provide employee incentives
programs for carpooling and alternative transportation
mode use.

Public-Private
Agreements
 Recommendation 1-D: Pursue shared parking
agreements with property owners to reduce unnecessary
parking impacts.

Parking Regulations  Recommendation 1-E: Establish time limits for parking within the Aquatics Center lot and install appropriate
signage.

Paid Parking  Recommendation 1-F: Implement paid parking in the Aquatics Center lot to manage parking demand and
provide greater flexibility for customers.
 Recommendation 1-G: Develop a policy to periodically
update parking rates based on parking utilization data.

Operational Staffing and
Enforcement
 Recommendation 1-I: Consider hiring a part-time
employee to provide enforcement duties.
 Recommendation 1-J: Implement proactive enforcement
during special events.

Pay Stations  Recommendation 2-A: Install pay stations at convenient locations within the lot.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 32 of 48 Mid-term Implementation Checklist
Long-term Implementation Checklist
Ongoing Best Practices

Mobile Payment  Recommendation 2-B: Encourage mobile payment for parking for additional user convenience and promote
compliance.

Parking Enforcement &
Citation Management
Technology
 Recommendation 2-C: Utilize the City’s existing License Plate Recognition (LPR) technology for license plate-
based parking enforcement and data collection.

Category Action
Paid Parking  Recommendation 1-H: Implement virtual parking permits in the Aquatics Center lot to provide long-term parking options for regular customers and residents.

Category Action
Alternative Uses of
Parking Resources
 Recommendation 3-B: Identify potential alternative uses for the parking resources in coordination with different City departments.

Residential Neighborhood
Parking Time-Limits
 Recommendation 4-A: Consider parking time limits for
the residential neighborhood South of the Aquatics
Center.

Residential Preferential
Parking (RPP)
 Recommendation 4-B: Consider establishing an RPP area in the residential neighborhood South of the Aquatics
Center.

Category Action
Incentives for Alternative
Mode Use
 Recommendation 3-A: Promote and incentivize
alternative transportation use.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 33 of 48 Appendix A - Parking Availability Modeling
Table 2 illustrates the relative average availability of parking on -site, providing a clear view of how demand fluctuates throughout the day, across seasons, and under varying staffing and program conditions. Negative numbers, highlighted in red text, are situations where parking demand exceeds the on-site supply and overflow parking is necessary to meet the anticipated program attendance levels. Evening and weekend cells are highlighted in grey to identify periods where overflow parking may be accommodated off-site after 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and all-day on weekends in the College of Alameda Science Annex parking lot.

Table 2. Average Estimated Parking Availability under both Lot Configurations

Weekday (non-Summer) Weekday (Summer)* Weekend
Morning Midday Evening Morning Midday Evening Morning Midday Evening 67 Spaces Typical
Conditions 47.1 14.6 40.0 5.3 -4.5 11.3 15.0 16.0 47.9
Community
Garden 37.1 4.6 30.0 -4.7 -14.5 1.3 5.0 6.0 37.9
Employee
Parking 27.1 -5.4 20.0 -14.7 -24.5 -8.7 -5.0 -4.0 27.9
50 Spaces Typical
Conditions 30.1 -2.4 23.0 -11.7 -21.5 -5.7 -2.0 -1.0 30.9 Community
Garden 20.1 -12.4 13.0 -21.7 -31.5 -15.7 -12.0 -11.0 20.9 Employee
Parking 10.1 -22.4 3.0 -31.7 -41.5 -25.7 -22.0 -21.0 10.9 * Average parking availability for weekday (summer) days assumes an increased demand for staff parking of approx. 5 spaces.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 34 of 48 Appendix B - Financial Modeling
DIXON developed the following preliminary parking program costs and revenue projections to examine two implementation pathways: a time-limited parking environment and a paid parking environment. The resulting financial models are intended to be used solely as estimates to support parking management planning and decision-making. As with any financial projection, actual results may vary. A conservative approach was deliberately taken to ensure expectations remain realistic.

