Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2017-09-21 packet Notice of Meeting & Tentative Agenda ®,6,�r ,F-I Ffsfob ff "kG \N v �,BLi6Tic )I JhI n — k—c M , . City of Jefferson Public Works & Planning Committee Thursday, September 21 , 2017 7:30 a.m. John G. Christy Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street Boone/Bancroft Room (Upper Level) TENTATIVE AGENDA 1) Introductions 2) Approval of the June 22, 2017 Committee meeting minutes 3) New Business 1. CAMPO Study on Transit Update (Katrina Williams) 2. Parking Study Update (Britt Smith) 3. South Lincoln Street Schedule (David Bange) 4. Storm Water $750,000 Funding Plan (Matt Morasch) 5. Demolition Ordinance Update (Eric Barron) 6. New World Cardboard Recycling Contract (Jayme Abbott) 7. Transit Triennial Review Update (Mark Mehmert) 4) Other Topics 1. Water Main Leak Report (Britt Smith) 2. Planning & Protective Services Updates (Sonny Sanders) 5) Citizen opportunity to address Council/Staff on Stormwater and Other Public Works Issues 6) Adjourn NOTES Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at(573)634-6570 to request accommodations or alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three business days to process the request. Please call (573)634-6410 with questions regarding agenda items. MINUTES JEFFERSON CITY PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING COMMITTEE Boone/Bancroft Room John G. Christy Municipal Building 320 East McCarty Street June 22, 2017 Committee Members Present: Attendance *Larry Henry, Chairman 3 of 3 Ken Hussey 3 of 3 Ron Fitzwater 3 of 3 **Rick Mihalevich 3 of 3 Rick Prather 3 of 3 *arrived late **left early Staff Present: Matt Morasch, Public Works Director Mark Mehmert, Transit Division Director Britt Smith, Operations Division Director David Bange, City Engineer Eric Seaman, Wastewater Division Director Sonny Sanders, Planning & Protective Services Director Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Eric Barron, Senior Planner David Helmick, Property Inspector Ryan Moehlman, City Counselor Steve Crowell, City Administrator Brenda Wunderlich, Administrative Assistant Vice Chairman Hussey called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. A quorum was present at this time. The following guests were present: Cathy Bordner, 718 Capitol Ave; Doug Record, 1009 Fairmount Blvd; Brian Bemskoetter, Board of Realtors; Dan Basel, 609 E. High St; Tammy Boeschen, 728 Deer Creek Rd; Jane Beetem, PO Box 476; Heath Clarkston, HBA; and Nicole Roberts, News Tribune. 1. Introductions Introductions were made at this time. 2. Approval of the April 20, 2017 Committee meeting minutes Councilman Prather moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to approve the April 20, 2017 minutes, motion carried. Vice Chairman Hussey moved Item 7 to the beginning of the agenda due to Councilman Mihalevich needing to leave the meeting early. 3. New Business 7. Demolition Ordinance Discussion (Sonny Sanders) Mr. Sanders explained staff would like to come up with recommendations and bring a revised draft ordinance to the Committee. Minutes/Jefferson City Public Works and Planning Committee 2 June 22,2017 *Chairman Henry arrived at this time (7:34 a.m.). There was discussion among Committee members and staff regarding boundaries, having a tiered approach, incentivizing/rewarding by protecting historic properties, having a diverse group of citizens on the Historic Preservation Commission, and information from the National Parks Service. Councilman Mihalevich moved and Councilman Prather seconded to direct staff to bring back an improved ordinance with the comments from today and at the previous work session to the full Council as soon as they can, motion carried. Councilman Mihalevich requested an update of progress at the next Committee meeting. **Councilman Mihalevich left the meeting at this time (8:30 a.m.) 1. Grease Interceptor Inspections (Eric Seaman) Mr. Seaman explained Wastewater staff will begin inspecting commercial grease interceptors for compliance. Inspections will be scheduled as convenient to the restaurant management. 2. Chapter 8 and Chapter 21 Code Amendments (Jayme Abbott) Ms. Abbott explained the amendment to Chapter 8 deals with re-securing structures immediately as needed and changing to using clear polycarbonate sheeting instead of plywood. Chapter 21 amendments include City's ability to visually inspect properties for nuisance violations, tax bill against owners, and language in the weeds, trees and storage of goods sections. There was discussion among Committee members and staff regarding property owner notification and cost of polycarbonate versus plywood. Councilman Prather moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to refer the code amendments to the City Council, with recommendation to approve, motion carried. 3. Home Repair Opportunity (HeRO) Update (Jayme Abbott) Ms. Abbott explained staff is recommending rescinding the grant award for several reasons: 1) MHDC has already indicated no longer funding City entities beginning in 2018; 2) City offers the Community Development Block Grant Homeowner Support Program; and 3) none of the 2017 HeRO funds have been expended. Councilman Prather moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to rescind the HeRO grant, motion carried. 4. Green Meadow Pump Station Flood-proofing (Eric Seaman) Mr. Seaman explained this project would floodproof doors to this major pump station impacted by high Moreau River levels. Minutes/Jefferson City Public Works and Planning Committee 3 June 22,2017 5. West McCarty Street Sewer Replacement(Eric Seaman) Mr. Seaman explained the existing sewer main is undersized and extremely deteriorated. It cannot be replaced by replaced by trenchless methods. Houses will have improved services per City plumbing code. 6. Permissive Use of Right-of-way for Statue in Roundabout(Capital Region Medical Center) (David Bange) Mr. Bange explained staff recommends approval of the permissive use request to place a sculpture in the central island of the Stadium and Jefferson roundabout. The proposed sculpture is made up of a pair of hands lifted skyward with a butterfly resting on one of the outstretched fingers. Councilman Hussey moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to refer the permissive use of right-of-way to the City Council with recommendation to approve, motion carried. 4. Other Topics 1. Water Main Leak Report (Britt Smith) Mr. Smith referred Committee members to the report included in the packet. 5. Citizen Opportunity to address Council/Staff on Stormwater and Other Public Works Issues Mr. Smith distributed a memo to the Committee regarding capital expenditure request with un- used salt funds. Staff is requesting approval to use the excess budgeted salt funds to make purchases for items requested in the upcoming budget. Councilman Hussey moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to endorse the plan as presented, motion carried. 6. Adjourn Councilman Hussey moved and Councilman Fitzwater seconded to adjourn the meeting at this time (9:04 a.m.), motion carried. MINUTES JEFFERSON CITY PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING COMMITTEE Stormwater Tour 320 East McCarty Street August 24, 2017 Committee Members Present: Attendance Larry Henry, Chairman 4 of 4 Ken Hussey 4 of 4 Ron Fitzwater 4 of 4 Rick Prather 4 of 4 Committee Members Not Present: Rick Mihalevich 3 of 4 Council Members Present: Carlos Graham David Kemna Mark Schrieber Staff Present: Matt Morasch, Public Works Director Britt Smith, Operations Division Director David Bange, City Engineer Don Fontan, Stormwater Engineer Ryan Moehlman, City Counselor Steve Crowell, City Administrator Guest Present: Nicole Roberts, News Tribune Julie Smith, News Tribune The tour was called to order at 12:00 p.m. Roll Call was taken. The following notice was read into meeting. a. Pursuant to § 610.020.4 RSMo.,this portion of the meeting is being held"at a place that is not reasonably accessible to the public," for good cause, being that it is highly beneficial for councilmembers to learn about and directly familiarize themselves with the condition and extent of the stormwater collection system that the City is in the process of repairing. This portion of the meeting will be devoted to fact-finding of the Council and no decisions or votes of the Council will be made during this portion the meeting. 1. Tour was conducted of Stormwater facilities 2. Adjourn Tour was adjourned at 1:44 p.m. Memorandum TO: CAMPO Board of Directors FROM: Katrina Williams,Transportation Planner DATE: September 15, 2017 SUBJECT: JEFFTRAN System-Wide Assessment—Existing Conditions Report Release The JEFFTRAN System-Wide Assessment, conducted by the contractor Lochmueller Group, began in March 2017. The Assessment is funded through the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization(CAMPO). As part of the Assessment, Lochmueller and CAMPO staff led and participated in several stakeholder meetings, staff interviews, a public meeting, and conducted ridership counts in March. A public survey was also deployed in June and July. The first deliverable, an Existing Conditions Report, has been finalized and released. Below are some highlights of the report: • Ridership numbers,broken down by individual routes, taken over a two day period. • A substantial demographic breakdown of the City of Jefferson and comparisons to other Missouri communities of similar size. • Peer system review. Working with JEFFTRAN, the consultant made comparisons with five other public transportation peer systems. A number of factors were looked at in these comparisons, including; farebox recovery (farebox revenue as a percentage of operating cost), passenger trips per revenue hour, and passenger trips per capita for both fixed route and demand response (Handi-Wheels). • A SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analysis was performed to evaluate the system in a comprehensive manner that offers an accurate view of the issues that currently influence JEFFTRAN. • A public survey was administered to gather feedback on possible service expansion. 441 responses were returned, indicating that weekend service, followed by evening service, were the most desired service expansions respondents were looking for. Expansion of service to Holts Summit was also expressed by survey respondents. The Existing Conditions Report is available for review on the CAMPO website: http://www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/CAMPO/Existing%20Conditions%20Report%20- %20Final%20Draft.pdf. A public meeting is planned for October 17 in the Boone-Bancroft Room in City Hall, 320 E. McCarty St, Jefferson City, MO 65101. The final assessment is expected in late October. 1. -VOL, Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - StudyArea----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 Map1 — Study Area-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 Analysis---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 ParkingInventory-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 Table A — Public Parking Supply Summary------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 TableB — Parking Supply----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 Map2 — Parking Supply----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Turnover and Occupancy Analysis--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7 Turnover 7 Table C — Parking Turnover Summary of 2 Hour or Less On -Street Spaces ------------------------------- 8 Map 3 — Parking Violations Observed During Turnover Study ----------------------------------------------------- 9 Occupancy--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 Graph 1 — Parking Occupancy Totals-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 Graph2 — Parking Occupancy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 Table D — Parking Occupancy Summary--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11 Table E — Parking Occupancy Analysis-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 Map 4 — Peak Parking Occupancy------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 Parking Demand Calculation---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 ParkingNeed----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 Graph 3 Observed Occupancy s. Calculated Demand ----------------------------------------------------------------- 21 Graph4 Shared Use Model-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21 ParkingDemand Zones-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------22 Zone 1 22 Zone 2 22 Future 22 Conclusion 22 Table F — Demand Matrix -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 Map 4 — Surplus/Deficit 1999 Parking Generation Ratios__________________________________________________________25 0 TC -1 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Map 4.1 — Surplus/Deficit New Parking Generation Ratios -------------------------------------------------------- 26 Table G — Zone 1 Demand Matrix 27 Map 4.2 — Surplus/Deficit Zone 1, 1999 Parking Generation Ratios _________________________________________28 Map 4.3 — Surplus/Deficit Zone 1, New Parking Generation Ratios __________________________________________29 Table H — Zone 2 Demand Matrix 30 Map 4.4 — Surplus/Deficit Zone 2, 1999 Parking Generation Ratios ------------------------------------------ 31 Map 4.5 — Surplus/Deficit Zone 2, New Parking Generation Ratios__________________________________________32 PublicInput------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33 Appendices- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 34 Appendix A — Business Owner Survey Results Appendix B — Employee Survey Results Appendix C — Customer Survey Results Appendix D — Resident Survey Results 0 Tc -2 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Final Report This Downtown Parking Demand Update prepared for the City Jefferson City is a comprehensive examination of parking needs. The goal of the report is to evaluate the use of existing parking supply and determine if the supply is adequate to meet current and future parking demand. This report is an assessment of findings: • overview of the parking study process. • assessment of how the existing parking is operating and how much new parking may be required based on current and anticipated future developments. • overview of public input. The study process consisted of a two part analysis. The first part included a determination of the parking demand by block based on the provided building inventory and calculated parking generation factors per 1,000 square feet of gross floor space. The demand was compared to the available supply and the resulting surplus or deficit determined on a block -by -block basis. The second part of the analysis involved comparing the parking surplus and deficit patterns to the observed conditions as determined by the turnover and occupancy data. This comparison offered a benchmark by which the surplus and deficit data was calibrated. PARKING STUDY AREA The study area determined by the City of Jefferson City is comprised of 37 blocks covering the majority of the downtown. This area contains the State Capitol, State Offices, Municipal offices, County Court system along with other County offices, retail, restaurant and office space. Rich & Associates evaluated the parking conditions, supply and activity of the 37 block study area along with blocks just outside the study boundaries. PARKING SUPPLY The following table summarizes the existing parking supply in the study area. There are a total of 9,596 parking spaces in the study area. Of these spaces 1,166 are on -street spaces and 1,634 are off-street public spaces. There are 6,796 privately controlled spaces of which 3,531 are State controlled private spaces. 0 Es -1 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Public Parking Supply On -Street Totals 1,166 12% Off -Street Totals 1,634 17% Public Parking Total 2,800 29% Private Parking Supply State Owned Parking 3,531 37% Other Controlled Private Parking 3,265 34% Private Parking Total 6,796 71 TOTAL PARKING SUPPLY 9,596 The City of Jefferson City manages and controls 29 percent of the parking in the downtown area. Based on Rich & Associates experience and best practices, we have found that to successfully manage municipal parking it is desirable for the municipality to have control of at least 50 percent of the supply. This allows the municipality to effectively manage the parking in terms of allocation, changing demand, market pricing, and allows the parking to be enforced with greater efficiency. Jefferson City does not meet this benchmark. TURNOVER AND OCCUPANCY STUDY The turnover and occupancy study involved an examination of on -street and off-street parking occupancies and vehicle movements encompassing both daytime and evening hours. Parking in both public and private areas were observed, though State owned lots were not included in the analysis because State lots are at or near capacity and are restricted to State functions and users. It should be noted that not all parking spaces in the study area were counted, instead the goal is to observe a large portion of the overall parking. The occupancy study occurred on Thursday, January 26, 2017 between the hours of 7:00am — 8:00pm. TURNOVER Turnover is an indicator of how often a parking stall is being used by different vehicles throughout the course of the day. Turnover is most relevant to the short term customer trying to find parking. The following table is the summary results of the turnover findings. The on -street spaces observed for parking turnover were signed two hour, 90 min, and one hour. There were 0 Es -2 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report 569 short term on -street parking spaces observed for turnover from the hours of 7:00am - 6:00pm. The last circuit of the study was strictly occupancy counts. The core downtown commercial area was the focus for the turnover analysis. State parking areas around the Capitol building were not included in this analysis. Parking Turnover Summary of 2 hour or less on -street spaces Vehicles that remained less than 2 hours 484(79.8%) Vehicles that remained between 2 and 4 hours 90(14.8%) Vehicles that remained between 4 and 6 hours 18(2.9%) Vehicles that remained between 6 and 8 hours 10(1.6%) Vehicles that remained between 8 and 10 hours 4 (less than 1%) Total number of vehicles observed 606 Total number of stalls analyzed for turnover 569 Turnover Rate 1.07 Source: Rich and Associates Field Observations *State parking was not included in Turnover analysis. OCCUPANCY Occupancy is an important aspect of parking because it helps us to understand the dynamic of how demand fluctuates throughout the day. 0 Es -3 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Key observations from the occupancy counts: • The peak occupancy occurred between 9:00am-11:00am at 52% occupancy (2693 of the 5147 observed parking spaces). • The 11:00am-1:00pm circuit was only 35 vehicles short of the overall peak and also showed a 52% occupancy. • The large amount of office land use in the downtown drives the early peak, • The lunch peak driven by the large amount of office employees in the downtown occurs between 11:00am-1:00pm. • Private parking locations were observed to have a higher occupancy rate than the public parking. • Public off-street parking has a higher occupancy rate than on -street parking. This may be due to the amount of on street parking available and the convenient locations of the off-street parking. It may also be due to the large numbers of professionals in the downtown who need to park for the entire day. • Though there is an overall low occupancy rate, there are pocket areas where finding a parking space is difficult. One factor that may be skewing the overall low occupancy may be the large amount of parking available on the periphery of the downtown which is included as part of the available supply. Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri PARKING DEMAND Final Report Analyses were performed to determine the current and future parking demands and needs for the study area. The data collected and compiled by Rich & Associates to calculate the parking demand included: • An inventory of the study area on -street and off-street parking supplies • Turnover and occupancy studies for public and private on -street and off-street parking areas Block -by -block analysis of square footage and type of land use in the study area. Jefferson City provided a building inventory of the downtown and this data was cross referenced with Rich & Associates field notes regarding use and the number of floors per building. The current parking situation is calculated showing an overall deficit of +/-2,522 spaces with the 1999 Parking Generation Ratios (PGR) and a deficit of +/-1,484 spaces with new PGR's. During the turnover and occupancy study we found that only 52% of the parking spaces analyzed were occupied. The turnover and occupancy study covered approximately 54% (5147 spaces observed of the total supply of 9,596) of the parking spaces in the study area. Not all of the State lots were counted due to the fact that they are typically full on a weekday. When speaking with a State of Missouri employee in charge of facilities we were told that the State operations does not have enough parking. If the State lots were included in the counts the percentage occupied would be much higher. Government use is the largest land use in the downtown. The occupancy for government use can change depending on the day, due to trials in the court buildings, whether or not the legislature is in session, the number of lobbyists in town, and special events occurring at the State Capitol building. Though there are parking shortages there is parking found on the surrounding blocks and in carpool lots to help supplement the parking supply. There are shortages of parking in this area that need to be addressed. The biggest issue currently is that the parking is located down a hill (if parking south of High Street) and some of the public lots with the lowest occupancy are on the edges of the study area. FUTURE When projecting the future scenarios, there is 41,238 square feet of vacant space in the downtown along with 31 residential units to be occupied. This square footage was assumed to be 40 percent occupied in five years and 80 percent occupied in 10 years. A mixed use parking generation ratio of 2.75 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet was used except for the residential component where 1.28 spaces/unit was used. Factoring this into the Parking Demand Matrix, the parking deficit is +/-2,586 spaces with 1999 PGR's and +/-1,545 spaces with the new PGR's in the five year scenario and then the deficit increases to +/-2,651 spaces with 1999 PGR's and 1,606 spaces with the new PGR's in 10 years. 0 Es -5 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri CONCLUSION Final Report Jefferson City only controls 29% of the parking in the downtown which means that there is limited opportunities for shared use parking occurring in the downtown, thus causing more driving trips to be created. The parking situation can be made more difficult when an employee parks on -street due to greater convenience when their business has a private parking space available for their use, because the employee is actually taking two spaces out of the parking supply. This is because the private space is not a shared parking space, instead it is reserved only for the business, whereas the public on -street spaces are available for anyone visiting the downtown to visit multiple destinations. Currently Zone 2 has a parking shortage because the majority of parking in the downtown area is private. Jefferson City will need to develop publically available parking in this zone or work with private parking land owners to bring the private parking into the public supply. This can be done through lease agreements, purchasing the parking or providing enforcement and cleaning of the lots in return for the use of the private parking lots. PUBLIC INPUT Public input involved staff meetings, group meetings with a variety of community stakeholders and an open house. The open house for anyone wanting to discuss parking with the consultants. This meeting occurred on January 25th between 4:00pm and 6:00pm. Stakeholders were selected by City staff and a general call to the community to represent a broad cross section of parties involved in the downtown. The cross-section of stakeholders spans local business people, residents, non-profit organizations, and Chamber members. The stakeholder meetings and open house provided consultant staff with individual perspectives on parking issues in Jefferson City. Four surveys were developed to gain additional public input. The surveys were directed toward Business Owners/Managers, Employees, Customers and Residents. These surveys were available on the City's website. The surveys response rates were as follows: • Business Owner: 9 Responses • Employee: 29 Responses • Customer: 49 Responses • Residential: 2 Responses 0 Es -6 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri DEFINITIONS The following are definitions used for the analysis: Final Report • Parking Supply - The number of parking spaces available for use by a specified group or groups of individuals (i.e. shoppers, employees, etc.). • Turnover - Turnover is the number of vehicles that occupied a parking space in a particular period. For example, if a parking lot has 100 spaces and during the course of the day, 250 different vehicles occupied the lot, then the turnover is two and a half times (2.5). • Occupancy - The number of vehicles observed in a specific lot or block face represented as a percentage of spaces occupied. • Occupancy Rate - The percentage of all parking spaces with vehicles parked in them at a given time. • Circuit - A circuit refers to the two-hour period between observances of any one particular parking space. For the turnover and occupancy study, a defined route was developed for each survey vehicle. One circuit of the route took approximately two hours to complete and each space was observed once during that circuit. • Block Face - A number was assigned to each block within the study area. Each block is then referenced by its block number and by a letter (A, B, C or D). The letter refers to the cardinal face of the block; with (A) being the north face, (B) the east face, (C) the south face and (D) the west face. Therefore, a block designated as 1 A would refer to the north face of block 1. • Modal Split - Fractional split identifying what percentage of people travel by a certain transportation type (i.e. automobile, bicycle, walking, etc.). • Parking Demand - The number of parking spaces generated by a single -purpose building, multi-purpose building, group of buildings or outdoor amenity. • Parking Need - Represents the number of parkers who need to be accommodated in a given block after the use of alternative parking facilities is considered. Use is affected by price, location, accessibility and user restriction. 0 Es -7 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri INTRODUCTION Final Report This Downtown Parking Study Update prepared for the City of Jefferson City, is an update of the parking demand from the study conducted by Rich & Associates in 1999. The study was undertaken to analyze the parking needs unique to the city and the forces that have created those needs. This update includes a detailed review of parking to determine current and future demand of parking. The original study drew on standards developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and the Urban Land Institute, which were modified in accordance with the recommendations of our senior partners to suite the unique circumstances present in the State Capital. Some considerations prevalent to the study included the presence of the State Capital building, Legislature, ancillary administrative offices, Supreme Court and related public facilities within the downtown area. STUDY AREA The study area determined by the City of Jefferson City is comprised of 37 blocks covering the majority of the downtown. Rich & Associates evaluated the parking conditions, supply and activity of the 37 block study area along with blocks just outside the study boundaries. Map 1 of the study area can be found on page 2, while blocks 35-37 were evaluated, the parking demand is not included for these blocks due to the location to the downtown and the amount of residential use on these blocks. 0 t A_All I IF - bra._ it f W INST.$ C .y F •.M 4s•yr .g �, y. r -. --�r •� +� ` � Wig, ,a 1 r JUAN t o i —•.