Want to help make Downtown SLO easier for everyone to access? Provide your feedback on the City's draft of the 2023 Access and Parking Management Plan Update Draft.

Some Of Save Our Downtown’s Concerns Relative To Downtown Parking and Traffic - Allan Cooper, Secretary Save Our Downtown

Vision Statement
Our downtown streets should become greenways or linear parks that can be lined with "placemaking," wind-buffered and/or noise-buffered mini-parks. These mini-parks could accommodate water features, lending libraries, fitness equipment, picnic tables, game tables, and kids' play areas.

As temperatures increase due to climate change, more shade- providing trees must be planted in our city. Unique designs could also be introduced to accommodate public art installations, information kiosks, weather-protected transit stops, and lunch wagons located at regular intervals. In the final analysis, every type of magnet to attract both residents and visitors must be explored in order to inject life back into the centers of our cities.

So the question will arise where do we put on-street parking? Of course there should be preserved a modicum of short term stop-and-shop and loading/unloading on-street parking spaces. However, we believe that public shuttle transit between downtown and outlying parking structures is the only logical answer. This shuttle transit will insure that these parking structures can be placed further outside of downtown (i.e., out near the City limits) where land values will not be as high as in the downtown core and where large, monolithic structures will not disrupt the historical, small town scale of our downtown.

Neighborhood Compatibility

Overflow employee and customer parking in adjoining residential neighborhoods should be discouraged by virtue of setting up parking zones reserved only for the residents. This is particularly a problem for those residents living in or near Pacific Street and in the Old Town Neighborhood.

Parklets

There should be assigned a maximum number of dining parklets located on any given street downtown to make room for short term stop and shop and/or loading zone parking.

Parking Meter Fees and Penalties

One of our most recent concerns has been that instead of doubling the fees for parking downtown, the City should look elsewhere for revenues to underwrite the expense of new parking structures. For example, why don't we increase parking in-lieu fees for new downtown developments as was suggested in Table A.2 “Approved Parking Management and Demand Reduction Programs”: “Increase the in lieu parking fee charged to new development to better reflect the cost of downtown parking”. Save Our Downtown is therefore recommending increasing the in lieu parking fees to cover a larger share of the construction cost of parking garages. It should be noted that our in lieu parking fee requirement is significantly less than in most other cities.

Parking Reductions

Our objection to across the board parking reductions City wide in anticipation of predicted modal shifts in transportation is as follows: In an Uber and Lyft study of nine major cities, Bruce Schaller (author of the influential study “Unsustainable?”) discovered that these new services “aren’t really causing people to drive less; they’re pulling passengers who otherwise would walk, take the bus or just stay home." So the argument that we will need less parking once we begin to rely more on non-personal or autonomous cars is a myth. This modal shift in transportation will actually increase, not decrease, our traffic and parking demands. In fact, "the TNC’s (i.e., online-enabled platforms to connect passengers with drivers) have caused a 94 million-mile spurt in car driving in the city of Seattle” and they will ultimately make our urban core a less desirable place to live if we do not accommodate this increase through more parking facilities.
According To A University Of Adelaide Study, When riders switch to autonomous vehicles, there will be an adverse impact on public transport. With most commuters not interested in ride sharing, this could increase peak period vehicle flows, which is likely to increase traffic congestion over the next 30years or so. Therefore there will be a rapidly increasing demand for more car parking. Urban sprawl will be exacerbated - not mitigated - by the arrival of the autonomous vehicle, the electric car along with remote work because both will make long commutes, as well as vacation and shopping trips safer, more enjoyable and more affordable.

We are opposed to the one-size-fits-all parking reductions in The Zoning Regulation Parking Options/Exceptions found in Table 1. These parking reductions should not apply to all new development.

It is our belief that for the reasons stated above, all hospitality and commercial development as well as multi generational housing should be exempted from these parking provisions. Save Our Downtown is also urging the city to exempt the C-D Zone from these proposed parking reductions. It is unlikely that 50% of the tourists and commuters arriving daily in the Downtown Core will not be using some form of personalized transportation. Imposing this “one size fits all” parking standard onto the C-D Zone will result in discouraging tourism, hurt our local economy and will force commuters to park in adjoining office or residential zones. We do, however, support project specific parking studies as a requisite part of proposed parking reductions whenever they are deemed appropriate.

Public Transit Improvements

There should be more funding for downtown transit improvements using a residential transit fee assessed to downtown housing units.

