Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/1993, 7 - REQUEST TO EXPAND AND MODIFY EXISTING PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT. MEETING DATE: 21� city of San LUIS OBISp0June 15- 1991 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: FROM: Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Wor - Wayne Peterson, City Engineer SUBJECT: Request to expand and modify existing preferential parking district. CAO RECOMIVVIIENDATION: By motion, deny the request for the expansion and modification of the existing preferential parking district. BACKGROUND In 1979, a preferential parking district was established in the residential area south of Cal Poly campus (boundaries as shown in Exhibit A). That parking district established a residential permit parking system during daylight hours (8am to 5pm), Monday through Friday. Staff has received a request (Exhibit B) from Henry Case and Tom Kay of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) to modify and expand that district. The request proposes: ■ to prohibit cars without a valid permit from parking on streets throughout the entire district between 2:00 am and 6:00 am; ■ to expand the existing parking district to include portions of Frederick Street (Grand Avenue west to 1400 Fredericks) for purposes of this nighttime parking prohibition only; ■ to include additional restrictions on paving yard areas to provide on-site parking; and ■ to modify the method by which permits are issued. The Parking Management Plan (Exhibit C) and the parking districts enabling ordinance (Exhibit D) establish criteria by which new districts can be formed and existing districts modified. Staff used this criteria and developed guidelines for the development of districts. The guidelines include a procedure (Exhibit E) for requesting formation of, or changes to, a district including the appropriate techniques for collecting majority support (more than 50%) of the property owners in a proposed district. The subject request was not accompanied by such a petition, therefore, there is no assurance that the request is representative of a majority of the property owners in the designated district. The Fredericks Street area was originally left out of the district because those property owners did not support it. DISCUSSION The request asks for the elimination of parking between the hours,of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The Police Department would have main responsibility for the enforcement of this proposed regulation. However, - because of the limited staff available during those particular hours and other high priorities, the Police Department may not be able to give the parking prohibition significant attention.. The Public Works ��++���►�►►�i�►illillllli�' ���IIII City of san Luis osispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Preferential Parking District Meeting of June 15, 1993 Page Two. Department does not have staff available at that time to enforce any parking regulations. Therefore, this provision would probably only be enforced on a complaint basis, and not meet the expectations of RQN for consistent, continuous, enforcement. The request asks to include some, but not all, of the parking restrictions of the district apply to the + properties to be added on Fredericks Street will make monitoring and enforcement confusing. In staff's opinion, the entire parking district should be subject to the same restrictions. Some of the details of the request involve how permits are issued and who they are issued to'(such as: temporary permits by telephone, waiver of permits for "health care" professionals working in the neighborhood and special ! permits for live-in household workers). The issue of who and how these requests can be provided, and their impact upon dwindling staff resources will require significant staff time and cannot be recommended for consideration at this time. Another portion of the request asks for parking restrictions on private property. The existing parking district includes properties exclusively zoned residential, either R-1 or R-2. In both zones, the minimum requirement for the street yard setback is 20 feet, measured from the front property line. Structures and required parking spaces are already prohibited from being located within the required street yards unless an exception is approved. Access to areas for required parking is permitted in a street yard, which in i. a R-1 zone generally consists of a driveway approximately 20 feet in width serving a two-car garage. " Additional paving of properties for parking that is visible from the street would only be permitted if the area was outside of.the street yard (i.e. morethan than 20 feet back from the front property line). Enforcement of parking restrictions in the set back area by the Community Development Department is difficult under the terms of our current ordinances and will be addressed more fully in the proposed Property Maintenance Ordinance. Therefore, existing zoning regulations do address the creation of formal parking spaces in street yards. i FISCAL IMPACT I There will be no fiscal impact to the general fund by denying the request to modify the district. If the Council feels that the request has merit, then Engineering staff time would be involved in meeting with the proponents and assisting them to prepare the necessary petitions. With actual implementation of the modifications to the district, there would be significant City costs with installation of new signs, expanded administration and enforcement. The proposed very specialized modifications to the parking district would make administration and enforcement complicated and could be very costly. If not properly administered, residents of the district and others affected by its restrictions could become very frustrated. The type of highly-specialized service benefit that the district modifications represent would best be implemented through the formation of a parking assessment district, consistent with the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code. This would allow for assessments to be made to those directly served to pay for the added cost to the City. ���������►�i�iillilllllPp1 ���lil city of san tui s 0151 spo NiS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Preferential Parking District Meeting of June 15, 1993 Page Three CONCURRENCES The Police Department concurs that it does not have sufficient manpower necessary to enforce the expanded parking district effectively.. The Community Development Department concurs that existing regulations are in place to regulate parking in street yards. The City Attorney concurs that a number of private property issues are involved that are beyond the city's current ability to regulate. I gum-isUpWt .mem Attachments: Exhibit A - Preferential Parking District Boundaries Map & Resolution No. 3932 (1979 Series) Exhibit B - Request from Henry Case/Tom Kay of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) Exhibit C - Excerpt from Parking Management Plan Exhibit D - Municipal-Code excerpts 10.36.170 — 10.36.230 Exhibit E - Preferential Parking Guidelines memo dated May 10, 1989 i 73 EXHIBIT A , Cpl .Pol �rAll•�' �% pl5TR1CT f30Uhlq?