HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-15-2012 PH1 JohnsonGoodwin, Heather
Subject: FW: Item PH #2 L
Attachments: frontyard.ltr.doc AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
From: Lichtig, Katie Date 5 15 4 -L Item#
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 8:13 AM
To: Schroeder, Sheryll; Goodwin, Heather
Cc: Johnson, Derek; Davidson, Doug; Leveille, Brian; Codron, Michael; Dietrick, Christine
Subject: FW: Item PH #2
Please distribute this agenda correspondence. Thanks.
Katie E. Lichtig
City Manager
City of San Luis Obispo, CA
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 -3249
805 - 781 -7114
www.slocity.org
From: Sandra Rowley jmailto:macsar99 @yahoo.coml
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 5:29 PM
To: Marx, Jan; Carpenter, Dan; Carter, Andrew; Ashbaugh, John; Smith, Kathy
Cc: Lichtig, Katie
Subject: Item PH #2
Attached please find correspondence for the May 15, 2012, City Council meeting pertaining to the above.
hfk c
c COUNCIL
a CDD AIR
O CITY MGR
a FIT DIR
C ASST CM
a FIRE CHIEF
o ATTORNEY
a PW DIR
• CLERKIORIG
a POLICE CHIEF
• PIB
a PARKS & REC DIR
• TRIBUNE
a LMLDIR
• NEW TIMES
o HR DIR
• SLO CITY NEWS
o COUNCIL
• CITY MGR
• CLERK
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
P.O. Box ] 2604 - San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
May 14, 2012
RE: Item #PH2 — Municipal Code Amendments Updating Front Yard Vehicle Parking Regulations
and Removal of 72 -hour Timeframe for Property Maintenance Standards Violations
Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members,
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods supports Staffs recommended amendments to the Front
Yard Parking Ordinance with one exception. Residences with single car garages should not be
given special consideration, i.e., the ability to add a "parking pad" on the side of an existing
driveway via a construction permit. We ask that Council remove this exception.
A residence with a single car garage has two off - street parking positions available, one in the
garage and one in the driveway. The proposed exception would allow a vehicle to be parked in
the front yard, the very situation this ordinance modification is attempting to correct. Staff has
done an excellent job clarifying the ordinance so that it is more easily understood. Adding the
proposed exception could create confusion as well as resentment among residents and owners,
require additional staff time for review and monitoring of construction permits, and create
difficulties for enforcement staff who must then determine which parking pad is legal and which
one is not.
The City's housing stock is varied, and it is impossible to make them all equal. Some homes
have circular driveways that can hold more vehicles, others do not; some have long driveways
that can accommodate tandem parking, some do not; some have three -car garages, some have
two -car garages, some have a one -car garage. When determining what house to buy or rent
many things are taken into consideration. One of them is available on -site parking. Once the
decision is made, the owner /renter must live with the property's advantages and limitations. To
try to make things "fair" or "equal" for everyone is an impossible task and will eventually render
the ordinance inequitable and controversial. We, therefore, request Council deny the exception.
RQN supports Staffs recommendation to remove the 72 -hour timeframe from the property
maintenance standards violation process. Some city residents have been frustrated with the
amount of time required for a violation to be corrected. The existing, time - consuming and
cumbersome process has, unfortunately, caused some of our residents to cease reporting such
violations because it appears that nothing is being done. Staffs proposal will correct this by
providing a more rapid resolution to NEO violations.
Thank you for your continued concern for and consideration of our neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Sandra Rowley
Chairperson