Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-07-2012 ac various 2 ph3Goodwin, Heather RECEIVE D rthv d $ ZOI ! SLO CITY CLER KFrom: Sent : To : Subject : Grimes, Maev e Monday, November 05, 2012 11 :15 AM Goodwin, Heathe r Council Correspondence, Illegal parking on city SLO street s Heather, Please process this as Agenda Correspondence for PH 3 . Thank you . maevc kennedy Ame s City Cler k city of san Luis o6lsp o 990 Palm Stree t San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1 phone : (805) 781-710 2 email :mgrimes@slocitv .org aaa a__ From :Marx, Ja n Sent:Friday, November 02, 2012 10 :10 AM To : Elaine Genasci ; Carter, Andrew ; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kathy ; Carpenter, Da n Cc: Grimes, Maeve ; Lichtig, Kati e Subject :RE : Illegal parking on city SLO street s I have talked with this resident and she requests that her letter be posted as Agenda Correspondence on the city website . Thank you , Jan Howell Marx Mayor of San Luis Obisp o (805) 781-7120 or (805) 541-271 6 From :Elaine Genasci [elgenasci@gmail .com ] Sent:Friday, November 02, 2012 9 :35 AM To : Marx, Jan ; Carter, Andrew; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kathy ; Carpenter, Da n Subject :Fwd : Illegal parking on city SLO streets Dear SLO City Council : A few months ago the owner of a catamaran parked (picture attached) illegally on the street next to my hom e located at 462 Chorro Street . After waiting the 72 hours, I called the city police and they said they would ta gand remove as soon as possible . Well,as soon as possible was three weeks,and before the catamaran could b etowed, the owner moved it to an other city street . The owner of this catamaran knows the system and he knows that the city has a back-log of illegally parke dvehicles, so he waits until just before the city police act and then he moves it again to an other city street . AGENDACORRESPONDENCEDate~~/Iz item# Mu 3 1 Well, the catamaran is back on the street next to my house once again (corner of Chorro & Mountain View).I have called the SLO Police to report it and was told that they would tag and tow it as soon as they can . It is very apparent that the owner of this catamaran knows the system and instead of paying to store his vehicle , he is moving it around the streets of SLO . Is it possible for the City Police to get this vehicle to the top of th e list this time?? A very frustrated City home owner . Elaine Genasc i 462 Chorro Stree t SL.,O . CA 9340 5 805-458-3978 2 Goodwin,Heather RECEIVE D NOV 06 201 2 SLO (d I Y U..tK K From:Lichtig, Kati e Sent Tuesday, November 06, 2012 7 :56 A M To:Grimes, Maeve; Goodwin, Heathe r Cc :Mattingly, Carrie ; Johnson, Derek ; Gesell, Steve; Hudson, Jake ; Bochum, Tim ; Horch , Robert; Storton, Keit h Subject :FW : PH3 Oversized Vehicles & Unattached Trailers Attachments:PH3 Oversized Vehicles .do c Please distribute as appropriate . AGENDA CORRESPONDENC E Date I' l-►2 Item#-PI4 3 Katie E . Lichtig Sent with Handhel d Original Message From : Sandra Rowley 1mailto :macsar99(avahoo .com l Sent : Monday, November 05, 2012 09 :58 PM Pacific Standard Tim e To :Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Carter, Andrew; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kath y Cc :Lichtig, Kati e Subject :PH3 Oversized Vehicles & Unattached Trailer s Mayor Marx and Members of the Council , Attached please find a letter from RQN addressing the recommendations in this report . Thank you , Sandra Rowle y Chair, RQN 1 Residents for Quality Neighborhood s P .O Box 12604 • San Luis Obispo,CA 93406 November 5, 201 2 Re : PH3, Oversized Vehicle & Unattached Trailer Parking Regulation s Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council , The beginning pages of the staff report speak directly to the issue before you regarding propose d parking regulations for oversized vehicles and unattached trailers . It states, "the purpose of th e proposed ordinance is to address traffic safety, neighborhood wellness and public health impact s that larger vehicles and unattached trailers create while being stored on city streets ." Unfor- tunately, in the midst of gathering information and drafting the recommendation the purpose ha s been forgotten. The oversized vehicles that impact neighborhoods are not delivery trucks or construction vehicles . They are, primarily, motorhomes of various sizes . They are not used as residences or for housin g guests . They are parked on the street in lieu of being stored on the owner's property (garage , driveway, side yard) or at a storage facility in the City or surrounding area . What are the impacts? Oversized vehicles are just that, oversized . They are generally wider an d taller than most vehicles as well as being longer . They encroach further into driving lanes, they ar e harder to see past and harder to maneuver around . Those parked on the street do not often move, so leaves and trash accumulate around and beneath them. The monthly street sweeper gives the m a wide berth . Unattached trailers are, also, stored on residential streets . They are not as large or bulky as th e vehicles, although there are some large boats on boat trailers . But, like the oversized vehicles, th e utility trailers, travel trailers, horse trailers, boats on trailers and various toy haulers mov e infrequently and are catch basins for leaves and trash. Members of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) have recommended off and on for ove r ten years that owners take responsibility for their vehicles/trailers and that a more permanen t solution be found for their storage - not because they make streets look like parking lots, no t because they are a magnet for trash . It is to improve safety in neighborhoods for those who walk , bike or drive there . Allowing oversized vehicles and trailers to park on residential streets exacerbates the existin g neighborhood wellness and safety problems RQN has hoped would be fixed . As stated in the