HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/24/2021 Item 6a, Czech
From:Genevieve Czech <agczech@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August
To:CityClerk
Subject:Fwd: Parking permit proposal issue
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
________________________________
Hello, Megan: I submitted an e-mail to A. Fuchs and the City Council yesterday which was intended to enter into the
Correspondence for the August 24th meeting with regard to the issue of parking permits, Agenda item 6a. If you would
be so kind as to locate it,or see the attached, I would appreciate it moving into the City Council August 24th meeting
Correspondence file. for that meeting. Thanking you, Genevieve Czech
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Genevieve Czech <
Date: Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 12:35 PM
Subject: Parking permit proposal issue
To: <afuchs@slocity.org>, <slocitycouncil@slocity.org>
Good morning, Alexander and Lady Mayoress Members of the City Council:
re: Agenda Item 6a August 24th City Council meeting
The proposal to extend the parking permits formula, making permits accessible per residents in a household, rather than
per residence is not based on reality in terms of parking spaces on residential roads.
While it is true that the existing scheme of 2 permits per household does not accommodate all the residents per
household on OUR road, inconvenient as that may be for the individual looking for a parking space, the number of
spaces available during term time is very limited indeed, given the number of residents owning vehicles. Surely, when
you visit the Cal Poly area, under which Stanford Drive is considered, you will have witnessed the gradual spread of cars
parked on adjoining streets. An example is one residence on our road rented to 6 girls, another will be renting to 7 who
each each bring a vehicle for the most part, and their parking spreads to Jeffrey and Cerro Romualdo by Throop Park
and Pacheco School. As Cal Poly increases its student population, the problem of shortage of spaces available for
student vehicles will increase. If permits are offered to these students, you will be encouraging the habit of students
bringing a vehicle to SLO rather than using public transport, thereby adding to the overall impact of city traffic. Students
use these vehicles for recreation, shopping, etc. If the City has pledged to discourage the use of automobiles, and to
improve the public transportation system and bicycle lanes, why are you even considering a scheme that contradicts
that concept? It makes the pledge to discourage vehicular traffic look false. When the Anholm Bikeway project was
under discussion, there was protest from long standing residents who were senior and disabled, that they would lose
their own parking accessibility. The complaints were overruled in the name of climate change and reduction of vehicular
use in SLO; street parking was not a city priority while bicycle lanes were. Now a few years later you are concerned to
provide street parking to temporary residents. Where is the consistency in the City´s scheme of things?
It has been repeatedly pointed out that the double garage space provided for 2 vehicles is not used by students for
vehicles. Rather they are used as gym/fitness centers, or storage for bicycles/scooters/and gear. Were the purpose of a
1
double garage, double space driveway. and 2 parking permits for street parking observed, there would be ample space
for 6 vehicles per residence.
You describe that existing parking districts will be individually evaluated and a vote given to the residents to expand the
number of permits allocated. Do you define the number of residents with any weighting for permanent, tax paying
residents who have grandchildren and relatives and friends visiting, not to mention those providing services like home
health visitors? A uniform policy for commercial tenants and owner occupying residents should not be proposed. If you
wish to enhance the parking for downtown businesses, why are you including the residential neighborhoods in the same
proposal?
The parking situation on August 24th, 2021 when this proposal is discussed does not reflect the parking situation of
September 24th when many thousands of student vehicles return to SLO. Issuing more permits for spaces that do not
exist will create a level of competition among students and permanent residents that does not foster friendly relations.
There would be a scramble, and driveways obscured by over parking. We are aware that ADUs are not required to
provide parking, and that the permit expansion scheme would promote ADUs being constructed. However,it would not
promote a greener, public transportation/pedestrian friendly environment that reduces carbon emissions and enhances
the environment.
We hope that the City reconsiders this proposal and amends it where needed to protect residential neighborhoods
currently over impacted by parking problems.
Respectfully yours,
Genevieve Czech, Stanford Drive SLO
2