Key Definitions
• Occupancy Rate: The percentage of available parking spaces that are occupied at a given time. • Compliance Rate: The estimated percentage of people who will comply and pay for parking as required. • Capital expenses: One-time or upfront costs required to establish or upgrade a parking system. • Operating costs: Ongoing, recurring expenses needed to run and maintain the parking system. • Operating hours: The specific hours during which parking rules, enforcement, or paid parking requirements are in effect.
• Operating days: The number of days in the year when parking regulations will be enforced. • Outsourced Enforcement: Parking enforcement services that are carried out by a third -party contractor rather than by City staff.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 35 of 48 Scenario 1: Time-Limited Parking
Program Costs
Implementing time-limit parking will require an initial expense of $18,581.36, driven primarily by upfront signage and other capital costs. In Years 2 and 3, these expenses are projected to decrease to $16,123.40 as only replacement and minor updates are needed. Maintenance costs are expected to remain consistent over all three years, while staffing costs incorporate an annual escalation factor of 3%.

Implementation and Program Management
Table 3 details program costs related to initial implementation and ongoing program management.

Table 3. Estimated Implementation and Program Management Costs Implementation & Program Management Costs

Signs and Wayfinding
Regulatory Signs 20 $75.00 $1,500.00
Pay Station Signs 0 $75.00 -
Information Signs 4 $60.00 $240.00
Poles 15 $100.00 $1,500.00
Installation 15 $100.00 $1,500.00

Maintenance
Equipment / Facility Maintenance 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00

Estimated Annual Projected Costs
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
One-time Capital Expenditures
Signage $3,240.00 - -

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 36 of 48 Ongoing Program Management Costs
Maintenance $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00

Total Estimated Annual Capital Costs $3,240.00 - -
Total Estimated Annual Ongoing Costs $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00

Combined Total Est. Annual Capital and Ongoing Costs $5,740.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Note: Estimated equipment costs may not include freight, additional signage, etc. All workbook pricing has been estimated. A quote should be obtained from a qualified Vendor for the most accurate and up to date costs.

Staffing Costs
Table 4 summarizes estimated costs related to staffing levels for administrative, equipment maintenance, and enforcement activities.

Table 4. Estimated Staffing Costs
Estimated Annual Projected Cost
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Parking Operations Staffing Costs $8,942.40 $9,210.67 $9,478.94 Enforcement Staffing Costs $3,898.96 $4,015.93 $4,132.90 Other Staffing Costs - - -
Outsourced Staffing - Salary Costs - - -
Outsourced Staffing - Fixed Fees - - -

Total Est. Annual Staffing Costs (w/ escalation) $12,841.36 $13,623.40 $14,428.55 Note: Staffing costs assume an annual escalation factor of 3%.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 37 of 48 Program Costs
Table 5 summarizes the program costs, including upfront capital expenditures for and ongoing operational and staffing costs.

Table 5. Summary of Estimated Revenues/Expenses
Alameda Aquatic Center Parking Financial Dashboard

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Projected Expenses

Capital Expenditures $ 3,240.00 $ - $ - Operating Costs $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 Staffing Costs $ 12,841.36 $ 13,623.40 $ 14,428.55 Subtotal Annual Expenses $ 18,581.36 $ 16,123.40 $ 16,928.55

Net Profit/(Loss) $ (18,581.36) $ (16,123.40) $ (16,928.55) Note: Staffing costs assume an annual escalation factor of 3%.

Summary
In Year 1, the City is expected to incur approximately $3,240 in capital costs, primarily for installing signage needed to support time-limited parking enforcement at the Aquatics Center. Additional ongoing expenses include roughly $2,500 in operational costs and $12,841.36 in staffing costs, with staffing expenses projected to grow annually based on a 3% escalation rate. Without new revenue sources (e.g. paid parking or permit parking) to offset these costs, the parking program would require subsidies from the General Fund or other funding mechanisms.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 38 of 48 Scenario 2: Paid Parking
Program Costs
The Paid Parking model assumes the purchase of two pay stations: one located near the center of the facility, and another placed at the transition point between the Aquatics Center lot and the College of Alameda Science Annex lot. These assumptions focus on typical daily demand; therefore, the Paid Parking Usage Calculation does not account for special event occupancy.

