Downtown City Councilmembers Jeannine Pearce and Lena Gonzales voiced support for creation of a City Hall "Parking Manager" (an item sought by TAPS and not opposed by city staff that noted it would require future Council budget approval.) The two downtown Councilmembers also voiced support for pursuing a request by residents to use nearby businesses' parking lots for overnight parking; city staff indicated it's begun pursuing this.

But neither Councilmembers Pearce nor Gonzalez chose to pursue flaws and omissions, cited with specificity by TAPS in the parking study and detailed in writing by its hired parking consultant...and no Council incumbents pursued (and Mayor Garcia didn't voice support for) Moratorium on acceptance of new development applications until the City has the data and professional evaluation that TAPS says is necessary to plan better for parking.

The City-hired consultant's parking study concluded in essence that there's sufficient parking available downtown but acknowledged a lack of adequate parking for residents in adjacent Alamitos Beach. In the short term, it recommended continuing with a number of measures already planned by city staff with evaluation of additional measures left for the future (details below.)

[Scroll down for further.]

In Council public testimony, multiple Alamitos Beach residents pleaded with Councilmembers to provide relief from a lack of parking that requires them to drive around their neighborhood for lengthy periods, sometimes parking blocks from their residences, and in some cases keeps them basically immobile over weekend periods for fear of losing a coveted street parking place. TAPS has previously said Alamitos Beach's parking woes (created in part by 1980's City Hall enabling of "crackerbox" residential density) have been exacerbated by the City Council's 2012 approval (with support from then-downtown Councilmembers Suja Lowenthal and Robert Garcia) of the PD-30 "downtown plan" that invited developers to build the highest residential high rises in LB history while simultaneously reducing grounds for residents' appeals of resulting neighborhood impacts..

Sponsor

Sponsor

Originally scheduled for Oct. 23, the item was withdrawn after residents criticized it online and sought a postponement. Testifying on Dec. 11, TAPS supporters/Alamitos Beach residents told the Council:

[Text as prepared for delivery]

My name is Debbie Dobias...Long Beach could be a shining example of how to do parking right while still accomplishing its Mobility goals. Many new parking programs can pay for themselves and help fund others. WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR HELP AND NEED YOUR LEADERSHIP TO DO THIS.

For 4 years of trying, we failed to get the City to look at the parking issues and solutions. The TAPS lawsuit asked for a court order that would have required the City to follow CEQA laws. Not following those laws would make parking problems worse, resulting in more traffic and air pollution. TAPS did not ask for money. The City's CEQA attorney led the City to settle. When we agreed to the settlement, we gave up something valuable - the court orders.

The intent of the settlement was to bring data, professional evaluation, and new options to you. The City agreed in the settlement that the parking study would do certain things, bringing an unusual opportunity to make things better. The study was required to be solution-oriented, comprehensive, inclusive of all users of parking, identify funding, recommend pricing strategies, find ways to integrate private parking for public use, protect existing residential parking, review all existing standards, and make any recommendations deemed warranted based on the data analyzed.

Tom Modica, Eric Widstrand, and Carrie Tai are City professionals who are trying to address the parking issue. They had thorough, creative, open and honest discussions on multiple fronts. At some point something changed, especially on the subject of the Downtown parking regulations. When Draft 2 came out, it looked like big holes had been punched in the study. THERE IS A PARKING PROBLEM IN DOWNTOWN LONG BEACH AND WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS IT.

Now the City is concluding the study without adhering to the work scope, leaving out things that are crucial to planning. For $250,000, you got something that looks more like staff report, stating little more than what the city was already willing to do. History tells us that very little will change regarding action on parking if you turn over further action to staff now UNLESS YOU DECIDE TO HELP OUT YOUR RESIDENTS AND REALLY WORK WITH US TO FIND SOLUTIONS.

We ask that you hold a study session on parking with the Planning Commission. Include Michael Kodama because he has more expertise on parking and TOD than anyone on city staff that has worked on parking. We ask that you declare a Moratorium on accepting new development applications until you have the data and professional evaluation that's needed to plan better for parking.

This is not just our opinion but also that of parking consultant Mike Kodama, who TAPS paid to advise us and give feedback to the study team. We've provided you with his written opinion of the parking study.

In his Memo, he says that important things are missing from the study that are needed to make their recommendations work. He points out how some of their key conclusions are not backed by data. For instance, he says, "it should be noted that field observations stopped at 6pm and therefore the analysis missed some of the impact related to residential parking needs later in the evening."

He also says it's a false statement to say that there is no parking problem downtown, explains why, and says, "it does not analyze blocks but rather only looks at total numbers for a large project area."

[Ms. Greco urged changes to the study, not simply "receive and file."]

This study relies heavily on parking management to solve parking issues without 4 key needs to accomplish that: management, a parking plan, parking for new buildings, and a funding plan.

1. Parking Management -- The study only describes how parking management is currently spread over multiple departments and tells the City how to go about hiring management should they decide to do so. Kodama said, "It is important that the City of Long Beach find a parking manager to focus on this complex issue. I cannot think of a large city without a parking manager or parking department..It is critical that the parking management program not be seen as a one-time deal. It must be continuous, collaborative and comprehensive."

2. Parking Plan -- The existing Downtown Plan considers visitor parking, not parking for residents and employees. The area needs a comprehensive Parking Plan that is balanced to include the needs of all types of parkers. Kodama points out several things that should be considered, including using incentives rather than more enforcement in an area that has parking issues.

Regarding residential permits, he says we need, "a new approach to develop residential parking permit programs and management options beyond the concept of residents setting up a Parking Assessment District or hiring their own parking management/operation firm themselves."