� ;I fly h +ri�� �' 1. — r _ W. MCCARTY ST. . y �°ii, t 146 16 23 All Uri— got F I 33 " 10 17 I i- �",;.,r� +rM 27 14 - 22 " � 32 4 1 E �• l r a r 1- 'FR>x it10, ■ r• r p If; lfi 7irj1 r)EYE" I [lb L"l+M Y f1�R, ^""��nf1i A"r'Hl.f•"�fe _ 1 HWY 50 J _ r 0 m P _ Y 13 + 18 '• r "f t +r L . ,fir r 19 20 3 29 _ aha;-�,�,,• -,� _ 30 I. z o 0 z z Lu o CL o z w ¢ 0 ¢ ¢ E. STATE ST. 1� 35 ,Ilei E. CAPITOL AVE. () COMMERCIAL WAY E. HIGH ST. 37 E. WALL WAY E. MCCARTY ST. 1 -- On E. MILLER ST. Q 1:1N4'1111111.YrIIYd R ICH &ASSOCIATES BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: MAP Number: PARKING CONSULTANTS LEGEND: A OF JEFFERSON —hWd°WP51em1415o11eROB lipCITY °�"'ce'° M�°"'�^'°°" 248,353.5080949 9860 "ARCHITECTS STUDY AREA O D DD PARKING STUDY Y STUDY U D AREA MAP 1 • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS C JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI 0 O R BLOCK Pg.2 osm NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri ANALYSIS Final Report This Analysis provides an assessment of how the existing parking system is operating and if new parking may be required based on current and anticipated future development and redevelopment. For the analysis, Rich & Associates used turnover and occupancy data, parking and building inventories, downtown business owner surveys, previous study work and our previous experience to refine this analysis. The process consisted of a two part analysis. The first part of the analysis included a determination of the current parking demand by block based on the provided building inventory and calculated parking generation factors per 1,000 square feet of gross floor space. The demand was compared to the available supply and the resulting surplus or deficit determined on a block -by -block basis. The second part of the analysis involved comparing the parking surplus and deficit patterns to the observed conditions as determined by the turnover and occupancy data. This comparison offered a benchmark by which the surplus and deficit data was calibrated. PARKING INVENTORY Table A summarizes the existing parking supply in the study area for downtown Jefferson City. There are a total of 9,596 parking spaces in the study area. Of these spaces 1,166 (12%) are on - street spaces and 1,634 (17%) are off-street public spaces. The private parking is broken into State owned private parking and other owned private parking with a total of 6,796 (71 %) off- street private spaces. Public Parking Supply Private Parkine Su TOTAL PARKING SUPPLY Table A On -Street Totals Off -Street Totals 1,166 12% 1,634 17% Public Parking Total 2,800 29% State Owned Parking 3,531 37% Other Owned Private Parking 3,265 34% Private Parking Total 6,796 71% 9596 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Table B on page 5 is a detailed supply listing types and durations of parking by each block. Map 2 is a spatial view of the parking supply. In cases where parking spaces were not marked, the number of spaces was estimated. The City of Jefferson City manages and controls 29 percent of the parking in the downtown. Based on Rich & Associates experience and best practices, we have found that to successfully manage municipal parking it is desirable for the municipality to have control of at least 50 percent of the supply. This allows the municipality to effectively manage the parking in terms of allocation, changing demand, market pricing, and allows the parking to be enforced with greater efficiency. Jefferson City does not meet this benchmark. Shared use parking is the concept whereby the same parking spaces can be used by different groups that need the spaces at different times during the day. Efficient parking use cannot occur if the majority of parking is privately owned and reserved. In order for shared use to work, the parking needs to be available for all users allowing customers and visitors to park once rather than move their vehicle for each stop. Additionally, shared use occurs between uses such as office and restaurants with peaks for office in the morning and restaurant peaks in the afternoon and then again in the evening. 0 S Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Table B Parking Supply Parking Supply Final Report Block>1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 16-1 7 1 8 1 9 1101111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361371 TOTALS Public On -Street 15 Min LZ 3 1 3 1 1 2 6 1 2 1 21 10 Min 4 4 15 Min 4 9 13 30Min 2 3 5 1 Hr 6 6 16 28 90 Min 6 8 25 11 14 11 12 8 7 102 2 Hr 4 4 14 14 15 6 24 8 16 10 115 3 Hr 8 8 4 Hr 15 8 7 30 10 Hr 25 9 34 90 Min Meter 9 22 31 2 Hr Meters 23 24 48 23 43 18 17 19 10 20 19 22 32 8 1 12 338 10 Hr Meter 13 13 26 29 16 10 2 17 7 6 10 5 11 165 Unrestricted 30 5 6 15 21 11 10 5 10 13 5 21 35 20 28 235 Barrier Free 1 1 2 10 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 37 Public Off -Street 1,166 Free 36 36 2 Hr meter 20 20 13 43 96 4 Hr meter 10 10 Permit 211 34 76 14 36 12 87 228 80 95 873 Garage 540 540 City Reserved 64 64 Barrier Free 3 4 1 3 2 2 15 State On -Street 1,634 30min 6 6 3 Hr 47 47 Reserved 25 25 News 7 7 Barrier Free 21 21 State Off -Street 106 Off -Street 60 325 376 166 151 312 593 414 679 14 3,090 Visitor 14 14 Shuttle/Carpool* 286 286 Barrier Free 8 10 11 4 2 35 Private 3,425 Off -Street 54 347 77 211 9 24 202 182 10 61 98 140 37 64 231 104 58 166 156 112 35 73 83 15 180 93 44 61 118 129 3,174 LZ 1 1 Barrier Free 5 12 2 8 5 9 6 2 4 7 4 2 5 3 2 2 4 2 1 1 3 1 90 3,265 Summary 99 384 376 166 520 313 415 609 625 251 249 64 246 224 72 217 184 218 1 65 1 69 271 178 691 877 223 175 165 211 98 5 261 1 310 238 106 106 1 149 166 9,596 Source: Rich and Associates 2017 *Capitol shuttle and carpool parking have been added to block #6 HWY 50 M my J� �O — �'' r � • • � � r • • 1 . • • • • RICH & ASSOCIATES F"'iK NG S•]N:NLi-•.VTS LEGEND: ON -STREET PARKING OFF-STREET PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: SheetTille: MAPNumbec CITY OF JEFFERSON ��:- STUDYAREA LONGTERM PARKING ® PUBLIC PARKING a p B PARKING PARKING STUDY 0 LOAD ZONE/SPECIAL USE = PRIVATE PARKING LOTS MAP 2 ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS METERED PARKING TIME LIMITED PARKING ® CITY RESERVED LOTS c SUPPLY JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI 0 # ® STATE PARKING R BLOCK NO PARKING Pg. 6 g osn� NUMBER STATE PARKING Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri TURNOVER & OCCUPANCY ANALYSIS Final Report Rich & Associates conducted a turnover and occupancy study in the study area. The turnover and occupancy study involved an examination of on -street and off-street parking occupancies and vehicle movements encompassing both daytime and evening hours. Parking in both public and private areas were observed, though State owned lots were not included in the analysis. The State lots are at or near capacity and were not a part of the turnover and occupancy analysis. Not all parking spaces in the study area were counted, instead the goal is to observe a large portion of the overall parking. The occupancy study occurred on Thursday, January 26, 2017 between the hours of 7:OOam - 8:OOpm. TURNOVER The turnover portion of the analysis, where license plate numbers were recorded, applied to on - street spaces in the downtown and were observed during each two-hour circuit. This is done to determine how long specific vehicles were parked in certain spaces and if parkers were moving their vehicles to different spaces to avoid being cited for overtime parking. At the same time, the turnover information also yields occupancy results for the parking area and therefore for each circuit a composite occupancy can be derived. Turnover is an indicator of how often a parking stall is being used by different vehicles throughout the course of the day. Turnover is most relevant to the short term customer trying to find parking. Table C on the following page, is the summary results of the turnover findings and Map 3 show the locations of vehicles in violation. The on -street spaces observed for parking turnover were signed two hour, 90 min, and one hour. There were 569 short term on -street parking spaces observed for turnover from the hours of 7:OOam - 6:OOpm. The last circuit of the study was strictly occupancy counts. The core downtown commercial area was the focus for the turnover analysis. State parking areas around the Capitol building were not included in this analysis. With parking posted two hour, the optimal turnover rate (this can only occur if there were not any violations for the entire day) would be 4.5 for a nine hour day with enforcement occurring from 8:OOam to 5:OOpm. The turnover rate in Jefferson City was 1.07 for the day which is lower than ideal. This number can be low due to a low overall occupancy of two hour spaces. Another factor that can affect the turnover number is with circuits lasting approximately two hours, presumably, a vehicle could be observed twice in these spaces and not be in violation. The better numbers to focus on when looking at turnover are in Table C, the actual numbers of vehicles in violation. There were 122 vehicles parked beyond two hours meaning that during the course of the day approximately 20 percent of the vehicles observed in on -street time limited parking spaces were in violation. A violation rate of five percent or less is generally considered a 0 7 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report sign of adequate enforcement. With circuits lasting approximately two hours, presumably, a vehicle could be observed twice in these spaces and not be in violation. Most likely the majority of the parking violations during the turnover and occupancy study were employees of downtown businesses or State operations. This behavior makes it difficult when customers of the downtown want to find convenient parking to conduct business and those spaces are taken. If employees of the downtown do not understand the vital importance of the convenient on street spaces for the success of the businesses there is no reason for the employee to park in the correct location. Table C Parking Turnover Summary of 2 hour or less on -street spaces Vehicles that remained less than 2 hours 484 (79.8%) Vehicles that remained between 2 and 4 hours 90 (14.8%) Vehicles that remained between 4 and 6 hours 18(2.9%) Vehicles that remained between 6 and 8 hours 10(1.6%) 4 (less Vehicles that remained between 8 and 10 hours than 1 %) Total number of vehicles observed 606 Total number of stalls analyzed for turnover 569 Turnover Rate 1.07 Source: Rich and Associates Field Observations *State parking was not included in Turnover 0 0 1 , 6rYivi�{+•��►�'M.i�rL••- W. MAIN ST. N W. HIGH ST. 8 r - 15 (R 25 CID ,I, r 44 tl, 9 1 6 : APITOI 2 5 2 AVE.b2 - e - 1•''4 rT.. W ;,,rt.5 jy, 1- -...Iwo s..e .ice. r M �^ � � SM� Lam•NO �. M 4 ^3'1 26 23 i Y• r 4h. 35 E. STATE ST. E. CAPITOL AVE. COMMERCIAL WAY E. HIGH ST. idsE. HIGH ST. icy - - .- _ r 1, �. I ,. .y ' { Y� _ 1 �•� ' � w�V l . Z 5 3 « 37 ' Q `• 8� 4 17 i 710 2 Q Z 2 O O W �z E. W.A. LL WAY lO O OQW {Qco p U RICH & ASSOCIATES °`R"'"` "'""""'-` LEGEND: # of VEHICLES BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: a Sheet Title: PARKING V I O LAT I O N S MAP Number CITY OF JEFFERSON STUDY AREA Beyond 2 Hours Beyond 3 Hours Dx B W. MCCARTY ST. 4 i _ -a _ Y / C E. MCCARTY ST. 2 1 E. MCCARTY ST. JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI a TURNOVER STUDY T BLOCK Pg. 9 rrn�.uu I� 4 1 3 .,;,•,, 201 0 31 H WY 50 �O is J� o E. MILLER ST. E. MILLER ST. a 17 19 A 00 �t rrkJAL x y ,.. < r `F� - - -'• ti � r a -r 30 z H WY. 50/63 Q O OZ Z U) Z O H Lu O U O O m U)W w Q 2 Z Q O Q 2 Y a RICH & ASSOCIATES °`R"'"` "'""""'-` LEGEND: # of VEHICLES BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: a Sheet Title: PARKING V I O LAT I O N S MAP Number CITY OF JEFFERSON STUDY AREA Beyond 2 Hours Beyond 3 Hours Dx B PARKING STUDY Beyond 4 Hours OBSERVED DURING MAP 3 pRCFIITECTB •ENGINEERS •PLANNERS Beyond 5 Hours JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI a TURNOVER STUDY T BLOCK Pg. 9 o3n� NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri OCCUPANCY Final Report Occupancy is an important aspect of parking because it helps us to understand the dynamic of how demand fluctuates throughout the day. Overall, the occupancy data is used by Rich & Associates to calibrate the parking demand model. Graph 1 and 2, Table D & E and Map 4 are the summary results of Rich & Associates occupancy findings. Any instance in the tables or maps where the occupancy exceeds 100% there were vehicles observed parking illegally. Graph 1 *State lots not included in Occupancy Analysis 0 us Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Graph 2 Final Report *State lots not included in Occupancy Analysis Table D Description # of spaces 7:00arn 9:00arr % Occ. 9:00am - 11:00am % Occ.2 11:00arn 1:00pm % Occ.3 2:00prn 4:00pm % Occ.4 4:00prn 6:00pm % Occ.5 6:00pm 8:00pm % Occ.6 Public On -street 1102 298 27% 452 41% 442 40% 430 39% 300 27% 293 27% Public Off -Street 1538 297 19% 678 44% 725 47% 710 46% 567 37% 156 10% Private 2507 797 32% 1563 62% 1491 59% j 1421 57% 741 30% 301 12% Overall Totals 5147 1 1392 1 27% 2693 1 52% 2658 1 52% 1 2561 1 50% 1 1608 1 31% 1 750 15% Key observations from the occupancy counts: • The peak occupancy occurred between 9:00am-11:00am at 52% occupancy (2693 of the 5147 observed parking spaces). Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report • The 11:00am-1:00pm circuit was only 35 vehicles short of the overall peak and also showed a 52% occupancy. • The large amount of office land use in the downtown drives the early peak and customers going to restaurants in the downtown for lunch drives the 11:00am- 1:00pm peak. • Private parking locations were observed to have a higher occupancy rate than the public parking. • Public off-street parking has a higher occupancy rate than on -street parking. This may be due to the amount of on street parking available and the convenient locations of the off-street parking. It may also be due to the large numbers of professionals in the downtown who need to park for the entire day. • The occupancy numbers for the City parking garage on Block 23 are estimated at 7:OOam— 9:OOam based on the overall occupancy for this time period. • The occupancy numbers for the state parking garage on Block 24 are estimated at 7:OOam— 9:OOam and 6:OOpm-8:OOpm based on overall occupancy for this time period. • Though there is an overall low occupancy rate, there are pocket areas where finding a parking space is difficult. One factor that may be skewing the overall low occupancy is the large amount of parking available on the periphery of the downtown which is included as part of the available supply. 0 12 0 Table E Occupancy Analysis 26 -Jan -17 Block - Face Description # of spaces 7:00am 9:00am % Occ. 9:00am - 11:00am % Occ.2 11:00am 1:00pm % Occ.3 2:00pm - 4:00pm % Occ.4 4:00pm - 6:00pm % Occ.5 6:00pm - 8:00pm Occ.6 4B On -street 2 hr meter 15 4 27% 12 80% 8 53% 13 87% 7 47% 5 33% 6A On -street 2 hr meter 9 3 33% 8 89% 8 89% 8 89% 3 33% 1 11% 6B On -street 2 hr meter 6 5 83% 5 83% 3 50% 6 100% 1 17% 0 0% 6C On -street 2 hr meter 9 5 56% 8 89% 4 44% 8 89% 5 56% 4 44% 7B On -street 2 hr meter 26 17 65% 19 73% 24 92% 18 69% 8 31% 14 S4% 9 Midblock 2 hr north side 4 4 100% 1 25% 2 50% 2 50% 0 0% 0 0% 9 Midblock 2 hr south side 6 1 17% 4 67% 4 67% 3 50% 1 17% 0 0% 9B On -street 1 hr meter 6 0 0% 1 17% 3 50% 2 33% 0 0% 0 0% 9B On -street 10 hr meter 15 14 93% 14 93% 14 93% 15 100% 8 53% 1 7% 96 9C On -street 2 hr meter On -street 90 Min free 15 6 4 3 27% 50% 12 3 80% 50% 8 4 53% 67% 13 4 87% 67% 7 3 47% 50% 5 4 33% 67% 9C On -street 15 min free 4 3 75% 1 25% 4 100% 4 100% 1 25% 2 50% 9C On -street 2 hr meter 6 0 0% 2 33% 2 33% 4 67% 4 67% 5 83% 9D 10 On -street 2 hr meter Lot A 25 17 2 12 8% 71% 13 11 52% 65% 13 10 52% 59% 9 10 36% 59% 8 7 32% 41% 5 1 20% 6% 10 Lot B 53 1 21 40% 28 53% 24 45% 31 58% 26 49% 2 4% 10 Lot C 13 5 38% 1 4 31% 2 15% 1 3 23% 1 4 31% 0 0% 10A On -street 2 hr meter 6 0 0% 4 67% 1 17% 4 67% 5 83% 3 50% 10B On -street 2 hr meter 10 3 30% 5 50% 6 60% 8 80% 2 20% 4 40% 10C On -street 10 hr meter 14 5 36% 8 57% 9 64% 7 50% 3 21% 1 7% 10D On -street 2 hr meter 7 2 29% 7 100% 6 86% 3 43% 3 43% 2 29% 11 City Lot 214 1 7 3% 144 67% 143 67% 135 63% 119 56% 11 1 5% 11A On -street 10 hr meter 15 1 7% 1 8 53% 1 10 67% 1 8 53% 1 4 27% 0 0% 11B On -street 10 hr meter 11 1 9% 2 18% 2 18% 1 9% 1 9% 0 0% 12 City Lot 25 34 1 3% 11 32% 11 32% 10 29% 10 29% 0 0% 12B On -street 1 hr free 7 0 0% 0 0% 1 14% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 13 Lot A 34 7 21% 6 18% 7 21% 7 21% 5 15% 5 15% 13 Lot B 142 1 13 9% 118 83% 134 94% 132 93% 118 83% 7 1 5% 13A On -street 10 hr meter 11 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 1 9% 1 0 0% 0 0% 13B On -street 10 hr meter 9 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 13C On -street unmarked 6 2 33% 5 83% 5 83% 4 67% 3 50% 1 17% 13D On -street 10 hr meter 11 0 0% 1 9% 1 9% 2 18% 1 9% 0 0% 14 Post office Lot A 20 19 95% 21 105% 15 75% 14 70% 9 45% 0 0% 14 Lot B 92 54 59% 67 73% 65 71% 55 60% 28 30% 15 16% 14 Lot 39 25 64% 27 69% 25 64% 27 69% 9 23% 20 51% 14 Lot D 5 0 0% 1 20% 3 60% 3 60% 2 40% 1 20% 14 Lot 23 12 52% 12 52% 10 43% 9 39% 7 30% 5 22% 14A On -street 15 min free 5 3 60% 2 40% 2 40% 2 40% 3 60% 4 80% 14A On -street 90 min free 8 1 6 75% 1 6 75% 6 75% 7 88% 5 63% 7 1 88% 14B On -street 90 Min meter 9 2 22% 6 67% 1 2 22% 1 4 44% 1 1 11% 1 11% 14C On -street 10 hr meter 10 1 10% 2 20% 3 30% 5 50% 3 30% 1 10% 14D On -street 10 hr meter 6 6 100% 6 100% 5 83% 5 83% 4 67% 6 100% 14D On -street 15 min free 4 2 50% 1 25% 1 25% 0 0% 1 25% 1 25% 15B On -street 2 hr meter 16 0 0% 3 19% 6 38% 6 38% 3 19% 1 0 0% 15C On -street 2 hr meter 13 1 6 46% 1 5 38% 6 46% 10 77% 9 69% 8 1 62% 15D On -street 10 hr meter 17 15 88% 17 100% 1 17 100% 1 17 100% 1 9 53% 4 24% 15D On -street 1 hr meter 17 0 0% 0 0% 7 41% 2 12% 3 18% 0 0% 16 City Lot 1 (A) 80 34 43% 37 46% 32 40% 33 41% 15 19% 3 4% 16 City Lot 1 (A) meters 19 7 37% 11 58% 11 58% 16 84% 6 32% 3 16% 16 City Lot 1 (A) HC 4 3 75% 2 50% 2 50% 3 75% 0 0% 0 0% 16 Lot 33 1 26 79% 1 27 82% 28 85% 25 76% 18 55% 1 8 24% 16 Lot C 14 6 43% 8 57% 1 6 43% 1 5 36% 1 1 7% 2 1 14% 16 Lot D 30 22 73% 22 73% 19 63% 18 60% 7 23% 1 3% 16A On -street 2 hr meter 12 8 67% 10 83% 8 67% 10 83% 8 67% 7 58% 16B On -street 90 Min free 12 2 17% 9 75% 10 83% 5 42% 11 92% 8 67% 16C On -street 90 Min free 16 10 63% 10 63% 12 75% 10 63% 12 75% 10 63% 16D On -street 2 hr meter 8 1 7 88% 1 8 100% 7 88% 5 63% 6 75% 4 50% 17 City Lot 8 (A) permit 14 6 43% 9 64% 1 2 1 14% 1 5 1 36% 1 10 71% 0 0% 17 City Lot 8 (A.1) meter 20 3 15% 10 50% 13 65% 7 35% 8 40% 4 20% 17 Lot 30 20 67% 24 80% 24 80% 24 80% 15 50% 2 7% 17 Lot C 15 9 60% 9 60% 8 53% 5 33% 5 33% 3 20% *State owned parking not included 13 0 Table E Occupancy Analysis 17 Lot 49 17 35% 19 39% 19 39% 20 41% 15 31% 0 0% 17 Lot 24 14 58% 5 21% 9 38% 6 25% 0 0% 0 0% 17A On -street 90/30 min free 15 14 93% 8 53% 10 67% 11 73% 8 53% 10 67% 17B On -street 2 hr meter 6 0 0% 2 33% 1 17% 4 67% 1 17% 5 83% 17C On -street 10 hr meter 10 2 20% 6 60% 7 70% 5 50% 2 20% 9 90% 17D On -street 2 hr meter(4)/90 min free (7) 11 5 45% 5 45% 2 18% 6 55% 2 18% 4 36% 18 City Lot 22 (A) 36 7 19% 15 42% 15 42% 15 42% 15 42% 3 8% 18 Lot B 60 0 0% 29 48% 31 52% 31 52% 25 42% 11 18% 18 Lot C 22 4 18% 15 68% 15 68% 15 68% 9 41% 6 27% 18 Lot D 42 6 14% 29 69% 32 76% 29 69% 25 60% 11 26% 18A On -street 10 hr meter 5 1 20% 1 20% 3 60% 1 20% 0 0% 2 40% 18B On -street 2 hr meter 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 18C On -street unmarked 14 1 7% 1 0 0% 1 1 7% 1 7% 0 0% 0 0% 18D On -street 2 hr meter 7 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 19 Central Bank 39 2 5% 9 23% 19 49% 12 31% 16 41% 3 8% 19A On -street unmarked 11 0 0% 0 0% 1 9% 2 18% 0 0% 0 0% 20A On -street unmarked 15 14 93% 14 93% 14 93% 12 80% 5 33% 0 0% 21 Lot A 10 2 20% 5 50% 5 50% 3 30% 2 20% 1 0 0% 21 Lot B 19 0 0% 1 20 105% 1 22 116% 1 18 95% 5 26% 0 0% 21 Lot C 16 0 0% 4 25% 3 19% 4 25% 3 19% 0 0% 21 Lot D 27 17 63% 22 81% 23 85% 24 89% 22 81% 13 48% 21 Lot 30 28 93% 21 70% 11 37% 13 43% 17 57% 11 37% 21 Lot F 40 0 0% 19 48% 19 48% 23 58% 22 55% 2 1 5% 21 Lot G 11 1 0 0% 5 45% 6 55% 5 45% 5 45% 1 9% 21A On -street 2 hr meter 4 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 1 25% 1 25% 21A On -street 10 hr meter 4 1 25% 2 50% 4 100% 3 75% 4 100% 1 25% 21B On -street 10 hr meter 9 3 33% 1 11% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 33% 21C On -street unmarked 5 1 20% 0 0% 0 0% 2 40% 1 20% 1 0 0% 21D On -street 2 hr meter 10 1 10% 2 20% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 22 Lot A 22 8 36% 17 77% 14 64% 13 59% 10 45% 2 9% 22 Lot B 8 1 2 25% 1 4 50% 1 5 63% 1 5 63% 1 4 50% 0 0% 22 City Lot 10 C 24 5 21% 16 67% 15 63% 11 46% 18 75% 18 75% 22 Lot 47 21 45% 26 55% 21 45% 22 47% 18 38% 0 1 0% 22 Lot E 13 5 38% 5 38% 6 46% 6 46% 2 15% 0 0% 22 Lot 31 13 42% 14 45% 13 42% 18 58% 14 45% 5 16% 22A On -street 90 min free 15 2 13% 6 40% 7 47% 6 40% 8 53% 15 100% 22B On -street 2 hr meter 11 1 1 9% 1 3 27% 1 2 18% 1 3 27% 1 0 0% 1 9% 22C On -street 10 hr meter 7 0 0% 4 57% 6 86% 6 86% 3 43% 3 43% 22C On -street 2 hr meter 3 0 0% 2 67% 2 67% 0 0% 1 33% 0 0% 22D On -street 2 hr meter (6)/2 hr free(4) 10 4 40% 6 60% 4 40% 6 60% 6 60% 6 60% 23 Lot 45 28 62% 28 62% 21 47% 26 58% 13 29% 7 16% 23 Lot B 13 1 6 46% 1 6 46% 1 8 62% 1 7 54% 1 7 54% 3 23% 23 City Lot 3 C 46 31 67% 21 46% 30 65% 11 24% 14 30% 14 30% 23 City Lot 2 ( Garage) permit 323 91 28% 225 70% 246 76% 224 69% 212 66% 63 20% 23 City Lot 2 (Garage) transient 219 10 5% 31 14% 70 32% 98 45% 40 18% 3 1% 23A On -street 2 hr meter 11 1 1 9% 1 2 18% 1 3 27% 1 3 27% 1 3 27% 3 27% 23B On -street 2 hr meter 8 4 50% 5 63% 2 25% 0 0% 3 38% 2 25% 23C On -street 90 Min free 16 5 31% 8 50% 8 50% 10 63% 8 50% 11 69% 23D On -street 90 mi free 6 1 17% 2 33% 6 100% 4 67% 6 100% 5 83% 24 Lot A 33 17 52% 17 52% 9 27% 3 9% 0 0% 1 0 0% 24 Lot 26 11 42% 11 42% 7 27% 7 27% 2 8% 1 4% 24 Lot C 20 1 14 70% 1 16 80% 1 17 85% 1 18 90% 1 2 10% 1 5% 24 Lot D 15 0 0% 9 60% 9 60% 7 47% 3 20% 2 13% 24 Lot E 23 0 0% 15 65% 15 65% 10 43% 4 17% 2 9% 24 State Parking Structure (2) 679 191 28% 563 83% 550 81% 493 73% 76 11% 20 3% 24AA Bus Parking 7 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 24B On -street 10 hr meter 6 1 1 1 17% 1 1 1 17% 1 1 17% 1 17% 1 0 0% 0 0% 24C On -street 2 hr meter 12 0 0% 5 42% 4 33% 2 17% 1 8% 1 8% 24D On -street 2 hr meter 11 2 18% 4 36% 3 27% 2 18% 1 9% 2 18% 25 Lot A 76 0 0% 28 37% 14 18% 16 21% 13 17% 35 46% *State owned parking not included 14 0 Table E Occupancy Analysis 25 Lot 27 10 37% 24 89% 13 48% 13 48% 10 37% 18 67% 25A On -street unmarked 8 1 13% 3 38% 2 25% 2 25% 2 25% 1 13% 25B On -street unmarked 13 10 77% 11 85% 10 77% 4 31% 0 0% 0 0% 25C On -street 2 hr meter 14 0 0% 0 0% 1 7% 3 21% 2 14% 8 57% 25D On -street 10 hr meter 25 0 0% 0 0% 1 4% 1 4% 0 0% 2 8% 26 Lot A 23 1 7 30% 11 48% 4 17% 1 10 43% 1 0 0% 0 0% 26 Lot B 19 10 53% 14 74% 12 63% 13 68% 9 47% 8 42% 26 Lot 39 7 18% 26 67% 21 54% 25 64% 4 10% 10 26% 26A 26B On -street 2 hr meter On -street 2 hr meter 11 12 1 1 9% 8% 2 7 18% 58% 3 7 27% 58% 3 7 27% 58% 3 7 27% 58% 7 0 64% 0% 26C On -street 90 min free 9 0 0% 11 122% 6 67% 6 67% 2 22% 6 67% 26C On -street 10 min free 4 1 0 0% 2 50% 2 50% 1 2 50% 1 0 0% 0 1 0% 26D On -street 2 hr meter 11 3 27% 7 64% 1 7 64% 0 0% 1 9% 1 9% 27 City Lot 11 (A) 46 10 22% 25 54% 25 54% 32 70% 20 43% 7 15% 27 Lot 30 2 7% 10 33% 12 40% 14 47% 11 37% 2 7% 27 City Lot 12 (C) 43 10 23% 31 72% 29 67% 31 72% 23 53% 6 14% 27A On -street 90 min free 10 5 50% 9 90% 7 70% 9 90% 6 60% 4 40% 27B On -street 10 hr meter 10 1 2 20% 6 60% 5 50% 1 3 30% 1 1 10% 6 60% 27C On -street 2 hr free 11 11 100% 1 0 0% 1 3 27% 0 0% 2 18% 0 0% 27D On -street 2 hr meter 8 3 38% 4 50% 4 50% 3 38% 1 13% 0 0% 28A On -street 2 hr free 7 0 0% 4 57% 1 14% 4 57% 2 29% 0 0% 28B On -street 2 hr free 6 2 33% 2 33% 1 17% 2 33% 2 33% 6 100% 28B On -street unmarked 3 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 0% 28C On -street unmarked 11 1 22 200% 3 27% 2 18% 1 2 18% 1 0 0% 0 0% 29A On -street unmarked 11 2 18% 1 2 18% 1 0 0% 2 18% 2 18% 2 18% 31 Lot A 17 0 0% 1 6% 3 18% 0 0% 3 18% 0 0% 31 City Lot 24 (B) 116 11 9% 50 43% 51 44% 48 41% 43 37% 10 9% 31 City Lot 24 (C) 102 25 25% 5 5% 5 5% 9 9% 6 6% 6 6% 31A On -street unmarked 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 1 0% 31D On -street 2 hr free 6 1 2 33% 1 17% 0 0% 1 1 17% 1 1 17% 0 0% 32 Lot A 54 12 22% 1 19 35% 1 21 39% 23 43% 28 52% 9 17% 32 Lot B 31 5 16% 14 45% 14 45% 15 48% 11 35% 0 0% 32 City Lot 16/15 C 113 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 32 Lot D 8 3 38% 1 13% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 25% 32 Lot E 4 0 0% 1 25% 1 25% 1 25% 2 50% 0 1 0% 32 Lot 26 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 0% 0 0% 32A On -street 2 hr meter 16 0 0% 1 4 25% 1 4 25% 3 19% 1 6% 0 0% 32B On -street unmarked 11 2 18% 5 45% 4 36% 5 45% 7 64% 5 45% 32C On -street 2 hr meter (9)/On street 2 hr free 2 11 1 9% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 9% 32D On -street 10 hr meter 11 0 0% 6 55% 3 27% 4 36% 2 18% 5 45% 33 Lot A 40 36 90% 33 83% 32 80% 28 70% 16 40% 8 20% 33 City Lot 5 (B) 32 8 25% 7 22% 4 13% 6 19% 2 6% 0 0% 33 Lot 29 12 41% 13 45% 10 34% 12 41% 6 21% 0 0% 33 Lot D 10 6 60% 8 80% 5 50% 7 70% 3 30% 2 20% 33 City Lot 6 (E) 53 28 53% 28 53% 21 40% 16 30% 1 6 11% 5 9% 33A On -street 2 hr free 11 0 0% 3 27% 5 45% 4 36% 5 45% 2 18% 33B On -street 3 hr free 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 33C On -street 4 hr meter 15 0 0% 4 27% 0 0% 0 0% 1 7% 3 20% 33D On -street 2 hr meter 13 2 15% 7 54% 8 62% 6 46% 8 62% 4 31% 34 Lot 16 15 94% 14 88% 11 69% 16 100% 15 94% 10 63% 34 Lot B 5 5 100% 5 100% 4 80% 2 40% 1 1 20% 0 0% 34 Lot C 10 7 70% 8 80% 8 80% 6 60% 3 30% 2 20% 34A On -street unmarked 8 0 0% 5 63% 5 63% 4 50% 4 50% 4 50% 34B On -street 2 hr free 13 0 0% 1 0 0% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 23% 34C On -street 2 hr free 3 0 0% 1 33% 1 33% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 34C On -street 10 hr meter 9 0 0% 0 0% 1 11% 0 0% 0 0% 2 22% 34D On -street unmarked 10 9 90% 11 110% 11 110% 4 40% 1 10% 4 40% 35A On -street unmarked 13 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 35AA On -street unmarked 13 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 35C On -street unmarked 12 3 25% 1 3 25% 1 4 33% 3 25% 2 17% 2 1 17% 35D On -street 2 hr free 10 0 0% 1 10% 2 20% 2 20% 2 20% 4 40% 36A On -street unmarked 8 1 13% 5 63% 2 25% 2 1 25% 3 1 38% 1 13% 36C On -street 4 hr free 8 3 38% 5 63% 4 50% 5 63% 3 1 38% 1 13% 37 Lot 36 0 0% 3 8% 3 8% 5 14% 5 14% 2 6% *State owned parking not included 15 0 Table E Occupancy Analysis 37 Lot B 12 0 0% 5 42% 5 42% 3 25% 3 25% 0 0% 37 Lot C 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 37 Lot D 17 0 0% 2 12% 3 18% 3 18% 1 6% 0 0% 37 Lot E 26 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 8% 7 27% 37 Lot F 12 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 7 58% 11 92% 37 Lot G 6 1 3 50% 5 83% 6 100% 1 3 50% 1 6 100% 2 33% 37A On -street 4 hr free 6 1 17% 1 1 17% 1 17% 5 83% 3 50% 1 17% 37C On -street unmarked 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 4 40% 4 40% 5 50% 38A On -street unmarked 10 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 10% Totals 5147 1392 27% 2693 52% 2658 52% 2561 50% 1608 31% 750 15% (1) The 7am-9am cout was estimated based on overall occupancy (2) The 7am-9am and 6pm-8pm count were estimated based on overall occupancy *State owned parking not included 16 o z ~ co OVERALL z Z O w w N 0 o% o ° z a Y PEAK = 52 % Q w 38/0 63% Q 0% E. STATE ST. A 37% State Parking Garage o 81% o r E 65% c N ( 0 15 ao°r° 25 c 4 34 0 B q �o o N 35rY 80% 42% 52% 0 o h D rn 60% W. MAIN ST.46% 3 AJ' W. CAPITOL AVE.AVE50% 67% 33% ° A 18% A 45/0 7% 11% 33% 33% 67% 27% 0 B 25/o o E. CAPITOL AVE. B 62% Permit Transient 83% 22% 0 82/0 70% 14% B ° 46% O rn-81 04 0O` °uALo C.0 Q26)3 26) i ° N ii c 45% oN COMMERCIAL WAY w Lfl to COMMERCIAL WAY 57% S 46/0 67% 74% E00` N 8 3 73% i� w -4im y W. HIGH ST. 89% 33% ° W. HIGH ST. 25% 50°ro 50% 50% 5 0 v rrf �w r---� 67 /0 ok, 40% 75°r° 53% 63% 40% E. HIGH ST. 90% 25%^ 17% 63% ,ami _ „� E,HIGH ,�ST. , B7c7I� 100 N C A p~ A B 42% 0%�f B 69% o A B 50% °� _ 13% 8% D -81 ° o A 64% ° ° c ° 73% CDLO o B o 77/0 67% 02 54% �Z7 1 0 3 5°/ 732)° M 12%(31) 6 1 4 p u) E 21 % D C `S � ° '� C 72% N �_ 25% F 0 E o j E. WALL WAY o A 65% oo \ 39% 60% Z E 38 /o D ° 0°/ 26°/ jj -� Ln C 31 % B--- w O 55% WO B fn O R 2 53 /o u E 52%20%w of Q F 45% O 33% 0 F 0% U �� I + 83% Q W. MCCARTY ST. 44% ° 64% U) 30% o 67% tsro 0% Q 0% 0% 53% 00 0% 70 /0o% E. MCCARTY ST. 57% o � 0% 50°r° 0% 0°ro E. MCCARTY ST. UZ q } 11 = B C A B c - 0 W Q a 42°/a A 50% 0 25% 6% 00m p 67% 48% 068% D .F= 43% 5% �,!'• T''� `_`IF Q rn r�a1 B o X21 23% r of 3 .+ o o i of m a A B o G 45% F E 70% o _o. 18% 83% o D 48% HWY 50 0 69% o 83% 7%9% a 0% E. MILLER ST. 0°x018% 93 E. MILLER ST. 32% 23% U) z 12 o vii 19 29 U) U) Q o U) U o a o z U) Zo w U) U) x O U) Y of Q tL Q O Q ED 2 75 Q HWY. 50/63 RICH & A S S O C I A T E S NnrKincccnsULI.