HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-2013 ph1 intro food vendors ord
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Doug Davidson, Deputy Community Development Director
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF MOBILE VENDOR ORDINANCE (TA 62-12)
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce by title only an ordinance to adopt amendments to the City’s Municipal Code
(Municipal Code Titles 5 and 10) to regulate mobile vendors in the public right-of-way and
adopt a Notice of Exemption under CEQA (General Rule §15061(b)(3) and Categorical
Exemption Section 15301(c).
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Over the last several years, the City Attorney’s Office and the Police Department have received
inquiries from the mobile vendors about how to obtain a mobile vendor permit. Currently, the
City has minimal regulations governing mobile vendors. On January 18, 2011, the City Council
directed staff to prepare an ordinance to govern mobile vendors. Staff reviewed legal issues,
case law, and ordinances from numerous other cities. Public outreach was conducted with
downtown interest groups, neighborhood organizations, mobile food vendors, and an attorney
representing the mobile food industry (Attachment 4). The proposed ordinance supplements
existing state law and County Department of Health regulations and is designed to minimize
risks to public safety.
The proposed ordinance recognizes that the City can not preclude mobile vendors from locating
in the City, but can regulate and impose restrictions on their operations if public health and
safety findings are supported by substantial evidence introduced and incorporated into the
administrative record. While the initial discussion focused on Mobile Food Vendors, the
proposed ordinance covers all mobile vendors, including other merchandise, services, and food.
DISCUSSION
Background
Update on Current Situation
A prospective applicant’s attorney contacted the City Attorney’s Office in fall 2010 regarding
the permitting process suggesting that if his client’s first mobile food truck was successful, they
would be interested in operating additional trucks in the City. They additionally advised the City
that there may be other mobile food vendors trying to replicate this approach. This information
was consistent with the growing popularity of mobile food vendors in other jurisdictions. Many
large and small cities are overseeing permit programs given the increasing popularity of mobile
food vendors.
Although, the City is not faced with a rush of vendors on City streets, the current ordinance is
outdated and not consistent with subsequent case law which is summarized in this report. The
PH1 - 1
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 2
City’s current ordinance is likely unenforceable and would subject the City to unnecessary
liability.
The City Council directed staff in January 2011 to begin the preparation of an ordinance given
the increase in popularity of mobile food vendors, in anticipation of the trend arriving in San
Luis Obispo. The fact that an influx of mobile food vendors did not materialize was one reason
for the delay in bringing forth the proposed ordinance to City Council. Additionally, modifying
regulations for mobile vendors was not identified as a Major City Goal or other important
objective. Staff devoted the majority of resources available for special ordinance preparation in
2011 and 2012 to an ordinance to address alcohol related issues. Most recently, staff efforts were
redirected to preparing a memorandum to consider a moratorium on additional outlets
downtown.
What is a Mobile Vendor?
A mobile vendor is a vehicle that sells or distributes merchandise, food, or services to the public
directly from the vehicle while parked in the public right-of-way. For example, a truck selling
tacos while parked in the public right-of-way would be a mobile food vendor. However, a truck
selling tacos while parked in a private parking lot or as part of a special event, such as Farmer’s
Market, would not be considered a mobile food vendor for purposes of the proposed ordinance.
Existing City Ordinances require a use permit for mobile food vendors on private property. As
part of the 2014 Zoning Amendments, staff will be proposing to allow mobile vendors to co-
locate in commercial zones on private property for less than two hours with a Director’s
approval. This was a best practice uncovered in research for this report. A use permit would still
be required for more than 2 hours on private property. This change is not a part of the ordinance
before the Council tonight which deals only with mobile vending in the public right-of-way.
In addition, as contained in the draft ordinance, an ice cream truck, or any other vendor who
parks in the same location in the public right-of-way for ten minutes or less is not considered a
mobile food facility, and would not be subject to any proposed ordinance. Likewise, a vehicle
delivering pizzas would not be considered a mobile food vendor under the ordinance.
The proposed ordinance is commonly referred to as the mobile food vendor ordinance (or mobile
food trucks), and food trucks are the primary focus of the new regulations. However, the
Municipal Code section (5.16) being amended is entitled “Solicitors and Peddlers” and the new
regulations would apply to any vendor selling food, merchandise, and/or services in the public
right-of-way.
The City’s Current Regulations Governing Mobile Food Facilities
Municipal Code, Section 5.16.010 (Attachment 1) requires an individual to obtain a permit from
the City Council to park in the public right-of-way to sell food. An individual is not required to
obtain a permit if the mobile food facility only stops long enough to transact a sale, and is in any
one location for no more than ten minutes. The only express basis on which to deny a permit is
an applicant’s adverse criminal history, which would put the public at risk given the business
model proposed. However, the permit application does require the applicant to specify hours and
proposed locations of operation.
PH1 - 2
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 3
State and County Regulations Governing Mobile Food Vendors
There is extensive state law governing mobile food vendors, and many of the same health and
safety regulations that apply to a “bricks and mortar” food facility, also apply to a mobile food
truck. Chapter 10 of the California Retail Food Code contains specific regulations for mobile
food vendors. The other body of State law that regulates mobile vendors is the California Vehicle
Code. Generally, local entities cannot adopt regulations that conflict with the Vehicle Code;
however, there are exceptions for additional requirements to regulate certain traffic matters.
Specifically, Vehicle Code §22455 1 allows local jurisdictions to adopt additional requirements
for the public safety regulating the type of vending and the time, place, and manner of vending
from vehicles upon any street.
The County of San Luis Obispo has the exclusive authority for enforcing the California Retail
Food Code and issuing permits for operation. These regulations apply to both permanent and
mobile food facilities 2. The County regulates food safety, cooking requirements, equipment,
cleanliness, and safety for all commercial food preparation. Mobile food vendors that conduct
business in one location for longer than one hour must be within 200 feet of available toilet and
hand washing facilities.
Mobile Food Vendors Case Law
The authority granted to local agencies through California Vehicle §22455 is narrowly
construed. The City can regulate the time, place, and manner of mobile vendors to address
public safety concerns only. Section 22455 does not provide the authority for cities to prohibit
mobile vendors.
Two important court cases address prohibiting mobile vendors in residential areas and excluding
vendors within certain distances of established restaurants. The California Appeals Court held in
(1) 22455.
(a) The driver of any commercial vehicle engaged in vending upon a street may vend products on a street in a residence district only after
bringing the vehicle to a complete stop and lawfully parking adjacent to the curb, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 9 (commencing
with Section 22500) and local ordinances adopted pursuant thereto.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 114315 of the Health and Safety Code or any other provision of law, a local authority may, by
ordinance or resolution, adopt additional requirements for the public safety regulating the type of vending and the time, place, and manner of
vending from vehicles upon any street.
(Amended by Stats. 2008, Ch. 139, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 2009.)
2 CHAPTER 10. Mobile Food Facilities
114294.
(a) All mobile food facilities and mobile support units shall meet the applicable requirements in Chapters 1 to 8, inclusive, and Chapter 13, unless
specifically exempted from any of these provisions as provided in this chapter.
(b) The enforcement agency shall initially approve all mobile food facilities and mobile support units as complying with the provisions of this
chapter and may require reapproval if deemed necessary.
(c) Each mobile food facility that is either a special purpose commercial modular and coach as defined by Section 18012.5 or a commercial
modular coach as defined by Section 18001.8 shall be certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, consistent with
Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18025) of Part 2 of Division 13, and regulations promulgated pursuant to that chapter. In addition, the
enforcement agency shall approve all equipment installation prior to operation
PH1 - 3
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 4
Barajas v. City of Anaheim (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 1808 that cities do not have the authority to
ban vending from vehicles parked on streets. Specifically, the Court considered: “Does the
Vehicle Code preempt an ordinance enacted by a charter city to ban vending from vehicles
parked on public streets in residential areas?” The Court answered simply: “Yes.” During the
preparation of the proposed ordinance, this case was cited to neighborhood and merchant groups
as the primary reason why mobile vendors cannot be prohibited from operating on city streets.
In People v. Ala Carte Catering Co. the State Appeals Court struck down the City of Los
Angeles’ ordinance prohibiting mobile vendors from selling within 100 feet of an established
restaurant. The Court found that it was an unlawful limitation on commerce and not a matter of
public safety. This case was cited to the restaurant owners as the primary reason why the
proposed ordinance does not restrict mobile food vendors from lawfully operating within a
certain distance of existing restaurants.
Advisory Body Review and Public Outreach
The proposed mobile food vendor regulations are contained in Municipal Code chapters 5 and 10
and are limited to vehicles in the public right-of-way. The Planning Commission reviews
amendments to Chapters 16 (Subdivision Regulations) and Zoning Regulations (Chapter 17).
Mobile food vending regulations do not fall under the direct purview of any other Advisory
Bodies. As shown in Attachment 4, extensive public outreach was conducted with neighborhood
groups, the Downtown Association, mobile food industry representatives, and other
organizations.
General Safety Regulations
The City may regulate mobile food vendors to protect health and safety, but it cannot prohibit
their operation. Vehicle Code §22455 limits a local authority in adopting additional requirements
for mobile vendors to address specific health and safety issues. The proposed ordinance has
relatively few specific locational criteria (compared to other cities) based on the requirement for
a health and safety nexus and the two court cases cited above. Nevertheless, the draft ordinance
contains ten health and safety findings to support the proposed ordinance.
Specific Criteria
The following summarizes the proposed primary locational/operational standards based on
public input, best practices, and legal constraints. As proposed in the Draft Ordinance, mobile
food vending would be prohibited (Ordinance Section 5.16.040):
1. Within a posted elementary or middle school zone during school ;
2. When the vehicle is parked in violation of any other provision of the Code or the California
Vehicle Code;
3. Within any marked commercial zone;
4. When any part of the vending vehicle is open to prospective customers adjacent to or
accessible from travel lanes of the street, alley, or highway;
5. When the vending vehicle is not legally stopped, parked or conducting business on the right
side of the street, alley or highway;
6. When the prospective customer is standing or sitting in another vehicle;
PH1 - 4
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 5
7. When the prospective customer is located in that portion of the street, alley, or highway
which is open to vehicular traffic;
8. Within the boundaries set forth in Municipal Code Section 12.36.020 (Downtown Parking
and Business Improvement Area), unless the vendor has complied with section 12.36.030;
9. Within any residential zone, between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.;
10. When the posted speed limit on the public street, alley, or highway is greater than 35 mph;
11. Unless otherwise permitted, within specified distances from intersections, midblock
pedestrian crossing, driveways, or transit stops depending on roadway speed limit;
12. On any public sidewalk or pathway.
Additional requirements under Section 5.16.040 include:
• No person shall back a vending vehicle to make or attempt to make a sale;
• No vending vehicle shall be operated in any one (1) location for longer than the posted
parking time limit;
• Vending is not allowed out of the front, rear, or traffic side of the vehicle; table and
chairs are not allowed on the sidewalk or street right-of-way;
• Lighting, noise, and trash pick-up requirements.