Staf f Report, the current 72-hour rule has not proven workable ; owners of these vehicles have learne d how to game the system to avoid fines . Adding this smorgasbord of additional rules to the 72 - hour rule increases safety and neighborhood wellness problems . If enforcement of the 72-hour rul e (See Notes, #1) is difficult, it can only be worsened by adding the following : 1."3 nights in any 7-day period" parking of an oversized vehicle or trailer is allowed on th e street within 75 feet of the address to which the vehicle is registered . (See Notes, #2) 2."With a permit, up to 72 hours (including 3 nights), every 30 days but limited to 5 permit s per year" a guest/visitor is allowed to park an oversized vehicle or trailer on the street within 7 5 feet of the owner's address . (See Notes, #3) 3."From 5 am until 12 midnight" oversized vehicles are allowed to be parked on any street . Including "within 75 feet of the address to which the vehicle is registered" is particularly vexing . Not only would this ordinance allow additional oversized vehicles and unattached trailers to b e legally parked in neighborhoods, it would allow someone to put their oversized vehicle or trailer i n front of your house with City sanction . Such an action does not foster congenial relations betwee n or among neighbors . Early outreach to Residents for Quality Neighborhoods and other neighborhood groups coul d have identified parking issues that currently affect residential neighborhoods . Subsequen t inclusion of these groups could have identified the additional impacts to neighborhoods created b y some of the recommendations contained in the Staff Report . It is unfortunate that with a n ordinance intended to address neighborhood wellness and traffic safety impacts of an issue th e one stakeholder group not contacted was neighborhood groups/associations . Recommend this item be continued so that neighborhood groups can be engaged and severa l focused meetings held . However, if Council decides to act on this item, recommend the followin g changes be made (see attachment for discussion). 1.Parking of vehicles over 22 feet in length is prohibited on residential streets at all times, except for loading/unloading and construction activities . Deliveries would, of course, be allowed . 2.Parking of unattached trailers is prohibited on residential streets at all times, except fo r loading/unloading and construction activities . 3.Parking of construction vehicles not be limited to 75 feet from the construction site . 4.Permits for guests/visitors to park on residential streets not be allowed . (Parking in driveways in residential neighborhoods would still be allowed .) Notes : 1.Current 72-hour rule :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 (MC 10 .36.050). [emphasis added ] 2.Current parking provisions for RV's and trailers : Recreational vehicles and trailers with current licenses are allowed to park i n driveways (MC 17 .17 .055) and, if screened, in side yards (MC 17 .17.040). 3.Current parking provisions for guests : A recreational vehicle may park in a residential parking space (applies to multi-famil y dwellings) or driveway for seven days for the purpose of housing guests of on-site residents (MC 17 .08 .010). Thank you for your time and your attention to this matter . Sincerely , Sandra Rowley Chair, RQN Attachment A-1 Oversized Vehicles Parking Regulation s Parking of vehicles over 22 feet in length is prohibited on city streets between the hours of 12 AM and 5 A M with the following exceptions (See #1 - 3, below): RON Concerns : a)Selection of this time period does not address either the public safety issue or the neighborhoo d wellness issue . It allows oversized vehicles to be parked on city streets during the day when children ar e going to/from school and residents are leaving for work, appointments, etcetera . This time period negativel y affects pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists and drivers of passenger cars/trucks who must try to see aroun d these vehicles in order to exit driveways, turn corners and cross streets . b)Selection of this time period assumes either a homeowner or business owner is awake between these hours and can report the infraction, or that we have sufficient police resources to check every street . Neithe r is likely. RON Recommendation :Parking oversized vehicles on city streets be prohibited 24 hours/day . If Council determines that 12 am to 5 am is appropriate for some streets, request the parking o f oversized vehicles be prohibited 24 hours/day on all residential streets . Unattached Trailer Parking Regulation s Parking of unattached trailers is prohibited on public city streets at all times with the following exception s (See #1 - 3, below): RON Recommendation :We support staffs recommendation for a 24-hour/day prohibition fo r trailers . I .Parking for oversized vehicles and all unattached trailers at registered owner's address .Vehicles over 22 feet in length and unattached trailers may be parked on the street within 75 feet of the address to which the vehicle is registered for no more than 3 nights in any 7-day period . The exception applies only to fixed rea l property addresses, in order to ensure that the property owner/resident responsible for the vehicle is known t o the City and can be contacted and held accountable for compliance . RON Concerns : a)Within 75 feet of the address to which the oversized vehicle or the trailer is registered can put them i n front of someone else's house, transferring any disturbance or inconvenience to a neighbor . b)Parking an oversized vehicle on residential streets is a traffic safety issue because of line-of-sight problems and the need to maneuver around them . c)Allowing oversized vehicles and unattached trailers to park for no more than 3 nights in any 7-da y period does not seem any more enforceable than the current 72-hour limit, possibly less so since parkin g employees do not work at night . Monitoring