+n is LEGEND: PARKING OCCUPANCY BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON a STUDY AREA 0 through 49% OCCUPANCY _'r Ai.`sL.;,r` DIqB PARKINGSTUDY 50% through 74% 4 ABCHITECTS•ENGINEERS•PLAMMS 75% through 84%MAP c Peak g:pp AM -11:00 AM JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI o O 85% through 100% H BLOCK Thursday February 26, 2017 Pg. 17 o3n7 NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report PARKING DEMAND CALCULATION Analyses were performed to determine the current and future parking demands and needs for the study area. The data collected and compiled by Rich & Associates to calculate the parking demand included: • An inventory of the study area on -street and off-street parking supplies • Turnover and occupancy studies for public and private on -street and off-street parking areas Block -by -block analysis of square footage and type of land use in the study area. Jefferson City provided a building inventory of the downtown and this data was cross referenced with Rich & Associates field notes regarding use and the number of floors per building. This demand analysis contains two levels of parking analyses to determine the number of parking spaces needed. First is a mathematical or hypothetical model of parking demand based on the building gross floor area. The mathematical model multiplies a parking generation ratio (PGR) by the area of specific land uses to derive the number of spaces needed. The second is a method of using field observations to calibrate the mathematical model and help to establish projected spaces needed. A point to consider regarding the parking supply and demand is that motorists in general perceive off-street spaces with occupancies greater than 85 percent to be at capacity, depending on the overall capacity. The greater the capacity, the less this perception is valid. When this occurs, motorists will begin to re -circulate to seek more parking, adding to traffic congestion and the drivers' perception that there is no parking available in the downtown. This study updates the parking generation ratios developed by Rich & Associates in the 1999 parking study. The new PGR's were established from Rich & Associates previous experience and surveys distributed to managers, employees, customers and residents throughout the downtown area. The demand factor for each land use type includes an estimate for employees and patrons to that particular land use. Once parking demand has been calculated for both current and future conditions, a comparison with the existing supply of parking is made. The resulting figures are parking surplus or deficit figures for each block. The PGR's are used in conjunction with information from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Urban Land Institute (ULI). These two sources are the generally accepted standards for parking generation. Rich & Associates uses experience along with these sources to modify or customize the parking generation ratios specifically to the study area. Once a parking demand model is developed that illustrates the surpluses and deficits numerically and graphically, we then compare the model with the actual field observations, 0 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report specifically the turnover and occupancy counts. The comparison serves as a test of the demand model and allows Rich & Associates staff to make further revisions or adjustments where necessary, thus ensuring accuracy to the overall parking dynamic in the downtown area. The PGR's were lowered based on a comparison to the occupancy counts and our experience in other communities. Parking systems need to be monitored at all times and fluctuate based on many factors such as: • Rich has found that in many downtowns, office settings are using the same floor space (as before the recession) with a fewer number of staff. This is not the case with hi -tech companies using flex office space where there are not assigned desks or offices. Government does not fall into this category. • The retail intensity at this time dictates a lower number than the previous study. • As additional boutique stores come into the downtown the ratios may need to be reviewed. • Restaurant use in downtowns often pull from business located in the downtown and many patrons walk to lunch. This is shown in the occupancy counts where the 9:00am- 11:00am count are almost identical. • The number of people who carpool, use transit, bike or walk. The assumptions used for the parking demand calculations are: Assumption 1: It was assumed that parking demand per block was dependent on the gross floor area contained in the block. Demand computed for one block was not affected by the amount of gross floor area available on surrounding blocks. Therefore, a block with surplus parking supply is not used to offset calculated shortfalls on adjacent blocks. Assumption 2:The projected parking demand for the future was derived under the assumption that currently occupied properties would remain occupied at existing or higher than existing levels into the future. Assumption 3:Parking demand is not affected by parking availability, use, location and price. PARKING NEED When determining the actual parking need for the downtown, Rich & Associates factors in the reality of parking to the demand. The following are issues that are considered when developing the number of parking spaces needed: • Building size, purpose and special use conditions. 0 E Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report • Alternative modes of transportation, which includes availability, use, attractiveness and policy impacts. • Proportion of the downtown trips that are multiple -use or linked. • Vehicle traffic. • Cost of parking. The gross square footage of individual buildings was provided by Jefferson City, and then sorted by land use categories. The different land uses for each block are in general multiplied by a parking generation ratio (PGR) of spaces required per 1,000 square feet. The resulting demand number is deducted from the available parking supply on each block to determine a surplus or deficit condition for each block. Table F is the Parking Demand Matrix on page 22, followed by a summary of the parking demand represented spatially in Map 4. The Parking Demand Matrix has both the 1999 parking generation ratios along with the updated ratios. Rich & Associates does not recommend changing the zoning code, these parking generation ratios are intended to be used as a tool to determine the current parking demand and help project the future parking demand. The current parking situation is calculated showing an overall deficit of +/-2,522 spaces with the 1999 PGR's and a deficit of +/-1,484 spaces with new PGR's. During the turnover and occupancy study we found that only 52% of the parking spaces analyzed were occupied. The turnover and occupancy study covered approximately 54% (5147 spaces observed of the total supply of 9,596) of the parking spaces in the study area. Not all of the State lots were counted due to the fact that they are typically full on a weekday. When speaking with a State of Missouri employee in charge of facilities we were told that the State operations does not have enough parking. If the State lots were included in the counts the percentage occupied would be much higher. Government use is the largest land use in the downtown. The occupancy for government use can change depending on day, due to trials in the court buildings, whether or not the legislature is in session, the number of lobbyists in town, visitors to the buildings and museums, along with special events occurring at the State Capitol building. Though there are parking shortages there is parking found on the surrounding blocks and in carpool lots to help supplement the parking supply. There are shortages of parking surrounding the Capitol and core downtown that need to be addressed. The biggest issue currently is that the parking is located down a hill (if parking south of High Street) and some of the public lots with the lowest occupancy are on the edges of the study area. It can be difficult to get employees to walk to the outlying lots. In Graph 3 the observed occupancy was compared to the calculated parking demand and shows a correlation between the two. Graph 4 is a shared use model of Jefferson City's demand. This graph breaks down the overall demand for land use in the downtown and the times when different land use experience peaks is also detailed within this graph. Shared use is 0 20 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report an important component of parking that allows municipalities to develop less parking for each land use due to the ability to park once and visit multiple locations. When analyzing the parking garage revenue for the last seven years along with past parking counts there is a consistent peak that occurs from February through April. The counts were conducted in January and the demand model is adjusted to show the peak time demand. The model is not the overall peak event in the downtown, it is designed to accommodate parking for the average weekday peak. Graph 3 e 21 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Graph 4 Final Report PARKING DEMAND ZONES A second analysis was run to re-examine the government area (Zone 1) from the core downtown (Zone 2). Rich & Associates developed the two Zones in the 1999 study with the help of City staff to show a more realistic view of parking in the downtown. The same zones were used in this study. When looking at Zone 1 with the updated PLR's there is a deficit of +/-1,972 parking spaces, with an overall demand of 6,513 spaces and a parking supply of 4,541 spaces. It is not expected that all of the parking demand is met in the zone and this is the daytime peak demand that may not occur on a daily basis. The Government PGR needs to be looked into further with updated employee numbers for all State buildings to accurately determine the State government parking needs. Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri ZONE 2 Final Report When looking at Zone 2 with the updated PGR's there is a deficit of +/-592 parking spaces during peak time. Again as stated above not all parking demand is being met within the zone. Ar issue in this zone is that the majority of the parking is private parking and not shared for all uses, so much of the parking goes underutilized. The public parking that is available is a few blocks from the demand generators. If more of the parking was publicly available the matrix can be adjusted to reflect share use parking standards. Shared use parking helps cut down on the overall number of parking spaces that need to be provided in a downtown setting. FUTURE When projecting the future scenarios, there is 41,238 square feet of vacant space in the downtown along with 31 residential units to be occupied. This square footage was assumed to be 40 percent occupied in five years and 80 percent occupied in 10 years. A mixed use parking generation ratio of 2.75 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet was used except for the residential component where 1.28 spaces/unit was used. Factoring this into the Parking Demand Matrix, the parking deficit is +/-2,586 spaces with 1999 PGR's and +/-1,545 spaces with the new PGR's in the five year scenario and then the deficit increases to +/-2,651 spaces with 1999 PGR's and 1,606 spaces with the new PGR's in 10 years. CONCLUSION Jefferson City only controls 29% of the parking in the downtown which means that there are limited opportunities for shared use parking occurring in the downtown, thus causing more driving trips to be created. The parking situation can be made more difficult when an employee parks on -street due to greater convenience when their business has a private parking space available for their use, because the employee is actually taking two spaces out of the parking supply. This is because the private space is not a shared parking space, instead it is reserved only for the business, whereas the public on -street spaces are available for anyone visiting the downtown to visit multiple destinations. Because the majority of parking in the downtown area is private, Jefferson City will need to develop publically available parking in Zone 2 or work with private parking land owners to bring the private parking into the public supply. This can be done through lease agreements, purchasing the parking or providing enforcement and cleaning of the lots in return for the use of the private parking lots. 0 23 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Table F Demand Matrix Final Report Daytime Parking Demand Matrix I 172,000 2(1) 0��000 I 3 I - 4 -46 I 5 -46 CURRENT 6(2) I 767,244 FUTURE 376 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X - 27,863 Government 202,892 270,712 17 (4) Mixed Restaurant 18 71,385 - Institutional/ Light Community/ 20 (4) - - 21 31,612 - 22 131,122 - Block Office - Hotel Retail Seryice 25 - Residential Theater Library - 27 83,657 Vacant Demand Demand Parking Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ - 31 / Museum - 32 83,912 Use /Bar 62,104 - 34 Warehouse Industrial Church - - 36 (5) - - 37 (5) - - Totals 1,042,637 2,213,103 -103 (per unit) -250 -122 -140 218 (per unit) (per seat) 24 24 71 71 65 (current) (current) Supply Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Previous 69 1 69 69 69 271 148 1 174 148 1 148 1 174 174 178 -392 1 -251 1 405 1 -417 1 -262 -274 Previou Previou New New Parking Previous Previous New s PGR's s PGR's PGR's PGR's 2.64 3.36 0.85 2.61 3.51 2.77 7.72 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.95 New PGR's Generation PGR's PGR's PGR's (future (future (future (future Ratios 5 yr) 10 yr) 5 yr) 10 yr) New Parking 2.00 3.36 0.85 1.95 3.51 2.13 4.50 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.75 (current) (current) 40% 80% 40% 80% Generation Ratios 1 - 172,000 2(1) 0��000 128,088 3 384 - 4 -46 - 5 -46 80,153 6(2) 376 767,244 7 376 - 8 8,087 - 9 - 478,942 10 7,016 198,885 11 - - 12 24,829 313 13 14,982 - 14 3,284 35,000 15 - 27,863 16 202,892 270,712 17 (4) 64,150 - 18 71,385 - 19 21,000 - 20 (4) - - 21 31,612 - 22 131,122 - 23 40,515 - 24 58,993 - 25 - - 26 106,299 - 27 83,657 - 28 - 54,216 29 - - 30 8,358 - 31 - - 32 83,912 - 33 62,104 - 34 26,527 - 35 (e) - - 36 (5) - - 37 (5) - - Totals 1,042,637 2,213,103 (1) Block 2 only includes Government square footage and parking (2) Capitol shuttle and carpool parking have been added to block #6 (3) Blocks 35-37 are not included in the demand matrix (421 parking spaces) (4) Theater use was taken out of blocks 17 and 20forthe daytime demand (5) Blocks 35, 36 & 37 only include on -street parking supply, these blocks do not contain building inventory A IIIIIIIII�0�0�� - I - 1 -479 0��000 -479 0��000 384 -46 -46 -46 -46 255 -46 376 376 376 376 376 376 000 166 8,087 166 166 166 - 166 - 36 - 250 - 6 - 250 25d-- 313 -2,265 -2,265 0��000 - - 4,800 8,164 25 - 415 405 405 46,397 - 25,782 6 - 40,776 - 12,148 7 50 - 1,970 - - - 592 592 625 - - - - 895 - 150 8,750 - - 5 - - - 78,084 - 1,835 4 - - 79,260 - 2,918 - - - - 3,680 5 - 241 241 241 - 18,000 - - - 28,000 - 10,073 - - - - -4 12 12 246 206 216 - - - - 6 - 216 224 -11 - - - - 16 - - - - - - 12 - - - - - 10 - -22 -22 -22 217 -1,557 -1,314 -1,561 -1,564 -1,317 405 283,310 1 12,887 1 54,527 1 149 945 28,000 (1) Block 2 only includes Government square footage and parking (2) Capitol shuttle and carpool parking have been added to block #6 (3) Blocks 35-37 are not included in the demand matrix (421 parking spaces) (4) Theater use was taken out of blocks 17 and 20forthe daytime demand (5) Blocks 35, 36 & 37 only include on -street parking supply, these blocks do not contain building inventory A IIIIIIIII�0�0�� -479 -479 1 -479 0��000 -479 0��000 384 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 376 376 376 376 376 376 000 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 520 250 250 250 250 250 25d-- 313 -2,265 -2,265 0��000 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 415 405 99 -479 -479 1 -479 -479 1 -479 -479 384 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 376 376 376 376 376 376 376 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 520 250 250 250 250 250 25d-- 313 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 415 405 405 405 405 405 405 609 587 592 587 587 1 592 592 625 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 251 -482 -477 -482 -482 -477 -477 249 241 241 241 241 241 241 64 -4 12 -4 -4 12 12 246 206 216 206 206 216 216 224 -11 21 1 -11 -11 21 21 72 -22 -22 -22 -22 -22 -22 217 -1,557 -1,314 -1,561 -1,564 -1,317 -1,320 184 -210 -103 -230 -250 -122 -140 218 24 71 24 24 71 71 65 10 23 10 10 23 23 69 69 69 69 1 69 69 69 271 148 1 174 148 1 148 1 174 174 178 -392 1 -251 1 405 1 -417 1 -262 -274 - 114,000 - 74 74 223 149 149 149 149 149 149 2,000 - 50,000 13,912 413 333 175 -238 -158 -254 -271 -173 -189 - - - 247 187 165 -82 -22 -82 -82 -22 -22 1,000 - 183 183 211 28 28 28 28 28 28 - 5,500 18 18 98 80 80 80 80 80 80 - 30 24 5 -25 -19 -25 -25 -19 -19 0 0 261 261 261 261 261 261 261 - - 242 188 310 68 122 68 68 122 122 16,000 190 150 238 48 88 48 48 88 88 - 25 83 66 106 23 40 10 -2 27 15 - 0 0 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 0 0 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 - - - - 0 0 36 36 1 36 36 36 36 36 19,159 34,842 1 227,521 41,238 11,806 10,768 9,284 (2,522) (1,484) (2,586) (2,651) (1,545) (1,606) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) I (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) 1W 24 RICH& AFSO4;lATkS- r� � 4 M �A► !1 t t rt Gi Fie` A I.. +187 - ��� W. MAIN ST. _ W. MAIN ST. 9 d " W. HIGH ST. - - W_ HIGH ST_ - - - 0 J m o +376 W. MCCARTY ST. HWY 50 40 +166 �J + VICE" 0 s. 14 05 +250 W. MCCARTY ST. " ' ! F OM E. STATE ST. �d L24 +685 E. CAPITOL AVE. E. MCCARTY ST. 11 a (a +241 13 18 21 +24 +206 +148 E. MILLER ST. 12 19 20 4 +10 +69 25 +149 34 +23 3D +45 E. STATE ST. E. CAPITOL AVE. U) J J Q 33 36 � +48 +28 _ sp SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: E. HIGH ST. Wpr A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 °x B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT o�`7 f U) a 32 Y 37 PARKING STUDY LkCMGECiS•E71r�YEGAS•RS -100+ t +36 v~ u~i HWY. 50/63 j H Z z o w o c z w E. MCCARTY ST. ¢i OY Q m 23 31 +28 +261 29 +80 30 -25 F E. MILLER ST. 1:1TAWAIll S S O C I A T E S QNSULTANTSLEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON.,,a .0 h�nd��.�" A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 °x B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT 0through 99 n z PARKING STUDY LkCMGECiS•E71r�YEGAS•RS -100+ USING 1999 PARKING MAP 5 v~ u~i HWY. 50/63 j H Z z o w o c z w OY Q m z w 0 F E. MILLER ST. 1:1TAWAIll S S O C I A T E S QNSULTANTSLEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON.,,a .0 h�nd��.�" A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 °x B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT 0through 99 PARKING STUDY LkCMGECiS•E71r�YEGAS•RS -100+ USING 1999 PARKING MAP 5 JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI O R GENERATION RATIOS BLOCK Pg. 25 o3n7 NUMBER +692-1 .✓�i Y W. MAIN ST. cr O `--- r r =�� +40 w W. HIGH ST. - 0 J OJ 0 � ,� ,� o +376 W. MCCARTY ST. 5 Z 0 21 r E. STATE ST. On e15 1//` X24 22 +735 E. CAPITOL AVE. - E. HIGH ST. 25 34 +149 +40 IN E. STATE ST. 35 +45 E. CAPITOL AVE. E. MCCARTY ST. E. MILLER ST. _ Q I:►riwAll $ A S S O C I A T E S RNSULTANTSLEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: E. MCCARTY ST. MAP Number: 36 A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 # B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT t +88 0through 99 1p +166 +250 +241 +28 , 2s JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI O R +71 +216 +174 +28 +261 HWY 50 ,Q. E. HIGH ST. U z27 r a 32 U) 0 37 -22 Q +122 19 (2 i E. MCCARTY ST. E. MILLER ST. _ Q I:►riwAll $ A S S O C I A T E S RNSULTANTSLEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: E. MCCARTY ST. MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON H..,� a�nd��°� � A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 # B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT jr 40 0through 99 1p +166 +250 +241 1 Q , 2s JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI O R +71 +216 +174 +28 +261 HWY 50 ,Q. �a • , j Pg. 26 my OJT E. MILLER ST. 19 (2 i 2J +80 +12 +23 +69 30 -19 r coco z o Z rn HWY. 50/63 z U) w U O o w 2 o z z ¢ O Q 2 E. MCCARTY ST. E. MILLER ST. _ Q I:►riwAll $ A S S O C I A T E S RNSULTANTSLEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON H..,� a�nd��°� � A STUDY AREA + 100 -99 through -1 # B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT 0through 99 PARKING STUDY aRUMCTS • UNINEeu • PLUMMS -100+ (, USING NEW PARKING MAP 5.1 JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI O R GENERATION RATIOS BLOCK Pg. 26 03/17 NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Table G Zone 1 Demand Matrix Final Report Daytime Parking Demand Matrix A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O CURRENT FUTURE P Q R S T U V W X Block Office Government / Museum Hotel Retail Service Mixed Use Restaurant /Bar Residential Theater Library Institutional/ Warehouse Light Industrial Community/ Church Vacant Demand Demand Parking Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ (per unit) (per unit) (per seat) (current) (current) Supply Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Previous Parking Generation Ratios 2.64 3.36 0.85 2.61 3.51 2.77 7.72 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.95 Previous PGR's New PGR's Previous PGR's New PGR's Previou s PGR's (future 5 yr) Previou s PGR's (future 10 yr) New PGR's (future 5 yr) New PGR's (future 10 yr) New Parking Generation Ratios 2.00 3.36 0.85 1.95 3.51 2.13 4.50 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.75 (current) (current) 40% 80% 40% 80% 1 - 172,000 - - - - - - - - - - 578 578 99 -479 -479 -479 -479 -479 -479 2(1) 128,088 - 430 430 384 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 -46 3 - 0 0 376 376 376 376 376 376 376 4 - 0 0 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 5 80,153 255 - 270 270 520 250 250 250 250 250 250 6(2) 767,244 - - - 2,578 2,578 313 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 -2,265 7 - - - - 15,591 10 10 415 405 405 405 405 405 405 8 - 8,087 - - 22 1 17 609 587 1 592 587 587 1 592 592 9 478,942 - - - 1,609 1,609 625 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 10 7,016 198,885 36 - - 733 728 251 -482 -477 -482 -482 -477 -477 11 - - 6 - - 8 8 249 241 241 241 241 241 241 12 24,829 4,548 - 68 52 64 -4 12 -4 -4 12 12 13 14,982 - - - - - 40 30 246 206 216 206 206 216 216 14 3,284 35,000 4,800 8,164 25 - - 235 203 224 -11 21 -11 -11 1 21 21 Totals 50,111 1,860,312 255 - - 12,887 8,164 67 4,548 15,591 6,580 6,513 4,541 (2,039) (1,972) (2,039) (2,039) (1,972) (1,972) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (1) Block 2 only includes Government square footage and parking (2) Capitol shuttle and carpool parking have been added to block #6 (3) Blocks 35-37 are not included in the demand matrix (421 parking spaces) (4) Theater use was taken out of blocks 17 and 20 for the daytime demand 0 2 7 W. MAIN ST. _ _— ��� �¢ _ W. MAIN ST. CID O l -46 +405 2i W. HIGH ST. O +376 W. MCCARTY ST. HWY 50 RICH & ASSOCIATES Sheet Title: ZONE 1 r r, fir• PµANIHf. f: fl 11 :.. Tear; LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: CITY OF JEFFERSON J ti. 1J.'.I— STUDYAREA + 10orough 1 A DX CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT PARKING STUDY 0 through 99 -100+B � MAP 5.2 W. HIGH ST. -0010/////,/i. %4% ko H } D 0 of m HWY 50 4 -14 F- U) } 0 0 of co 11 +241 U) z O z Q -1 • � T, .gip .1 f • f. N '. t r o i •, 1`IlrFf •,• NIP f "� • r „f • r i r 1 �!■ E. CAPITOL AVE. Ave r. 0 D M RC_ r yl •Ctrl=� ..r: •� � T a r� E. HIGN ST.-' t ' E. WALMAY nr E. MCC91RTY ST_. //y � ""1771 � f1= � N ➢ � - 13 is f 1 r l { l i IF tl 1 +206 E. MILLER ST. I =�.r. of W LL LL w 0 cn _ RICH & ASSOCIATES Sheet Title: ZONE 1 MAPNumber: PµANIHf. f: fl 11 :.. Tear; LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: CITY OF JEFFERSON J ti. 1J.'.I— STUDYAREA + 10orough 1 A DX CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT PARKING STUDY 0 through 99 -100+B � MAP 5.2 ARCHITECTS •ENGINEERS •PLANNERS GOVERNMENT AREA "o # JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI n BLOCK USING 1999 PARKING GENERATION RATIOS Pg. 28 os �T NUMBER — w r i MO/ W. HIGH ST. i_ Vrrr O +376 } 0 Of m HWY 50 W. HIGH ST. HWY 50 1 } 11 +241 ° 0 m _z Ar. . ii ► ., 4 .f. _ r E. CAPITOL AVE. �. , w Yr' LL LL MERC ttr- +' ' • � _ E. WALL WAY — E. MCCARTY ST. 13 �•� � . _ wry s^ � "7 '- . , L �, , � • � � _ w�r.tM +216 ' E. MILLER ST. 12'' F-: U) +12 0 oz of0 w cn LL 0 LL ¢ CITY OF JEFFERSON PARKING STUDY JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI RICH &ASSOCIATES nlrrclu_ cur.SuLIFr.I<. M=:==u::_� ' - - pRCHfLECTG- ENGINEERS - PLANNERS LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: a STUDY AREA � + 100 -99 through -1 �0through99 _100+ o j# B � Sheet Title: ZONE 1 CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT GOVERNMENT AREA MAP Number MAP 5.3 o n BLOCK USING NEW PARKING GENERATION RATIOS P9. 29 osn� NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Table H Zone 2 Demand Matrix Final Report Daytime Parking Demand Matrix A B C D E F G H I -�� J K L M N O P CURRENT Q R S T U FUTURE V W X Block Office Government / Museum Hotel Retail Service Mixed Use Restaurant /Bar Residential Theater Institutional/ Library Warehouse Light Industrial Community/ Church Vacant Demand Demand Parking Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ Surplus/ (per unit) (per unit) (per seat) I (current) (current) Supply Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Deficit Previous Parking Generation Ratios 2.64 3.36 0.85 2.61 3.51 2.77 7.72 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.95 Previous PGR's New PGR's Previous PGR's New PGR's Previou s PGR's (future 5 yr) Previou s PGR's (future 10 yr) New PGR's (future 5 yr) New PGR's (future 10 yr) New Parking Generation Ratios 2.00 3.36 0.85 1.95 3.51 2.13 4.50 1.28 0.25 1.85 0.45 0.63 0.65 2.75 (current) (current) 40% 80% 40% 80% 9 - 478,942 - - - 1,609 1,609 625 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 -984 10 7,016 198,885 36 - - 733 728 251 -482 -477 -482 -482 -477 -477 11 - - 6 - - 8 8 249 241 241 241 241 241 241 12 24,829 4,548 - 68 52 64 -4 12 -4 -4 12 12 13 14,982 - - - 40 30 246 206 216 206 206 216 216 14 3,284 35,000 4,800 8,164 25 - - 235 203 224 -11 21 -11 -11 21 21 15 - 27,863 - - - - - 94 94 72 -22 -22 -22 -22 -22 -22 16 202,892 270,712 46,397 25,782 6 3,131 - - 6 1,774 1,531 217 -1,557 -1,314 -1,561 -1,564 -1 ,31 7 -1,320 17 (4) 64,150 - 40,776 12,148 7 50 - - 24,000 16,801 394 287 184 -210 -103 -230 -250 -122 -140 18 71,385 1,970 - - - - 194 147 218 24 71 24 24 71 71 19 21,000 - - - - - 55 42 65 10 23 10 10 23 23 20(4) - - - 895 - - - 0 0 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 21 31,612 150 8,750 - 5 - 6,480 12,066 - - 123 97 271 148 174 148 148 174 174 22 131,122 - 78,084 1,835 4 - - 1,430 10,494 570 429 178 -392 -251 -405 -417 -262 -274 23 40,515 79,260 2,918 1,000 22,776 - - 351 264 691 340 427 340 340 427 427 24 58,993 - 3,680 5 1,000 - 1,000 192 142 877 685 735 685 685 735 735 25 - - - - - 114,000 74 74 223 149 149 149 149 149 149 26 106,299 18,000 28,000 2,000 50,000 13,912 413 333 175 -238 -158 -254 -271 -173 -189 27 83,657 - 10,073 - - - - - 247 187 165 -82 -22 -82 -82 -22 -22 28 - 54,216 - 1,000 - 183 183 211 28 28 28 28 28 28 29 - - - 11 - 5,500 18 18 98 80 80 80 80 80 80 30 8,358 - 6 - 30 24 5 -25 -19 -25 -25 -19 -19 31 0 0 261 261 261 261 261 261 261 32 83,912 16 - 242 188 310 68 122 68 68 122 122 33 62,104 12 16,000 190 150 238 48 88 48 48 88 88 34 26,527 - 10 - - - - 25 83 66 106 23 40 10 -2 27 15 Totals 1,042,637 1,065,618 150 283,310 4,800 54,527 149 945 28,000 19,159 34,842 211,930 41,238 7,918 6,885 6,293 (1,625) (592) (1,689) (1,754) (653) (714) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (stalls) (1) Block 2 only includes Government square footage and parking 0 we, -� k_ U• t 144 a z o `() Z 1 (D W U) LL n LU -1,557 E. MCCARTY ST. U) z o Q Z m 11 +241 < 13 +206 E. MILLER ST. 4 dl'T !� ! F � o - 1-L �. � � _4 E. CAPITOL AVE. U) W 0 cY +340 ,; -238 M, � 1 A /Mv E. MCCARTY ST. 18 21 28 +24cn +148 +28 E. MILLER ST. U) 1 g F 2U � 29 +80 of +10 0 +69 0 LL zLL 0W 30 -25 E. CAPITOL AVE. COMMERCIAL WAYwim —� u , 1 rli r , E. HIGH ST. 1 �1 E WALL WAY tiq fit, ly Q E. MCCARTY ST. �.J,. SA « ' wt E. MILLER ST. ASSil�CIATES OMSIiOWS LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: ZONE 2 sI CITY OF JEFFERSON ��""'"��p°'""`"� A nMyn.um: smh[d6w wr,K ""V"" NMI 'A" STUDY AREA +100-99through -1 ° B 0through99 -100+ FCURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT PARKING STUDY MAP 5.4 ABCHTECi .ENGlMEER9.P4hM„� r COMMERCIAL AREA � JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI H BLOCK -...- ` ®✓<' � .v ♦ it F NUMBER. E. MCCARTY ST. U) z o Q Z m 11 +241 < 13 +206 E. MILLER ST. 4 dl'T !