The proposed standards all address health and safety issues and are in compliance with State law
and cases limiting local government authority. Mobile vending has the potential to pose special
dangers to health and safety, including negative impacts on community character, and traffic.
The City has a substantial public interest to provide regulations to prevent health and safety
hazards.
The operations of mobile food vendors within posted school zones could jeopardize the health
and safety of young students and children. Attracting young people off campus could pose a
safety hazard to unsupervised children running across the street to a mobile food truck. At
certain times of the school day, particularly morning drop-off/arrival and afternoon pick-
up/departure, mobile vendors could add to the congestion and traffic hazards around school
zones when school is in session.
Prohibiting mobile vendors in residential zones between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is consistent
with the City’s Noise Ordinance and respects the character of residential neighborhoods.
Interjecting commercial enterprises, such as mobile vendors, into residential zones late at night
could jeopardize the public health, safety, and welfare with their attendant noise and crowds.
Furthermore, mobile vendors are not feasible in higher density areas with limited overnight
parking for residents or in parking permit districts.
Finally, the new ordinance repeals a requirement that a door to door solicitor obtain a permit.
The current section 5.16.070 is inconsistent with Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, Inc. v.
Village of Stratton (2002) 536 U.S. 150, which struck down a law requiring registration and
issuance of a ministerial permit as a prior condition for all door to door canvassing and
solicitation as being overbroad.
PH1 - 5
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 6
Implementation and Enforcement
The Police Department (PD) will be implementing and enforcing the ordinance upon its
adoption. The permit fee and process for mobile vendors will be similar in nature to how the
Department processes Massage Parlor and taxi operator permits. This process includes a
thorough review of the applicant and screening criteria that would allow for rejection of the
applicant if they had issues in their driving history or criminal background. All Ordinance
requirements will be included in the permit.
CONCLUSION
The City’s mobile vendor regulations are updated to address the increasing popularity of mobile
food vendors, ensure a safe environment for the public, and bring the City’s regulations into
compliance with state law as interpreted by published cases. Although the City cannot prohibit
mobile food vendors, regulations may be enacted to maintain the health and safety of the
community. The proposed regulations balance the need to adequately protect health and safety
and to be in compliance with State law. Public outreach efforts included the downtown business
owners, mobile food vendor operators, and residential neighborhoods. All three groups have
some concerns about the proposed ordinance. A one-year review of the ordinance is
recommended to address any unanticipated problems that might occur with the operation of
mobile vendors This is common City practice, particularly when developing new regulations in
response to new industry and evolving case law. Staff will return with an update within one year
of the proposed ordinance taking effect.
CONCURRENCES
The Public Works and Police Departments have been a part of the City project team and concur
with the recommendations. The City Attorney’s Office has been involved since the initial contact
with the attorney in 2010 and has reviewed the draft ordinance as to form and legality.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under the General Rule
(Section 15061(b)(3) and Categorical Exemption Section 15301(c). There is no possibility that
the activities in question could have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed
mobile vendor regulations address the hours, location, and operations of food trucks currently
allowed on existing City streets and have no impact on the physical environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no anticipated fiscal impacts. Fees generated from permit revenue are likely to be less
than $1,000 per year.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional
information or policy modifications required.
PH1 - 6
Council Agenda Report – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations (TA 62-12)
November 19, 2013 Page 7
2. Do not approve the proposed amendments and maintain the existing ordinance. This is not
recommended because the existing ordinance is inadequate, inconsistent with state and case
law.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Attachment 1 - Chapter 5.16 (Existing Ordinance).pdf
2. Attachment 2 - Chapter 10.36 (Existing Ordinance).pdf
3. Attachment 3 - Prohibited Locations Map.pdf
4. Attachment 4 - Public Outreach Program.docx
5.Attachment 5- Draft Ordinance Mobile Vendors Ordinance- 2013-07-16 (Johnson-
Davidson).docx
T:\Council Agenda Reports\2013\2013-07-16\Mobile Vendors Ordinance (Johnson-Davidson)
PH1 - 7
San Luis Obispo, California
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/[6/6/2013 4:00:45 PM]
Print DocBookmark Text Size: -A +A Show TOC
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Attachment 1 - Chapter 5.16
SOLICITORS AND PEDDLERS
Sections:
5.16.010 Permit—Required.
5.16.020 Petition for permit—Contents.
5.16.030 Permit—Determination.
5.16.040 Permit—Revocation.
5.16.050 Fee for license and permit.
5.16.060 Exceptions.
5.16.070 Entering upon private residential property without invitation.
5.16.080 Criminal conduct—Ineligibility for city licenses and permits.
5.16.010 Permit—Required.
No person shall stand or maintain any cart, wagon, automobile or other vehicle on or in the public streets of the city for the purpose of selling or
offering for sale from or in the cart, wagon, automobile or other vehicle any peanuts, popcorn, candy, soft drinks, ice cream, sandwiches, cigars,
cigarettes, tobacco or other goods, wares and merchandise, except upon permit from the council. (Prior code § 6220)
5.16.020 Petition for permit—Contents.
Whenever any person desires to stand or maintain any such wagon, cart, automobile or other vehicle for such purpose, the person shall petition
the council for a permit, which petition shall set forth the name of the person desiring such permit, the character of the business to be
conducted, the exact location where and the hours during which it is proposed to stand and maintain such cart, wagon, automobile or other
vehicle. (Prior code § 6220.1)
5.16.030 Permit—Determination.
Permit application shall be referred to the chief of police for investigation and report to the licensing authority pursuant to Section 5.16.080. (Ord.
1202 §§ 9, 10, 1991: prior code, § 6220.2)
5.16.040 Permit—Revocation.
The council may, at its discretion and at any time, revoke any and all permits theretofore granted by written notice to the holder of such permit.
(Prior code § 6220.3)
5.16.050 Fee for license and permit.
Application for a license or permit shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable fee as established by the council. The fee shall be in an amount
sufficient fully to defray administrative cost incurred in the processing of an application, and shall not be in lieu of other fees or taxes, including
business taxes, required by this code. (Ord. 1202 § 12, 1991)
Prior to its repeal by § 11 of Ord. 1202, § 5.16.050 was entitled “Permit holders not exempt from license fees” and was derived from prior code,
§ 6220.4.
5.16.060 Exceptions.
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to peddlers who travel along the streets of the city and who do not allow such cart, wagon,
automobile or other vehicle to stand for a longer period than actually necessary to complete a sale. (Prior code § 6220.5)
5.16.070 Entering upon private residential property without invitation.
A. No solicitor, peddler, hawker, itinerant merchant, transient vendor, or any other person shall enter in or upon private residential property or
premises in the city without invitation or authorization of the occupant, or the occupants, of such residential premises for the purpose of soliciting
orders for any and all types of real or personal property or for any type of services or disposing of or peddling or hawking the same, except
upon permit from the council or the council’s designee.
B. “Private residential premises” means any premises in the city whereupon a person is residing or living, including but not limited to any private
residence, hotel, motel, boardinghouse, roominghouse, apartment or multiple-residential dwelling. (Ord. 1215 § 1, 1992; Reso. 8033, 1992; Ord.
1202 § 14, 1991: prior code, § 4220.11)
5.16.080 Criminal conduct—Ineligibility for city licenses and permits.
The provisions of Section 5.08.030 shall be applicable to this chapter. (Ord. 1202 § 15, 1991)
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1589, passed May
7, 2013.
Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the
ordinance cited above.
City Website: http://www.slocity.org/
City Telephone: (805) 781-7103
Code Publishing Company
eLibrary
PH1 - 8
San Luis Obispo, California
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/[6/6/2013 3:57:08 PM]
Print DocBookmark Text Size: -A +A Show TOC
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
Attachment 2 - Chapter 10.36
STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES OR IN CERTAIN PLACES
Sections:
10.36.010 Applicability of provisions—Temporary alteration of parking controls and regulations by traffic engineer.
10.36.020 Stopping or standing in parkways prohibited.
10.36.030 Maintenance of no stopping and no parking zones—Traffic engineer’s duty—Compliance with markings required.
10.36.040 No parking areas.
10.36.050 Storage of vehicles upon streets prohibited.
10.36.060 Repealed.
10.36.070 Repairing or greasing vehicles on public streets prohibited—Exception.
10.36.080 Washing or polishing vehicles on public streets.
10.36.090 Parking adjacent to schools.
10.36.100 Parking prohibited on narrow streets.
10.36.110 Parking on grades.
10.36.120 Peddlers, vendors—Unlawful parking.
10.36.130 Emergency parking signs.
10.36.140 Parking of large or commercial vehicles near intersections.
10.36.150 Nighttime parking of large vehicles.
10.36.160 Nighttime parking of vehicles with operating air-conditioning or refrigeration units.
10.36.170 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Adoption of resolution.
10.36.180 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Content of resolution.
10.36.190 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Sign posting.
10.36.200 Limitations on parking in a residential permit parking area.
10.36.210 Reserved.
10.36.220 Residential parking permit—Issuance.
10.36.221 Lost, stolen, or defaced permit replacement.
10.36.230 Residential parking permits—Display required.
10.36.232 Enforcement.
10.36.233 Repealed.
10.36.235 Restricted parking in certain city parking lots.
10.36.240 Violation—Penalty.
10.36.010 Applicability of provisions—Temporary alteration of parking controls and regulations by traffic engineer.
A. The provisions of this chapter prohibiting the stopping, standing or parking of a vehicle shall apply at all times or at those times as specified in
this chapter, except when it is necessary to stop a vehicle to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer
or official traffic-control device.
B. The provisions of this chapter imposing a time limit on standing or parking shall not relieve any person from the duty to observe other and
more restrictive provisions of the Vehicle Code or the ordinances of this city prohibiting or limiting the standing or parking of vehicles in specified
places or at specified times.