Purchase of Public Parking Lots

We think the City should purchase a lot near the Wells Fargo bank. Parking garages recoup their cost usually within 5-7 years which should include the City’s purchase of the lot. This payback period is more than acceptable. Additional revenue generation for the City would of course come from the visitor spending downtown that such a garage would generate. The City has been evaluating the potential to use portions of City-owned parking lots and structures for residents’ parking. Save Our Downtown advises that this be done sparingly as the net result could be insufficient parking for tourists, out-of-town employees and shoppers.

Park & Ride Lots

The 2011 Access & Parking Management Plan states under 2.10: “The City will work to consider park-and-ride lots that serve the commute need of commercial core employees. The City will evaluate outlying parking lots for their commercial core employees with a shuttle connecting these lot with the core”.
There is currently only one park and ride lot within the City limits of San Luis Obispo and that is the Calle Joaquin Park and Ride Lot with a capacity of 31 car spaces and 2 motorcycles. After 11 years, why aren’t there more?

Solution for Congested Truck Traffic and Commercial Parking Zones

2011 Access and Parking Management Plan:
1.10 “If congestion levels in the commercial core exceed standards set by the Circulation Element the City will adopt an ordinance that limits times for commercial deliveries.”
However in the absence of such an ordinance the Municipal Code states the following (though there is evidence that this code is not enforced):
SLO Municipal Code Chapter 10.48 identifies the vehicles prohibited in central traffic district at certain times of day, types of commercial vehicles operating in the city, the routes on which they operate, where they can park, and measures to facilitate loading and unloading of goods. SLO limits the hours of truck access to 6 P.M. to 9 A.M. Why not extend these hours to later than 6 P.M. so that truck congestion and noise doesn’t intrude on night-time (particularly sidewalk) dining? City laws permit trucks to be no more than 35 feet for single unit vehicles and 55 feet in overall length for multi-unit vehicles, but, the national industry standard is now 73 1⁄2 feet in length.

Despite city regulations, larger trucks are still regularly observed on city streets. The volume of freight vehicles operating within city boundaries is steadily increasing, which contributes to road congestion, especially in urban areas with a parking deficit. Emerging delivery methods are on pace to transform the last-mile delivery network into a cleaner, safer, and more efficient freight system. Freight Mode Shift supports alternative modes for last-mile goods transport (box trucks, cargo bikes, and drones) so long as there are additional loading zones. After a tractor trailer is sorted at the local distribution warehouse, the merchandise is loaded onto smaller delivery trucks and brought to the retail and commercial areas. The growth in small intercity trucks can be the result of a variety of industry and economic shifts over the last decade, including:
1) Increase in e-commerce and home deliveries made by smaller parcel delivery trucks to residential addresses.

2) Companies selecting single unit trucks or downsizing fleets to avoid regulations requiring that drivers must have Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDL) (there is a national shortage of CDL holders)
3) Increase in construction activity in the city, which predominately utilizes single unit trucks to remove waste and deliver building materials to construction sites.

Addressing Climate Change

Los Angeles is painting their roads white to cool the City down. Why not apply this principle to surface parking lots and parking garage roof tops?
Why not install solar panel arrays over surface parking lots and on parking garage roof tops? This will provide the double advantage of shading and protecting the cars while generating clean energy.

Charging stations should be installed in all existing and new parking structures.
Existing surface lots should be resurfaced with permeable pavers or porous concrete.

Extensive planting of native plants and the provision of bioswales should be incorporated into surface lots and parking garages.
In the event that a parking garage is retired, adaptive reuse design features should allow this conversion into an office building or warehouse without requiring demolition. An automated parking garage has no need for sloping floors or ramps. It involves less driving and less light is needed. All that is needed for adaptive reuse is the removal (in tact) of the automated parking racks.

Downtown parking should be incentivized (i.e., reduced meter fees) for solar, hydrogen or battery powered cars. Many point to the high non-renewable energy costs of manufacturing these cars. However, solar, hydrogen or battery powered cars can be manufactured using the power of water. For example the BMW Group currently manufactures electric cars using regional green electricity. This makes this new generation of cars a greener alternative to gas powered cars.