� ! F � o - 1-L �. � � _4 E. CAPITOL AVE. U) W 0 cY +340 ,; -238 M, � 1 A /Mv E. MCCARTY ST. 18 21 28 +24cn +148 +28 E. MILLER ST. U) 1 g F 2U � 29 +80 of +10 0 +69 0 LL zLL 0W 30 -25 E. CAPITOL AVE. COMMERCIAL WAYwim —� u , 1 rli r , E. HIGH ST. 1 �1 E WALL WAY tiq fit, ly Q E. MCCARTY ST. �.J,. SA « ' wt E. MILLER ST. ASSil�CIATES OMSIiOWS LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet Title: ZONE 2 MAP Number: CITY OF JEFFERSON ��""'"��p°'""`"� A nMyn.um: smh[d6w wr,K ""V"" NMI 'A" STUDY AREA +100-99through -1 ° B 0through99 -100+ FCURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT PARKING STUDY MAP 5.4 ABCHTECi .ENGlMEER9.P4hM„� COMMERCIAL AREA � JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI H BLOCK USING 1999 PARKING GENERATION RATIOS Pg. 31 03,17 NUMBER. U) ¢ 0 rr �:....n,� .a•rr •w av�pre m IVAt�'E; i'It• A E. HIGH ST +21 E. MCCARTY ST. f— Z 0 c� +241 1 s +216 E. MILLER ST F-� 0 of LU LL LL LLI x;12 v 11 Z +12 OfW LLLLw ,� v -22 +735 +149 E. CAPITOL AVE. F HI(H RT- ' +40 r p�yd+ /.- COMMERCIAL WAY E. MCCARTY ST. +23 z O D �7if �t °"rfftas;r ¢ E. HIGH ST. E. WALL WAY �. M('' "Y ST 'Imam_ �F 20 9 +p 8 169 O T 30 -19� z M:r O 2 [ .*I J T ( r_ E. MILLER ST. Ws 1 $ A S S O C I A T E S oNSuLTANTS BLOCK FACE KEY PLAN: Sheet ride: ZONE Z MAP Number: LEGEND: SURPLUS OF PARKING DEFICIT OF PARKING CITY OF JEFFERSON � ;�..�,a � �� °� A STUDY AREA +100 -99 through -1 ° x B CURRENT SURPLUS/DEFICIT PARKING STUDY - _ 0through 99 -100+ COMMERCIAL AREA MAP 5.5 JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI R USING NEW PARKING GENERATION RATIOS BOK n Phi. 32 03/17 NUMBER Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri PUBLIC INPUT Final Report Public input involved staff meetings, group meetings with a variety of community stakeholders and an open house. The open house for anyone wanting to discuss parking with the consultants. This meeting occurred on January 251h between 4:00pm and 6:00pm. Stakeholders were selected by City staff and a general call to the community to represent a broad cross section of parties involved in the downtown. The cross-section of stakeholders spans local business people, residents, non-profit organizations, and Chamber members. The stakeholder meetings and open house provided consultant staff with individual perspectives on parking issues in Jefferson City. Topics that came up during the discussions include: • Relative convenience of parking and walking distances o Hills are difficult to walk • Need for additional parking • Courts and juror parking • Downtown parking is becoming an issue for future development • State Government does not have enough parking • Residential parking is a challenge in the downtown • Visitor parking is an issue • Events cause parking issues • 90 min parking spaces do not give enough time • Lack of parking structures for alternate uses such as farmers market and concerts • Parking is typically available for shopping and dining • Like the free High Street parking • Need a parking garage 0 33 Parking Study Update Jefferson City, Missouri Final Report Four surveys were developed to gain additional public input. The surveys were directed toward Business Owners/Managers, Employees, Customers and Residents. These surveys were available on the City's website. The surveys collected are as follows: • Business Owner: 9 Responses • Employee: 29 Responses • Customer: 49 Responses • Residential: 2 Responses The surveys included a series of questions pertaining to how individuals traveled downtown, where they parked, how many businesses they visited, and how long they stayed. These questions along with business specific questions on size of commercial area, number of employees, hours of operation and number of customers helped Rich & Associates understand parking issues in the downtown. Additional questions provided an opportunity for participants to offer an opinion on various aspects of the parking system. Questions ranged from enforcement to overall parking adequacy. Results of the opinion based questions are located in the Appendix. 0 34 Jefferson City - Business Owner #1 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:02:02 PM Last Modified: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:07:38 PM Time Spent: 00:05:35 IP Address: 216.106.24.42 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Brydon, Swearengen & England Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Office apply, i.e. retail & food service) O3: Hours of Operation Open Close Monday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Tuesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Wednesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Thursday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Friday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Saturday Sunday Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season rag»►L7/.7� Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Summer 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Fall 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Winter 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Other (please specify how many employees) 25-30 05: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 0 Owned nearby 0 Leased with building or business 15 Leased nearby 10 1 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring Summer Fall Winter Q3. What day is your peak day? weekdays Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? Other Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q13: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? varies varies varies varies varies Respondent skipped this question Respondent skipped this question Drive and Park my own car No Private lot Yes rd19»04151 KIM1 No - Employees must park using public parking Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where No to park? Q13: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q2: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? No Yes No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking Other (please specify) Some clients can only walk a few steps b/c of age. Some can walk for blocks Yes - The amount of customer/visitor parking is fine Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from No - Everyone parks where they should. other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? 2 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q2: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one strongly agree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) strongly agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) strongly agree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments Respondent skipped this regarding parking below. question /d19»04151 KIM1 #2 Jefferson City - Business Owner Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Friday, January 20, 2017 3:12:01 PM Last Modified: Friday, January 20, 2017 3:59:10 PM Time Spent: 00:47:09 IP Address: 184.6.111.97 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Downtown Realty 616 E High St Jefferson City, MO 65101 Q`: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Office apply, i.e. retail & food service) 2 Fall Q3: Hours of Operation Winter 2 Open Close Monday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Tuesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Wednesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Thursday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Friday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Saturday 8:00 AM 12:00 Noon Sunday 8:00 AM 12:00 Noon If your business hours of operation change seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by season Hours by appointment only. How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Spring 2 Summer 2 Fall 2 Winter 2 How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 10 Owned nearby 0 Leased with building or business 0 Leased nearby 0 Part -Time 4 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring 40 Summer 40 Fall 40 Winter 40 Q8: What day is your peak day? Monday Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? AM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q13: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where to park? 1008: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q10: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? 8-12 50%-60% 25%-50% Drive and Park my own car Yes, /d19»04151 KIN1 If "Yes", where is this parking located Parking in rear. On -street free Yes Yes - All employees have parking provided and available Yes, If "Yes", please explain policy Park in Rear. No Yes No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 3 blocks Yes - The amount of customer/visitor parking is fine Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from No - Everyone parks where they should. other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? 5 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q24: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one agree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) agree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments Respondent skipped this regarding parking below. question /d19»04151 KIM1 Jefferson City - Business Owner #3 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Friday, January 20, 2017 3:43:15 PM Last Modified: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:06:06 PM Time Spent: 00:22:51 IP Address: 76.2.170.109 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Ana Maries Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Retail apply, i.e. retail & food service) Q3: Hours of Operation Id1»: 1►UD.I1 Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 1 2 Summer 1 1 Fall 1 1 Winter 1 2 06: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 2 Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Respondent skipped this question 7 Open Close Monday 10:00 AM 5:00 PM Tuesday 10:00 AM 5:00 PM Wednesday 10:00 AM 4:00 PM Thursday 10:00 AM 5:00 PM Friday 10:00 AM 5:00 PM Saturday 9:00 AM 4:00 PM Sunday Other (please specify) Evening appts are availabl by appt. Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season Id1»: 1►UD.I1 Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 1 2 Summer 1 1 Fall 1 1 Winter 1 2 06: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 2 Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Respondent skipped this question 7 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q8: What day is your peak day? Saturday -winter and spring up to 50 people a day in the store Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? AM PM Q10During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q13: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? 10-2 4-5 50%-60% 5%-10% Drive and Park my own car Yes Respondent skipped this question Yes Id1»A0151 KIN1 Some - Can provide for some employees but not all Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where No to park? Q1 Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q10: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? M Other - Please feel free to add comments They park where their are long term spots and walk a couple blocks No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 2 blocks Respondent skipped this question Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from No - Everyone parks where they should. other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? Q24: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one disagree a Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) agree 026: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. All the street closings are an inconvenience to my business. My saturday customers are coming in specifically to my shop, not attending the festival and stopping in. When they have to walk several blocks to get to my store, or drive around in circles looking for parking when the streets are closed they are very irritated when they finally to make it in. If you are closing streets you need to notify the downtown retailers early in the week so we can notify clients about how to get downtown and where to park. I myself have come downtown at 8 on a Saturday morning to find the streets closed with no notification. #4 Jefferson City - Business Owner Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:01:10 PM Last Modified: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:14:46 PM Time Spent: 00:13:36 IP Address: 216.106.24.42 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Type of Business (if multiple types check all that apply, i.e. retail & food service) Hours of Operation Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Other (please specify) na Open 8:00 AM 8:00 AM 8:00 AM Brydon. Swearengen & England P.C., 312 E. Capitol Avenue, Jefferson City,MO Office, Other (please specify) Law Firm Close 5:00 PM 5:00 PM 5:00 PM 5:00 PM 5:00 PM Other times by appointment If your business hours of operation change seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by season How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in "other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Summer 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Fall 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Winter 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Other (please specify how many employees) 23 i0 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q6: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business Owned nearby Leased with building or business Leased nearby Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring Summer Fall Winter Q3: What day is your peak day? No specific day Q0: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? Other Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11 - In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q 13 Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q1 5: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where to park? Q18: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q10: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? 0 0 0 23 20 20 20 20 No specifal time 20%-30% 20%-25% Drive and Park my own car M City owned parking structure Yes /d19»04151/.I1 Yes - All employees have parking provided and available Yes, If "Yes", please explain policy They generally are to park in leased spaces, unless parking in metered parking is necessary because of activities related to work. Other - Please feel free to add comments na No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 11 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q21; How far away are you comfortable asking 1 block customers to walk? 022: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available Yes - The amount of customer/visitor parking is fine, parking for customers/visitors? Other (please specify) When available. Sometimes events, such as 4th of July, eliminate our parking for a full week. Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from No - Everyone parks where they should. other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? 024: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one strongly agree 025: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) strongly agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) disagree 026: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. Normally, on street parking is sufficient for our purposes. However, as mentioned above, the 4th of July street shut down has grown to where we lose parking for a full work week. This is difficult for our older clients who have a hard time parking and walking. Additionally, there are times during the year where we lose the street parking for a full day. Two years ago this happened without notice causing problems for appointments that had already ben scheduled. This year, we did receive some prior notice, which was helpful and appreciated.. 12 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A #5 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:02:27 AM Last Modified: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:18:39 AM Time Spent: 00:16:12 IP Address: 76.4.160.188 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Press & Port's Eatery Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Restaurant / Food Service apply, i.e. retail & food service) 3: Hours of Operation Open Close Monday 6:30 AM 3:00 PM Tuesday 6:30 AM 3:00 PM Wednesday 6:30 AM 3:00 PM Thursday 6:30 AM 3:00 PM Friday 6:30 AM 3:00 PM Saturday Sunday Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in "other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 3 2 Summer 3 2 Fall 3 2 Winter 3 2 06: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 1 7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Winter 40-50 13 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q3: What day is your peak day? 7-9/12-130 Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? PM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q13: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q1 5: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? 016: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? 12 30%-40% 50%-75% Drive and Park my own car No On -street free Yes /d19»04151 KIM1 No - Employees must park using public parking 01'7: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where No to park? Q10: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? X320: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? M M No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 1 block No - We need more parking for customers and visitors Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from Yes - Some park at on -street spaces other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? Q24: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one disagree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) agree 14 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. Being new to downtown parking, I had no idea what an issue it is for employees and business owners that use free or metered parking. Our employees set their phones to go pay parking meters. I personally have had 1-2 tickets in the past 2 weeks because I get busy in the restaurant and can't get out in time to pay the meter or move the car. I also hate taking parking close to our store, I feel I am taking customer spots. Is there a list somewhere that has the owners of the lots that lease spaces? I would be willing to pay a monthly fee to get secured parking every day for myself or even my employees. Another option is Uber. Our employees would definitely take Uber if it was available, however, taxis are just too expensive. A couple of ideas: An employee commuter lot with shuttling every 15 minutes would be great (maybe the old St Mary's hospital lot would work) Longer paid parking on side streets to allow employees to pay for more hours and not leave their work sites to pay meters. A possible new garage closer to the Truman building/100 block of High Street. Madison street parking is a great set up but something on the other side would be nice. 15 Jefferson City - Business Owner #6 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Monday, January 23, 2017 7:27:58 AM Last Modified: Monday, January 23, 2017 7:37:48 AM Time Spent: 00:09:49 IP Address: 199.255.161.20 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address central Bank Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Service, Office apply, i.e. retail & food service) Q3: Hours of Operation Open Close Monday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Tuesday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Wednesday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Thursday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Friday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Saturday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Sunday 8:30 AM 5:00 PM Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season /d19»04151 KIN1 Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Summer 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Fall 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Winter 10 or More (if more than 10 specify below) Other (please specify how many employees) Q6: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business Leased with building or business 10 or more (if more than 10 specify below) 10 or more (if more than 10 specify below) 10 or more (if more than 10 specify below) 10 or more (if more than 10 specify below) 110 in the downtown core yet in summer we generally add 7 - 12 interns 95 20 16 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring Summer Fall Winter Q8: What day is your peak day? the 1st & 15th of each month (pay day) Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? AM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q1 3: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where to park? Q18� Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q 2E]: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? 75 75 75 75 Mornings 20%-30% 50%-75% Drive and Park my own car No, If "Yes", where is this parking located City parking garage City owned parking structure Yes Id1»A04151 KIN1 Yes - All employees have parking provided and available Yes, If "Yes", please explain policy Parking is assigned Yes, we encourage those who can to ride a bike whenever possible Yes, we encourage use of other means (rideshare, etc) No, Other - Please feel free to add comments During legilative session there is a shortage No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 1 block 17 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q22; Do you feel that there is enough publicly available No - We need more parking for customers and visitors parking for customers/visitors? Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from Yes - Some park at on -street spaces other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? Q2: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one disagree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) neither agree or disagree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments Respondent skipped this regarding parking below. question 18 Jefferson City - Business Owner #7 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 2:22:11 PM Last Modified: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 2:33:28 PM Time Spent: 00:11:16 IP Address: 168.166.67.57 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Shrunken Head Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Bar, Medical Office apply, i.e. retail & food service) Q3� Hours of Operation Open Close rag»►L7/.7� Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 6:00 PM 11:00 PM or Later Friday 6:00 PM 11:00 PM or Later Saturday 6:00 PM 11:00 PM or Later Sunday Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Part -Time Spring 2 Summer 2 Fall 2 Winter 2 : How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 0 Owned nearby 0 Leased with building or business 0 Leased nearby 0 19 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring Summer Fall Winter Q8: What day is your peak day? Friday & Saturday Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? PM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q1 3: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? Q1 61 Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? 30 25 30 25 /d19»04151 KIM1 10:00 50%-60% 15%-20% Drive and Park my own car No On -street free No, If "No", please explain Lots of parking mishaps/hit & runs No - Employees must park using public parking Q17: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where No to park? Q13: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? No No No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 1 block No - We need more parking for customers and visitors Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from Yes - Some park at on -street spaces other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? 20 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q24: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one strongly disagree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) neither agree or disagree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. East Side is in desperate need of additional parking to accommodate multiple businesses. 21 Jefferson City - Business Owner #$ COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:09:17 PM Last Modified: Friday, January 27, 2017 6:20:43 PM Time Spent: 00:11:25 IP Address: 64.85.206.14 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey /d19»►UD.I1 Q1: Business Name & Address Root Cellar 306 E High St. Jefferson City Mo 65101 Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Restaurant / Food Service, Retail apply, i.e. retail & food service) Q3: Hours of Operation Open Close Monday Tuesday Wednesday 10:00 AM 7:00 PM Thursday 10:00 AM 7:00 PM Friday 10:00 AM 7:00 PM Saturday 9:00 AM 5:00 PM Sunday Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified answers, please respond in 'other" response with number of employees) Full -Time Spring Summer Fall Winter C6: How many parking spaces? Leased with building or business 2 Part -Time 4 5 4 3 22 Jefferson City - Business Owner Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring Summer Fall Winter 0: What day is your peak day? Thursday and Friday Q9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? PM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? Q11: In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? Q1 3: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? 16: Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? 40 50 40 25 4to6 30%-40% 15%-20% Drive and Park my own car Yes, /d19»04151 KIM1 If "Yes", where is this parking located Behind the building in a small private lot included with lease Respondent skipped this question Yes Some - Can provide for some employees but not all X31 7: Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where No to park? Q10: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? No Yes No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 1 block 23 Jefferson City - Business Owner APPENDIX A Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available No - We need more parking for customers and visitors parking for customers/visitors? Other (please specify) Being a retail food store customers are often carrying large amounts of purchases. More parking is always helpful! Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from Yes - Some park at on -street spaces other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? Q24: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one neither agree or disagree Q25: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) agree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. Downtown would benefit from multi use parking facilities. Utilizing parking structures for other activities like festival and/or farmers market activity could be useful. This may provide additional weekday parking and create event flexibility for Downtown activities during PM and Weekend Hours. 24 Jefferson City - Business Owner #9 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:47:03 AM Last Modified: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:56:42 AM Time Spent: 00:09:38 IP Address: 65.114.105.10 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Business Owner/Manager Survey Q1: Business Name & Address Turnbull & Stark PC Q2: Type of Business (if multiple types check all that Office apply, i.e. retail & food service) Q3: Hours of Operation Open Close Monday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Tuesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Wednesday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Thursday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Friday 8:00 AM 5:00 PM Saturday Sunday Q4: If your business hours of operation change Respondent skipped this seasonally please explain changes, hours/days by question season Q5: How many people work here? (if more than specified Respondent skipped this answers, please respond in 'other" response with question number of employees) Q6: How many parking spaces? Owned with building or business 1 Leased nearby 4 Q7: Number of customers in a typical day by season? Spring 6 Summer 6 Fall 6 Winter 6 03: What day is your peak day? M -Th rag»►L7/.7� 25 Jefferson City - Business Owner O9: What hour(s) is your busiest time of day/night? AM PM Q10: During your peak hour(s) what proportion of your daily customers are in your business? O1.1 : In your estimation, what proportion of your daily customers are already downtown Jefferson City for another purpose such as work, shopping, other personal business etc.? Q12: How do you generally get to work? 013: Do you have parking for yourself at your business/building? Q14: If not, where do you generally park? Q15: Do you feel that you and your vehicle are safe when you park downtown? 016, Do you provide parking for any employees at your business/building? 