C. The city traffic engineer or his or her designated alternate may, at his or her discretion, set aside, suspend or relocate parking controls and
regulations on a temporary basis when it is found to be in the public interest or required for traffic safety. Before any such temporary change
may become effective, the city traffic engineer shall receive the police department’s approval for the change and have the change posted. (Prior
code § 3209)
10.36.020 Stopping or standing in parkways prohibited.
No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle within any parkway. (Prior code § 3209.1)
10.36.030 Maintenance of no stopping and no parking zones—Traffic engineer’s duty—Compliance with markings
required.
A. The city traffic engineer is authorized to maintain, by appropriate signs or by paint upon the curb surface, all no stopping zones, no parking
areas, and restricted parking areas, as defined and described in this chapter.
B. When the curb markings or signs are in place, no operator of any vehicle shall stop, stand or park such vehicle adjacent to any such legible
curb marking or sign in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter. (Prior code § 3209.2)
10.36.040 No parking areas.
No operator of any vehicle shall stop, stand, park or leave standing such vehicle in any of the following places, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the direction of a police officer or other authorized officer, or traffic sign or signal:
A. Within any divisional island, unless authorized and clearly indicated with appropriate signs or markings;
B. On either side of any street between the projected property lines of any public walk, public steps, street, or thoroughfare terminating at such
PH1 - 9
San Luis Obispo, California
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/[6/6/2013 3:57:08 PM]
street when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface;
C. In any area where the city traffic engineer determines that the parking or stopping of a vehicle would constitute a traffic hazard or would
endanger life or property, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface;
D. In any area established by resolution of the council as a no parking area, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint
upon the curb surface;
E. Upon, along or across any railway track in such manner as to hinder, delay or obstruct the movement of any car traveling upon such track;
F. In any area where the parking or stopping of any vehicle would constitute a traffic hazard or would endanger life or property;
G. On any street or highway where the use of such street or highway or a portion thereof is necessary for the cleaning, repair or construction of
the street or highway or the installation of underground utilities or where the use of the street or highway or any portion thereof is authorized for
a purpose other than the normal flow of traffic or where the use of the street or highway or any portion thereof is necessary for the movement of
equipment, articles or structures of unusual size, and the parking of such vehicle would prohibit or interfere with such use or movement;
provided, that signs giving notice of such no parking are erected or placed at least twenty-four hours prior to the effective time of such no
parking;
H. At any place within twenty feet of a point on the curb immediately opposite the midblock end of a safety zone, when such place is indicated
by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface;
I. At any place within fifteen feet of a crosswalk at an intersection when such place is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the
curb surface, except that a bus may stop at a designated bus stop;
J. Within fifteen feet of the approach to any traffic signal, boulevard stop sign, or official electric flashing device. (Prior code § 3209.3)
10.36.050 Storage of vehicles upon streets prohibited.
No person who owns or has possession, custody or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle upon any street or alley for more than a
consecutive period of seventy-two hours. (Prior code § 3209.4)
10.36.060 Parking for demonstration prohibited.
Repealed by Ord. 1484 . (Prior code § 3209.5)
10.36.070 Repairing or greasing vehicles on public streets prohibited—Exception.
No person shall construct or cause to be constructed, repair or cause to be repaired, grease or cause to be greased any vehicle or any part
thereof upon any public street in this city. Temporary emergency repairs may be made upon a public street. (Prior code § 3209.6)
10.36.080 Washing or polishing vehicles on public streets.
No person shall wash or cause to be washed, polish or cause to be polished any vehicle or any part thereof upon any street in this city, when a
charge is made for such service. (Prior code § 3209.7)
10.36.090 Parking adjacent to schools.
A. The city traffic engineer is authorized to erect signs indicating no parking upon that side of any street adjacent to any school property when
such parking would, in his or her opinion, interfere with traffic or create a hazardous situation.
B. When official signs are erected prohibiting parking upon that side of a street adjacent to any school property, no person shall park a vehicle in
any such designated place. (Prior code § 3209.8)
10.36.100 Parking prohibited on narrow streets.
A. The city traffic engineer is authorized to place signs or markings indicating no parking upon any street when the width of the roadway does
not exceed twenty feet, or upon one side of a street as indicated by such signs or markings when the width of the roadway does not exceed
thirty feet.
B. When official signs or markings prohibiting parking are erected upon narrow streets as authorized in this section, no person shall park a
vehicle upon any such street in violation of any such sign or marking. (Prior code § 3209.9)
10.36.110 Parking on grades.
No person shall park or leave standing any vehicle unattended on a highway when upon any grade exceeding three percent without blocking the
wheels of the vehicle by turning them against the curb or by other means. (Prior code § 3209.10)
10.36.120 Peddlers, vendors—Unlawful parking.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this section, no person shall stand or park any vehicle, wagon or pushcart from which goods, wares,
merchandise, fruits, vegetables or foodstuffs are sold, displayed, solicited or offered for sale or bartered or exchanged, or any lunchwagon or
eating cart or vehicle, on any portion of any street within this city, except that such vehicles, wagons or pushcarts may stand or park only at the
request of a bona fide purchaser for a period of time not to exceed ten minutes at any one place. The provisions of this subsection shall not
apply to nonprofit organizations who have obtained prior approval of the council.
B. No person shall park or stand on any street any lunchwagon, eating cart or vehicle, or pushcart from which tamales, peanuts, popcorn, candy
or other articles of food are sold or offered for sale. (Prior code § 3209.11)
10.36.130 Emergency parking signs.
A. Whenever the chief of police shall determine that an emergency traffic congestion is likely to result from the holding of public or private
assemblages, gatherings or functions, or for other reasons, the chief of police shall have power and authority to order temporary signs to be
erected or posted indicating that the operation, parking or standing of vehicles is prohibited on such streets and alleys as the chief of police shall
direct during the time such temporary signs are in place. Such signs shall remain in place only during the existence of such emergency and the
chief of police shall cause such signs to be removed promptly thereafter.
PH1 - 10
San Luis Obispo, California
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/[6/6/2013 3:57:08 PM]
B. When signs authorized by the provisions of this section are in place giving notice thereof, no person shall operate, park or stand any vehicle
contrary to the directions and provisions of such signs. (Prior code § 3209.12)
10.36.140 Parking of large or commercial vehicles near intersections.
No person shall park any vehicle greater than six feet in height, including any load thereon, within one hundred feet of any intersection at any
time. This section shall not apply to any particular intersection until signs or markings giving adequate notice thereof have been placed as
determined appropriate by the city engineer. (Ord. 1062 § 1, 1986: prior code § 3209.14)
10.36.150 Nighttime parking of large vehicles.
Between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m., it is unlawful to park or leave standing upon any public right-of-way within two hundred feet of
any dwelling, any vehicle exceeding (1) twenty feet in length, or (2) six thousand pounds unladen weight, except trailer coaches, housecars,
campers or motorhomes. (Prior code § 3209.15)
10.36.160 Nighttime parking of vehicles with operating air-conditioning or refrigeration units.
Between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m., no person shall park or leave standing on any street or public right-of-way any vehicle, except a
passenger vehicle, with an operating refrigeration or other unit to cool, heat, humidify, or otherwise air-condition the cargo area, except for
locations at least two hundred feet distant from the nearest dwelling. (Prior code § 3209.16)
10.36.170 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Adoption of resolution.
A. The council should, by resolution, designate an area of the city as a residential parking permit area if the council finds that:
1. The area is predominantly residential;
2. The streets in the area are congested with vehicles parked by persons not residing in the area and the designation is supported by a
majority of the affected households as indicated by a city survey of the affected households in which a sixty percent majority of participating
households is required; or
3. Limiting the parking of vehicles along the streets in the area to vehicles registered or controlled and exclusively used by persons residing
in the area is necessary in order to preserve the character of the existing neighborhood as defined in resident petition and approved by a
sixty percent majority of households in the area. Households will be determined using the city’s address database (there may be more than
one household per parcel) and will be limited to non-multifamily units of less than five dwelling units.
B. In determining whether limiting the parking of vehicles along the streets in the area to vehicles registered to or controlled and used exclusively
by persons residing in the area is necessary in order to preserve the character of the existing neighborhood for the persons residing in the area,
the council shall consider the negative effect of vehicles parked by persons not residing in the area on:
1. Environmental characteristics such as ambient noise levels and air pollution levels;
2. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety in the area; and
3. The burden on persons residing in the area gaining access to their residences.
C. The council may, by resolution, designate an area of the city as a residential parking permit area after holding a public hearing and making a
finding that the establishment of the district represents the desire of a majority of the households of the area. The hearing on any such resolution
should only be held after the council receives a request, in a form acceptable to the council. (Ord. 1454 § 1, 2004: Ord. 1412 § 2 (part), 2002;
Ord. 1264 § 1, 1994: prior code § 3209.17)
10.36.180 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Content of resolution.
The resolution designating an area of the city as a residential permit parking area shall describe the designated area in which parking will be
limited to vehicles displaying a parking permit issued by the public works department for that purpose and shall set forth the hours and days, as
specified by a sixty percent majority of the households in the district, when parking will be limited to those vehicles. (Ord. 1454 § 2, 2004: Ord.
1412 § 2 (part), 2002: Ord. 1264 § 2, 1994: prior code § 3209.18)
10.36.190 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Sign posting.