Parking permit implementation and management costs are derived from recent pricing proposals. In addition, fully burdened wage estimates are based on recently reported step increases and corresponding hourly rates.

Paid Parking Equipment
Table 6 summarizes costs associated with paid parking equipment , including upfront capital expenses and operating costs.

Table 6. Estimated Paid Parking Equipment Costs
Paid Parking Technology Quantities

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Pay Stations: # of Units to Purchase 2
Pay Stations: # of Units Already Purchased, to Maintain 0 2 2

Paid Parking Technology Costs

Equipment Costs (Capital Expenses) Pay Stations
Mobile
Payments
Purchase Cost Per Unit $8,500 $0.00
Platform Integrations $0.00 $0.00

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 39 of 48

Operating Costs
Monthly Device Software Fees - Per Unit $85.00 --
Annual Warranty (starting Year 2) - Per Unit $550.00 -- CC Processing Fees - Flat Rate Per Transaction $0.13 -- CC Processing Fees - Percentage of Transaction Total 3.5% 3.5% Mobile Payments Convenience Fee - Per Transaction -- $0.35

Paid Parking Usage Calculation Factors
Paid Parking Space Inventory
Aquatic Center
Parking Lot
College Annex
Parking Lot
# of Paid Parking Spaces 67 125

Payment Method Split Adds up to 100% Adds up to 100%
Cash (Pay Station) 5% 2%
Credit Card (Pay Station) 80% 73%
Mobile Payments 15% 25%

Technology Usage Split Adds up to 100% Adds up to 100%
Pay Stations 85% 75%
Mobile/Text to Pay 15% 25%

Transaction Data
Average Compliance Rate 60% 60%
Average Occupancy Rate 66% 2%
Average Operating Days 354 354

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 40 of 48 Estimated # of Transactions Per Space, Per Day 3.25 0.00 Estimated # of Transactions Per Day, Total 86 0

Estimated Annual Projected Costs
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Pay Stations
Equipment Costs $17,000.00 - -
Software Fees $2,040.00 $2,040.00 $2,040.00
5% Contingency for Additional Spares & Maintenance $850.00 $850.00 $850.00 Warranty Cost (after Year 1) - $1,100.00 $1,100.00

Mobile Payments
Equipment Costs - - -
Convenience Fees $13,613.54 $13,613.54 $13,613.54

Credit Card Transaction Fees
Credit Card Transaction Fees (Pay Station) $8,739.35 $8,739.35 $8,739.35 Credit Card Transaction Fees (Mobile Payment) $5,580.54 $5,580.54 $5,580.54

Total Estimated Annual Paid Parking Equipment Costs $17,000.00 - - Total Estimated Annual Paid Parking Ongoing Costs $31,681.23 $32,781.23 $32,781.23

Combined Total Estimated Annual Paid Parking Costs $48,681.23 $32,781.23 $32,781.23

Note: Estimated equipment costs may not include freight, additional signage, etc. All workbook pricing has been estimated. A quote should be obtained from a qualified Vendor for the most accurate and up to date costs.

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 41 of 48 Implementation & Program Management
Table 7 summarizes costs related to program implementation and ongoing program management.

Table 7. Estimated Implementation and Program Management Costs (Paid Parking) Implementation & Program Management Costs

Equipment Implementation Costs Quantity $ per Unit $ Total Installation (vendor-provided) 2 $1,125.00 $2,250.00
Configuration 1 $500.00 $500.00
Spare Parts 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00

Signs and Wayfinding
Regulatory Signs 20 $75.00 $1,500.00
Pay Station Signs 3 $75.00 $225.00
Information Signs 4 $60.00 $240.00
Poles 15 $100.00 $1,500.00
Installation 15 $100.00 $1,500.00

Parking Permits
Startup Costs 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Monthly Service / Cloud Hosting Fee ($800/month) 1 $9,600.00 $9,600.00 Fulfillment Costs (per virtual permit) 808 $2.00 $1,616.00 Processing Costs (per transaction total) 19,440.00 5% $972.00