1 e': Do you have a policy for your staff regarding where to park? C18: Do you offer incentives to your staff not to drive to work but instead bicycle or other means? Q19: If any staff are required to use public parking, is enough parking provided near your business? Q20: Do you provide parking for customers/visitors at your business/building? Q21: How far away are you comfortable asking customers to walk? Q22: Do you feel that there is enough publicly available parking for customers/visitors? 8 -Noon 1-5:00 50%-60% 0% Drive and Park my own car Yes, If "Yes", where is this parking located On our building property Respondent skipped this question Yes /d19»04151 KIN1 Yes - All employees have parking provided and available Yes, If "Yes", please explain policy Employees use the Madison Street Garage or park use metered parking if necessary. Im No, Other - Please feel free to add comments Public parking requires payment and exposure to risk of getting a ticket No - Customers / visitors must park using public parking 1/2 block, Other (please specify) Our clients are elderly/disabled No - We need more parking for customers and visitors Q23: Do you think that employees or staff members from Yes - Some park at on -street spaces other businesses are taking convenient parking away from your customers or visitors? 26 Jefferson City - Business Owner 024: It is easy to locate a parking space in downtown Jefferson City. Choose one disagree 025: Parking signage (directional, length of stay, etc.) is easy to follow and understand. On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone, etc) agree Directional Signs (public parking this way, etc) disagree Q26: Please feel free to make any additional comments Respondent skipped this regarding parking below. question /d19»0151 KIM1 27 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B Full -Time Employee (Wo... Part -Time Employee (Wo... 0 Temporary Employee am a (check all that apply): Answered: 29 Skipped:0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Full -Time Employee (Work more than 30 hours per week) 93.10% Part -Time Employee (Work less than 30 hours per week) 10.34% Temporary Employee 0.00% Total Respondents: 29 # Other (please specify) Date There are no responses. 1 27 3 0 Monday - Friday dayti... Monday - Friday eveni... Weekend Days only (6am -... Weekend evenings (af... Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey When are you generally at work? Answered: 28 Skipped:1 MINVA U]/:":3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Monday - Friday daytime (6am - 5pm) 92.86% Monday - Friday evening (after 5pm) 14.29% Weekend Days only (6am - 5pm) 3.57% Weekend evenings (after 5pm) 3.57% Total Respondents: 28 # Other (please specify) Date 1 Monday -Friday 7:30-4:00 1/27/2017 2:35 PM 2 26 4 1 1 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey Name of the city/town where you reside if not in Jefferson City? Answered: 8 Skipped: 21 Responses i Boonville, MO CAMDENTON MO New Bloomfield 4 Jefferson City 5 Taos, MO 6 Columbia 7 Fulton 8 Taos r���au.�►� 3 Date 2/3/2017 7:23 AM 2/1/20171:21 PM 1/20/2017 4:29 PM 1/20/2017 3:39 PM 1/20/2017 3:33 PM 1/20/2017 10:31 AM 1/20/2017 10:23 AM 1/18/2017 6:13 PM 3 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B Drive and Park my own car Ride with friend or... Dropped Off Walk Bicycle' Motorcycle 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Drive and Park my own car Ride with friend or spouse Dropped Off Walk Bicycle Motorcycle 93.10% 27 0.00% 0 3.45% 1 0.00% 0 3.45% 1 0.00% 0 Total 29 # Other (please specify) Date There are no responses. 4 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B Yes a No Answer Choices Yes No 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B City owned lot State owned lot Private lot City owned . parking... State owned parking... On -street metered On -street free' 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices City owned lot State owned lot Private lot City owned parking structure State owned parking structure On -street metered On -street free Responses 6 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B No - Parking is too far away Yes - Publicly available lo... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices No - Parking is too far away Yes - Publicly available lots are near enough Responses Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B No M. Yes, we are encouraged t... Yes, we are offered... Answer Choices No 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes, we are encouraged to ride bikes or use other means Yes, we are offered incentives if we don't drive Responses Less than 1 block 1 block to 1 1/2 blocks 1 1/2 to 2 blocks 2to2112 blocks 2 1/2 to 3 blocks More than 3 blocks Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Less than 1 block 1 block to 1 1/2 blocks 1 1/2 to 2 blocks 2 to 2 1/2 blocks 2 1/2 to 3 blocks More than 3 blocks 9 Yes No Answer Choices Yes No Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 10 Yes No Answer Choices Yes No Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses It Yes - Employees ar... No - There is no policy No - I am told to park... Answer Choices Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes - Employees are told that on -street parking is for customers No - There is no policy No - I am told to park on -street Responses 12 Yes - All the time Sometimes No Answer Choices Yes - All the time Sometimes No Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 13 Yes - The amount of... No - We need more parking... Answer Choices Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes - The amount of customer/visitor parking is fine No - We need more parking for customers and visitors. Responses 14 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey APPENDIX B Yes - Some park at... Yes - They should park ... No - Everyone parks where... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Yes - Some park at on -street spaces Yes - They should park in lots further away No - Everyone parks where they should Responses 15 Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey Choose one strongly disagree disagree neither agree or disagree agree strongly agree Choose one r���au.�►� 3 10 Total Weighted Average 16 On -street notification... Directional signs on-str... Jefferson City - Downtown Employee Survey rAWaau.IU 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone etc) Directional signs on -street (Public parking this way etc) strongly disagree neither agree or agree strongly Total Weighted disagree disagree agree Average 17 Jefferson City - Customer Survey I am a (check all that apply): Answered: 49 Skipped:0 Resident of Jefferson City Downtown Resident Frequent Visitor to... Infrequent ■ Visitor to... Out -of -Town Visitor 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Resident of Jefferson City 7959% Downtown Resident 0.00% Frequent Visitor to downtown 59.18% Infrequent Visitor to downtown 8.16% Out -of -Town Visitor 2.04% Total Respondents: 49 1 39 0 29 4 1 Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C If not a resident of Jefferson City, what City, Town or Village do you reside in? Answered:7 Skipped: 42 # 1 Responses Boonville, MO Moberly Russellville Wardsville, MO Fulton Holts Summit Elston Date 2/3/2017 7:21 AM 2 1/23/201711:49 AM 1/23/2017 11:36 AM 1/20/2017 5:43 PM 3 4 5 1/20/2017 10:20 AM 6 1/19/201711:32 PM 7 1/19/2017 10:22 AM 2 Jefferson City - Customer Survey 3 How do you generally arrive to Jefferson City? Answered: 49 Skipped:0 Drive and Park my Own Car Dropped Off Motorcycle/scoo ter Walk Bicycle I 0% 10% Answer Choices Drive and Park my Own Car Dropped Off Motorcycle/scooter Walk Bicycle Total # Other (please specify) There are no responses. 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 97.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.04% Date 3 48 0 0 0 1 49 Monday - Friday dayti... Monday - Friday eveni... Saturday - Sunday dayti... Saturday - Sunday even!... Monday - Friday daytime (6am - 5pm) Monday - Friday evening (after 5pm) Saturday - Sunday daytime (6am - 5pm) Saturday - Sunday evenings (after 5pm) Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 One Two Three Four Total Weighted Average 59.09% 11.36% 9.09% 20.45% 26 5 4 9 44 1.91 10.26% 30.77% 41.03% 17.95% 4 12 16 7 39 2.67 21.43% 42.86% 26.19% 9.52% 9 18 11 4 42 2.24 12.20% 21.95% 17.07% 48.78% 5 9 7 20 41 3.02 4 Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C Public owned parking lot State owned parking lot Private owned parking lot City owned ■ parking... State owned parking... On -street metered On -street free 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Public owned parking lot State owned parking lot Private owned parking lot City owned parking structure State owned parking structure On -street metered On -street free Responses 5 Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C about once per week 1 to 2 times per week 3 to 4 times per week 5 or more times per week about once a month less than once a month I tend not to come downtow... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices about once per week 1 to 2 times per week 3 to 4 times per week 5 or more times per week about once a month less than once a month I tend not to come downtown because Responses 6 Hours Choose Time 0% 10% 1 M2 -10 or more Jefferson City - Customer Survey 20% 30% 40% 3 .4 .5 1 2 3 4 5 Choose Time 50% 60% 70% 80% 6 07 -18 09 6 7 8 90% 100% 9 10 or more Total 7 Generally 1 (single... Answer Choices Generally 1 (single purpose) 2 3 4 5 or more Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C 3 4 I 5 or more I 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 8 Answer Choices 25 feet 100 feet 1(2 block 1 block 1 to 2 blocks More than 2 blocks Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C 25 feet 100 feet 1/2 block 1 block' 1 to 2 blocks' More than 2 blocks 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 9 Yes - The number of... No - There are not enough... Answer Choices Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes - The number of parking spaces seems to be okay No - There are not enough spaces. Responses im Yes No Answer Choices Yes No Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 11 Jefferson City - Customer Survey APPENDIX C Yes - Some park at... Yes - They should park ... No - Everyone parks where... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Yes - Some park at on -street spaces Yes - They should park in lots further away No - Everyone parks where they should. Responses 12 Jefferson City - Customer Survey Choose one strongly disagree disagree neither agree or disagree agree strongly agree Choose one 10 Total Weighted Average 13 On -street notification... Directional signs on-str... Jefferson City - Customer Survey 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 strongly disagree neither agree or disagree disagree On -street notifications (No Parking, loading zone etc) Directional signs on -street (Public parking this way, etc) agree strongly Total Weighted agree Average 14 Jefferson City - Residential Survey #1 COMPLETE Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:42:58 PM Last Modified: Sunday, January 22, 2017 7:51:50 PM Time Spent: 00:08:51 IP Address: 97.87.171.12 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Residential Survey Q1: Please indicate your type of residence: Owner Occupied Loft Space Q2: What is the address? 232 E. High Street Q3: How many residential units are there in the building? Six Q4: Do you have a designated parking space? Building does not have parking Q5: Is a parking space included in the cost of your rent or price paid for the unit? 06: Is there sufficient parking at your building for all residents? Q7: If there is insufficient parking at the building for residents, where else do you park? Q8: Is there sufficient parking for guests? Q9: If there is not sufficient parking at your building for guests, where do guests park? Do not have parking No On -street free Not at all On -street free Q10: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. The metermaid informed me I have to invest $25k into my residence before I can qualify for residential parking. That's crazy, I did gut two apartments and made one big apt. at the cost of $18k and still get weekly parking tickets! The same residents everyday get the same parking tickets - When I'm sick and can not go outside to move my car, results in multiple tickets. The city is making money off the same people, this is just wrong. #2 Jefferson City - Residential Survey Collector: Web Link 1 (Web Link) Started: Thursday, January 26, 2017 7:23:12 PM Last Modified: Thursday, January 26, 2017 7:28:43 PM Time Spent: 00:05:31 IP Address: 76.4.190.176 PAGE 1: Jefferson City - Residential Survey Q1: Please indicate your type of residence: Owner Occupied Loft Space Q2: What is the address? 123 E High St Rear Q3: How many residential units are there in the building? 1 Q4: Do you have a designated parking space? Q5: Is a parking space included in the cost of your rent or price paid for the unit? 06: Is there sufficient parking at your building for all residents? 7: If there is insufficient parking at the building for residents, where else do you park? Q8: Is there sufficient parking for guests? Q9: If there is not sufficient parking at your building for guests, where do guests park? If Yes, how many spaces (please specify) 1 space but 2 vehicles Yes, If you have parking, how many spaces? 1 space but 2 vehicles No City owned lot Usually, but not always City owned lot 010: Please feel free to make any additional comments regarding parking below. I live and work downtown, so my vehicle rarely leaves our one building owned spot. But my husband parks in metered parking next to our apartment. He usually leaves prior to 8:00 am and returns after 5:00 pm, so it works well that he doesn't usually need to pay the meter. Guests use metered parking in the City lot. Memorandum 320 East McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P: 573.634.6410 e I=: 573.634.6562 . www.meffersoncitymo.gov Date: September 15, 2017 To: Public Works and Planning Committee From: David Bange P.E., City Engineer Subject: South Lincoln Street Update We have received the final plans for the South Lincoln Street reconstruction from our consultant and the project will be advertised on Sunday, September 17th. Bids for the project will opened on October 3rd at which point staff will review them and Make a recommendation to the Council for the October 16th Council meeting. Staff will be requesting the Council to approve the contract and a supplemental appropriation at that meeting so that work on the project may begin as soon as possible. If everything works according to plan the contractor may begin work as early as October 23rd. With a fifty day contract time, the work should be completed just before Christmas. There are several issues that may affect this schedule foremost among them is the Corps of Engineers 404 permit. This permit is required prior to any work taking place. At this time it is anticipated that we will have the permit within two weeks, however, there is a chance that this may be delayed. The other element that is not yet completed is the acquisition of several temporary construction easements from the adjoining property owners. Now that the plans have been finalized staff can proceed with acquiring these necessary easements. If you have any questions concerning this grant I can be reached at 634-6433. U:1PublicworkslEngineeringWbange\PUBLIC WORKS & PLAN NING\2017\J-21-1 AS. Lincoln Street.docx Department of Public Works Memorandum 320 E. McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 • P 573-634-6410 • F 573-634-6562 • www.jeffcilymo.org Date: September 15, 2017 To: Public Works and Planning Committee From: Matt Morasch, P. E., Director of Public Works r/ Subject: Public Works Staff Recommendation for $750,000 Stormwater Funds City staff recommends that the newly budgeted $750,000 stormwater funds be utilized to hire an additional Street Division construction crew (approximately $250,000 personnel and materials) that focuses on stormwater projects and then combine the remainder of the allotment ($500,000) with Capital Improvement Sales Tax Stormwater Funds ($360,000) to go towards our traditional design/bid/build projects, City staff believes that much more stormwater work can be accomplished with an in-house construction crew (and in a shorter period of time) than utilizing all the funds to go towards our traditional design/bid/build projects. We understand there may be some reservation to hiring additional staffing as this has long term funding implications. However, we also believe that funding storm water needs is a long term commitment. If in the future the City develops a new revenue source for stormwater, then staff purely focused on stormwater could be funded by that revenue stream. Attached are two project scenarios for the funding, one with increased staffing (Scenario A) and the second (Scenario B) without increased staffing. The projects contained on the two scenarios are from a list provided to the Mayor and Council back in May 2017, (email/list attached May 23, 2017). As demonstrated considerably more work would be accomplished by adding an internal crew than could be accomplished with just adding the funds to our traditional design/bid/build work ($1+ million differential). The main reasons for the differences are: • Engineering/administration is eliminated (almost) • No equipment costs are included (only personnel and materials, City already has backhoes, dump trucks, skid steers, etc.) • Contractor "up -costs" are eliminated (overhead, profit, insurance, prevailing wage differential, etc.) Public Works' CORE Mission and Values improve the Community - take ownership — deliver Results — Empathize with the customer To implement the staff recommendation, we request the Committee endorse the plan (Scenario A) and recommend that the 2017/2018 budget be modified to include the positions noted. Staff will then bring the plan forward to the full council at the next available meeting. If you have any questions about the information, attachments or our recommendation please feel free to contact me at 6346410. MM;mm Attachment List: Scenario A Scenario B May 23, 2017 email and stormwater project list 2018 Overlay list example Listing of Street Division stormwater work accomplished Jan -Aug 2017 Street Division plan sheet Public Works` CORE Mission and Values improve the Community - take Ownership — deliver Results — Empathize with the customer Scenario A 1. Hire three staff (crew leader, equipment operator, maintenance worker and material funds:) $250,000 $600,000 Overlay Crossroad Pipes and inlets 20 locations (assume bid costs $30,000 per location) $300,000 Current staffing stormwater repair 20 locations ($15,000 each) $300,000 Sue Drive Area (50% of work accomplished) $150,000 Inglenook (no structure buyout/relocations) $350,000 Timber Trail Area(no detention structure or property buyout/relocations) $1,700,000 Total 2. Complete design/bid/build projects: ($500,000 +$360,000 CIP sales tax) $860,000 $100,000 Engineering Design Contract* $250,000 Mesa $440,000 Schellridge to Huntleigh Place $150,000 Chicadee $940,000 Total** $2,640,000 total of stormwater work accomplished *Allowing for engineering fees will allow projects to begin construction in spring 2018, engineering staffing levels were reduced 50% from 4 to 2 in 2013/14 budget **each design/bid/build scenario planning level costs exceed budget, staff will work with engineer to meet budget and accomplish as much of the work as possible Scenario B 1. Utilize existing staffing: $0 $300,000 Current staffing stormwater repair 20 locations ($15,000 each) $300,000 Total 2. Complete design/bid/build projects: $1,110,000 ($750,000+ 360,000 CIP sales tax) $125,000 Engineering Design Contract* $250,000 Mesa $440,000 Schellridge to Huntleigh Place $150,000 Chicadee $250,000 Air Street $1,215,000 Total** $1,515,000 total of stormwater work accomplished *Allowing for engineering fees will allow projects to begin construction in spring 2018, engineering staffing levels were reduced 50% from 4 to 2 in 2013/14 **each design/bid/build scenario planning level costs exceed budget, staff will work with engineer to meet budget and accomplish as much of the work as possible Morasch, Matt From: Morasch, Matt Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 5:08 PM To: Crowell, Steve; Fitzwater, Ron; Graham, Carlos; Henry, Larry; Hussey, Ken; Kemna, David; Mihalevich, Rick; Moehlman, Ryan; Powell, Phyllis; Prather, Rick; Schreiber, Mark; Tergin, Carrie; Ward, Laura; Wiseman, Erin Cc: Bange, David; Fontana, Don; Mueller, Margaret; Morasch, Matt Subject: Storm Water Issues $2 M List Attachments: Storm Water Issues.pdf Mayor and Council Councilman Prather requested I provide a list of about $2 M urgent needs related to storm water projects. I asked the staff to give me their top issues "as of now" across the City ( meaning frequent complaints, flooding issues, systems that are failed or likely to fail at any time, etc.) From that point of view we prepared the above list and it contained almost $10 M. We could have added more but needed to cut it off at some point. It goes without saying that there are many needs and if you are one who is living near a storm water issue, it would be a priority for you. After that exercise we tried to drill down to $2 M and those are listed below. I am sure one could argue that there are many things not on the $10 M list and further argue why some made the $2 M list versus others. The bottom line it is more of an art than an exact science. I think this exercise further reinforces the need for more dollars on an annual basis than the $360,000 that we currently spend. I would also like to point out that there are many issues on the horizon that may warrant fund balance funding discussions. To name the top few that I am aware include: • Lincoln Street Roadway failure • Downtown sidewalks and electrical maintenance and upgrades • Court Renovations at Annex • Fire Station Funding $2 M Storm Water List: • Chicadee $150,000 • Air Street $250,000 • Schellydige Huntleigh $440,000 • Mesa $250,000 • Green Berry Maior Isom $950,000 Total $2,040,000 Sorry for the long explanation/email, Please let me know if you need any other information. thanks. Matt Morasch, P.E. Director, Department of Public Works City of Jefferson City, Missouri 573-634-6410 Storm Water Issues May 2017 Households Project Location Affected Description Estimated Costs Chicadee 4 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $150,000 Midway 30 Failed Box Culvert $400,000 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed (pipe beneath Linden/Pamela South School 12 home) $600,000 Washington/Attichson to Mulberry Dunklin 40 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $750,000 Sue Drive 34 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $600,000 Douglas Wayne Bolton Area 57 Lack of system, failing system and home flooding $1,100,000 Air Street 6 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $250,000 Cole Allen Drive 6 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $350,000 Lowell Marilyn 8 Lack of system, failing system and home flooding $250,000 Scheliridge Huntleigh 10 Neighborhood pipes/inlets failed $440,000 Households Project Location Affected Description Estimated Costs Stadium Satinwood Numerous Flooding concerns $1,250,000 Inglenook 3 Flooding concerns $350,000 Timber Trail 15 Flooding concerns $750,000 Mesa 4 Failed Box Culvert $250,000 Grenn Berry Major Isom 80 Lack of system, failing system and home flooding $950,000 Green Meadow Bridge 15 Flooding concerns $800,000 Total Costs $9,240,000 Street Division Stormwater Work —Jan. through Aug. 2017 January Dix Rd. — Point repair near DeLongs Tower Drive — Point repair March Wildwood — Inlets and cross -road pipe ahead of the overlay Rehagen — Inlet and pipe ahead of the overlay April Edgewood — Box -culvert rehab Monroe — Point repair Tanner Bridge — Reconstruct inlet and pipe May Hawthorne Parkway — Inlets and cross -road pipe Allen Court—Sinkhole repair Jason Dr. — Collapse / wash out repair June Glenwood — Emergency Repair — Trash truck fell through street due to deteriorated pipe Belair — Inlets and pipe ahead of overlay Hillview— Point repair Seven Hills Road — Sinkhole repair — partial pipe run replacement Southgate / Duane Swift — sinkhole repair Hillsdale — Re -built inlets ahead of stormwater pipe lining project E. Circle. — Sinkhole point repair on box culvert Brookdale — pipe replacement July Sterling Price—Sinkhole repair Harvest Lane—Sinkhole repair W. McCarty Street — Pipe repair August Sterling Price — Emergency repair due to pipe collapse y T 0 r CNN O 2018 Preliminary Street Overlay List LOCATION Planned WARD FROM TO Year Alice Dr. Cherokee Dr Greentree Rd High St Hillview Dr. Indian Meadow Mary St. High St St Marys Blvd Belair Dr. Catalina Geneva St.. Ihler Rd. Ihler Rd. N Ten Mile Dr. N Ten Mile Dr. N Ten Mile Dr. Palisades Scott Station Rd. Sue Dr. Gettyburg PI Independence Dr. Manassas PI Shiloh PI Strasburg Ct Sumter PI Southwest Blvd. Drive Lanes 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 2,4 Hillview Dr. St Louis Rd Ash St. Skyview Dr. St Louis Rd Hillview Dr. Jackson St. Armory Dr Twin Hills City Limits Sue Dr. Lola Dr. Sue Dr. 3308 N. Ten Mile Dr Dover St. W Truman Catalina Truman Blvd. Geneva Rd. Shermans Hollow Liberty Ln. Shermans Hollow Shermans Hollow Shermans Hollow Gettysburg PI Stadium Blvd. Dead End Mohawk Dr Jackson St. E McCarty St. End Dead End Adams St. Dead End Boonville Rd Palisades Lola Westley St. Lola Dr. Scott Station Rd. 3308 N. Ten Mile Dr. Dover St. N Capistrano City Limits Rt 179 Shermans Hollow Dead End Gettysburg PI Gettysburg PI End End Tower Dr. Approximately 40 cross road pipes - 50% esimated to need replacement Page i of 2 ISS" �-.. , ,• `` .,_ --' ..` `.+; 4 4' ,i 'ti,�•. - 'sem ¢ - .`^' Y_r ,_ rte, �\. •• w� - ' ow 41 , so y Y - oe Jo f * ' _ IF i 1� ? • Z n. W TYPE C 4' DIA W/O DEFL• MANHOLE 4" PVC +f _ MELODY DR.PERF. 15" HDPE , f" @ 3% MIN. , *V. �` ' •l. 4' TYPE C 15" HDPE W/DEEFL. @ 10% MIN w., TIT, _qmR 19 /a tqm%jbJ . - � •.tom+ - _ •`'_may - , =s�`. - - '''�"`—` f,�.S _ ,- .{�, *,y,..r ti - - .-� ` -1 ti� 18" HDPE 3% MIN ' 4' TYPE C BEUHRL.E DR. � Y �'_40♦►,+. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES MEMORANDUM TO: Public Warks and Planning Committee THROUGH. Sonny Sanders, Director of Planning and Protective Services .FROM., Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager DATE' September 13, 2017 RD:• Demolition Ordinance Update In September 2015, the Historic City of Jefferson (HCJ) brought forth a proposed demolition ordinance to the City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission. HCJ is a local non -for- profit organization that is not a City commission or board, but has an interest in historic preservation. The City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the HCJ demolition proposal and voted to amend the document. The City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission created a subcommittee to specifically review the City's Demolition Ordinance within is located within Chapter 8 of the City Code. During the February 28, 2017, Special Meeting, the City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission approved their version of the proposed demolition ordinance. The City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission has drafted a proposed demolition ordinance over the last 18 plus months. The Planning and Protective Services Department took comments on the proposal through Wednesday, April 12, 2017. The draft proposal was presented to the Public Works and Planning Committee on April 20, 2017, and Council Work Session on May 22, 2017. During the June 22, 2017, Public Works and Planning Committee meeting, Council members directed Planning and Protective Services staff to develop a draft demolition ordinance based on the City of Jefferson Historic Preservation Commission proposal, feedback obtained from public comments and staff research. Staff has made progress on the assigned task and ready to present the draft demolition ordinance. Attached are the Staff Analysis Report summarizing the details of the proposed changes and the Draft Council Bill for this Committee's review. Historic Preservation Demolition Bill Staff Summary and Description Summary This bill would 9-12-17 - Relocate the regulations for review of demolition proposals by the Historic Preservation Commission to a separate section of the City Code (they are currently contained within the regulations regarding issuance of a demolition permit) and establish an approval process separate from the process for approving a demolition permit (although they would still be linked). - Amend the review process and review criteria for demolition proposals requiring Historic Preservation Commission review. - Establish the requirement for approval of demolition proposals for structures greater than 100 years old or located in a local historic district (by the Historic Preservation Commission or, upon appeal, the City Council) prior to demolition permit issuance. - Establish a public hearing process for the Historic Preservation Commission. - Establish application fees within Appendix Y. Key Terms Demolition Permit— required to demolish or remove any structure or part of a structure, where the structure is at least 120 sf for Commercial, 200 sf for Residential (the same sf sizes that require a building permit). Historic Preservation Demolition Review — review of demolition permit proposals for structures between 50 and 100 years old, or located within a National Register District, or designated a local landmark, by the Historic Preservation Commission. The review process is largely advisory in nature, and cannot prevent a demolition permit issuance. Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance — review and issuance of clearance for demolition permit proposals for structures greater than 100 years old or located in a local historic district. The issuance of clearance is required prior to demolition permit issuance. Notable Structure — A structure that has been found to be notable with respect to historic value or impact on other historic structures or districts. Finding of a notable structure does not necessarily preclude approval of demolition clearance, the state of deterioration or location within a redevelopment area are other items for consideration. Appeals — a denial of issuance of demolition clearance could be appealed to the City Council. Local Historic District — a historic district established in accordance with Chapter 8, Article IV of the City Code pertaining to Preservation and Conservation. Not to be confused with a National Register District. National Register District — a district established in accordance with federal regulations and meeting federal criteria. National Register Districts are often presented with a "no strings attached" description to property owners contained within the district, and are therefore not appropriate for regulations that are anything but advisory in nature. Nothing would prevent a local historic district from being established along the same boundaries as a National Register District. Public Hearing Requirement Demolition Review — Applications for demolition review would not be subject to public hearing requirements. Demolition Clearance — Applications for demolition clearance would require a public hearing prior to vote on issuance of the clearance. Notice of the public hearing would be posted on the property. Notice would not be mailed to surrounding property owners. Appeals — Appeals of denial of demolition clearance would be heard by the City Council with a new public hearing. The property would be reposted with the public hearing time. Processing Timeline Demolition Review — 75 day (or two meetings, whichever is less) timeline from the date application is received — or — when Historic Preservation votes for approval. Demolition Clearance — Application placed on next available agenda, with consideration for public notification requirements (filing deadline calendar to be maintained by the director, similar to P&Z applications). Applications could be continued by applicant for one month by request, and by Historic Preservation Commission for one month with cause. Appeals to City Council — Application for appeal would be placed on next available agenda with consideration for public notification requirements. A resolution for approval of the Demolition Clearance would be placed on the Council agenda for their vote along with a public hearing. Consideration of the appeal could be continued by applicant for one month by request, and by City Council for one month with cause. Review Criteria — Review Criteria would be tiered, with the finding of a historically significant or "notable" structure being separate from the determination of the structural integrity of the structure of location within a redevelopment area. If the structure is not found to be "notable", or if the structural integrity or location necessitates demolition, demolition clearance would be issued. Fees — application fees are proposed as $53 for reviews and $105 for applications for Clearance. Fees are based on comparable application fees (P&Z and BOA applications are $210, but include newspaper publishing and surrounding property mailing expenses). Validity — approval of clearance or review would be valid for a period of one year, and would have no tie to the current property owner. This would allow for a property owner to pursue historic preservation review independently from plans to actually demolish the structure. This allows historic preservation review to proceed in anticipation of a real estate transaction, as a single piece of a development plan involving multiple properties, etc. Penal — penalties for demolition without a permit are outlined in Section 8-37, and include misdemeanor designation punishable by fine of up to $500 and/or 180 days imprisonment. No changes are proposed. What the Demolition Ordinance does not consider - Modifications to structures that meet the requirements for demolition review or clearance. Fa4ade rehabs, roof replacements, etc. would not be subject to the demolition review process. - The future use of the property or the design of, or requirement for, a replacement structure. Such considerations would require design standards to be in place. The requirement for a "Certificate of Appropriateness" for new construction or renovations within historic districts is a future possibility for properties within local historic districts, but would be difficult to justify without design standards in place. - Statement by engineer or architect as to the structural stability or feasibility of repair. Statements can be prepared by the property owner or applicant. Consultation with professional engineers or architects can be a costly endeavor, and my not be entirely necessary in order to get a general sense of the condition of the structure. - The Zoning or intended use of the property. While there is a reference to consideration of areas designated for redevelopment, redevelopment areas are not the focus or expertise of the Historic Preservation Commission. 3 BILL NO. SPONSORED BY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AMENDING CHAPTER 8, BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, PERTAINING TO REVIEW OF DEMOLITION PERMITS BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Jefferson recognizes the need to preserve and protect historic resources and notable architecture, and; WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has been assigned the duty of safeguarding the city's historic, cultural, aesthetic and architectural heritage, among other duties, and; WHEREAS, a process for review of proposals to demolish buildings by the Historic Preservation Commission would help protect historic resources and notable architecture. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sec. 8-32 (Permit to Demolish) is deleted in its entirety and reestablished as follows: See. 8-32. Permit to demolish. A. PeFmitRequ:red. it s, Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus. B. . t AA l�plioat. to the De»....tment of Pl.,....:.,.. (90) days; and 2) a s-- eF peFmissien to d 1' 1.., buiiding9T .......tUFe Shall M a and Proteetiye SeFyiee.. ❑,...., St....,.t....o that is fi fi y icm yeaFs sides, , WEen within the last Rinety statement ftem the e%%qieF addressing why the pr-epeFty eannet be Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus. Sec. 5-32. Permit to demolish. A. Demolition shall be construed to include an act or process which destroys, in part or in whole, a structure or which threatens to destroy a structure by failure to maintain it in a condition of good repair and maintenance. B. Review Process. Applications for demolition shall be reviewed in accordance with the following. 1. Application form. All applications to demolish or remove a structure shall be made to the Department of Plannine and Protective Services on the appropriate form supplied by the Department. 2. Utility Disconnect. A permit to demolish or remove shall not be issued until a release is obtained from the utilities having service connections with the structure. The release shall state that service connections and appurtenant equipment, such as meters and regulators, have been removed or sealed and plugged in a safe manner. 3. Storm Water Ouality and Gradine. Demolition sites are subject to the stormwater quality and grading permit regulations of Chapter 31, as well as applicable state and federal regulations. Information reearding adherence to applicable stormwater and aradine regulations shall be submitted with the demolition permit application. Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as t#as. 4. Review by Historic Preservation Commission. Applications to demolish or remove a structure shall be subject to the review requirements and regulations contained in Section 8-43 pertaining to Review of Demolition Permit Proposals by the Historic Preservation Commission. Where a Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance is required, issuance of a demolition permit shall not proceed prior to approval of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. Nothing in Section 8-43 shall be construed so as to prohibit the building official from acting under any emergency provisions of Chapter 8 of the Code of the City of Jefferson. Section 3. Section 8-43 (Reserved) is hereby amended with respect to establishment of Historic Preservation Commission review processes associated with demolition permit applications. Sec. 8-43. ReseFved Review of Demolition Proposals by Historic Preservation Commission. A. Purpose and Intent. It is the purpose of this section to encourage and enforce the preservation of notable historic structures and historic or notable architecture And to preserve the character of historic streetscapes and areas. B. Applicability. Applications to demolish or remove a structure that meet one or more of the following criteria shall be subject to the application requirements, regulations: and review by the Historic Preservation Commission in accordance with this section. Where Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance is required, issuance of a demolition permit shall not proceed prior to issuance of Historic Preservation.Demolition Clearance. 1. Demolition Applications Reguirine Historic Preservation Commission Review. a. Structures greater than 50 years old. b. Structures desienated as a Local Landmark C. Structures listed on the National Reeister or located within a National Reeister District. 2. Demolition Applications Requiring Historic Preservation Commission Review and Issuance of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. a. Applications to demolish or remove a structure greater than 100 years old. b. Applications to demolish or remove a structure located within a locally designated historic district. C. Public Hearine. For apnlications for demolition reouirine a Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance, 'a• public hearing in accordance with Section 8-47 shall be conducted prior to Historic Preservation Commission action on the application. For appeals pursued in accordance with Section 8-43.I, a public hearine in accordance with Section 8-47 shall be conducted prior to City Council action on the appeal. D. Application Requirements. Applications to demolish or remove a structure that is subject to this section shall include the followine: 1._ Application for Historic Preservation Demolition Permit Review/Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. The application may be submitted independently or concurrently with an application for demolition permit. 2. Digital photoeraphs of the structure taken within the last ninety days including photographs of all exterior sides, interior rooms and stairwells. Photoeraphs must show all areas and characteristics of the principal and accessory structures, not just those areas in disrepair. Interior photoeraphs may be waived by the Director if the structure is determined structurally unsound. Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus. 3. Applications requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall include the following additional information: a. The Historic Preservation Commission may request information regardine the state of deterioration or disrepair or structural unsoundness of the structure, and the practicability of rehabilitation. In order to expedite review time, said information may be submitted with the initial application. b. plans for the preservation or salvaee of notable historic or architectural features and historic fixtures that contributed to the finding of a notable structure. F. Application Processing and Timeline. a. Upon receipt of a complete application for demolition permit review by the Historic process. b. Applications not requirine Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. The Historic Preservation Commission shall review applications for demolition permit review that do not require Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance within 75 days of receipt of a complete application by the Director or within two reeularly scheduled meetines (where the application was submitted at least 10 days prior to the first meetine), whichever is less. If the Historic Preservation Commission does not take action on the application within the review periodahe application is deemed amroved. C. Applications requirine Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. The Historic Preservation Commission ^shall review applications for demolition permit review that require Historic Preservation Commission Clearance in accordance with the public hearing. requirements outlined in Section .847. At the conclusion of the public hearine, the Historic Preservation Commission shall vote to approve or deny the Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance unless the proceedings are continued in accordance with Section 847. If the Historic Preservation Commission does not take action on the application is accordance with Section 847, the application is deemed approved. G. Review Criteria. In reviewing an application for demolition review or Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance, the Historic Preservation Commission shall consider the followine criteria: I. Whether the structure is a notable structure with respect to historic value by reason of: (a) its association with an event or events that significantly contributed to the broad patterns of the history or architectural heritage of the city, county, state or nation; or (b) its association with the life or lives of a person or persons significant in the historyof the city, county, state or nation, or (c) its embodiment of distinctive characteristics of a type, design, period or method of construction; or (d) it represents the work of a master designer or architect or possesses hieh architectural value; or (e) it exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social or historic heritage of the ci • or (f) it contains elements of design, detail, material or craftsmanship which represent a significant construction innovation; or (g) it is part of or related to a square, park or other distinctive area that was or should be developed or preserved according to a plan based on a historic or Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as tis. architectural motif, or h) it is an established and familiar visual feature of a neiehborhood or of the entire community,• or (i) it has yielded, or is likely to yield archeological artifacts and/or information. 2. Whether the structure is a notable structure with respect to its demolition beine detrimental to: (a) the visual or spatial relationship of the structure to desienated landmarks, national reeister sites, or the streetscape of a local historic district or national reeister district; or (_b) the architectural, cultural, historic or contextual character of property desienated as a local historic landmark, local historic district, or buildine or area listed on the National Reeister of Historic PIaces. 3. If found to be a notable structure with respect to item 1 or 2 above, the Historic Preservation Commission shall consider the following; (a) the state of deterioration, disrepair or structural unsoundness of the structure, and the practicability of rehabilitation. The Historic Preservation Commission may request the applicant to submit documentation or other information necessary to determine whether the property can be rehabilitated or restored with a reasonable economic return to the owner. (b) whether the property is located within an area identified for redevelopment within the adopted comprehensive plan, and the nature of the intended redevelopment. (c) the nature of the surroundine area and the compatibility of the structure to existing adjacent structures and land'uses. (d) the number of similar structures that exist within the City of Jefferson. (e) plans for the. preservation or salvaee of notable historic or architectural features and historic fixtures that contributed to the finding of a notable structure. documented and the Director shall notify the applicant in writing of the decision of the Commission. 1. Appeal to City Council. An application for Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance that is denied by the Historic Preservation Commission may be appealed to the City Council. A written request for appeal to the City Council shall be submitted to the Director within 30 days of notice to the applicant of the Historic Preservation Commissions decision. The City Council, after reviewine the circumstances of the application and the reasons for the denial, may vote to approve or not approve a resolution erantine Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. I Conditions that the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council May Impose. The Commission or Council may impose conditions on the approval of a Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance in order to ensure that the demolition complies with any applicable requirements of this section that include, but are not limited to, the followine: 1. to ensure that notable historic or architectural features or historic fixtures that contributed to the finding of a notable structure are beine salvaged or preserved. 2. to ensure that a structure found to be a notable structure and approved for demolition clearance is properly documented for posterity. 3. to ensure that partial demolition of a structure found to be a notable structure does not Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as tlpa6. result in establishment of an exterior finish that is out of character with the structure. 4. other conditions that the Commission or City Council may deem appropriate to reduce the impact of the demolition with respect to the applicable review criteria. Conditions imposed by the Historic Preservation Commission may be appealed to the City Council in the manner provided for in Section 8-43.I. K. Validity. 1. Applications not requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. Historic Preservation Commission review of applications for demolition that do not require Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of approval of the application by the Historic Preservation Commission or the date of the expiration of the 60 day review period, whichever occurred first. 2— - _ Applications requiring Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance. An approval of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of approval by the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, as applicable. In the event that the applicant fails to obtain a demolition permit within one year of approval of Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance, the applicant shall be required to obtain a new Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance prior to demolition permit issuance. In the event of expiration of a demolition permit prior to demolition and after Historic Preservation Demolition Clearance has expired., a new certificate of appropriateness shall be required prior to issuance of a new demolition permit. Section 3. Sec. 8-47 (Definitions) is hereby moved to a new Sec. 8-48 as follows: See. 8 47. Sec. 8-48 Definitions. Section 4. Sec. 8-48 (Definitions) is hereby amended to include the following definitions: Director. The Director of the Department of Planning and Protective Services, or his or her designee. Local Historic District. A historic district established in accordance with Chapter 8, Article IV of the City Code. Notable Structure. A structure found to be notable per the review criteria listed in Section 8- 43.G. Section 5. A new Section 8-47 is hereby created with respect to establishment of public hearing procedures for Historic Preservation Commission and City Council review of Preservation and Conservation applications. Sec. 8-47 Public Hearing Procedures A. Public Hearing. the following notification requirements and public hearing procedures shall apply for matters requiring a public hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission and such matters forwarded by the Historic Preservation Commission and requiring a public hearing before the City Council: 1. Notification Requirements. a. Property Sign. The Director shall post one or more distinctive signs, with minimum dimensions of 24" x 24" giving notice of the date, time and place of the hearing and of the action requested. The signs on the subject property shall be posted at least ten calendar days but not more than 15 calendar days prior to the hearing in conspicuous places visible from every street along the frontage of the Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as t#as. subiect property. The siens shall remain posted on the property until after the close of the public hearing. The failure to post signs upon the property or retain notification signs upon the property shall not be grounds for invalidating any action taken by the responsible decision making body. b. Agenda Notice. Notice of all public hearings shall be posted at City Hall at least 24 hours prior to any public hearing. 2. Public Hearing Procedures. a. Purpose. The purpose of a public hearing is to allow the applicant and all other interested parties a reasonable and fair opportunity to be heard, to present evidence relevant to the application, and to have input into the process. b. Conduct of the Hearing. (1) Any person or persons may appear at a public hearing and submit evidence, either individually or as a representative of an organization. Each person who appears at a public hearing shall state, for the record, his or her name, address, and if appearinie on behalf of an organization, the name and mailing address of the organization. (2) The order of proceedings shall be as follows: a) The Director or appropriate staff member shall present a description of the applieation and reouired findines, if applicable. The findings shall address each applicable factor required to be considered prior to action or approval of the application; (b) The applicant may present any information that the applicant deems appropriate: (c) Public testimony shall be heard first in favor of the proposal, then in opposition to it; (d) The Director or other staff member may respond to any statement made by the applicant or any public comment: (e) The applicant may respond to any testimony or evidence presented by the staff or public: and (f) The body conductine the hearing shall close the public portion of the hearing and conduct deliberations prior to acting on an application. C. Record of Proceedines. (1) The body conducting the hearing shall record the proceedines by any appropriate means as prescribed by rule and consistent with city code and other applicable laws and regulations. (2) Testimony and statements of opinions, the minutes of the secretary, applications, exhibits submitted, all staff and advisory body reports and recommendations, and the decision and report(s) of the body before which the hearing is heard, shall constitute the record. (3) The record shall be open for inspection at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice. (4) The body conducting the hearing shall appoint, by rule, a custodian of records. d. Continuance of Proceedines. Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus. 10 (I) Any applicant or authorized agent of an applicant shall have the right to one continuance before the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council, provided that a written request is filed. (2) The hearing body may grant one continuance for good cause shown. All motions to grant a continuance shall state the date on which the matter is to be heard. A majority vote of those members in attendance shall be required to grant a continuance. The record shall indicate the reason such continuance was made and any stipulations or conditions placed upon the continuance. (3) If a public hearing is continued, the Historic Preservation Commission or City Council may direct the Director to renotify property owners or repost public notice on the property. if such notice was required in the first instance. Section 6. Appendix Y, Schedule of Administrative Fees, Permits, Licenses and Other Charges, is amended with the addition of the following fees pertaining to historic preservation review of demolition proposals: Chapter Section Section Title Fee 43 Applicatio�'for HistOrle Pres+�ryat<cn 00rr;olltigrt 43` - gpPlicatan'for Histone Preservation :- OWWew and=Clearance _. Section 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval. Passed:. Approved: Presiding Officer ATTEST: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scriveners Note: Inserted text shown as thus. Deleted text shown as thus. Department of Planning and Protective Services Memorandum 320 East McCarty Street • Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 . P: 573.634.6410 . www.jeffersoncitymo.gov Date: September 13, 2017 To: Public Works and Planning Committee From: Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Manager Through: Sonny Sanders, Planning & Protective Services Director Subject: New World Recycling, Cardboard Recycling Contract In 2015, the City entered into a zero dollar ($0) contract with New World for collecting, processing, and market newspaper, magazines and cardboard from six different locations for a total of 9 containers. The contract was for one year with the option of Four additional one year renewals. The City is coming, up on the year 4 renewal option to begin November 1, 2017. The locations of these containers are: • Mckay Park • Memorial Park (3 containers)533 • Fire Station One, 621 W High St • Fire Station Two, 2400 E McCarty St • Fire Station Five, 1005 Fairgrounds Rd • City Hall Parking Lot, 420 E McCarty St (2 containers) Per the contract, each of the containers are to be picked up and transported once a week on Monday. In addition the containers located at the City Hall East parking lot are to be picked up again on Friday. Although the City is not paying New World Recycling for their services, the contractor is able to recycle the cardboard for money. Since 2015, there have been multiple occasions the contractor did not pick up the containers and transporting on a weekly basis. When contacting New World Recycling requesting pick up per the contract, the response provided included truck is broken down, the driver is off today, and/or we don't pick up that container unless we are contacted to. After asking for pick up of the containers, it could be several days to weeks before the containers are serviced. Staff has to monitor and clean up around the containers as they are often sites of illegal dumping and overflow of cardboard. Signs had been placed on the containers a listing of all the locations to take recyclables to. Unfortunately, the signs have not deterred the dumping. The containers were purchased in the 1990's as part of a recycling grant to provide City residents an option for recycling cardboard, newspaper, and magazines. The containers condition is in rough shape as they are rusted, will require maintenance, and have outlived their useful life. There are currently no funds dedicated to the maintenance of these containers. In November 2009, single stream recycling (grey top carts) was offered through our current provider, Republic Services. Since City residents are provided single stream recycling which accepts the newspaper & cardboard, the main users of these containers are businesses and/or county residents. Staff consulted with Republic Services to determine their costs of servicing the 9 containers. Republic Services currently has an exclusive solid waste contract, including recycling, with the City. Republic Services estimated cost of $34,000 to service the containers. The breakdown is $95 per load servicing biweekly for a total of 360 loads per year. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends not renewing the New World Recycling contract for FY2018. Republic Services offers single stream recycling, and has done so since 2009. Our current contract with Republic Services goes through 2026 for which they are the exclusive solid waste provider including recycling. The existing containers could be sold through the surpluse process. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration Mr. Mark Mehmert Transit Director Jefferson City 320 E. McCarty Street Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Dear Mr. Mehmert: REGION VII Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska August 11, 2017 901 Locust Street Suite 404 Kansas City, MO, 64106 816-329-3920 816-329-3921 (fax) Re: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Fiscal Year 2017 Triennial Review — Draft Report The enclosed draft report documents the FTA's Triennial Review of Jefferson City (the City), in Missouri. This review is required by Chapter 53 of Title 49. Although not an audit, the Triennial Review is the FTA's assessment of the City's compliance with Federal requirements, determined by examining a sample of grant management and program implementation practices. As such, the Triennial Review is not intended as, nor does it constitute, a comprehensive and final review of compliance with grant requirements. The Triennial Review focused on the City's compliance in 17 areas. No deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements in 10 areas. Deficiencies were found in Financial Management and Capacity, Technical Capacity, Americans with Disabilities Act, Procurement, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Satisfactory Continuing Control, and Drug -Free Workplace/ Drug and Alcohol Program. The City had two repeat deficiencies from the 2014 Triennial Review in the areas of Technical Capacity (incorrect FFR reporting (122)) and Drug -Free Workplace/Drug and Alcohol Program (improper post -accident determination (118)). Subsequent to the site visit, the City provided corrective action response to address and close the deficiency in Financial Management and Capacity, electronic clearinghouse (ECHO) documentation deficient (142). As part of this year's Triennial Review of the City, FTA incorporated an Enhanced Review Module (ERM) in the Technical Capacity area. The purpose of an ERM is to conduct a more comprehensive review of underlying or contributing issues identified during the pre -assessment stage of the Triennial Review. Deficiencies resulting from the ERM are presented in the Technical Capacity section of the report that follows. Mr. Mehmert Page 2 of 2 Please review this draft report for accuracy and provide your comments to both the reviewer and your FTA Program Manager within ten business days from the date of this letter. A final report that incorporates your comments to the draft report will be provided to you within 14 business days of your response. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during this Triennial Review. If you need any technical assistance or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Jeremiah Shuler, Community Planner, at (816) 329-3940 or by email at jeremiah.shuler@dot.gov or James Buckley, your reviewer, by phone at (267) 608-1063 or by email at jbuckley@milligancpa.com. Sincerely, Mokhtee Ahmad Regional Administrator Enclosure cc: Jeremiah Shuler, FTA DRAFT REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2017 TRIENNIAL REVIEW of Jefferson City, MO Recipient ID: 6309 Performed for: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION REGION VII Prepared By.- Milligan y: Milligan & Company, LLC Scoping Meeting Date: February 9, 2017 Site Visit Date: July 12-13, 2017 Draft Report Date: August 11, 2017 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary............................................................................................................... 1 II. Review Background and Process......................................................................................... 2 1. Background.....................................................................................................................................2 2. Process.............................................................................................................................................2 3. Metrics.............................................................................................................................................3 III. Grantee Description............................................................................................................... 4 1. Organization....................................................................................................................................4 2. Services............................................................................................................................................4 3. Grant and Project Activity..............................................................................................................4 IV. Results of the Review............................................................................................................ 6 1. Financial Management and Capacity.............................................................................................6 2. Technical Capacity..........................................................................................................................6 3. Maintenance....................................................................................................................................7 4. Americans with Disabilities Act.....................................................................................................7 S. Title VI.............................................................................................................................................8 6. Procurement...................................................................................................................................8 7. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise..............................................................................................9 8. Legal...............................................................................................................................................10 9. Satisfactory Continuing Control..................................................................................................10 10. Planning/ Program of Projects.....................................................................................................11 11. Public Comment on Fare Increases and Major Service Reductions..........................................11 12. Half Fare........................................................................................................................................11 13. Charter Bus....................................................................................................................................11 14. School Bus.....................................................................................................................................12 15. Security..........................................................................................................................................12 16. Drug Free Workplace and Drug and Alcohol Program..............................................................12 17. Equal Employment Opportunity.................................................................................................13 V. Summary of Findings........................................................................................................... 14 VI. Attendees............................................................................................................................... 16 VII. Appendices........................................................................................................................... 17 I. Executive Summary This report documents the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Triennial Review of Jefferson City (the City), in Missouri. The review was performed by Milligan & Company, LLC. During the site visit, administrative and statutory requirements were discussed and documents were reviewed. The City's transit facilities were toured to provide an overview of activities related to FTA -funded projects. The Triennial Review focused on the City's compliance in 17 areas. As part of this year's Triennial Review of the City, FTA incorporated an Enhanced Review Module (ERM) in the Technical Capacity area. The purpose of an ERM is to conduct a more comprehensive review of underlying or contributing issues identified during the pre -assessment stage of the Triennial Review. Deficiencies resulting from the ERM are presented in the Technical Capacity area of this report. Deficiencies were found in the areas listed below. Subsequent to the site visit, the City provided corrective action response to address and close the deficiency ECHO documentation deficient (142), noted in the Financial Management and Capacity section of the report. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 1 1 P a g e Deficiencies Review Area Code Description 1. Financial Management and 142 Electronic Clearing House (ECHO) documentation Capacity deficient 122 Incorrect Federal Financial Report (FFR) reporting 2. Technical Capacity (repeat) 365 Insufficient technical capacity 4. Americans with Disabilities Act 109 Limits or capacity constraints on ADA complementary (ADA) paratransit service 6. Procurement 129 No FTA clauses 7. Disadvantaged 100 DBE goal not submitted or submitted late to FTA Business Enterprise (DBE) 264 DBE policy not updated 9. Satisfactory 25 Violation of incidental use requirements Continuing Control 58 Inadequate equipment records 16. Drug -Free Workplace/Drug and 118 Improper post -accident determination (repeat) Alcohol Program Subsequent to the site visit, the City provided corrective action response to address and close the deficiency ECHO documentation deficient (142), noted in the Financial Management and Capacity section of the report. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 1 1 P a g e II. Review Background and Process 1. Background The United States Code, Chapter 53 of Title 49 (49 US.C. 5307(f) (2)) requires that "At least once every 3 years, the Secretary shall review and evaluate completely the performance of a recipient in carrying out the recipient's program, specifically referring to compliance with statutory and administrative requirements..." This Triennial Review was performed in accordance with FTA procedures (published in FTA Order 9010.113, April 5, 1993). The Triennial Review includes a review of the grantee's compliance in 17 areas. The basic requirements for each of these areas are summarized in Section IV. This report presents the findings from the Triennial Review of the City. The review concentrated on procedures and practices employed during the past three years; however, coverage was extended to earlier periods as needed to assess the policies in place and the management of grants. The specific documents reviewed and referenced in this report are available at FTA's regional office or the grantee's office. 2. Process The Triennial Review process includes a pre -review assessment, a review scoping meeting with the FTA regional office, and an on-site visit to the grantee's location. The review scoping meeting was conducted with the Region VII Office on February 9, 2017. Necessary files retained by the regional office were sent to the reviewers electronically. A grantee information request and review package was sent to the City advising it of the site visit and indicating information that would be needed and issues that would be discussed. The site visit to the City occurred on July 12-13, 2017. The onsite portion of the review began with an entrance conference, at which the purpose of the Triennial Review and the review process were discussed. The remaining time was spent discussing administrative and statutory requirements and reviewing documents. The reviewers visited the City's transit and maintenance facilities to provide an overview of activities related to FTA -funded projects. The reviewers examined a sample of maintenance records for FTA -funded vehicles and equipment. Upon completion of the review, FTA and the reviewers provided a summary of preliminary findings to the City at an exit conference. Section VI of this report lists the individuals participating in the review. 2017 Triennial Review —Jefferson City, MO 2 1 P a g e 3. Metrics The metrics used to evaluate whether a grantee is meeting the requirements for each of the areas reviewed are: • Not Deficient: An area is considered not deficient if, during the review, no findings were noted with the grantee's implementation of the requirements. • De icient: An area is considered deficient if any of the requirements within the area reviewed were not met. Not Applicable: An area can be deemed not applicable if, after an initial assessment, the grantee does not conduct activities for which the requirements of the respective area would be applicable. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 3 1 P a g e III. Grantee Description 1. Organization The City operates its transit service, known as JEFFTRAN, under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works. The City has provided transit service since 1978, serving all of Jefferson City, Missouri. The City operates all service in-house. The population of its service area is approximately 43,169. 2. Services The City operates a network of six fixed routes and three tripper routes. Service is provided weekdays from 6:40 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. There is no service on Saturdays and Sundays. The City's ADA complementary paratransit service, known as Handi-Wheels, operates during the same days and hours of service as the fixed routes. The basic adult fare for bus service is $1.00. Children under the age of six ride free when accompanied by an adult. Transfers are free. A reduced fare of 50 cents is offered to persons age 60 and over, persons with disabilities, and Medicare cardholders during all hours. The fare for ADA complementary paratransit service is $2.00. The City operates a fleet of 12 buses for fixed -route service. The City also has a fleet of 10 vans, which are operated for ADA complementary paratransit service. The City's service is oriented around a transit center and maintenance facility at 820 East Miller Street in Jefferson City. The offices of the Department of Public Works are located at 320 East McCarty Street in Jefferson City, Missouri. Jefferson City received a Small Systems Waiver from the National Transit Database (NTD); however, its NTD Report for fiscal year 2016 provided the following financial and operating statistics for fixed -route and ADA complementary paratransit service. Operating Statistic Fixed -Route Service ADA Complementary Paratransit Service Unlinked Passengers 251,859 50,414 Revenue Hours 16,619 13,443 Operating Expenses $1,346,030 $897,353 3. Grant and Project Activity Grant Activity The City had no active grants at the time of the review. 2017 Triennial Review —Jefferson City, MO 4 1 P a g e Noteworthy Projects Since the last triennial review, the City completed the replacement of three paratransit vehicles. At the time of the review, the City was replacing two paratransit vehicles and updating its automated vehicle location system. The City plans to continue to pursue bus replacement projects as funding becomes available. 2017 Triennial Review —Jefferson City, MO 5 1 P a g e IV. Results of the Review 1. Financial Management and Capacity Basic Requirement: The grantee must demonstrate the ability to match and manage FTA grant funds, cover cost increases and operating deficits, cover maintenance and operational costs for FTA -funded facilities and equipment, and conduct and respond to applicable audits. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, a deficiency was found with the FTA requirements for Financial Management and Capacity. ECHO documentation deficient (142) FTA ECHO -WEB user manual version 1.9 requires all ECHO requests to be approved by the designated approving official. The City's designated approving official did not approve the ECHO drawdowns reviewed during the site visit. Subsequent to the site visit, the City submitted to the FTA regional office a revised process documenting that an authorized official will approve each future ECHO request. Based on the submission of the above corrective action, this deficiency is closed. 2. Technical Capacity Basic Requirement: The grantee must be able to implement FTA -funded projects in accordance with the grant application, FTA Master Agreement, and all applicable laws and regulations, using sound management practices. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Technical Capacity based upon the enhanced review conducted. Incorrect FFR reporting (122) 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D and FTA C. 5010 detail the information that, at a minimum, must be included in the Federal Financial Reports (FFRs). Reports for projects must include: a. Federal cash receipts - the amount of FTA funds received for the period and reported on a cash basis - when the funds are received. b. Federal cash disbursements - the amount of FTA funds disbursed as of the end of the reporting period and reported on a cash basis - when the funds are disbursed. For grantees that draw funds on a reimbursement basis, Federal funds are reported as disbursed only after they are received. FTA Circular 5010.1E Ch III Section C. (6) states "The recipient is responsible for indicating whether or not it is charging indirect costs to the Award at the time of application. If the recipient is charging indirect costs to the Award, the recipient is responsible for having an approved Indirect Cost Rate Proposal or Cost Allocation Plan approved by the cognizant agency on file, and uploading the documentation into their Transit Award Management (TrAMS) `Recipient Profile.' The recipient must report on related indirect expenditures." 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 6 1 P a g e The City's FFR for MO -2016-0020, submitted August 23, 2016, did not accurately report Federal cash receipts and disbursements and did not report indirect expenses charged to the grant. This is a repeat finding from the 2014 Triennial Review. Insufficient technical capacity (365) During the Triennial Review, the reviewers found that key areas covered by the review are not understood by city staff. Requirements related to areas such as grant reporting, ECHO drawdown, ADA monitoring, procurement, DBE, satisfactory continuing control, and Drug -Free Workplace/Drug and Alcohol Program were not followed, resulting in deficiencies. Two of these deficiencies were also cited during the previous fiscal year 2014 Triennial Review. On-site discussions with City staff focused on developing a work plan to address current, as well as repeat, deficiencies. Cross training, additional hiring, and better documentation of policies and procedures were all discussed as strategies to alleviate the City's issues in the area of technical capacity. Corrective Actions and Schedule: • For the deficiency, incorrect FFR reporting (122), by December 14, 2017 perform the following: o Submit FFRs in TrAMS with the correct information in accordance with the requirements of FTA Circular 5010. o Submit procedures for completing FFRs with the correct information. • For the deficiency, insufficient technical capacity (365), by December 14, 2017, submit to the FTA regional office a plan that details how the City will allocate resources to address technical capacity concerns in the areas of grant reporting, ADA monitoring, procurement, DBE, satisfactory continuing control, and Drug -Free Workplace/Drug and Alcohol Program. The plan shall include how the City will ensure that assigned personnel receive adequate training to fulfill their responsibilities. 3. Maintenance Basic Requirement: Grantees and subrecipients must keep federally funded vehicles, equipment and facilities in good operating condition. Grantees and subrecipients must keep Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility features on all vehicles, equipment, and facilities in good operating order. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Maintenance. 4. Americans with Disabilities Act Basic Requirement: Titles II and III of the ADA of 1990 provide that no entity shall discriminate against an individual with a disability in connection with the provision of transportation service. The law sets forth specific requirements for vehicle and facility accessibility and the provision of service, including complementary paratransit service. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 7 1 P a g e Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, a deficiency was found with the U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) requirements for ADA. Limits or capacity constraints on ADA complementary paratransit service (109) 49 CFR 37.131 (f) Capacity constraints. The entity shall not limit the availability of complementary paratransit service to ADA paratransit eligible individuals by any of the following: (1) Restrictions on the number of trips an individual will be provided; (2) Waiting lists for access to the service; or (3) Any operational pattern or practice that significantly limits the availability of service to ADA paratransit eligible persons. (i) Such patterns or practices include, but are not limited to, the following: (A) Substantial numbers of significantly untimely pickups for initial or return trips; (B) Substantial numbers of trip denials or missed trips; (C) Substantial numbers of trips with excessive trip lengths. The City could not demonstrate that it is not limiting the availability of complementary paratransit service to ADA paratransit eligible individuals because it is not monitoring on-time performance and the number of excessively long trips. Corrective Action and Schedule: • For the deficiency, limits or capacity constraints on ADA complementary paratransit service (109), by December 14, 2017, submit to the FTA regional civil rights officer (RCRO) procedures for monitoring the City's ADA complementary paratransit service for capacity constraints. 5. Title VI Basic Requirement: The grantee must ensure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participating in, or be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance without regard to whether specific projects or services are federally funded. The grantee must ensure that federally supported transit services and related benefits are distributed in an equitable manner. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Title VI. b. Procurement Basic Requirement: Grantees use their own procurement procedures that reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the process ensures competitive procurement and 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 8 1 P a g e the procedures conform to applicable Federal law, including 49 CFR Part 18, (repealed effective December 26, 2014), 2 CFR Part 1201, incorporating 2 CFR Part 200 (specifically Sections 200.317-200.326), and FTA Circular 4220. IF, "Third Party Contracting Guidance." Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, a deficiency was found with the FTA requirements for Procurement. No FTA clauses (129) Grantees are required to include specific required clauses in FTA -funded procurements, intergovernmental agreements (e.g., those involving states and other public entities), and subrecipient agreements. FTA's Master Agreement identifies certain clauses that apply to third party contracts. 2 CFR 200.326 and Appendix I1 to 2 CFR Part 200 identify contract provisions for non -Federal contracts under a Federal award. FTA C. 4220.1F discusses Federal requirements that affect a recipient's acquisitions. The City of Jefferson's third -party contract for a vehicle tracking system did not include any FTA third -party contract clauses or provisions. Corrective Actions and Schedule: • For the deficiency, no FTA clauses (129), by December 14, 2017 perform the following: o Submit to the FTA regional office revised procurement procedures that address inclusion of all FTA required third -party contract clauses. o For the next applicable procurement, submit to the FTA regional office documentation that the required third -party contract clauses have been incorporated. 7. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Basic Requirement: The grantee must comply with 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of US DOT -assisted contracts. Grantees also must create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for US DOT -assisted contracts. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, deficiencies were found with the US DOT requirements for DBE. DBE goal not submitted or submitted late to FTA (100) 49 CFR part 26.45 and FTA guidance requires recipients to submit a DBE goal. According to the FTA DBE Three-year Submission schedule, the City was to develop and submit to the FTA via TrAMS a three-year goal for its DBE program by August 1, 2016. The City submitted its three- year DBE goal after August 1, 2016. DBE policy not updated (264) 49 CFR part 26.21 (b) (2) states "You do not have to submit regular updates of your DBE programs, as long as you remain in compliance. However, you must submit significant changes in the program for approval." The City's DBE program does not identify the current DBE Liaison Officer. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 9 1 P a g e Corrective Actions and Schedule: • For the deficiency, DBE goal not submitted or submitted late to FTA (100), by December 14, 2017 implement a procedure to ensure that future goals will be submitted by August 1. • For the deficiency, DBE policy not updated (264), by December 14, 2017, upload an update of the City's DBE program to TrAMS for review and notify the FTA RCRO once completed. 8. Legal Basic Requirement: The grantee must be eligible and authorized under state and local law to request, receive, and dispense FTA funds and to execute and administer FTA -funded projects. Grantees must comply with Restrictions on Lobbying requirements. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Legal. 9. Satisfactory Continuing Control Basic Requirement: The grantee must ensure that FTA -funded property will remain available to be used for its originally authorized purpose throughout its useful life until disposition. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Satisfactory Continuing Control. Violation of incidental use requirements (25) FTA circular 5010.1E i. (6), (a) states, "Incidental uses must be compatible with the approved purposes of the Award and may not interfere with either the intended uses of the property or the recipient's ability to maintain satisfactory continuing control. The recipient should consult with FTA before continuing with incidental use. An incidental use may not affect a property's transit capacity or use." The City is using its FTA -funded maintenance facility to maintain other city vehicles but did not consult with FTA regarding such use. Inadequate equipment records (58) FTA C 5010.1E Ch IV, Section 4(n) rolling stock and equipment management procedures include the following minimum requirements: (1) Equipment records must be maintained by the recipient. Records must include the following: (a) A description of the asset; (b) The identification number or serial number; (c) The entity or individual that holds title to the asset; (d) The source of funding (the FAIN number under which it was procured); (e) The acquisition date; (f) The cost of the asset; (g) The percentage of federal participation in the cost; (h) The location; (i) The use and condition; 0) The useful life; and (k) The disposition data, including the date of disposal and sale price, or, where applicable, method used to determine its fair market value. The City's equipment records do not include useful life. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 10 1 P a g e Corrective Actions and Schedule: • For the deficiency, violation of incidental use requirements (25), by December 14, 2017, obtain FTA approval for any unapproved incidental uses and submit to the FTA regional office procedures for obtaining prior FTA approval for future incidental uses. • For the deficiency, inadequate equipment records (58), by December 14, 2017, submit to the FTA regional office updated records with the required information. 