this is too cumbersome for our limited police resource s (including SNAP) to tag and follow up each vehicle while concurrently handling the City's other nighttim e problems . Also, it is likely that owners of these vehicles will learn to game the system as they have with th e 72-hour rule . d)Allowing oversized vehicles and trailers to park in neighborhoods will likely relocate some of the vehicles/trailers that are currently stored on Prefumo Canyon Road and elsewhere in the City to ou r neighborhoods, further clogging residential streets and creating traffic hazards for pedestrians, bicyclists , motorcyclists and drivers of passenger cars/trucks . RON Recommendation :We request Council not allow oversized vehicles and unattached trailers to b e parked on the street in residential neighborhoods at any time, except for loading/unloading an d construction activities . Both recreational vehicles and trailers with current licenses already ar e allowed to park in driveways (MC 17 .17.055)and, if screened, in side yards (MC 17.17 .040). Allowing them to park on residential streets creates safety problems . A-2 2 .Parking for construction and loading/unloading activities .Vehicles over 22 feet in length and unattached trailers may be parked when in the act of loading/unloading or in accordance with the requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the City as part of the adjacent permitted or allowed construction, within 7 5 feet of the work site. RQN Concerns : a)This exception involves two completely different activities that take very different amounts of tim e and, thus, should be divided into an exception for loading/unloading an oversized vehicle or unattache d trailer, and a separate exception for construction activities . b)Loading/unloading within 75 feet of the address to which the vehicle/trailer is registered can put it i n front of someone else's house, transferring the inconvenience and any potential mess to a neighbor . Unles s this is necessary for ease of loading/unloading, the vehicle/trailer should be parked in front of the address t o which the vehicle/trailer is registered . If the vehicle/trailer must remain overnight it should be parked i n front of the address to which the vehicle/trailer is registered . c)Requiring construction vehicles/trailers to park within 75 feet of the work site may not be optima l because it could result in oversized vehicles being parked across the street from each other, potentiall y creating a traffic hazard . Presumably, as each stage of construction is been completed those vehicles/trailer s will be removed . RQN Recommendation :Separate these two provisions, stipulate that loading/unloading should occu r in front of the address to which the vehicle is registered whenever possible and place a time limit o n loading and unloading operations . Remove the 75-foot limit for construction vehicles/trailers . 3 .Parking permits for guests or visitors .Vehicles over 22 feet in length and unattached trailers may b e parked, with the property owner's permission, for up to 72 hours on a city street within 75 feet of a propert y with a (free) permit issued by the City . Permits are limited to 3 consecutive nights, permits are limited to on e every 30 days, and no more than 5 permits are allowed per year . Again, this approach provides property owner/resident accountability for the compliance of vehicles permitted to the address . RON Concerns : a)Allowing a guest to park within 75 feet of the address to which the permit is obtained can put th e oversized vehicle or trailer in front of someone else's house, transferring any disturbance, mess or othe r inconvenience to a neighbor . The neighbor has no veto power and, even if there were veto provisions, thi s 75-foot rule could create ill will between or among neighbors . b)These rules are as cumbersome as the 3-nights-in-any-7-days rule and more cumbersome than the 72 - hour rule . It would seem that in order to track and enforce the provisions of these permits, either Cit y resources would need to be re-directed or enforcement would be complaint-driven and occur as enforcemen t resources were available . RON Recommendation :Recommend this exception be abandoned . Currently a recreational vehicl e may park in a residential parking space (applies to multi-family dwellings) or driveway for seven day s for the purpose of housing guests of on-site residents (MC 17 .08 .010). This provision seems to hav e been sufficient; adding the ability to park a recreational vehicle on a residential street to hous e guests/visitors does not appear necessary nor, because of conditions potentially hazardous to traffic , would it be supportive of public safety or neighborhood wellness. For Violations The City would provide a warning affixed to the vehicle on the first offense as a matter of procedure . Th e warning would provide a description of the violation and information on where and when parking i s permitted, in addition to how to apply for a permit . After an initial warning a vehicle would be subject to A-3 citation when found in violation, unless the registered owner has changed since the warning . The proposed base fine is $38 and would double for every subsequent citation ; after any 5 parking citations, the vehicl e would be subject to towing . RON Concern :Although we support an initial warning, receipt of an additional 5 citations prior to bein g subject to being towed seems generous . `Subject to being towed' appears similar to `may be towed,' thus giving the impression that the only consequence to repeated violations is the imposition of fines . RON Recommendation :If the paragraph were to state that in lieu of a third citation, i.e., the fourth violation, the vehicle or trailer shall be towed, the ordinance would have a real consequence and , maybe, cause the owner to make permanent storage arrangements thus eliminating repeat violation s and moving these vehicles/trailers off of residential streets .