Maintenance
Equipment / Facility Maintenance 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 42 of 48 Estimated Annual Projected Costs
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
One-time Capital Expenditures
Paid Parking Equipment Installation $5,250.00 - -
Signage $3,465.00 - -
Permit Setup $3,000.00 - -

Ongoing Program Management Costs
Parking Permits $12,188.00 $12,188.00 $12,188.00
Maintenance $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00

Total Estimated Annual Capital Costs $11,715.00 - -
Total Estimated Annual Ongoing Costs $17,188.00 $17,188.00 $17,188.00

Combined Total Est. Annual Capital and Ongoing Costs $28,903.00 $17,188.00 $17,188.00 Staffing
Table 8 summarizes annual staffing costs related to the enforcement of a paid-parking program and includes an annual 3% escalation calculation.

Table 8. Estimated Staffing Costs (Paid Parking)
Estimated Annual Projected Cost

In-House Staffing Costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Parking Operations $17,884.80 $18,421.34 $18,957.89 Enforcement $17,998.24 $18,538.19 $19,078.13
Other $8,226.40 $8,473.19 $8,719.98
Subtotal Est. Annual In-House Staffing Costs (w/
escalation) $44,109.44 $45,432.72 $46,756.01

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 43 of 48

Outsourced Services Staffing Costs
Enforcement Labor - - -
Maintenance and Collections Labor - - -
Monthly Fixed Fees - - -
Subtotal Est. Annual Outsourced Services Staffing
Costs (w/ escalation) - - -

Total Est. Annual Staffing Costs (w/ escalation) $44,109.44 $45,432.72 $46,756.01

Program Revenues
The model assumes that overflow parking in the Annex lot will remain free, except during special events. Seasonal operating days are aligned with the AUSD academic year calendar, and the projected Annex parking hours are informed by Fehr & Peers demand modeling and estimated occupancy patterns.

The Special Event Parking Rate model incorporates an escalating fee structure to account for higher -demand events.

Fehr & Peers modeling also assumes that approximately 50% of attendees are dropped off at the Aquatics Center. In addition, it estimates an average vehicle occupancy of two people during special events, which explains the difference between total attendance and total vehicles.

Table 9 provides a summary of hourly, special event, and permit parking calculations and related estimated revenues.

Table 9. Estimated Paid Parking Revenues
Paid Parking Inventory

Aquatic Center
Parking Lot
College Annex
Parking Lot
# of Paid Parking Spaces 67 125

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 44 of 48 Hourly Parking Rate Models

Typical Weekday (non-Summer)
Hourly Rate $0.50 $0.00
Operating Days per Year
# Days per Week 5 5
Start Date 8/11/2025 8/11/2025
End Date 6/4/2026 6/4/2026
# Holidays 10 10
Total Days 203 203
Daily Operating Hours
Start Time 7:00 AM 2:30 PM
End Time 5:00 PM 4:00 PM
Hours 10 1.50
Compliance Percentage 60% 60%
Average Daily Occupancy 49% 2%

Typical Weekday (Summer)
Hourly Rate $1.00 $0.00
Operating Days per Year
# Days per Week 5 5
Start Date 6/5/2026 6/5/2026
End Date 8/10/2026 8/10/2026
# Holidays 1 1
Total Days 47 47
Daily Operating Hours
Start Time 7:00 AM 10:00 AM
End Time 5:00 PM 3:30 PM
Hours 10 5.5
Compliance Percentage 60% 60%
Average Daily Occupancy 87% 3%

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 45 of 48 Typical Weekend
Hourly Rate $1.00 $0.00
Operating Days per Year
# Days per Week 2 2
Start Date 8/11/2025 8/11/2025
End Date 8/10/2026 8/10/2026
# Holidays 0 0
Total Days 104 104
Daily Operating Hours
Start Time 7:00 AM 11:00 AM
End Time 5:00 PM 1:00 PM
Hours 10 2
Compliance Percentage 60% 60%
Average Daily Occupancy 61% 1%

