San Bruno City Council
November 12, 2024

Paid Parking Program Update and
Study Session
November 12, 2024

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
Ryan Johansen, Chief of Police
Nick Pegueros, Administrative Services Director
AGENDA
I. Objective
II. Background
III. Discussion
IV. Questions
V. Council Feedback & Direction
2 OBJECTIVE
Receive 6-month update on the Paid Parking Program and
conduct a Study Session regarding future direction

3 BACKGROUND
 Extensive background and history of this
topic/program in the Staff Report
 Brief summary here
4 BACKGROUND
 Purpose: address severely impacted parking in and
around downtown
 Well-documented occupancy rates in excess of 100%
for years
 Lack of available parking as top reason people don’t
shop downtown
 Public safety concerns as well
 Double parking, pedestrians, etc.
5 BACKGROUND
• Well-studied and documented
 2009: The City of San Bruno General Plan (GP)
 2013: Transit Corridors Plan (TCP)
 2019: Downtown Parking Management Plan (DPMP)
 2019: San Mateo Avenue Conceptual Streetscape Plan
(SMACSP)
 2020: FY2020-21 City Council Strategic Initiatives
• All identified the need for a paid parking program
6 BACKGROUND
Why was a paid parking program identified as a solution?  Influences parking behavior
 Increases parking turnover
 Shorter term parkers on street
 Longer term parkers in lots
 Funding for critical enforcement
7 BACKGROUND
85%
8 Ideal peak occupancy rate for businesses and customers alike Ensures available parking for varied needs

BACKGROUND
9 Abbreviated Development Timeline
Police
Department
assigned to
pursue Paid
Parking and
Enhanced
Citywide
Parking
Enforcement
Early
2022
March
2022
City
Council
received
first report
on potential
structure of
program November
2022
City Council
received
updated report
with info re:

Parking
Enterprise Fund
and LAZ
contract
April
2023
City Council
established
Parking
Enterprise
Fund &
authorized
LAZ and T2
contracts
September
2023
City Council
Study
Session
reviewing
draft
regulations for
the program
October
2023
City Council
adopted the
Resolution and
Ordinance
establishing the
regulations for
this program January
2024
Kiosk
installs
began
April
2024
Paid parking
requirements
took effect
May
2024
Paid parking
enforcement
began

BACKGROUND
10 Extensive Public Outreach Efforts
• Multiple downtown business “Town Hall” meetings
• Parking Enforcement Information webpage
• Paid Parking Program Information webpage
• Dozens of social media posts
• Flyers disseminated to area businesses and residences • City Manager’s e-Newsletter articles
• Utility bill insert mailers
• Digital message board deployments
• PSA on Channel 1
• Additional City Council presentations (11/23, 1/24, 4/24, and 10/24)

DISCUSSION
The purpose of this Staff Report is to provide City Council with an update on the Paid Parking and Enhanced Citywide Parking Enforcement Program through its first six (6) months of operation
11 This section will discuss:
• Challenges encountered and how they’re being addressed • Data collected as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date • Potential program adjustments being considered by Staff

DISCUSSION
The long-established primary goal of this program was to bring parking occupancy rates to near 85% to improve the downtown experience by increasing parking turnover on San Mateo Avenue so that convenient parking was more frequently available 12 At a high-level, despite significant growing pains, some anticipated and some not, the program is effective in so far as it is achieving this goal Since deploying this program, occupancy rates have hovered right around 85%, the ideal target according to the most prevalent experts on this topic 85%

DISCUSSION
13 • Kiosk malfunctions and inoperability
 Power issues
• Operator error
 40,000 transactions – 12 complaints – 0.03%
 “O” or “0”
• False reports/claims, and fraud
• Vandalism and sabotage
• Issues with LAZ Parking Officers
 Overzealous enforcement
Challenges Encountered

DISCUSSION
14 • Parking behavior
 Fundamental premise that paid parking influences behavior  Typical pattern
Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date Initial Deployment
People dislike, some avoid area
Occupancy down
Citations up
60 – 90 Days
Acceptance, learning use
Occupancy rises
Citations decrease
90 – 120 Days
Behaviors modified, new normal
Occupancy rises and levels
Citations rise and level