Predicting Future Car Parking Supply

Predicating future car parking supply (see Table 1 “Zoning Regulation Parking Options/Exceptions”) on the targeted mode split of 50% auto trip usage, 20% bicycle trip usage, 18% walking (or motorcycle, golf cart, Segway, scooter or skateboard usage) and 12% transit usage is unrealistic and unattainable. Why? This targeted mode split can only be achieved by making the following ridiculous assumptions:
All residents (assume they are all ambulatory... and they are not) relying on bicycles, walking or public transit to get around (not cars):

all 6,700 adult residents holding jobs in San Luis Obispo, all 14,300 Cal Poly and Cuesta College students living off campus and in San Luis Obispo
3,000 residents employed as faculty and staff at Cal Poly
1,870 residents employed at the CMC
929 residents employed as faculty and staff at Cuesta College
all of the remaining 6,231 residents who are neither college students nor those who work in SLO (excluding residents with mobility issues, pre schoolers and those working in outlying communities)
The sum total for this group is 33,030.
There is a transient (or non-resident) population who must continue to rely on automobile usage:

the 24,300 workers (source: SLOCOG) commuting daily into SLO from outlying communities
the 2,700 transient occupants who will be spending a night or two in a motel or hotel in SLO (which will increase to 3,623 overnight visitors once the 14 hotels in our pipeline are completed)

800+ more transients staying in Airbnb’s,
the approximately 1,100 out-of-town shoppers and day visitors,
the 3,950 Cal Poly and Cuesta College students living in outlying communities (ref: CPSU Masterplan) There are residents who must continue to rely on automobile usage:

the 5,700 residents 65 years of age or older who may have mobility issues due to age or infirmity,
the 1,570 pre-school children (who are too young to ride bicycles)
an unknown number of residents who are employed in outlying communities (not including Cal Poly, CMC and Cuesta College employees)

The sum total for this group is 40,120.

So the above roughly approximates a 45-55 split. However, it is a fact that within the State of California, 36% of those who are employed have some kind of disability. Of those, 12.5% have an ambulatory, hearing or vision disability which may prevent them from using public transit, walking or riding a bike.This would whittle down the employed population relying on bicycles, walking or public transit by 1,200.

Then consider that all of the residents employed at Cal Poly (3,214), the Men’s Colony (1,800) and Cuesta College (687) have little incentive to abandon their cars when they have ample parking available to them at their places of employment. This would whittle down the employed population relying on bicycles, walking or public transit by 5,701. Once these employees are using their cars for work, they will naturally be inclined to use them for shopping, doctor’s appointments, etc. as well.

Increasing parking costs will not have the results you are seeking. The opposite will happen, people won’t go downtown to shop/eat. They will go to other places where it isn’t so stressful and expense to park. I love downtown and brag about it constantly, but your plan won’t have the results you claim. Limiting parking time and increasing costs will definitely have people shopping and eating elsewhere.

Just to add my short statement. I very very seldom go downtown. Parking has become a major problem. We use to be a great downtown where you could spend half a day. Now you are limited to 2 hours as well as limited parking spaces. I can and do shop else with tears in my eyes. I loved and shopped locally for the past 25 years. Not any more. Sad.
I know there must be a better way.

I find the parking studies reported in the city’s plan to be somewhat suspect in accurately capturing parking patterns - At the least, there should have been two additional representative parking days —

There should have also been some smaller studies more associated with actual shopping patterns and perhaps some ‘ride-alongs’ with people trying to find a parking spot when they are shopping.

I think planners would have gotten a more accurate picture of the perception that parking has become a nightmare and people would rather shop elsewhere. Add in the alleged ‘improvements’ to street configurations and navigating downtown seems to have gotten more complicated and foreboding.

Perception guides behavior —

All of the case study cities are not comparable to SLO. Many of them have complex infrastructure to support commuters-- for example, they have a reliable transit system that SLO does not. This plan does not address the commuters that live outside of SLO city limits and need their cars to drive. What about folks that have kids? They can't spend hours waiting for a bus.

This plan also recommends switching from quarterly and monthly parking passes to daily bundles. The parking pass program is well-utilized and is a source of funding for the parking program. There is clearly demand for these types of programs; why would we get rid of them? The monthly/quarterly passes also encourage people to come downtown more often since they have already paid for parking. Don't we want to support downtown vitality?

It is also recommended in this plan that some of the 10 hour meters transition to 2 hour meters. The 10 hour meter program is frequently sold out. Why would we reduce the number of spaces? Clearly there is demand for this type of program. Additionally, people are not going to want to park on the periphery of downtown if they need to move their car in 2 hours time.

This plan recommends updating the parking website to "highlight overall transportation choices and methods, with Driving/Parking as just one option." While this is great, there are plenty of parking programs that people are completely unaware of, such as the validation program. The website ALSO needs to be updated so that the current parking programs are clearly displayed.

Clearly, there is a disconnect with this plan and the realities of folks living in SLO County. We live in a rural community where many folks commute into town. Many community members already complain about how difficult it is to park downtown. Raising the parking rates, getting rid of the first hour free, and changing all the parking programs discourage them from coming downtown even more. Don't we all want to support the local businesses downtown?