Upon adoption of a resolution by the council designating an area of the city as a residential parking permit area, the city traffic engineer shall
cause appropriate signs to be erected along the streets identified in the resolution which shall give notice of the limitation on the parking of
vehicles in the area as provided in Section 10.36.170 , and shall indicate the hours and days when such limitations shall be in effect. (Prior code
§ 3209.19)
10.36.200 Limitations on parking in a residential permit parking area.
It is unlawful for any person to stop, stand, or park a vehicle on any street identified in a resolution adopted by the council designating a
residential permit parking area during the hours and on the days set forth in such resolution except:
A. Those vehicles described in Section 10.36.180 displaying a valid permit issued as provided for by Section 10.36.220 and parked within the
street block in front of the household to which the permit is issued or within one adjoining district block; or
B. Any emergency vehicle, including, but not limited to, an ambulance, fire engine, or police vehicle; or
C. A vehicle with commercial plates which is under the control of a person, who does not reside within the district, providing service for hire to
property located in the designated residential permit parking area, including but not limited to a delivery vehicle; or
D. District residents wishing to sponsor special one-day events which will exceed the number of parking permits available may contact the city
parking manager and request a temporary, special-event exemption to the residential permit requirement. If the temporary exemption is granted
by the parking manager, all vehicles which have as their destination a qualified residential permit address, shall display in clear view on the
dashboard, written confirmation of the street address and date and time of the event. Further, special events shall be deemed infrequent
occurrences and any regular requests for parking permit exemption will not be authorized. This section shall not be interpreted to allow the daily
parking of vehicles. Any vehicle not displaying the proper or authorized identification shall be subject to citation. (Ord. 1454 § 3, 2004: Ord. 1264
PH1 - 11
San Luis Obispo, California
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/[6/6/2013 3:57:08 PM]
§ 3, 1994: prior code § 3209.20)
10.36.210 Reserved.
*Ord. 1264, adopted June 7, 1994, repealed former § 10.36.210, relative to fee for residential parking permit application, which derived from prior code
§ 3209.22.
10.36.220 Residential parking permit—Issuance.
Annually, the director of public works shall issue two residential parking permits to the registered property owner, or the registered property
owner’s representative, as authorized in writing, of each property shown with a unique number on the latest county of San Luis Obispo
assessment roll within each residential parking permit area established by resolution as set forth in Section 10.36.180 . Qualified households that
have multiple, separate dwelling units shall be eligible for additional permits, providing the total number of permits issued to one parcel does not
exceed twice the number of residential dwelling units on the parcel. All parking permits may be picked up in person at the office of the city
parking manager or will be mailed to the address of the property on written request of the property owner.
Parking permits may be transferred by the residents to any vehicle that is to be parked on the street and will be recognized by the city, providing
they are displayed clearly. The parking permits shall be issued annually. Fees for residential parking permits shall be established by city council
resolution. The permits shall be considered part of the residential property and shall be transferred to the new property owner upon sale of the
residence. (Ord. 1565 § 1, 2011: Ord. 1454 § 4, 2004: Ord. 1264 § 4, 1994: prior code § 3209.21)
10.36.221 Lost, stolen, or defaced permit replacement.
Any permit lost, stolen, defaced or otherwise altered shall be deemed invalid and a replacement permit shall be issued to the qualified property
owner for a fee of fifteen dollars. If the replacement permit is again lost, stolen, or defaced, a replacement permit will be issued for a fee of
twenty-five dollars. No additional replacement permits shall be issued within a twelve-month period. All permits shall be picked up by the property
owner or a representative authorized in writing by the registered property owner, with proof of identification, at the office of the city parking
manager. The property owner or a representative authorized in writing by the owner shall certify that the original permit was lost, stolen, or in the
case of damaged permits shall submit the damaged permit, stating the permit shall be used by qualified residents and their bona fide visitors.
Any resident and/or property owner found to misrepresent themselves for the purposes of fraudulently obtaining residential parking permits shall
lose their right to said permits and no permits will be issued to the household until the beginning of the next permit year and shall be guilty of an
infraction. (Ord. 1454 § 5, 2004: Ord. 1264 § 5, 1994)
10.36.230 Residential parking permits—Display required.
Parking permits issued under Section 10.36.220 shall be displayed on a vehicle in a manner prescribed by the director of public works. The
method of display shall be clearly stated on the rear of the permit. (Ord. 1264 § 6, 1994: prior code § 3209.23)
10.36.232 Enforcement.
Enforcement of the residential parking permit district shall be on a regular and routine basis, and may be on a complaint basis by residents within
the district boundaries. Enforcement personnel shall be dispatched on an as-available basis as determined by the city parking manager/police
department. All parking citations issued for noncompliance with the parking permit requirement shall be governed by the civil proceedings set
forth in the California Vehicle Code. (Ord. 1412 § 2 (part), 2002: Ord. 1264 § 7, 1994)
10.36.233 Parking in yard.
Repealed by Ord. 1579. (Ord. 1264 § 8, 1994)
10.36.235 Restricted parking in certain city parking lots.
No person shall stop, stand, park or leave standing a motor vehicle in any city parking lot where vehicular parking has been restricted by a
resolution adopted by the council; provided, that signs specifying the restrictions, or conditions under which parking is permitted, shall have been
posted at all entrances to such property. Such signs shall be approved both as to wording and posting by the chief of police. (Prior code
§ 4220.10)
10.36.240 Violation—Penalty.
Every person convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine for each separate offense as provided in
Section 10.64.030 . (Prior code § 3209.99)
The San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1589, passed May
7, 2013.
Disclaimer: The City Clerk's Office has the official version of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code. Users should contact the City Clerk's Office for ordinances passed subsequent to the
ordinance cited above.
City Website: http://www.slocity.org/
City Telephone: (805) 781-7103
Code Publishing Company
eLibrary
PH1 - 12
Br
o
a
d
N.SantaRosa
Santa
Rosa
California
Higuera
W e st Foothill
Foothill
SouthHiguera
Tank Farm
LosOsosValley
Grand
Johnson
M onterey
M arsh
N
.
C
h
o
r
r
o
Highland
Orcutt
M a d o n n a
µ
0 1 2 3 40.5 Miles
Legend
Speed Limits Over 35 mph
School Zones
Commercial Loading Zone in Downtown
Higuera
Broad
Santa
Rosa
M arsh
Johnson
M onterey
Pis m o
Cho
r
ro
Palm Osos
M ill
Toro
M
orro
BuchonMontere
y Pacific
Garden
Broad
Nipo
m
o Osos
Railr
o
a
d
Li
n
c
o
l
n
Peach
Pepper
Attachment 3
PH1 - 13
Attachment 4 – E-CAR Mobile Vendor Ordinance: Public Outreach Program
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Community Development staff conducted an extensive outreach program as summarized in the
following table:
All of groups provided valuable input and had valid concerns relative to the limitations that
preempt the full regulatory discretion that some groups had desired. To the extent permissible,
suggestions from the groups were specifically included in the proposed ordinance.
Common concerns from both the downtown and residential neighborhood groups were lighting,
trash, and noise generation from food trucks. These concerns are addressed in the proposed
ordinance under section 5.16.040.
There was significant discussion about the potential for food trucks to congregate in one place
instead of spread throughout the City. Some cities throughout the country, most notably
Portland, Or. have become well known for their food truck courts. These groups of food trucks
take place on private property, or on public property. These are typically permitted through a use
permit on private property. The proposed ordinance addresses the public-right-of-way. The
City’s Municipal Code requires a use permit for private property or a special event permit for
City property.
One recommendation was to provide a map to clearly show where food trucks could not park. A
map has been provided in Attachment 3 and depicts the school zones, streets with posted speed
limits of greater than 35 mph, and commercial loading zones in the downtown.
Mobile Food Truck Operators
Staff reviewed and discussed the draft Ordinance with five local mobile food vendors:
Konfusion, Tio Alberto’s, Pacifica, Haute Skillet, and Porter’s. For the most part, these vendors
do not sell on the public streets, but set up on private property and/or special events. The vendors
Public Outreach Efforts – Mobile Food Vendor Regulations
Resident and Stakeholder Groups Date
Old Town/Downtown Workshop at Senior Center April 5, 2012
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) Board August 15, 2012
Downtown Association Economic Activities Committee August 16, 2012
Save Our Downtown August 29, 2012
San Luis Coastal Unified School District August, 2012
Neighborhood Services Team Meeting September 6, 2012
Food, Beverage, and Services Committee (formerly SNL) November 6, 2012
RQN Board November 14, 2012
Downtown Association Board December 11, 2012
Kevin Behrendt, Attorney at Law March-May, 2013
Mobile Food Vendors (5) March-May, 2013
Food, Beverage, and Services Committee July 9, 2013
PH1 - 14
Attachment 4 – E-CAR Mobile Vendor Ordinance: Public Outreach Program
stated that it was virtually impossible to locate on downtown streets due to the traffic congestion,
street width, and lack of available parking. (The only vendor of those contacted who sets up on
City streets downtown is Tio Alberto’s who locates regularly near the corner of Marsh and Santa
Rosa.)
They believe that the only feasible way to locate downtown is in conjunction with special events,
such as Farmers Market. The main concern of the local vendors was that even though they are
not particularly affected, they worry about over-regulation of food trucks and the possible
roadblocks to small business offering this form of meal service. Staff reiterated with the vendors
that the proposed regulations would not affect private property or special events and only pertain
to the street right-of-way.
Kevin Behrendt, Attorney at Law
Kevin Behrendt, Attorney at Law, from Los Angeles contacted the City Attorney’s office in fall,
2010 to discuss the City’s mobile food vendor regulations. He expressed concerns about the
legality of the City’s ordinance and its impact on his client. It was these initial contacts with Mr.
Behrendt that caused the City to review the City’s existing ordinance in light of new case law.
Mr. Behrendt has represented food truck operators in Southern California and agreed to review
the proposed ordinance.
The leitmotif of the attorney’s comments was to provide evidence that the proposed regulations
are necessary to protect public safety. He expressed legal reservations about the validity of
health and safety issues associated with requiring 300 feet between food trucks, 100 feet from
intersections/crosswalks, 35 mph posted speed limit, and time limits. Based on this input and
further research into state law, staff expanded the required health and safety findings and
eliminated some requirements where a public safety nexus was difficult to establish. These
include regulating specific distance minimums from parks, schools, and other mobile vendors.
Although many cities contain these types of regulations, staff could not identify any valid health
and safety findings to support making limiting operations in this manner.
Neighborhood Concerns
Staff met with the RQN Board early in the process and followed up in November, 2012 as the
proposed ordinance was taking on a draft form. Workshops were hosted for Old Town and
Downtown residents at the Senior Center. A Neighborhood Services Team Meeting also
dedicated time to reviewing the proposed ordinance. In addition to the general concerns noted
above, the main request from the neighborhood groups was to prohibit them in all residential
zones as an inappropriate commercial activity.
Staff cited the Barajas case where it was ruled that a city cannot prohibit mobile vendors on
public streets in residential areas. Vehicle Code §22455 specifically authorizes vendors in
residential zones, but allows restricting the time, place, and manner of operation. The proposed
ordinance includes a time limit on mobile vending in residential areas (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
which is consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance. An earlier draft of the ordinance proposed
a 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. restriction based on the City’s construction time limits; the City’s Noise
Ordinance is a provides a better health and safety nexus to this specific regulation.