DISCUSSION
15 Even with aforementioned issues, San Bruno has basically followed suit Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date 40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24
Average Monthly Occupancy - San Mateo Avenue

DISCUSSION
16 Even with aforementioned issues, San Bruno has basically followed suit Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date

DISCUSSION
17 • Transaction data helps show when, how, and where people use the system Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date

60.29%

36.92%

2.78%
% of Transactions in Each Area
Streets Lots El Camino

DISCUSSION
18 • Transaction data helps show when, how, and where people use the system Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date

14.86%

85.14%
Cash vs. Credit Card Transactions
Cash Credit Card

DISCUSSION
19 • Transaction data helps show when, how, and where people use the system Data as it relates to the program’s effectiveness to date

36.27%

63.73%
Mobile Pay vs. Kiosks
Mobile Pay Kiosk

DISCUSSION
20 • The overarching objective of this program is to overcome the longstanding issue of impacted parking downtown
• The body of research on this topic indicates that maintaining an 85% occupancy rate, especially during peak hours, is the key to achieving this • This is why City Council established 85% occupancy as the aim point for paid parking policies and practices
• Parking occupancy data is critical in this process
• This was the primary reason for a 6-12 month evaluation period • Staff conducted physical counts of parked vehicles versus available spaces at various times of day and days of the week. Counts were conducted on multiple days and averaged to provide the following snapshots.

Parking Occupancy Data

DISCUSSION
21 Parking Occupancy Data
Red bars indicate times when occupancy rates exceeded the 85% target (indicated by the orange line). 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00
San Mateo Avenue - Weekdays

DISCUSSION
22 Parking Occupancy Data
Red bars indicate times when occupancy rates exceeded the 85% target (indicated by the orange line). 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00
San Mateo Avenue - Saturday

DISCUSSION
23 Parking Occupancy Data
Red bars indicate times when occupancy rates exceeded the 85% target (indicated by the orange line). 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00
San Mateo Avenue - Sunday

DISCUSSION
24 Parking Occupancy Data

DISCUSSION
25 Impact of Business Permits
• To minimize the initial impacts to local businesses, City Council requested and adopted a discount permit program
• This program allows businesses in the paid parking area to obtain up to two permits to park in off-street lots at a discount of up to 100%, and to purchase monthly permits for employees at $30/month
• City Council’s request of Staff was to provide the full 100% discount initially, noting that this might have to be revisited in the future • Each business was able to obtain up to two (2) free permits and the ability to purchase additional permits at $30/month (must prove employment)  $30/month represents more than a 50% discount off lowest lot rate

DISCUSSION
26 Impact of Business Permits
• As of the writing of this staff report, there are 159 business parking permits issued at the 100% discount rate
• This equates to a potential revenue loss of $4,770/month, or $57,240/year, compared to the already discounted $30/month business permit cost

DISCUSSION
27 Potential Program Adjustments Under Consideration
• Shorter paid parking intervals
 Already adjusted for on-street ($0.75 / 20 minutes)
 Some requests in lots as well
o Counter to pushing longer term parkers into lots
o Cost prohibitive
• Exempting holidays
 Mistake in adopted ordinance
 All City holidays exempted in actual practice from the start  Should amend ordinance to match practice

DISCUSSION
28 Potential Program Adjustments Under Consideration
• Exempting, or reducing hours on Sundays
 Many other cities do so
 Impact to area churches
 Not supported by occupancy data
 Different hours creates signage and complexity issues • Allowing pay once and move about all lots
 Counter to “park once and walk” strategy
 Data collection and variable pricing problems

DISCUSSION
29 Potential Program Adjustments Under Consideration
• Removing paid parking from some, or all, of El Camino Real  Less than 3% of transactions
 Neighborhood impacts of new construction projects
• Create more short term (green) zones
 Is the request for shorter-term parking, or free parking  Have not been requiring payment, but should be
 Short term option coupled with available spaces is basic equivalent  Can look into a green zone only short-term option in lots