I am current resident of downtown and a downtown employee. I fully support moving towards a greener city, and enjoy walking to work myself, when possible. However, I know that this "option" to use other modes of transportation is not a reality for many of the employees and patrons of our downtown. We are a rural county, with San Luis Obispo's downtown at the center of it all. It is a destination for many in the surrounding counties for shopping and dining. If we wish to keep it this way, and not create exclusivity with large rate increases, downtown will need to be easy to access for any mode of transportation, and priced so that lower to medium income families and individuals will still be able to shop, work, and dine here.

Downtown SLO is also where many people from other cities/towns in SLO County are employed. With limited transit options from these locations, the vital workforce that keeps our downtown thriving, would be affected the most by this plan. Having convenient ways for employees to pay for parking on a monthly/yearly basis, is vital to keeping downtown stores operating.

Another factor to consider is parents with school children, who need their cars to pick up their children from school on a moments notice. These rate increases would make coming downtown for work or pleasure extremely cost prohibitive for families. And with new shopping centers and public markets opening around town (with free parking available) patrons will opt not to come downtown, essentially defeating the goal of making downtown a bustling cultural hub of SLO.

I think that there is room to educate the public on alternative modes of transportation, and improve the current transit systems and bike pathways, to make downtown access easier. By making downtown safer, more well lit, protecting cyclists, and potentially increases the frequency of our transit system, I feel that naturally more and more people will use these options. I think there should be incentives and options for locals to pay a discounted rate for parking. Perhaps retaining the first hour free for residents, or creating a system where only locals can access monthly/yearly permits to make parking easier and more convenient for them, or even just a $1 off the reg price for each hour for anyone living in SLO county. We know that tourists are willing to pay whatever rate is set when on vacation, but we do not want to make our downtown cost prohibitive to our residents. We all want less emissions, but we can not discount the fact that driving is a necessary part of all of our lives and often, the only option we have in a busy world.

Well made plan, very impressive. I would recommend creating a more consise list of recommend outcomes (not the lofty goals, but the vision of what downtown will feel like) and including it near the front. Maps are great, more if possible? I echo some other commenters - replace the rest of the coin meters. Lastly when adding the 'share road with bike' paint along bike corridors, please please use a different method so the paint doesn't protrude out of the road - you can feel the bumps on the bike and it makes the road more unfriendly - I like the marker, but there has to be another paint or method. Again, great job

Speed up replacement of coin parking meters. I use ParkMobile App.

Thoughts on Goal 1: While I fully support keeping downtown SLO a walkable and bikeable community, the reality is that most visitors will still need to drive to get there and, therefore, will need somewhere to park once they get there. All of the implementations of these proposed changes will impact downtown business employees the most. Long-term rates need to be reduced, not raised. Raising the metered street parking rates makes sense. Instead of encouraging people not to park downtown, we should encourage them to PARK and WALK to their destination. I don't believe that raising parking rates will encourage people to start biking or walking or taking public transit — I think it WILL encourage them to shop and dine elsewhere.

Thoughts on Goal 2: It makes sense for on-street parking to be short-term, but some of the 10-hour meters are either A) in a parking lot (ex. Nipomo/Monterey/Palm) or on more residential streets (ex. Chorro/Pacific). Wayfinding is essential for clarity. Part 2.D.2. is the most essential part of this plan and seems to be an afterthought.

The most obvious overlook in this document is the lack of a communication plan and local incentive programs. The City is severely underestimating the amount of public outcry the increased rates will cause, especially if the first hour free in the structures goes away. The narrative and perception around downtown will be very negative during that time, and there is no PR plan for how this will play out once these become more public.

While tourists will pay the price of parking, locals will not. There is little to no awareness surrounding the current parking validation program. Sell parking vouchers/tokens to downtown businesses at a very discounted rate, and let them provide them to customers to incentivize shopping and dining downtown. Create signage about that program. Offer lower rates during the Mid-Week (Sunday-Wednesday). Offer large discounts to downtown employees who keep our downtown vibrant and economically sound. There is a lot of brainstorming to be done, and the PR surrounding this plan will be a mess if these issues are not addressed.

The amount of building happening in SLO is off the scale. The traffic has increased and so has crime. This used to be a nice area but feel it's now becoming like Santa Barbara being overwhelmed with traffic and people. City Leaders are destroying what was once an affordable place to live and raise children has now become a place for the Wealthy. Congratulations City planning and the Previous Mayor Heidi Harmon for selling out SLO!!!