PH1 - 15
Attachment 4 – E-CAR Mobile Vendor Ordinance: Public Outreach Program
RQN also expressed concerns about the prohibition on mobile vendors on streets with speed
limits 35 mph or greater and the potential to push more mobile vending into residential
neighborhoods. The potential for this is minimized by the recommended restrictions on vendors
operating within prescribed distances of driveways and on public sidewalks and pathways for the
purposes of safety and ADA access. Given the typical density of driveways in residential areas,
the recommended regulations should actually reduce the volume of mobile food vending in
residential neighborhoods.
Save Our Downtown
Save Our Downtown (SOD) was concerned about the possibility of mobile food trucks on
Higuera Street and their impact on downtown restaurants. They also suggested that an area be
designated for mobile food trucks to locate as opposed to spreading them out through town on
the streets. A one-year review was suggested to see how effective the ordinance addresses those
concerns.
SOD believed that a requirement to move a vending vehicle every 30 minutes would contribute
to more traffic and congestion as trucks circle around looking for a parking spot. The standard to
move a vehicle a defined distance within a certain time frame was removed from proposed
ordinance based on public input and further analysis. Nonetheless, posted time limits for parking
spaces must be observed for all mobile vendors.
Another citizen encouraged looking at the Portland model, establishing a buffer between
restaurants and food truck, and protecting school zones. Staff did not evaluate this regulatory
model since it is in another state with a different set of statutes governing the regulatory authority
of cities to regulate the time, place, and manner of vehicles.
Downtown Restaurant Concerns (Food, Beverage, and Services Committee, formerly the Safe
Night Life Association, Downtown Association)
The Food, Beverages, and Services Committee of the Downtown Association was opposed to
allowing mobile food vendors downtown, especially without a minimum distance requirement
from an established restaurant. They believe that it is unfair to allow mobile food trucks to park
in front of their restaurants since they do not have the rent, maintenance, and operational costs
associated with “brick and mortar” restaurants.
As noted above, in People v. Ala Carte Catering Co. the State Appeals Court struck down the
City of Los Angeles’s Ordinance prohibiting mobile vendors from selling within 100 feet of an
established restaurant, finding it was an impermissible regulation on commerce and not a matter
of public health and safety. Local governments cannot regulate commerce and hence
competition as it is not a public health and safety issue. This case was cited to the Committee
and the Downtown Association Board as the primary reason that mobile food vendors are not
being restricted relative to existing brick and mortar style restaurants.
The Committee also suggested amending City parking rules to disallow large vehicles from
using more than one parking space in the downtown. The intent would be that it would
essentially regulate mobile food trucks as they would not likely fit within a single parking space.
PH1 - 16
Attachment 4 – E-CAR Mobile Vendor Ordinance: Public Outreach Program
City Ordinance 1076 does not prohibit the parking of larger vehicles that take up more than one
space on City streets. The larger vehicle is required to pay for both parking meters.
The Downtown Association was concerned that mobile food trucks would not pay the downtown
assessment since their fixed place of business is not in the downtown. However, section
5.16.040.A.8 requires the mobile vendor to pay the downtown assessment if they intend to sell
within the Downtown Business Improvement District (D-BID) boundaries. For vendors who
intend to sell within the downtown boundaries, they would pay the business tax and obtain a
business license and would be subject to the, the downtown assessment. The vendors would pay
the downtown assessment fees based on the receipts related to business transacted in the
downtown area.
School District
The School District Director of Food Service acknowledged that they have a hard time
competing with outside food sources and the potential loss of revenue for the school lunch
program. The high school is an open campus (except for freshmen) and the students tend to stick
close to campus given the limited lunch time.
PH1 - 17
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
1
ORDINANCE NO._______ (2013 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO AMENDING MOBILE VENDORS REGULATIONS
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (TA 62-12)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on November 19, 2013, for the purpose of considering amendments to the
Municipal Code (TA 62-12); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendments are
consistent with the General Plan, the purposes of the Municipal Code, and other applicable
City ordinances; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the
manner required by law; and
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The project is exempt from
environmental review per CEQA Guidelines under the General Rule (Section
15061(b)(3)) and Categorical Exemption Section 15301(c). The project involves updates
and revisions to existing mobile vending regulations, as well as establishing a permit
process and fee. The proposed Code Amendments are consistent with case law, State of
California Vehicle Code and local policies and codes. It can be seen with certainty that
the proposed Municipal Code text amendments will have no significant effect on the
environment because the amendments are to an existing City Ordinance that only
regulates mobile vending vehicles in the public right-of-way in compliance with the
Vehicle Code.
SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the
following findings:
1. California Vehicle Code Section 22455 allows municipalities to regulate mobile
food vending in order to protect public safety.
2. Mobile vending has the potential to pose special dangers to the public health,
safety and welfare of residents of the City, including negative impacts on
community character, public safety, and traffic. The City has a substantial public
interest to provide regulations to prevent safety and health hazards and to preserve
the public health, safety, and welfare.
PH1 - 18
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
2
3. The primary purpose of the public streets and right-of-way is to facilitate the free
passage of vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.
4. The act of looking for prospective buyers while operating a vending vehicle makes
the operator less attentive to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Mobile vendors
operating on public roadways, particularly in areas with high volumes of
pedestrians, increases the potential for traffic accidents with vehicles and
pedestrians as the trucks maneuver for position.
5. The City is the hub of the County for employment, tourism, services, and
entertainment. Consequently, a large number of nonresidents come into the City
every day to work or recreate, contributing further to the population and traffic
congestion of vehicles and pedestrians.
5. Mobile vendors conducting business in the public right-of-way present a potential
hazard to vehicles, pedestrians, and other mobile vendors and their customers. The
operations of mobile vendors in the public right-of-way should be regulated,
particularly near intersections, driveways, and transit stops based on the posted
speed limit of the street.
6. The operations of mobile food vendors within posted school zones during school
hours could jeopardize the health and safety of young students and children.
Attracting young people off campus could pose a safety hazard to unsupervised
children running across the street to a mobile food truck. At certain times of the
school day, particularly morning drop-off/arrival and afternoon pick-up/departure,
mobile vendors could add to the congestion and traffic hazards around school
zones.
7. Prohibiting mobile vendors in residential zones between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
is consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance and respects the character of
residential neighborhoods. Interjecting customer serving commercial enterprises,
such as mobile vendors, into residential zones late at night could jeopardize the
public health, safety, and welfare with their attendant noise and crowds.
Furthermore, mobile vendors are not feasible in higher density areas with limited
overnight parking for residents and in parking permit districts.
8. Mobile vendors conducting business in the public right-of-way may increase the
propensity for higher severity pedestrian collisions on higher speed roadways.
Pedestrian collision studies conducted as part of FHWA Publication #HRT-04-100
found that “sites with speed limits of 35mph and greater were associated with a
higher percentage of fatal and injury type accidents as compared to sites having
lower speed limits”. Because mobile vendors generate pedestrian activity in the
vicinity of the vehicle that may not be readily apparent to drivers, prohibiting
mobile food vendors on streets with a posted speed limit of greater than 35 miles
PH1 - 19
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
3
per hour will reduce the propensity for higher severity pedestrian collisions.
9. Mobile vendors conducting business in the public right-of-way present a potential
hazard when operating within close proximity to the following types of facilities;
intersections, midblock pedestrian crossings, driveways, & bus stops by limiting
stopping sight distance & obstructing visibility of traffic control devices. The
California State Highway Design Manual Chapter 200, Table 201.1 establishes
stopping sight distances based on the design speed of the roadway. Establishing a
minimum distance from these facility types based on these standards or a vehicle
and/or location specific authorization or restriction based on an engineering survey
as part of the permit will serve to reduce the propensity for collisions associated
with visibility limitations or obstructions.
10. Allowing mobile vendors or non-motorized pushcarts to operate on public
sidewalks & pathways could reduce accessible routes below minimum widths as
established under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ancillary
standards & regulations.
SECTION 3. Chapter 5.16 (Solicitors and Peddlers) of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Municipal Code is hereby repealed and replaced to read as follows:
Chapter 5.16 Solicitors and Peddlers
5.16.010 Permit—Required.
Except as provided in Chapter 10.36.120, no person shall stand or maintain any cart,
wagon, automobile or other vehicle on or in the public streets of the city for the purpose of
selling or offering for sale from or in the cart, wagon, automobile or other vehicle any
peanuts, popcorn, candy, soft drinks, ice cream, sandwiches, or other food, goods, wares
and merchandise that are lawful under both federal and state law, except upon permit from
the Chief of Police. (Prior code § 6220)
5.16.020 Petition for permit—Contents.
A. Whenever any person desires to stand or maintain any such wagon, cart, automobile or
other vehicle for mobile vending purposes, the person shall submit an application for a
permit on the form prescribed by the Chief of Police. The application shall set forth the
name of the person desiring such permit, the character of the business to be conducted, the
general location where and the hours during which it is proposed to stand and maintain
such cart, wagon, automobile or other vehicle, and any other information sought by the
Chief of Police to determine compliance with this Chapter. (Prior code § 6220.1)
PH1 - 20
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
4
B. Neither the filing of any application for a permit, nor the payment of an application
fee, shall authorize the vending from or the operation or management of a vending cart,
wagon, automobile or other vehicle until such permit has been granted.
5.16.030 Permit—Determination.
A. The Chief of Police or his or her designated representative shall grant the permit only
if he or she finds that all of the following requirements have been met and that applicant
accepts his or her liability as set forth in subsection B:
1. The required fees have been paid;
2. The applicant has obtained all other applicable federal, state, county and
city permits or licenses, and is in good standing with the applicable issuing
authority.
3. To the extent that the applicant may vend on private property, the applicant
has obtained written permission of the private property owner and any
applicable land use permits;
4. The application conforms in all respect to the provisions of this article;
5. The applicant has not knowingly made a material misrepresentation of fact
in the application;
6. The applicant, if an individual, or any of the directors, officers or
stockholders holding more than five (5) percent of the stock of the
corporation, or any of the partners, including limited partners, or profit
interest holder, manager or other person principally in charge of the
operation of the existing or proposed business of vending from a vehicle, or
a natural person employed or contracted with to be a driver is not
disqualified from holding a city permit or license under Section 5.08.030;
and
7. If the applicant intends to vend or operate within the boundaries set forth in
Section 12.36.020 of this Code, the applicant has complied with section
12.36.030 of this Code
8. The goods and/or services the applicant proposes to offer or sell from the
vehicle are legal under both state and federal law.