DISCUSSION
30 Potential Program Adjustments Under Consideration
• Seek a better Mobile Pay application
 Mobile Pay increases compliance and reduces citations  Clunky and slow, doesn’t store plates or payment methods  Staff already assessing better options
• Rate adjustments
 Importance of 85% occupancy
 Currently over during some windows
 Can adjust rates only during those windows
 Staff suggests waiting to see impact of solving technical issues

DISCUSSION
31 Potential Program Adjustments Under Consideration
 Moving program management out of Police Department
o Never intended to reside there
o No other cities manage infrastructure out of PD
o Public Works or City Manager’s Office
 Potential need for expanded service contract
o Staff time has been excessive
o Have only minimal service contracted through LAZ
o Need to better assess need following recent tech fixes  Need for enhanced wayfinding signage

FISCAL OVERVIEW

NICK PEGUEROS

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
32 DISCUSSION
33 Six-Month Fiscal Overview
• ($0.14 million) Fiscal Year 2024 Actuals
 No allocation of staff to support the program
 No loan repayment
• ($0.18 million) Fiscal Year 2025
 3-months of representative data (May-June-July)
 No seasonality (holidays/ wet weather)
 First year of loan repayment
 Overhead allocation (~8%)
• ($1.76 million) Cumulative deficit by June 30, 2030
 Based on three months of data
 No structural changes to the program
34 $0.16
$0.66 $0.66
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24 ACTUAL FY25 PROJECTED FY26 FORECAST FY27 FORECAST FY28 FORECAST FY29 FORECAST FY30 FORECAST Millions
Parking Fund Revenues
Parking Fees
35 $0.16
$0.66 $0.66
$0.18
$0.52
$0.33
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24 ACTUAL FY25 PROJECTED FY26 FORECAST FY27 FORECAST FY28 FORECAST FY29 FORECAST FY30 FORECAST Millions
Parking Fund Revenues
Parking Citations
Parking Fees
36 $0.29
$0.56 $0.64
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24 Actual FY25 Projected FY26 Forecast FY27 Forecast FY28 Forecast FY29 Forecast FY30 Forecast Millions
Parking Fund Expenditures
Contract enforcement
37 $0.29
$0.56 $0.64$0.11
$0.62
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24 Actual FY25 Projected FY26 Forecast FY27 Forecast FY28 Forecast FY29 Forecast FY30 Forecast Millions
Parking Fund Expenditures
Contract enforcement Loan repayment & equip replacement 38 $0.29
$0.56 $0.64$0.11
$0.62
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24 Actual FY25 Projected FY26 Forecast FY27 Forecast FY28 Forecast FY29 Forecast FY30 Forecast Millions
Parking Fund Expenditures
Contract enforcement Loan repayment & equip replacement Overhead Other 39 $0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
FY24
Actual
FY25
Projected
FY26
Forecast
FY27
Forecast
FY28
Forecast
FY29
Forecast
FY30
Forecast
Millions
Parking Fund Revenue and Expenditures
($1.76 million)
cumulative deficit
by June 30, 2030

DISCUSSION
40 • Fund Status: Enterprise v. Special Revenue
 Self-supporting Enterprise Fund (current Municipal Code) o Program revenues offset program expenditures – no General Fund backstop o Required to set rates
 Quality data, ideally 24 months from December 1, 2024  Expenditure stabilization – maintenance, overhead allocations, capital o Opportunities
 Revenue - Fees increases; sixty percent increase (60%)  Expenditures - Restructure loan repayment
 General Fund-subsidized Special Revenue Fund
o Objective of 85% v. full cost recovery
o General Fund serves as backstop for deficit years
• Impact on General Fund long-term financial planning
Financial Considerations

CLOSING

RYAN JOHANSEN

CHIEF OF POLICE
41 NEXT STEPS
 No Action
 Staff is seeking City Council feedback and direction on:
• Shorter intervals in the parking lots
• Revising the exempted holidays in the ordinance to match practice • Exempting Sundays
• Making all lots a single zone so that cars can pay once and move about the lots
• Removal of some or all the paid parking requirements on El Camino Real
• Seeking an alternative mobile pay solution/application • Rate adjustments based on the occupancy rates/goals
• Priority of enhanced wayfinding signage
42 QUESTIONS?
43 Shop Small Shop LocalSmall Business
30 November 2024
Saturday
2024 BPAC ANNUAL REPORT TO