Special Event / Flat Rate Parking Rate
Models

Special Event Pricing (Low-Impact
Events)
Hourly Rate Differential $1.00 $0.00
Event Frequency
# Events per Week 2 0
Start Date 6/5/2026 6/5/2026
End Date 8/11/2026 8/11/2026
# Events Total 19 0
Daily Operating Hours
Start Time 9:00 AM 9:00 AM
End Time 4:00 PM 4:00 PM
Hours 7.0 7.0
Attendance # Event Attendees 300 0

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 46 of 48 % Drop-Offs 50% 50%
Total Vehicles 150 0
Compliance Percentage 60% 60%

Flat-Rate Pricing (High-Impact Events)
Rate Flat Rate $5.00 $0.00
Event Frequency
# Events per Week 1 1
Start Date 8/11/2025 8/11/2025
End Date 8/10/2026 8/10/2026
# Weekly Events 52 52
Attendance
# Event Attendees 300 500
Avg. Ridership 2 2
Total Vehicles 150 250
Compliance Percentage 60% 60%

Parking Permits (Virtual)

Price Per Permit Estimated # Sold
Monthly Permit $30.00 44
Monthly Permit (Low Income) $15.00 10
Monthly Permit (Senior) $15.00 10
Quarterly "Season Pass" $81.00 10

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 47 of 48 Estimated Annual Projected Revenue

Paid Parking Revenue
Aquatic Center
Parking Lot
College Annex
Parking Lot
Paid Parking Revenue (Non-Summer Weekdays) $ 20,097.00 $ - Paid Parking Revenue (Summer Weekdays) $ 16,356.00 $ - Paid Parking Revenue (Weekends) $ 25,584.00 $ - Total Paid Parking Revenue $ 62,037.00 $ -

Special Event Paid Parking Revenues (Hourly) $ 11,970.00 $ - Special Event Paid Parking Revenues (Flat Rate) $ 23,400.00 $ - Total Special Events Paid Parking Revenue $ 35,370.00 $ -

Total Paid Parking Revenue $ 97,407.00 $ -

Permit Parking Revenue
Monthly Permits $ 19,440.00
Quarterly Permits $ 3,240.00
Total Permit Parking Revenue $ 19,440.00

Total Estimated Annual Projected Revenue $ 116,847.00 Note 1: The hourly rate differential is the dollar amount charged in addition to the standard hourly rate, e.g. (hourly rate + $1.00/hr.) Note 2: The Avg. Ridership is the # of event attendees sharing a trip/vehicle (assumes parents or family members riding together) Note 3: Total permit sales represent an approx. 10% oversell of number of available parking spaces in a 67-space lot configuration

Alameda Aquatics Center - Parking Action Plan Page 48 of 48 Summary
Table 10. Summary of Estimated Revenues/Expenses (Paid Parking) Alameda Aquatic Center Parking Financial Dashboard

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Projected Revenue
Paid Parking Revenue $62,037.00 $63,898.11 $65,815.05 Special Event Parking Revenue $35,370.00 $36,431.10 $37,524.03 Permit Parking Revenue $19,440.00 $20,023.20 $20,623.90 Subtotal Annual Revenue $116,847.00 $120,352.41 $123,962.98

Projected Expenses

Capital Expenditures $28,715.00 - -
Operating Costs $48,011.43 $49,111.43 $49,111.43
Staffing Costs $44,109.44 $45,432.72 $46,756.01
Subtotal Annual Expenses $120,835.87 $94,544.16 $95,867.44

Net Profit/(Loss) $ (3,988.87) $25,808.25 $28,095.54
Conclusion
In Year 1, the City is projected to generate approximately $116,847.0 in revenue from paid parking, special event parking, and permit sales. This revenue is expected to increase annually with an assumed 3% escalation factor. Operating costs will decline after Year 1, although staffing expenses will continue to rise due to the same 3% escalation assumption.

Capital expenditure in Year 1 will result in a net loss of $3,988.87, but these costs are not expected to recur in later years.

Overall, despite rising staffing and operating expenses, the program is projected to fully cover its costs and produce a net profit of $25,808.25 in Year 2, with continued growth anticipated in subsequent years.