B. Insurance and Indemnification Provisions
1. Each permittee is solely responsible for any damage or liability occurring
by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the permittee or his or
her agent, employee, servant or subcontractor, or in connection with any
work, authority or jurisdiction delegated under any permit issued as a result
of an application; and each permittee shall indemnify and hold harmless the
City, its officers, agents, employees or servants from any and all loss and
liability, including cost of defense and attorney fees, resulting from any
claims made by reason of or in connection with any work done under the
authority of or as a result of any permit issued under this chapter.
PH1 - 21
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
5
2. It shall be unlawful for any person to own, lease, drive, operate or cause or
permit to be driven or operated any food vending vehicle in the city for
vending purposes unless such person has submitted with his application for
permit a motor vehicle liability insurance policy, covering each food
vending vehicle, issued by a solvent corporation holding a certificate of
authority to do insurance business in the state, which policy shall conform
in all respects to the requirements of this chapter.
3. The required motor vehicle liability policy shall insure the owner, driver,
and any other person using or responsible for the use of any food vending
vehicle with the consent, expressed or implied, of such owner, driver or
person, against loss from the liability imposed upon such owner, driver or
person by law for injury to, or death of, any person, or damage to property
going out of the maintenance, operation or ownership of any food vending
vehicle, in an amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined
single limit, no aggregate.
4. Every insurance policy and every certificate of motor vehicle liability
insurance filed within the city pursuant to the provisions of this article shall
contain the following endorsements:
(1)
This policy shall inure to, and be for the benefit and protection of,
anyone who shall sustain any damages or injury, or to the heirs,
personal representatives, administrators, executors or assigns of any
such person who may be so damaged or injured or suffer death, by
reason of the operation of the motor vehicle or from the defective
condition thereof. Liability under this policy shall in no manner be
abrogated or abated by the death or dissolution of the feasor or the
insured.
(2)
There is continuing liability up to the full amount of the policy,
notwithstanding any action or recovery thereon.
(3)
No cancellation or reduction in coverage of this policy for any
reason whatsoever shall become effective until the expiration of
thirty (30) days after written notice of such cancellation or
reduction in coverage shall have been given to the chief of police.
Said period of thirty (30) days to commence running from the date
said notice is actually received in the office of the chief of police.
C. If the Chief of Police or his or her designated representative finds that all of the
requirements set forth in this Section have not been met, he or she shall deny the
application for a vendor's permit. In the event the application for the permit is denied by
the Chief of Police or his designated representative, written notice of such denial shall be
given to the applicant specifying the ground or grounds of such denial. Any applicant
PH1 - 22
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
6
whose application for a permit under this section has been denied may appeal such denial
to the City Council as provided by Chapter 1.20 of this Code.
5.16.040 Prohibited conduct.
A. No person shall vend from a vending vehicle which is stopped, parked or standing
on any public street, alley or highway:
1. Within a posted elementary or middle school zone during school hours;
2. When the vending vehicle is parked in violation of any other provision of
this Code or the California Vehicle Code;
3. Within any marked commercial loading zone;
4. When any part of the vending vehicle is open to prospective customers
other than on the side of the vehicle that is positioned opposite the adjoining travel
lanes of the street, alley or highway;
5. When the vending vehicle is not stopped, parked or standing on the right
side of the street, alley or highway;
6. When the prospective customer is standing or sitting in another vehicle;
7. When the prospective customer is located in that portion of the street, alley
or highway which is open to vehicular traffic;
8. Within the boundaries set forth in Section 12.36.020 of this Code unless the
vendor has complied with section 12.36.030 of this Code;
9. Within any residential zone, between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m.;
10. When the posted speed limit on the public street, alley, or highway is
greater than thirty-five (35) miles per hour;
11. Unless otherwise authorized or restricted as part of the permit, within a
distance as established in the table below from any of the following facilities:
intersections, midblock pedestrian crossings, driveways, or bus stops;
Roadway Speed Limit Distance from Facility
20 mph 125’
25 mph 150’
30 mph 200’
35 mph 250’
12. On any public sidewalk or pathway.
B. No person shall back a vending vehicle to make or attempt to make a sale.
C. No vending vehicle shall be operated in any one (1) location for longer than the
posted parking time limit.
D. Vending is prohibited out of the front, rear, or traffic side of the vehicle.
E. Tables and chairs are not allowed in the public right-of way.
F. Lighting shall comply with the California Vehicle Code and the City’s Municipal
Code (Section 17.23).
PH1 - 23
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
7
G. Except as required to insure the safe operation of the vending vehicle while being
operated on any public or private street, alley, or highway or public property, no person on
a vending vehicle shall operate any horns, sound amplification systems or other sound-
producing devices or music systems which can be heard outside of the vending vehicle
when such vehicle is moving, stopped, standing, or parked for purposes of advertisement
when such vehicle is being operated as a vending vehicle on any public or private street,
alley or highway or on public property.
H. All vending vehicles shall be equipped with solid waste containers large enough to
contain all solid waste generated by the operation of such vehicle, and the operator of the
vending vehicle shall pick up all solid waste generated by such operation within a fifty-
foot radius of the vehicle before such vehicle is moved.
I. Mobile vending on private property requires permission from the property owner
and an administrative use permit approval (Municipal Code Section 17.08.010). Mobile
vending on City property requires City approval in conjunction with a special event.
5.16.050 Permit—Suspension, Revocation.
A. Any permit may be suspended or revoked by the Chief of Police or his or her
designated representative for any of the following reasons:
1. Falsehood of any information supplied by the permittee upon which
issuance of the permit was based;
2. Failure of the permittee to notify the Chief of Police within two (2) weeks
of any change occurring subsequent to the issuance of the permit in the information
supplied by the permittee upon which issuance of the permit was based;
3. Failure of the permittee or of any employees or subcontractors of the
permittee to comply with the regulations set forth.
4. A finding by the Chief of Police that issuance of the permit or continued
operation under the permit presents a threat to the public safety.
B. In the event the Chief of Police or his or her designated representative finds that any of
the above grounds for permit revocation or suspension exist:
1. Written notice of proposed revocation or suspension of the permit shall be
mailed to the permittee specifying the ground or grounds on which such proposed
revocation or suspension is based.
2. The permittee shall be given no less than fifteen (15) days from the date of
mailing of said notice in which to deliver a response in writing to the Chief of Police. Any
response shall specify any and all facts or information the permittee believes should be
considered by the Chief of Police prior to any revocation or suspension of the permit.
PH1 - 24
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
8
3. If permittee does not timely respond to the notice provided, the revocation
or suspension of the permit shall become effective on the sixteenth (16th) day following
mailing of the notice.
4. If a timely response is received, the Chief of Police shall consider all
information provided by the permittee and shall mail the final decision on any proposed
revocation or suspension to the permittee within 10 days of receipt of permittee’s
response.
5. Any permittee whose application for a vendor or operator's permit has been
denied, revoked, or suspended may appeal the Chief of Police’s determination to the City
Council as provided by Chapter 1.20 of this Code.
5.16.060 Fee for permit.
Application for a permit shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable fee as established by
the Council. The fee shall be in an amount sufficient fully to defray administrative cost
incurred in the processing of an application, and shall not be in lieu of other fees or taxes,
including business taxes, required by this code. (Ord. 1202 § 12, 1991)
5.16.070 Exceptions.
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to peddlers who travel along the streets of
the city and who do not allow such cart, wagon, automobile or other vehicle to stand for a
longer period than actually necessary to complete a sale as provided in Section 10.36.120.
(Prior code § 6220.5)
5.16.080 Criminal conduct—Ineligibility for city licenses and permits.
The provisions of Section 5.08.030 shall be applicable to this chapter. (Ord. 1202 § 15,
1991)
SECTION 4. Section 10.36.120 (Peddlers, vendors – Unlawful Parking) of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.120 Peddlers, vendors—Unlawful parking.
Except as otherwise provided in this section or in Chapter 5.16, no person shall
stand or park any vehicle, wagon or pushcart from which goods, wares, merchandise,
fruits, vegetables, foodstuffs, or services are sold, displayed, solicited or offered for sale or
bartered or exchanged, or any lunch wagon or eating cart or vehicle, on any portion of any
street within this city, except that such vehicles, wagons or pushcarts may stand or park
only at the request of a bona fide purchaser for a period of time not to exceed ten minutes
at any one place.
SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council
PH1 - 25
Attachment 5 – Draft Ordinance: Mobile Vendors
9
members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final
passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This
ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the 19th day of November 2013 , AND FINALLY
ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of
200 , on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Anthony Mejia
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
PH1 - 26
NO\/ 13 2013
¿:l,Jt-K
p ETVËD
CÏ-ry13 November 2013
To: Mayor Jan Marx and City Council Members
From: Deborah Cash, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Downtown Association
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
RED FILE
Re: Mobile Food Vendor Ordinance
The Downtown Association (DA) Board of Directors has followed this item ever since
the idea of an ordinance was first proposed to address the possibility that current
regulations on "food trucks" were inadequate when applied to the more evolved
phenomenon of sophisticated mobile restaurants.
Naturally, some of those DA members whose businesses could be negatively affected by
direct competition with non-brick and mortar vendors expressed that permitting such
operators allows an unfair advantage over those who assume hard costs and obligations
such as having to provide parking, restrooms, ADA, etc, and in the case of those in the
Downtown areas, Business Improvement District fees.
V/hile it was pointed out and understood that competition cannot legally be the basis of
denying these types of businesses, it remains-at least for DA members who operate food
establishments-a potential threat to their existence if some number of vendors begin
setting up shop in Downtown areas and siphoning off customers from established
businesses.
V/hile the DA Board understands that an ordinance update to regulate mobile food
vendors is necessary, the Board members felt that supporting any ordinance in this case
would appear to be supporting the idea of allowing mobile food vendors to conduct
business in the City and that would be unacceptable to those members potentially
negatively affected. Therefore, the Board voted to not support any ordinance applicable
to mobile food vendors.