This study relies heavily on parking management to solve parking issues without 4 key needs to accomplish that: management, a parking plan, parking for new buildings, and a funding plan.

#3. Parking for new buildings. Mike Kodama says this in his Memo to the City:

How can KOA find no evidence that new development in Downtown Long Beach has triggered any parking shortage or that there is no need to reconsider parking requirements for new development without an analysis linking parking requirements and utilization to existing and proposed square footage? This analysis is incomplete without that...[i]t is not a comprehensive program as it does not address the extremely important issue of residential spillover parking, does not set parking priority users in sub-areas around the Downtown commercial core nor developed an evaluation methodology based on parking data.

In addition, any analysis of future parking demand must consider the loss of parking spaces usually associated with new development in a dense, downtown environment.

#4. Funding -- Many parking studies include an analysis of new revenue streams from parking programs. They combine that info with an analysis of parking pricing. The result is a planning tool that allows the city to create a funding plan to improve parking. Parking improvements besides big parking structures are available like automated parking, loan programs, and partnering with developers.

This study does not provide such an analysis.

Mike Kodama says this in his Memo to the City:

It is also suggested that potential parking revenues be reinvested back into a parking management system.

This can be from the parking management program. This is not a new concept and has been effective in cities such as Portland, Seattle, Ventura, Pasadena, San Diego and many other places. It creates transparency and opens up a willingness to pay for parking knowing that it is being reinvested back into the community with the parking issues.

Neither of LB's two incumbent downtown Councilmembers chose to address or pursue these issues.

Sponsor

City staff's agendizing memo noted that the City hired consultant made recommendations grouped into short-, medium- and long-term measures.

[City staff agendizing memol text] The recommended measures seek to address: high demand for on-street parking, under-utilization of off-street parking, and overall parking supply constraints (only in Alamitos Beach). Examples of short-term measures include restriping and other measures to increase the supply of on-street parking, such efforts are already underway on Broadway and other strategic locations. Wayfinding and vigorous parking enforcement are other short-term measures. Medium-term measures include, for example, advanced parking meter technology and dynamic metered-parking pricing. Some longer-term measures include the use of parking lifts and robotic parking structures, benefit or special assessment districts to fund parking improvements, and improved transit or shuttle service that would allow those who own a car, but routinely travel by other means, to park remotely in a less constrained location.

Next Steps

The Departments of Development Services and Public Works are committed to address the parking issues highlighted in the Study. Many of the recommendations, such as improving wayfinding and adding on-street parking through restriping, are already underway. Those items that can be accomplished within existing funding and work programs will continue without the need for further City Council approval. Other recommendations require further analysis and may have fiscal implications beyond what is available in the PSIF. These items will return to the City Council for the appropriate authorization, funding and policy consideration. Many of the mid- and long-term recommendations for Alamitos Beach may require Coastal Permits and may be constrained by the City's Local Coastal Program and the California Coastal Act. As the Study serves as a starting point and not a final plan or list of measures, Development Services and Public Works, will also continue to pursue new measures to address community parking concerns whether or not those measures appear in the Study. Staff will provide the City Council with updates regarding these improvements at appropriate regular intervals.

Sponsor

Sponsor

As previously reported by LBREPORT.com, on December 8, Councilwoman Pearce's office sent a mass emailed newsletter ("This Week in Council District 2") reciting/summarizing some of the consultant's recommendations with no acknowledgment of the flaws specifically cited by her parking impacted residents: "We are looking forward to discussing the parking study of Downtown Long Beach and the Alamitos Beach Neighborhood," she wrote. "There are short, medium and long term recommendations for each individual area studied and they range from restriping and utilizing available off street parking to improving transit options to alternative parking infrastructure. It is a dense study and your input is highly important. Please come and tell us what you think of the study...and what solutions you would like to see implemented in your neighborhood."

On Dec. 9, Councilwoman Pearce mass emailed a "District 2 Council Update" that didn't mention the upcoming Dec. 11 parking item.

At the Dec. 11 Council meeting, Councilwoman Pearce indicated she's been working on parking issues since taking office [mid-July 2016] and has supported measures including adding diagonal parking spaces. Pearce also noted that as an area resident, she too frequently finds herself impacted by parking issues and acknowledged the potential nighttime safety issues they raise.

When asked by a resident (who said he'd incurred thousands of dollars in parking tickets) if the City could eliminate some of the red marked spaces where parking currently isn't allowed or at least not ticket residents in those areas during high demand overnight hours, Councilwoman Pearce asked city staff about this and when told LB's current ordinances don't allow exceptions for certain hours in red marked spaces, thanked staff for its reply and didn't indicate publicly whether she plans to pursue the matter further.

Councilwoman Gonzalez indicated basically that she plans to support Councilwoman Pearce's lead on the Alamitos Beach parking issues.

Prior to the Dec. 11 Council session, TAPS said on its Facebook page:

One way or another, this parking study will be over soon along with the good that it could have done for us. While the parking study only covers downtown and Alamitos Beach, our work could help parking in other areas, too. All of Long Beach will soon be affected by the City's parking policies...

Will the parking study help make parking easier for us?

That's the question we hear most often. The answer is probably not. We've always known that the City could just toss this study aside and choose not to do anything. This is worse than that...

This is not just our opinion but also that of our parking consultant Mike Kodama [whose] summary memo on the parking study...points out how some of their key conclusions are not backed by analysis and that key things are missing to make their recommendations work...

Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to incumbent Long Beach officials, development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.