COUNCIL

MATT GAINES

BPAC CHAIR
NOVEMBER 12, 2024

CITY COUNCIL
I. Committee Members
II. 2024 Significant
Accomplishments
III. 2025 Outlook
2 Agenda
BPAC
Committee
Members
• Matt Gaines, Chair
• Cecile Riborozo, Vice Chair
• Quinton Cutlip
• Paul Rose
• Nina Stupi
• Matthew Cheng-Zedler
3 2024 SIGNIFICANT

ACTIVITIES
Huntington Avenue Bicycle and
Pedestrian Improvements Segment 2
Letters of Support for Active
Transportation Grant
4 2024 SIGNIFICANT

ACTIVITIES
5 2024 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIES
Provided Feedback to the Crosswalk Installation Guidelines 6 2024 SIGNIFICANT

ACTIVITIES
Bay Trail SFO Gap Study
7 2024 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIES
Bike to Wherever Day
8 2025 OUTLOOK
9 • Continued Implementation of the Walk ‘n Bike Plan and the Safe Routes to School Plan
• Expand community outreach for children and adults
• Continue to support Bike to Wherever Day and other community events and activities

THANK YOU
10 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION ANNUAL
REPORT

MARCO DURAZO

PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR
NOVEMBER 12, 2024

CITY COUNCIL
Agenda
I. 2024 Significant Policy Accomplishments
II. 2024 Significant Project Accomplishments
III. 2025 Forecast
2 2024 Planning Commissioners
 Marco Durazo, Chair
 Rick Biasotti, Vice Chair
 Auros Ansbergs Harman
 Mary Lou Johnson
 Gerard Madden
 Thomas Kuhn
3 Policy Accomplishments
 Planning Process Amendments
 Housing Element Adoption
 Housing Element Rezonings
 Housing Element Policy Implementation Ordinance
4 Project Reviews
 EIR Scoping meetings:
 Tanforan Redevelopment
 Amazon Distribution Center
5 Project Reviews
 Embarc
 Lowe’s Outdoor Enclosure
6 Project Reviews
 Highland Ridge Subdivision (58 units)
 Crestmoor Subdivision (155 units)
 111 San Bruno Avenue (46 units)
7 2025 Forecast
 Planning Projects:
 Tanforan
 Engvall Subdivision
 Amazon Distribution Center
 Housing Element Policy Implementation Items
 Long Range Policy Initiatives
8 Conclusion

TAX EXEMPT BONDS FOR

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
AT 840 SAN BRUNO AVENUE

PETER GILLI

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
NOVEMBER 12, 2024

CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
I. Objective
II. Project Background
III. Bond Issuance
IV. Recommendation
V. Public Comment
VI. Questions, Deliberation, and Action
2 OBJECTIVE
Adopt a resolution approving the issuance of tax-exempt bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority for the affordable housing project at 840 San Bruno Avenue

3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
 JEMCOR
 Nov. 2023 approval
 341 units
 100% affordable
 Housing Element
 Fulfill low-income
allocation
4 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL FINANCE AUTHORITY
(CMFA)
 JEMCOR requests $160M in tax-exempt
bonds from CMFA
 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act
(TEFRA)
 Tax-exempt bonds require public
hearing to determine if the project
provides a public benefit to qualify for
tax-exempt bonds
 2023 – City Council approved tax-
exempt bonds for 732 El Camino Real
5 CITY IMPACTS
FISCAL
 Bonds issued by the CMFA
 No fiscal responsibility to the City
 Sole responsibility of the borrower
 Portion of issuance fee to come to the City ($40,000)

ENVIRONMENTAL
 This action is not a “Project” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act
6 RECOMMENDATION
 Consider adoption of a resolution approving the
issuance of the California Municipal Finance Authority
exempt facility bonds for a qualified residential rental project in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$160,000,000 for the purpose of financing or refinancing the acquisition, construction, improvement and
equipping of the 341 multi-family units at 840 San Bruno Avenue
7 AGENDA
I. Objective
II. Project Background
III. Bond Issuance
IV. Recommendation
V. Public Comment
VI. Questions, Deliberation, and Action
8