CC SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors
Doug Davidson, Community Development
Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
ETVFf')
Goodwin, Heather NOv I I 2013
Mejia, Anthony
Monday, November 18, 2013 1:56 PM
Goodwin, Heather
FW: PH L REVIEW OF MOBILE VENDOR ORDINANCE (TA62-12)
Anthony J. Mejia I City Clerk
cffy o[ s¡n lurs oßrspo
99o Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 934or
tel | 8o5.78r.7roz
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date iljl'ì/rs ltem* PHI
From: Christianson, Carlyn
Sent: Monday, November 18,2013 1:55 PM
To: Brett Cross
Cc: Mejia, Anthony
Subject: RE: PH 1 REVIEW OF MOBILE VENDOR ORDINANCE (TA 62-12 )
I did see it, thank you, and I'm cc'ing our City Clerk in my reply so it can be included in public comment for tomorrow's
hearing.
Thank you,
Carlyn
Carlyn Christianson
Member, San Luis Obispo City Council
990 Palm Street, SLO 93408
805-550-9320 cell
805-752-1021 home (for city calls)
SLO CITY CLERK
From: Brett Cross fbrettcross@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18,2013 1:52 PM
To: Max, Jan; Carpenter, Dan; Smith, Kathy; Ashbaugh, John; Christianson, Carlyn
Subject: Fw: PH 1 REVIEW OF MOBILE VENDOR ORDINANCE (TA 62-12 )
I don't see this in my outbox. I apologize tt you received it.
Brett
On Monday, November 18,2013 1:29 PM, Brett Cross <brettcross(Oyahoo.com> wrote
On Monday, November 18,2013 1:28 PM, Brett Cross <brettcross(Oyahoo.com> wrote
Dear Council members,
I'd say I'm surprised by staffs recommendation to allow Mobile Vendors to operate within
a residential neighborhood from 7 AM in the morning until 10 PM at night but I'm really not
This is just another "death by a thousand cuts" to the loss of our residential neighborhoods
to commercial uses. Last week you decided that short term stays in R-1 zones is
appropriate and now this week it's a recommendation to allow more commercial use in
neighborhoods.
This has to stop. Neighborhoods are not intended for commercial uses. The land use
patterns along with building requirements don't lend themselves to commercial users.
Parking, setbacks, coverage, and height restrictions are intended to provide a living
environment that is compatible and conducive with quiet and serenity that people expect
in their home.
Mobile vendors will quickly figure which spot is most desirable to locate within a residential
neighborhood and will set up "shop" daily in that location. The poor homeowner who is
unfortunate enough to have this desired location will have tolerate this use continuously if
you approve allowing mobile vendors in neighborhoods from 7 AM until 10 PM.
It's not appropriate and should have never been considered. I urge you to prohibit Mobile
Vendors within residential neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Brett Cross
San Luis Obispo
2
5
RËCEÏ D
V I ?013
ER
Goodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Marx, Jan
Tuesday, November 1-9,2013 8:23 AM
Suzanne Heitzman; Smith, Kathy; Christianson, Carlyn; Carpenter, Dan;Ashbaugh, John
Mejia, Anthony; Goodwin, Heather
RE: Mobile vendor
Thank you for your input. I am including our city clerk staff in this response, so that your email is posted on the website
as agenda correspondence for tonight's meeting.
All the Best,
Jan
Jan Howell Max
Mayor of San Luis Obispo
(BOs) 781-7120 or (805) 541-2716
From : Suzanne Heitzman [suzanne. heitzman@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November L9,20L3 8:06 AM
To: Max, Jan; Smith, Kathy; Christianson, Carlyn; Carpenter, Dan; Ashbaugh, John
Subject: Mobile vendor
Please find my letter attached.
Suzanne
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
oate \\lll lls ftem#-P/il-
1
November 19,2013
City Council
Katy Lipchitz,
City Administrator
San Luis Obispo, CA
I am long time resident of San Luis Obispo and currently reside in the neighborhood
behind Laguna Middle School. Today I am writing to you about the proposed mobile
vendor ordinance before council.
I have been following this issue with concern. There are several problems with the
ordinance that will affect both the quality of life and potential health and safety in our
neighborhood, both residents and children in school.
The hours of operation behind proposed for the vendors--from 7:00am to 7:00pm are an
issue. They are excessive for a residential neighborhood.
My neighborhood is behind Laguna Middle School. Like most schools in San Luis
Obispo it is under built for the volume of cars that drop and pick up children by today's
concern. There is extreme traffic congestion during the morning and afternoon hours on
the corners of LOVR and Laguna Lane, and the internee section of La Virada and
Laguna Lane. The traffic congestion is a particular concern at these two intersections as
it is the sole ingress and egress for about about 100 residences in the neighborhood.
Should there be an emergency and need to evacuate our neighborhood during school
pick up/drop off time, we would not be able to get in or out of our neighborhood. With
the proposed vendor ordinance, vendors would be allowed to park on the city streets
during the same highly congested hours competing with the parents for scarce parking
spaces. Our access out of the neighborhood would be blocked in the event of a fire or
other emergency. The sole outlet poses daily safety issues, and a potential crisis in the
event of a significant emergency.
There are other concerns regarding the ordinance. This is a quiet, residential
neighborhood. We bought our homes with an expectation we would be living in a
tranquil, quiet neighborhood. Mobile vendors will bring in transient traffic, most likely
increase litter, and possible noise with chimes from multiple ice cream trucks. Children
and their parents will trespass on our private property. This behavior is currently
problematic with one ice cream truck operating outside Laguna Middle School.
The other grave concern has to do with the quality of food sold from a vendor truck.
While most of the country is focusing on feeding children more healthful food, vendor
trucks are notably processed foods, fast foods, refined sugars and high fat. The food is
not healthy for children. San Luis Obispo is going the opposite direction of the rest of
the country to reduce rates of diabetes and obesity in children by allowing increased
access to poor quality food.
There will be no enforcement of the city code around the mobile vendors. City resources
and priorities do not support it. Residents will be expected to tolerate violations of the
permits or School officials do not have authority of the children off campus to address
potential misbehavior.
It is quite likely that property values will decrease in school neighborhoods where it will
be popular to park a mobile vendor. With increased noise, transient traffic, and litter, the
school neighborhoods, already struggling under the weight of too much traffic during
school drop offlpick up, will suffer further.
This ordinance if passed will allow a few individuals to profit at the at the expense of
safety of our residential communities.
Respectfully,
Suzanne Heitzman
San Luis Obispo, CA
Suzanne. heitzman @ gmail.com
Notl I I eors
REfi t)
SL t-ËF?'KrJTT'Y
Goodwin, Heather
From
Sent:
To:
Mejia, Anthony
Tuesday, November 19,20L3 2:24 PM
Goodwin, Heather
Subject:FW: Comments Regarding Proposed Mobile Food Vendor Ordinance
Anthony J. Mejia I City Clerk
{.:¡t._! ()f s¡n lri¡s ùiitsl'}ö
ggo Patrn Street
San I uiE (}bis¡:c, CA 93r*or
t el | ôo5.7tr.7:.o;r
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
oate \\-lUj Jrgftem# ìÐ-J-
From: Christianson, Carlyn
Sent: Tuesday, November 79,20L3 1:36 PM
To: Harriet Ross
Cc: Mejia, Anthony
Subject: RE: Comments Regarding Proposed Mobile Food Vendor Ordinance
Hi Mr. And Mrs. Ross,
Thank you for again taking the time and effort to communicate with the Council on this issue, I've cc'd the City Clerk in
my response so he can make sure your comments are on the public record.
Thanks again,
Carlyn
Carlyn Christianson
Member, San Luis Obispo City Council
990 Palm Street, SLO 93408
cchristi@slociW.org
805-550-9320 cell
805-752-1021 home (for city calls)
From: Harriet Ross [slospot@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November L9,20L3 1:26 PM
To: Max, Jan; Smith, Kathy; Christianson, Carlyn; Carpenter, Dan; Ashbaugh, John
Subject: Comments Regarding Proposed Mobile Food Vendor Ordlnance
Dear Mayor Max and City Council Members:
For over two years now (see letter below to Councilman Ashbaugh) we have been dealing with an
issue that involves an ice cream truck vendor that comes to our Laguna Shores neighborhood twice a
week - every Wednesday and Friday that school is in session, The truck arrives in front of our house
and parks at about 2:15 pm so that the vendor can get a parking space close to Laguna Middle
School. The truck usually remains parked there until 3:15 or 3:30, or until the students stop coming to
buy ice cream.
1
We have only one way in and one way out of our neighborhood. School traffic on Laguna Lane is
awful before school but it is simply horrendous after school! ln the mornings before school the timing
of the cars coming into our neighborhood is staggered somewhat. Parents are permitted to drive
through the parking lot to let their children out of their cars. However, after school it is quite another
story. Parents must park on the surrounding streets and the children have to walk to the cars to be
picked up. The mass exodus happens all at one time and the car and pedestrian traffic is really
ovenruhelming.
Please carefully consider all of this as you address the mobile food vendor ordinance at your meeting
tonight. The hours mobile food vendors will be allowed in residential neighborhoods, especially
neighborhoods where there are schools, is of utmost concern.
Thank you.
Harriet and Richard Ross
September 28,2012
Dear Councilman Ashbaugh
We are writing this email at your suggestion and as a follow-up to previous conversations we have
had with you. To refresh your memory, we live at 1296 Laguna Lane; our home is adjacent to
Laguna Middle School (LMS). At least twice a week (currently on Wednesdays and Fridays) an ice
cream truck parks in front of the unit next door to us at 1292 Laguna Lane. The name of the business
is Surfer Dan the lce Cream Man and it is operated by Cindy Tucker. We seek your assistance to
help us resolve an ongoing problem that has become an intolerable situation.
We have lived here for over 25 years. Living next door to LMS is a very positive experience, except
for the traffic situation on Laguna Lane when students are being dropped off for or picked up from
school. There has always been an issue of a few students walking across or assembling on our lawn
now and then. However, since the ice cream truck started operating in our neighborhood this has
increased significantly to the point where we have 40-60 students trespassing on our property as they
use our lawn as a pathway to get to the truck to buy ice cream whenever it is here.
The issue is that students are trespassing on and littering our property. We are detrimentally being
affected by the operation of Ms. Tucker's ice cream business, We have tried asking students to
please use the sidewalk and as a result have often been verbally abused or mocked. Last school
year we started calling LMS for assistance. Several times an administrator came out and helped
monitor the situation; but that only worked for that particular day. We have asked the school to allow
the truck to park on their property but were told they don't want it there. We have asked the police
department for their help. We are now at the point of not knowing what else to do.