10. Planning/ Program of Projects Basic Requirement: The grantee must participate in the transportation planning process in accordance with FTA requirements, Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, and the metropolitan and statewide planning regulations. Each recipient of a Section 5307 grant shall develop, publish, afford an opportunity for a public hearing on, and submit for approval, a program of projects (POP). Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Planning/POP. 11. Public Comment on Fare Increases and Major Service Reductions Basic Requirement: Section 5307 grantees are expected to have a written, locally developed process for soliciting and considering public comment before raising a fare or carrying out a major transportation service reduction. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Public Comment on Fare Increases and Major Service Reductions. 12. Half Fare Basic Requirement: For fixed -route service supported with Section 5307 assistance, fares charged seniors, persons with disabilities, or an individual presenting a Medicare card during off peak hours will not be more than one half the peak hour fares. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Half Fare. 13. Charter Bus Basic Requirement: Grantees are prohibited from using federally funded equipment and facilities to provide charter service if a registered private charter operator expresses interest in providing the service. Grantees are allowed to operate community based charter services excepted under the regulations. 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 11 1 P a g e Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Charter Bus. 14. School Bus Basic Requirement: Grantees are prohibited from providing exclusive school bus service unless the service qualifies and is approved by the FTA Administrator under an allowable exemption. Federally funded equipment or facilities cannot be used to provide exclusive school bus service. School tripper service that operates and looks like all other regular service is allowed. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for School Bus. 15. Security Basic Requirement: As recipients of Section 5307 funds, grantees must annually certify that they are spending at least one percent of such funds for transit security projects or that such expenditures for security systems are not necessary. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for Security. 16. Drug Free Workplace and Drug and Alcohol Program Basic Requirement: Grantees are required to maintain a drug-free workplace for all grant -related employees and to have an ongoing drug-free awareness program. Grantees receiving Section 5307, 5309, 5311 or 5339 funds that have safety -sensitive employees must have a drug and alcohol testing program in place for such employees. Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, a deficiency was found with the FTA requirements for Drug -Free Workplace and Drug and Alcohol Program. Improper post -accident determination (118) 49 CFR 655.44 stipulates the FTA requirements for post -accident testing. The City has a joint drug and alcohol testing policy that includes provisions for city employees covered by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations and employees covered by FTA. The City's policy regarding post -accident testing does not differentiate between FMCSA and FTA regulations and stipulates that all employees are post -accident tested when receiving a traffic citation. This requirement only applies to FMCSA regulated employees, not FTA regulated employees. This is a repeat finding from the 2014 Triennial Review. Corrective Action and Schedule: • For the deficiency, improper post -accident determination (118), by December 14, 2017, submit to the FTA regional office a process for ensuring that post accident testing under FTA 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 12 1 P a g e authority is only conducted for accidents that meet the definition of an accident under 49 CFR Part 655.44. 17. Equal Employment Opportunity Basic Requirement: The grantee must ensure that no person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, or disability be excluded from participating in, or denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination in employment under any project, program, or activity receiving Federal financial assistance under the Federal transit laws. (Note: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's regulation only identifies/recognizes religion and not creed as one of the protected groups.) Finding: During this Triennial Review of the City, no deficiencies were found with the FTA requirements for EEO. 2017 Triennial Review —Jefferson City, MO 13 1 P a g e V. Summary of Findings Review Area Finding Deficiency Corrective Action Response Date Date Closed 1. Financial D 142: ECHO Submit to the FTA regional office a process December July 17, Management documentation documenting that an authorized official 14, 2017 2017 and Capacity deficient approves each ECHO request. 2. Technical D 122: Incorrect FFR Submit FFRs in TrAMS with the correct December Capacity reporting (repeat) information in accordance with the 14, 2017 requirements of FTA Circular 5010. Submit procedures for completing FFRs with December the correct information. 14, 2017 365: Insufficient Submit to the FTA regional office a staffing December technical capacity plan that details how the City will allocate 14, 2017 resources to address technical capacity concerns in the areas of grant reporting, ADA monitoring, procurement, DBE, satisfactory continuing control, and Drug -Free Workplace/Drug and Alcohol Program. The plan shall include how the City will ensure that personnel receive adequate training to fulfill their job responsibilities. 3. Maintenance ND 4. ADA D 109: Limits or Submit to the FTA RCRO procedures for December capacity constraints on ADA complementary monitoring the City's ADA complementary paratransit service for capacity constraints. 14, 2017 paratransit service 5. Title VI ND 6. Procurement D 129: No FTA clauses Submit to the FTA regional office revised December procurement procedures that address inclusion 14, 2017 of all FTA required third party contract clauses. For the next applicable procurement, submit December to the FTA regional office documentation that 14, 2017 the required third -party contract clauses have been incorporated. 7. DBE D 100: DBE goal not Implement a procedure to ensure that future December submitted or goals will be submitted by August 1. 14, 2017 submitted late to FTA 264: DBE policy not Upload an update of the City's DBE program December updated to the TrAMS for approval and notify the 14, 2017 FTA RCRO once completed. 8. Legal ND 9. Satisfactory D 25: Violation of Obtain FTA approval for any unapproved December Continuing incidental use incidental uses and to submit to the FTA 14, 2017 Control requirements regional office procedures for obtaining prior FTA approval for future incidental uses. 58: Inadequate Submit to the FTA regional office updated December equipment records records with the required information. 14, 2017 10. Planning/ POP ND 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 14 1 P a g e Review Area Finding Deficiency Corrective Action Response Date Date Closed 11. Public ND Comment on Fare Increases and Major Service Reductions 12. Half Fare ND 13. Charter Bus ND 14. School Bus ND 15. Security ND 16. Drug -Free D 118: Improper post- Submit to the FTA regional office a process December Workplace/ accident determination for ensuring that post accident testing under 14, 2017 Drug and (repeat) FTA authority is only conducted for accidents Alcohol that meet the definition of an accident under Program 49 CFR Part 655.44 17. EEO ND 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 15 1 P a g e VI. Attendees Name Title phone Number E-mail Address City of Jefferson, Missouri Mark Mehmert Director of Transportation 785 832-3464 MMehmert@jeffcitymo.org Richard Turner Consultant 5732918265 rtumer@jeffcitymo.org Shiela Pearre Chief Accountant 5736346459 spearre@jeffcitymo.org Glenna Vernon Transit -Admin Assist 573-645-0719 gvernon@jeffcitymo.org Cara Sankey Senior Accountant 573-634-6495 csankey@jeffcitymo.org Alex Rotenberry Transportation Planner 573-634-6525 arotenberry@jeffcitymo.org Terry Stephenson Purchasing Agent 573-634-6325 tstephenson@jeffcitymo.org Margie Mueller Director of Finance and IT 573-634-6513 mmueller@jeffcitymo.org Shawn Stumpe CM Supervisor 573-634-9600 sstumpe@jeffcitymo.org Sarah Trittler HR Specialist 573-634-6529 strittk jeffcitymo.org Mark Morasch Public Utility Manager 573-634-6410 mmorasch@jeffcitymo.org FTA Bill Kalt Director, Office of Program Management and Oversight 816-329-3927 William.kalt@dot.gov Milligan & Company, LLC Jim Buckley Reviewer 267-608-1063 jbuckley@milligancpa.com Stephen Kingsberry Reviewer 267-546-5313 skingsberry@milligancpa.c om 2017 Triennial Review—Jefferson City, MO 16 1 P a g e VII. Appendices No appendices included in this report. 2017 Triennial Review —Jefferson City, MO 17 1 P a g e Missouri American Water Street Cut and Rk]ht-of-VVoy November 1. 2013-Seobember12.2017 9/3/17 9/6117 1126 E Atchsion 21638 8/13117 8/15/17 8/28/17 11 1003 Indiana Ave 21637 Closed 8/2117 8/4/17 8/28/17 20 1715 Hayselton 21636 Closed 7/22117 , 7122/17 8/8/V 12 .900 Witter 21635 Closed 7/21117 7121/17 7/27/17 5 11100 Industrial Driv 21634 Closed 6/2117 6H17 6/8117 5 1111 ndustria I Dr 21633 Closed 5/28117 5128/17 6/8/16 9 MO Blvd and High St 21632 Closed 5117/17 5/17/17 7/12/17 39 2308 Hyde Park 21586 Closed 5/13/17 5/13/17 5125/17 9 2211 BrandyLn 21585 Closed 4125117 4/25117 5119/17 19 603 Ohio 21584 Closed 3/27/17 3127/17 4117/17 16 .1220 W High Street 21583 Closed 3/13/17 3/14/17 3116/17 4 1405 Moreland 21582 Closed 3/13/17 3113/17 3/29/17 13 103 E CjrIce 21581 Closed 3/10/17 3110/17 3/15/17 4 716 W Main 21580 Closed 3/9/17 319117 4117/17 21 Adams/Capitol 21579 Closed 3/11/17 313/17 3110/17 8 2409 Hyde Park 21578 Closed 311/17 3/1/17 4/26117 43 .526 E Capitol 21577 Closed 2123117 2/27117 317/17 9 11011 Industrial 21576 Closed 2127/17 2/27117 611/17 67 E Cirlce 21575 lClosed 2127117 2/27117 3/13117 13 603 Linn 21574 Closed 2119/17 2/19/17 109 Bluff 21573 2117117 2/17117 205 Clay St 21572 1/13/17 2/7117 2114/17 22 West Tanner Way 21541 Closed 1113/17 217/17 2/17117 25 11031 Bun a Vista 21540 Closed 2/3117 2/3117 2/17/17 11 1810 Stadium 21539 Closed 12/18/16 116/17 1200 Elmerine 21535 12114/16 V6117 1/12/17 17 Hart/ W McCarty 21534 Closed 12113/16 12/14/16 714 Michigan 21531 12112116 12/14116 923 Dockery St 21530 12110/16 12110116 4/17/17 88 .1323 Karen 21529 Closed 1219116 12/9116 1708 Belair 21528 1218116 12/8116 1609 Bevelry 21527 10127/16 10/26/16 10126/16 6 1010 Rosewood Circle 21478 Closed 10120/16 10/21/16 10125/16 4 EdmundsIBuna Vista 21477 Closed 10120/16 10/21/16 10/25/16 4 EdmundslElizabeth 21476 Closed 10120/16 10/21116 10/25116 4 EdmundslMyrtle 21475 Closed 9130116 9/30116 1112116 24 1701 Belair 21474 Closed 9117/16 9/17/16 11/2116 35 11618 E Miller 21473 Closed 9114/16 9/14116 11/2/16 36 1909 E Capitol 21472 Closed 9/14/16 9114/16 1112116 36 1200 Hub St 21471 Closed 919/16 919/16 10/6/16 20 1901 Glenwood 21470 Closed 8119/16 8/19/16 9127/16 28 1105 and 106 Carri Ann 21469 Closed 8/15/16 8115/16 9/12116 21 200 Block Clay Street 21468 Closed 8/13116 8/13116 9114/16 23 1810 Stadium 21467 Closed 7/25/16 8/11/16 8129116 26 Rosewood/Carol 21466 Closed 818/16 8/8/16 8/24/16 13 611 Hibernia 21440 Closed 7/26/16 7/2R/16 7129/16 3 IStadiurn and Carter 21439 Closed 7/26116 7/26/16 7129/16 3 11228 Carter 21438 Closed 7126/16 7/26116 8/12/16 14 Rosewood/Carroll 21437 Closed 7125/16 7/25116 8/12/16 15 10 11 Winston 21436 Closed 7120/16 7/201 ' 16 8/12/16 18 East Ashley and Madison 21435 Closed 7/8116 7/8/16 8/26/16 37 2653 Sue Drvie 21434 Closed 7/7/16 717/16 7/29/16 17 613 Michigan 21433 Closed 7/6116 7/16/16 8/2/16 12 .701 E McCaty 21432 Closed 715/16 7/5/16 8/29/16 40 1901 E Capitol 21431 Closed 7/4/16 7/4/16 7111/16 4 901 Madison 21430 Closed 713116 7/3/16 8/26/16 40 2201 Marilyn 21429 Closed 712116 7/2116 7/1 V16 5 104 Jackson 21428 Closed 7/1/16 711/16 8/23/16 37 824 SW Blvd 21427 Closed 6130/16 6/30/16 917/16 49 908 Westwood 21426 Closed 6130/16 6/30/16 7/20116 14 1816 Green Meadow 21405 Closed Missouri American Water Street Cut and Right -of -Way November 1. 2013 -Sentember 12. 2017 ... .-..6 ....... .. . .......... ........ ............................. . . .......... .. ..... .. .......... ......... ........ ..... ............... ... .. ... ........ ............ Oescr ............... ............ .. .... ... .. ....... 6/28116 /28/16 7/11/16 11 1401 E Elm 21404 Closed 6/28/16 6/28/16 8/2/16 24 613 Waverly 21403 Closed 6/26116 6/26/16 7/20116 17 24,06 James Street 21402 Closed 6119116 6119/16 7/11116 26 CottaRe Ln/ Gordon 21401 Closed 6/14/16 6/14116 8/12/16 44 lAdams/State 21400 Closed 6114/16 6/14116 7/20116 25 1101 Maplewood Ct 21399 Closed 5/26/16 5126/16 6/28/16 23 1805 W Main 21398 Closed 5/10/16 5110/16 5131/16 14 1115 E Miller 21397 Closed 515/16 514/16 1827 Mississippi 21396 Closed 515/16 515/16 5118116 9 617 Houchin 21395 Closed 512/16 5/2116 .1900 Summers Way 21394 Closed 511116 511116 5110116 8 938 Fairmont Blvd 21393 Closed 4121/16 4/21/16 5/4/16 9 1209 West Main 21392 Closed 4/20/16 4120/16 514116 10 127 W DrIce 21391 Closed 4/19/16 4119/16 4127/16 7 1210 Moreland 21390 Closed 4115116 4115/16 2207 Merlin 21389 Closed 4/12116 4/12/16 4119/16 6 .620 Ohio 21388 Closed 4/12116 4/12/16 4119/16 6 608 Ohio 21387 Closed 4111116 4/11/16 4115/16 5 High Street ram /MO Blvd 21386 Closed 4/7/16 4/7/16 4/15/16 7 207 Vista 21365 Closed 4/5116 4/5116 513/16 21 2015 Tower 21364 Closed 3129116 3/29116 5/4/16 28 2026 W Main 21363 Closed 3125116 3125/16 7/11/16 73 1428 Bald Hill 21362 Closed 3/25/16 3/25116 416/16 1 10 513 Gipfe!rt Ln 21361 Closed 3/23/16 3/23116 416/16 10 1805 Bald Hill Rd 21359 Closed 3/18/16 3/18/16 416/16 12 1014 Laural 21358 Closed 3110116 3110/16 4/6/16 20 333 Old Gibbler 21357 Closed 3110/16 3/10116 4/6116 20 2210 Melody Dr 21356 Closed 3/10/16 3110/16 3/15116 4 400 Donna Bella 21355 Closed 317116 30/16 3/9/16 2 618 E High 2154 Closed 312116 3/2116 12025 Edgewood (Hydrent) 21353 Closed 2126/16 2126116 4/6/16 28 12025 Edgewood 21352 Closed 2/23/16 2123/16 8/24116 130 11415 Stadium 21351 Closed 2/19116 2119/16 1217/16 1300 blk E State St 21320 Closed 2/18116 2/18116 2/29116 8 lUnion/Jackson 21319 Closed 2112/16 2112116 3/9/16 19 12109 Edgewood Drive 21318 Closed 2112/16 2/12116 3/9/16 19 1818 Air View 21317 Closed 2/11/16 2/11116 3/9116 20 12500 Orchard Ln 21316 Closed 2111/16 2111/16 2125116 11 11722 South Ridge 21315 Closed 2/5116 215/16 319116 23 12000 Meadow Ln 21314 Closed 2/3116 2/3/16 2115/16 9 12128 Green Meadow Dr 21313 Closed 2/1/16 2/11/16 2115116 11 1308 Moreau 21312 Closed 1129/16 1/29116 211/16 1 1709 Francis 21311 Closed 1128/16 1/28/16 2/1116 2 710 Belair 21310 Closed 1128/16 1/28/16 2/1116 2 Hough Park and Kolb 21309 Closed 1126/16 1126/16 211116 4 122 Boonville 21308 Closed 1/26/16 1/26116 1/27116 1 .126 E Circle 21307 lClosed 1122/16 1122116 319/16 33 12124 Lowell 21306 Closed 1121116 1/21116 2/4/16 11 1200 Moreland 21305 Closed 1117116 1/17/16 319116 37 1822 Tanner Bridge 21304 Closed 1/15/16 1115/16 1/25/16 5 906 Broadway 21303 Closed 1/11116 1/12/16 1/14116 3 810 Stadium 21302 Closed 1/11116 1/12116 1/13116 2 Rid .gewood.and W McCaqy 21301 Closed 112/16 1/12116 1/29116 20 Southwest and Sunvally 21211 Closed 1/2/16 1112116 1/14116 9 .1837 W McC aqy 21210 Closed 12/24/15 12130/15 1/6/16 8 1812 W Stadium Blvd 21209 Closed 12/21/15 12123/15 1/6116 10 1228 West Edgewood 21208 Closed 12/4/15 1217115 12121115 12 W. McCarty and Manilla 21207 Closed 12/4/15 1217/15 12121/15 12 1808 Greenberry x2 21206 Closed 11/28/15 11130/15 2/23/16 60 2224 Oakview 21205 Closed 11119/15 11118/15 2/23/16 Oakview/Hillsdale 1 21204 lClosed Page 2 of 6 Missouri American Water Street Cut and Right -of -Way November 1. 2013-Seotember 12. 2017 .... ........................... Dadone Pat�rn /led Comaleted .. .... y Active: .................................. tbeatwn :: .::::::...... .. ..... PelfCtit ................................. 13esCt►{�tS4tt ::.......,............................ .......... . .. . 10/28/15 10/28/15 1214/15 25 2619 Schellrid a 21203 C losed 10/23/15 10/26115 1214115 28 319 Meier 21202 Closed 10/10/2015 10/12/2015 10/23/2015 10 400 E Cedar Way 21201 Closed _ 1017120151 10/8/2015 10/912015 3 1409 Moreland 21200 Closed 1013/2015 10/5/2015 10122/2015 141 M© Blvd and Stadium 21199 Closed 9/1512015 9115/2015 9/22/2015 6 213 E Elm 21198 Closed 9/8/2015 9/1412015 9/22/2015 8 1025 Westwood 21197 Closed 917/2015 9/8/2015 9/22/2015 9 2601 Schellrid a 21196 Closed 9/5/2015 9/8/2015 9/22/2015 11 1901 Bassman 21195 Closed 9/2/2015 9/8/2015 10/30/2015 43 804 Adams 21194 Closed 8/18/2015 8/20/2015 8/2012015 2 E ElmlLinn 21193 Closed 8/10/2015 8/20/2015 9/22/2015 31 1933 Leslie 21192 Closed 8/7/2015 8/20/2015 9/15/2015 25 11312 Lynnwood 21141 Closed 6/30/2015 6/30/2015 7/6/2015 5 1313 Hart 21139 Closed 6/30/2015 6/30/2015 7/2/2015 3 1100 E Cedar Way 21140 Closed 6122/2015 6/22/2015 6/2512015 3 1707 West Main 21137 Closed 6/19/2015 612212015 717/2015 13 .800 Adams 21138 Closed 6/1712015 6/18/2015 6/2412015 6 Satinwood/Brandy Lane 21136 Closed 6/10/2015 6/10/2015 6/15/2015 3 100 Jefferson 21135 Closed 6/2/2015 6/3/2015 6/912015 5 2406 James Street 21134 Closed 5/29/2015 5129/2015 6/9/2015 8 623 Ohio 21133 Closed 5/26/2015 5126/2015 6/9/2015 11 11313 Moreland 21132 Closed 512112015 5121/2015 6/24/2015 25 Hibernia/Mokane Road 211_30 Closed 5/21/2015 5/21/2015 6/3/2015 10 1900 Stadium 21131 Closed 5/15/2015 5/15/2015 6/3/2015 13 319 Stadium 21129 Closed 5/1412015 5114/2015 6/3/2015 14 205 Boonville 21128 Closed 5/6/2015 5/6/2015 5/11/2015 3 1317 Monroe 21127 Closed 4/28/2015 412812015 5/7/2015 8 312 E Capitol 21126 Closed 4/19/2015 4/20/2015 5/4/2015 10 1110 Lee Street 21125 Closed 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 5F7/2015 17 1711/1713 Ha selton 21124 Closed 4/3/2015 4/10/2015 5/7/2015 25 217 Stadium Blvd 2.1123 Closed 3/27/2015 3/27/2015 6/24/2015 66 1419 Hough Park 21122 Closed 3/26/2015 3/26/2015 3/30/2015 3 209 E Atchison 20982 Closed 3/26/2015 3126/2015 5/7/2015 31 Jackson/Stadium 20983 Closed 3/19/2015 3/20/2015 4/24/2015 26 419 Oak Valley Ct 20980 Closed 3/19/2015 3120/2015 5/21/2015 45 1902 Stadium Blvd 20981 Closed 3/17/2015 3/18/2015 3/30/2015 10 Dunklin/Jefferson 20979 Closed 3/6/2015 319/2015 3/12/2015 5 909 Indiana 20978 Closed 3/5/2015 _31612015 VOID 1104 Madison St in all 20977 VOPD 3/3/2015 3/3/2015 1808 Crader Dr 20973 Closed 3/3/2015 314/2015 3/26/2015 18 110 block Jackson 20974 Closed 2/2712015 314/2015 4/1512015 33 Boonville and Norris 20975 Closed 2/27/2015 3/4/2015 411512015 33 W. McCarty and Hart 20976 Closed 2/24/2015 2125/2015 3/24/2015 21 719 Jefferson 20972 Closed 2/22/2015 2/23/2015 1212 Moreland Ave 20971 Closed 2111/2015 2/11/2015 311212015 22 2717 Lola Dr 20970 Closed 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 3/3/2015 17 1924 Ha selton 20968 Closed 2/9/2015 2/9/2015 3/2/2015 32 1525 E High 20969 Closed 1/29/2015 1/29/2015 3/30/2015 44 1 Dunklin and Jefferson 20967 Closed 1/25/2015 1/26/2015 1/30/2015 4 104 N. Taylor 20966 Closed 1/21/2015 1/21/2015 1/30/2015 7 400 E Hess Way 20965 Closed 1/20/2015 1/21/2015 1/27/2015 5 117 E Circle 20958 Closed 1/19/2015 1/21/2015 1/27/2015 7 412 E Cirice 20960 Closed 1/19/2015 1/21/2015 3/24/2015 47 401 Capitol 20963 Closed 1/19/2015 1/21/2015 2/612015 14 319 Meier 20964 Closed 1/1712015 1/29/2015 2/6/2015 15 823 Primrose 20957 Closed 1/17/2015 1/21/2015 1/27/2015 7 917 Moreau 20961 Closed 1116/2015 112112015 1/30/2015 11 414 Hess Way 20959 Closed 1/1112015 1/11/2015 1/2112015 8 Boonville and West Main 20956 Closed 111012015 1/11/2015 1/27/2015 11 Moreland and Moreau 20953 Closed 1/10/2015 1/11/2015 1/20/2015 7 1320 Moreland 20954 Closed Page 3 of 6 Missouri American Water Street Cut and Right -of -Way November 1, 2013 -September 12, 2017 Date worfG' done Date called in ... DateDays Camptot+i. d .......... Active .. Location . ............. i'eimlt atlo ...., HesCripUOn > .. . ..-- - 1/10/2015 111112015 2/6/2015 20 2306 Hillsdale 20955 Closed 117/2015 119!2015 1/1412015 6 2503 Industrial Drive 20952 Closed 1/612015 116/2015 1/21/2015 12 300 Berry St 20951 Closed 1/1/2015 1/5!2015 2/6/2015 26 1902 MO Blvd/Beck St 20949 Closed_ 1/1/2015 1/15/2015 2/11/2015 30 413 Beck St 20950 Closed 12/26/2014 12/2912014 1/20/2015 16 1308 Houchins _20947 Closed 12/26/2014 12/29/2014 1/20/2015 16 Dunklin and Houchins 20948 _ Closed 12/2/2014 121312014 12115/2014 12 Donald Dr 20946 Closed 11/27/2014 12/1/2014 12/15/2014 14 Donald Dr 20945 Closed 11!18/2014 11/19/2014 12/15/2014 18 1924 Ha selton 20944 Closed 11/14/2014 11117/2014 121212014 18 1837 Crestmere 20943 Closed 11/13/2014 11/17/2014 1501 Mesa 20942 Closed 10/28/2014 10/29/2014 12/212014 22 2600 Schellrid a 20941 Closed 10/16/2014 10/20/2014 11/4/2014 13 1605 Bald Hill Rd 20940 Closed 10/13/2014 10/16/2014 11/4!2014 15 Do wood/Buehrle 20939 lClosed 106/2014 10/9/2014 10/19/2015 10 212 Broadway 20938 Closed 9/16/2014 9117/2014 1011!2014 10 2500 Country Club 20937 Closed 9/8/2014 9/8/2014 9/17/2014 9 RidQeway and Oakview 20936 Closed 8/22/2014 8126/2014 106/2014 lEast Miller and Marshall 20934 Closed 8/21/2014 8/22/2014 9/15/2014 14 421 Union 20935 Closed 8/1612014 8/1/2014 11/4/2014 65 1827 W. McCarty 20933 Closed 7/3012014 7/31/2014 West Ashley and M lberry 20860 Closed 7/2812014 7/26/2014 200 block of S. Bluff Street 20859 Closed 7/23/2014 7/23/2014 8111!2014 19 1319 E Elm Street 20856 Closed 7/2312014 7/25/2014 8/1/2014 10 103 East Circle 20857 Closed 7123/2014 7125/2014 8/11/2014 19 700 Block of Michi am 20858 Closed 7117/2014 7/22/2014 2025 West Ed ewood Dr 20854 Closed 7/17/2014 7/22/2014 Hiebernia 20855 Closed 711312014 7/22/2014 8119/2014 37 1429 Dixon Drive 20853 Closed 76114 718/14 7115114 1502 Greenberry 20852 Closed 7/5114 718/14 10/3!14 58 114 Ridgeway 20851 Closed 7/1/14 713/14 8114/14 21 1120 Lee Street 20850 Closed 6130114 7/1114 7115114 400 Block Jackson_ 20848 Closed 6130114 7!3114 7115114 1306 West Main 20849 Closed 6120114 6/23/14 7115114 1505 Stadium 20847 Closed 616114 619/14 - 327 Fox Creek - 20845 Closed 6/4114 615114 4120/15 West Main and MO Blvd 20844 Closed 5/27/14 5128/14 Industrial and Jaycee Dr 20842 Closed - New Main 5121114 5121/14 6/4/14 14 1321 Wilson Drive 20841 Closed 5120114 5120/14 6/4114 15 14411 Industrial 20840 Closed 5113114 5/14114 11101 Industrial Drive 20839 Closed 518114 5113/14 5114114 6 Hillsdale and Binder 20837 Closed 511/1.4 505 Meier Dr 20836 Closed 4/29/14 4/29114 5/6114 7 421 Ladue Rd 20835 Oen - Driveway Issues 4128114 11/17/14 700 Block SW Blvd 20830 Closed 4/28/14 4129/14 5115114 17 102 Vista 20832 Closed 4128114 4129/14 5/11/14 3 1308 Cotta a Lane 20833 Closed 4/28114 4129114 5/6114 8 2215 Hillsdale 20834 Closed 4126114 206 John St 20831 Closed 4/24114 300 Block East High 20829 Closed 4123/14 606 Washington Street 20828 Closed 4116/14 2107 Buehrle Dr 20825 Closed 4116/14 1010 Holly 20826 Closed 4116114 IMaryland and Lowell 20827 Closed 46/14 2940 Valley View Drive 20824 Closed 4014 1215 Ed ewood 20822 Closed 412/14 1801 Notre Dame 20823 lClosed 3/18114 104 W. Franklin 20821 lClosed 36114 Hiberia/Mokane Road 20820 Closed 2128114 Locust 1 Walsch 20819 Closed 2124114 Edmonds 1 Du Ile 20818 Closed 2121114 1 12708 Twin Hills 20817 Closed - Driveway uestion 2/18114 1 1306 N Lincoln 20815 Closed Page 4 of 6 Missouri American Water Street Cut and Right -of -Way November 1, 2013 -September 12, 2017 pate +Nark Gate caf[ed Gate :done .;::: m:.... corn tet6d .......... ... P pays: Locatloh AeGva. .. ,...... :........ Permit No Description ........... 2118114 Pondarosa Street 20816 Closed 2113/14 100 Blk East Ashley 20814 Closed 2111114 317 Stadium 20813 Closed 214114 216 - 218 McKinley Street _ 20811 Closed 2/3/14 1408 East High(Alley) 20812 Closed 1120114 1314 Moreau Drive 20751 Closed 1120114 1120114 516114 106 311 E High Street 20752 Closed 1112114 Douglas / Wayne 20749 Closed 1112114 130 Boonville Road 20750 Closed 1//194 1120 Carol Street 20748 Closed 1/5114 11515 Rosewood 20747 Closed 1/3114 708 Wicker Lane 20746 Closed - New Main 112/14 710 Wicker Lane 20745 Closed - New Main 111114 McCarty Street I Manilla 20743 Closed 111114 Pierce 1 Edwards 20744 Closed 12/26/13 1504 Bald Hill Road 20742 Closed 12/23/13 1122 East Atchison 20741 Closed 12/18/13 11505 Southwest Blvd, 20739 Closed 12/18/13 I Oakview 20740 Closed 12/11/13 -Marilyn 1306 Emmience 20737 Closed 12111/13 623-625 W McCarty Street 20738 Closed 12/10/13 709 E McCarty Street 20734 IClosed 12/10/13 2107 Rear Mo. Blvd. 20735 IClosed 12/10/13 200 Blk Filmore 20736 Closed 1218113 719 Wicker Lane 20733 Closed 1213113 12109 Ed ewood Drive 20731 Closed 1213/13 1119 Darlene 20732 Closed 11/28/13 636 Belmont 20730 Closed 11/27/13 1210 Ed ewood 20729 Closed 11/19/13 1310 East High Street 20728 Closed 11114/13 603 Meir 20726 Closed 11/14/13 Westwood I Wood Cliff 20727 Closed 11/13/13 13032 Oak Valley Drive 20723 Closed 11/13/13 11901 Bassman 20724 Closed 11/13/13 11/15/13 5/14/13 316 Ash Street 20725 Closed - New Main 1115113 Satinwood Drive 1 Melody 20722 Closed 11/4/13 2207 Schell Ride 20720 Closed 1114113 1822 Cedar Ride 20721 Closed 5/30/13 613/14 6/4/14 370 2212 Oakview Drive 20843 Closed 5112/13 5113114 2600 Jason Road 20838 Closed 138 Forest Hill 20753 Closed 1225 Hi h Cliff 20754 Closed 1551 Bald Hill Road 20755 Closed 6111114 619/14 619 Houchin 20846 Closed Page 5 of 6 Missouri American Water Street Cut and Right -of -Way November i, 1uij-beptember 12. zui! pate wvrXc taxi ca9led Date Days Permit Lccetaon €3escri{�tion eons �n: lorr�pleted Rctive fJo Page 6 of 6 City of Jefferson Department of Planning 8 Protective Services 320 E. McCarty Street Jefferson City, MO 65101 Memorandum TO: Public Works and Planning Committee FROM: Sonny Sanders, Director, Planning and Protective Services DATE: September 14, 2017 SUBJECT: Update on Current Work Tasks Carrie Terpin, Mayor Sonny Sanders, AICP, Director Phone: 573-634-6410 Fax: 573-6346457 Yard Waste and Compost Site Contract. The Yard Waste and Compost Site Contract with All Season's Landscaping will expire on October 31, 2018. The final year of the five year contract runs from November 1, 2017 to October 31, 2018 at a cost of $224,000 to the City of Jefferson. The current yard waste and compost site is located at 2417 Southridge Drive. Planning and Protective Services staff is currently preparing the request for proposal for the future contract which will begin on November I, 2018. A city wide survey will be conducted to receive citizen input on the yard waste drop-off and compost site. A committee, developed from city staff members, will review this information received from the public. The committee will then assess what needs the citizens are requesting for yard waste disposal and then develop the request for proposal. This committee will then select a qualified contractor when proposals are received to perform this service. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program will be holding a public hearing on September 19, 2017 at 4:00 pm regarding the 2018 Annual Action Plan. The purpose of the "Plan" is to identify anticipated funding levels, budget of those funds between programs, etc. Current programs include Down Payment, Home Owner Support, Public Improvements, Demolition, and Public Assistance. Copies of the Plan will be made available at City Hall, Public Housing Authority, Missouri River Regional Library and online at www.ietTersoncitvmo.eov. Take our survey at www.stirvevmonkeN,.com/r/CX3N69Z. Comments regarding the Plan will be accepted through October 20, 2017. Property Inspection/Code Enforcement Computer Software. Over the past several months, staff has been researching computer software for code enforcement, permitting, design review and citizen portal. Staff has determined that utilizing software will aid in efficiency and communication. The efficiency will be increased out in the field as property inspectors would be able to check status of property while onsite, create nuisance violation letters and post the property in one visit. Communication will be increased with the citizen portal where the public can report concerns, check the status of an issue and receive real time updates as actions are taken. It is anticipated that the computer software will enable the property inspectors to take proactive actions versus the current reactive process currently in place. Property Inspection/Code Enforcement is the first division for which software is being pursued. Ad Hoc Building Committee Activities. The committee is currently reviewing processes for the Building Regulation Division. This includes staffing and permit fees. After their recommendation has been received for any modifications or improvements, the committee's work will be finished.