We have been told that school officials are responsible for students going to and from school. We
feel the school has transferred their responsibility to us and have created a problem for us. Why has
this become our problem? Why can't Ms. Tucker be allowed to park her truck on school property and
conduct her business there?
Another possible solution would be for Ms. Tucker to find an alternative location in the
neighborhood. Perhaps she could relocate to the City Park nearby in our development on Vista Del
Lago. lt is only about 100 yards away, lf she moved there she would not be operating in front of a
residence.
2
Please help us finally address and resolve this situation. Ms. Tucker should not be allowed to
continue to operate in the current location. Her business license and permit to operate should not be
at the expense of creating a problem others.
Thank you in advance for your time
Sincerely,
Richard and Harriet Ross
1296 Laguna Lane, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 541-0256
cc: Principal Diane Frost, Laguna Middle School
3
RFËËTVËD
AGENDA NOV I 8 Zot¡
co
Date l\iiQlli'rte CÏTY CLËRK
November L8,20L3
Re: Public Hearing ltem #L, Review of Mobile Food Vendor Ordinance - Ordinance lntroduction
Mayor Marx and Members of the Council,
RQN recommends that Mobile Food Vendors be allowed to operate in residential neighborhoods
only from LL:00 am - 2:00 pm, be allowed to remain in one location no longerthan one hour and,
after this time has elapsed, required to move at least 300 feet away before vending again, Although
we are concerned about more commercial enterprises being allowed in the City's residential
neighborhoods, staff advised us that residential neighborhoods could not be exempt.
On August 15,20L2, the RQN Board received a presentation by staff regarding the necessity of
drafting an ordinance to regulate mobile food vendors, and responded to staff's request for input.
Staff, also, explained that banning the trucks from residential neighborhoods would not be allowed
under current State law. ln response, the Board provided several recommendations including that
the City adopt a plan similar to that of Portland, Oregon, where mobile food vendors were allowed
only in designated public parking lots; that if their operation in residentialzones could not be
prohibited, it be limited to the 11:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. long lunch hour; that the amount of time
vendors are allowed to operate in one location be limited; that some provision be made for the trash
generated; and that some regulation of the noise they could produce be included.
The Board was concerned that the trucks would create a traffic hazard on residential streets for
people, bikes and cars because of the narrowness of the streets, the difficulty seeing past parked
cars and the difficulty often experienced when two cars try to pass each other, and because the
trucks would entice groups who do not live in the neighborhood to enter and congregate there.
We concluded that allowing mobile food trucks in neighborhoods would compromise the safety of
residents in addition to altering the character of and the quality of life in the neighborhoods.
On NovemberL4,2OL2, the Board received a follow-up presentation from staff. Atthattime staff
indicated they were recommending that the mobile food vendors be allowed to park in residential
neighborhoods from 7:00 a.m, until 7:00 p.m. Staff explained this would coincide with the noise
ordinance regarding the hours construction and other workers were allowed to work in residential
neighborhoods, The amount of time a vendor could remain parked in one place was not addressed
Last week when the Staff Report became available, we were surprised to discover that staff is now
recommending a 7:00 a.m. to L0:00 p.m. time period for the mobile food vendors to operate in
residential neighborhoods. We note there is still no recommendation for limiting the amount of
time a vendor can remain parked in one place.
Staff's recommendation to allow mobile food vendors to operate in residential neighborhoods until
L0 p.m. is far too late. At a time when Cal Poly is trying to move nighttime activities out of our
residential neighborhoods by offering alternate on-campus activities, the City should not be
promoting a new venue in residential neighborhoods where individuals can congregate and chat.
t
RQN remains very concerned that the additional foot, bicycle and vehicle traffic generated by the
presence of mobile food trucks in residential neighborhoods will exacerbate the unsafe conditions
that already exist on many of our residential streets, ln addition to narrow streets and parked cars
obstructing visibility, there may be pedestrians and drivers who are unfamiliar with a particular
neighborhood and inadvertently create added safety hazards. We remain concerned that the mobile
food trucks will be enticing to individuals who are looking for places to congregate and visit with one
another.
Although we would prefer that residential neighborhoods, other than those under construction, be
exempt from the requirement to host mobile food vendors, since staff indicated that was not an
option, we think the L1:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m, timeframe would be the best fit. lt would allow anyone
who lives or works in a residential neighborhood (construction workers, handymen, painters,
plumbers, gardeners, etc.) the opportunity to utilize the services of a mobile food vendor with
minimum safety concerns and minimum infringement on the residential character of the
neighborhood.
The continued efforts to allow commercial enterprises into our residential neighborhoods is very
disturbing to many of us. Business operations in residential neighborhoods threaten the safety of
our residents and alter the neighborhood character and quality of life that people expect when they
choose to purchase a home. Allowing mobile food vendors into our neighborhoods at night will only
worsen our existing problems. Please protect the safety of our neighborhoods and work to prevent
further deterioration in the quality of life our residents are experiencing.
Sincerely,
Sandra Rowley
2
RECË,:
Goodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Subiect:
agenda correspondence
Jan Howell Marx
Mayor of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-7t2o or (91sl s41.-2716
Max, Jan
Tuesday, November L9,20L312:26 PM
Goodwin, Heather
FW: Food Truck agenda item
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
oate t\.Iß-[åtrem#&
From : rschmidt@ rain.org Irsch m idt@ rain.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November t9,2013 10:38 AM
To: Marx, Jan; dcarpen@slocity.org; Ashbaugh, John; Smith, Kathy; Christianson, Carlyn
Subject: Food Truck agenda item
Re; Food Vending Trucks Agenda ltem
Dear City Council,
Once again the high-and-mighty we-know-what's-best-for-the-rubes staff comes to you with a proposal to mess up
what's left of the livability of our neighborhoods by permitting food vending trucks to operate within residential areas.
Shame on them. Now you need to stand up to them and be counted - FOR neighborhoods for a change, or once again
against them.
Regardless of staff's indifference to the public health consequences of these types of food vendors - and there are many
things to be concerned about regarding this third-class method of distributing likely-to-be-harmfulfood -there are
many demonstrable reasons why these operations don't belong in residential areas. ONE SUSPECTS THAT ALLOWING
THEM lN RESIDENTIAL AREAS lS STAFF'S WAY OF PLACATING RESTAURANT OWNERS (staff regards the Chamber, not
residents, as its rightful constituency), WHO LEGITIMATELY DON'T WANT THEM lN COMMERCIAL AREAS NEAR
RESTAURANTS.
Just throw neighborhoods under the bus once again - staff's modus operandii throughout the present LUCE update -
and you refuse to tellstaff to quit it no matter how many times this is pointed out to you, so it must be your plan as well
to finish off what's left of the still-livable parts of SLO.
A few reasons why food trucks don't belong in neighborhoods:
1. This is rank commercialization of areas that were set aside for the peace, comfort, and quiet of living, lf we wanted to
live next to noisy trucks and commerce, we'd not have settled in quiet places like neighborhoods. You will have a whole
lot of complaints from the 99% who have no clue all the games you folks are "enacting" once the trucks show up in their
neighborhoods. And your response then will be: "We can't do anything. There's nothing illegal about it. They're not
breaking the ordinance." So, don't do this. Keep the trucks out of all residential areas. We don't need curbside
restaurants in neighborhoods.
2. Attraction of strangers into neighborhoods. How does it benefit a neighborhood to have this type of stranger-
attract¡ng hit-and-run business operating within it? This is just one more way to erode neighborhood safety in orderto
satisfy the commercial greed of the few.
1
st_0
3. Noise. These trucks aren't quiet. Most have at least a generator, and many have compressors and engines that run
constantly. Some may be air conditioned as well. Why should any neighborhood be subjected to this racket for hour
after hour so some greedy company can make a few bucks at the expense of residents who want their peace and quiet?
4. Pollution. Any device that's making noise is also generating air pollution. This is stationary source pollution that
doesn't belong in a neighborhood. ls there to be no place left where we can escape breathing the health-robbing
exhaust ofgas and diesel engines?
And what about water pollution? Most of these types of operators have no qualms about dumping their slops in the
gutter. Even if they're more or less careful, there will be spills. Creek pollution will inevitably result from this. (One of my
long-standing annoyances is the type of business operator we have - like Crushed Grape on El Mercado - who dump
their slops into the gutter. l've asked that woman to quit it, but she sneered at my request and keeps right on year after
year, and the city does nothing. You can see the stains where she dumps her slops, and that they run right into the
gutter and from there into the creek. More city hypocrisy.)
5. Trash. Who cleans up the trash the truck vendor customers leave behind?
Who goes out through the neighborhood to clean up the stuff people drop as they eat while walking away? Who cleans
up the "window drops" from cars speeding away from the illicit restaurants? (l'm constantly cleaning up stuff from the
fast food places on Foothillwhich are a good distance away. This is not a made-up issue, I also fish their crap out of the
creek in my backyard.)This is another degradation of neighborhoods, another burden on residents, if they even bother
to clean it up. lf they don't, the crap just ends up in the creek, and floats out to the Great Pacific Gyre to augment that
vast monument to human greed, stupidity, indifference, and genuflection to "the way things are done."
6. General hubbub. The transactions at food vendors are not silent or even quiet. There's a lot of talk, shouting, etc., car
doors opening and closing, engines starting and stopping as people arrive and leave the scene of these hit-and-run
restaurant operations. None of these people care a bit about the impacts they have on the neighbors. The neighbors,
however, have to put up with it - and no help on that from the city. This sort of activity doesn't belong in
neighborhoods.
ALLOWING FOOD TRUCKS IN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD OR RESIDENTIAL AREA IS JUST PLAIN WRONG. DON'T GO THERE
Thank you
Richard Schmidt
PS. I find the "state law forces us to do this" argument really stupid.
It's just staff manipulation of the council, lf state law is a problem, and you agree on that, do something about it. Katcho
would be glad to help. Ask him.
PPS. Disease spreading, health-harming food trucks are not in the public health interest. Realizing that, you should seek
to limit their existence as much as possible since, according to the Almighty Staff, you cannot regulate health issues
directly. Be creative rather than just taking Almighty Staff's word for it.
2