�F2I�5 m �3 Q I)espVon 01 sa t as I rea ■■.aa� ■ ® a_sas■ ® aaae ■ ML(,O Grti! of qa•i - I aOak■ 1wait niloom a ®a ==1aMEN aa.o d RESOLUTION No. 3932 (1979 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ESTABLISHING AN AREA OF THE CITY AS A RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT AREA, ESTABLISHING DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION OF SAID AREA AND SETTING FEES FOR APPLICATION FOR A PARKING PERMIT . WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has received a petition from a majority of the residents living within the neighborhood shown on attached Exhibit "A" , and, WHEREAS , the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has determined that the quality of life for the residents of this area has been adversely affected by non-residents using the neighborhood streets for parking and, WHEREAS , the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has determined that the elimination of non-resident parked cars from the district will decrease the ambient noise level, lower air pollution levels, and improve other environmental characterisitcs of the neighborhood and, WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has determined that the elimination of the non-resident parked cars will improve pedestrian and vehicular safety and allow residents to gain proper access to their residences and, WHEREAS, the Council of the •City of San Luis Obispo has determined that there is appropriate alternative parking for non- resident cars on the Cal Poly Campus . BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 3209. 17 et seq. of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code a residential parking permit area is R 3932 i hereby established as shown and described on the attached � Exhibits "A" and "B" . SECTION 2. No vehicle other than vehicles providing services to the area or having a permit attached to it or a visitors permit in the drivers side window may park on any street in the area between the hours of 8 AM and 5 PM, Monday through. Friday, except for holidays.. SECTION 3. The Public ServicesDepartment is directed to post the area with signs that clearly indicate these restrictions. SECTION 4 . The Finance Director shall issue residential parking permits and guest parking permits on demand as permitted in Section 3209 .21 and 3209 .22 of the Municipal Code. Permits shall be issued for a year beginning November 1 and shall be prorated if issued during the year. SECTION 5. Fee for each residential permit shall be $5 . SECTION 6. Fee for guest parking permits shall be $5. Guest permits shall be issued annually as are residential parking permits. SECTION 7. Fee for replacement of .mutilated or lost permits shall be $5 . SECTION 8. Residential parking permits shall become void if either the owner of the vehicle moves out of the area shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" or the owner of the:evehicle sells they vehicle to an individual living outside the area shown in Exhibits "A" and "B" . C ! SECTION 9 . Because signs, permits and other materials are yet to be ordered, manufactured, issued, or installed, as the _ r case may be, this resolution shall become effective on November 1, 1979. SECTION 10. Unless other action is taken by the Council the provisions of this resolution shall expire on November 1, 1980 . On motion of Councilman Jorgensen , seconded by Councilwoman Billig ; and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Jorgensen, Billig, Bond, Dunin and Mayor Cooper NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing resolution was passed. and pted this 7thday of August_ 1979 .. r ynn R. Co, per ATTEST: City .rk J. H. Fitzpatrick Approved as to form: City Attorney EXHIBIT A Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Grand Avenue and the prolongation of the northerly property line of Fredericks Street, thence westerly along said northerly line of Fredericks Street to the southerly prolongation of the westerly line of Longview Lane (formerly Motley and now abandoned) , thence northerly along said westerly line of Longview Lane to the centerline of Bond Street, thence westerly along the centerline of Bond Street to the centerline of Hathway, thence southerly along the centerline of Hathway a distance- of 100.00 feet, thence westerly at right angles to said centerline to the westerly property line of Hathway Avenue, thence northerly along said westerly line to the southerly line of Carpenter Street, thence North 0°26' East to the northerly line of Hathway, thence northeasterly along the northerly property line of Hathway Avenue to the centerline of Via Carte, thence southerly along said centerline to the centerline of Hathway Avenue, thence northeasterly along said centerline to the centerline of Slack Street, thence southerly and easterly along said centerline to a point, said point being the intersection of the centerline of Slack 'Street and the northerly prolongation of the easterly line of Lot 12, Tract No. 64 (Alta Vista) , thence southerly along said prolongation and the easterly line of Lots 12, 22, 23, 24, and 25 to the northerly line of McCollum Street, thence easterly along said northerly line of McCollum Street to the centerline of Grand Avenue, thence southerly along said centerline to the point of beginning. Approved as to content: lUl` City Administrative 0f icer (;o unity De elopment irector 1 C�ty. EngiI er mm Public Ser s Director inand for 7-9 I RESOLu fION PROPOSED FOR COUNGIL"ACTION EXHIBIT B Whereas the area bounded by Grand.Avenue, Slack Street, Longview Lane, Hathway Avenue, Bond Street, Fredericks Street has been zoned for R-1 use; and, Whereas R-1 use is intended to be low density single dwelling unit housing; and, Whereas the streets within this area have been designed to accommodate low traffic volumes and only incidental street parking associated with low density residential use (most streets are 34 feet or less in width and without walkways); and, Whereas the area is being impacted by cars parked along the streets; and, Whereas such parking greatly restricts the safe flow of traffic and creates a hazard for vehicles exiting from driveways, pedestrians and bicycle riders. Now therefore be it resolved that in order to preserve the quality of life and maintain low density housing characteristics of the area described above the Council declares its' intention to modify the existing parking district. — - The appropriate staff is directed to prepare the necessary resolutions and ordigancsr k E0 amendments to modify this parking district. MAY 111993 EXPLANATION CITY COUNCIL SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA The current district provides that no street parking is allowed between 8 AM and 5 PM Monday through Friday without a permit and does not include Fredericks Street. Modify the current district as follows: Add a provision that no street parking will be allowed between 2 AM and 6 AM daily without a permit. Modify the district to include Fredericks Street from Grand Avenue to No. 1400 for the 2 AM to 6 AM prohibition only. Rules for granting permits should be established by resolution. Initially the rules should include the following provisions: Permits may be granted to current residents for any vehicles currently registered at that address or later replacement of a current vehicle. Health care providers shall be exempt when the vehicle is properly identified. Short term guest parking permits shall be issued by telephone without fee. CSpecial parking permits may be issued to live-in household workers for disabled. For residences that were not initially constructed to provide space for parking modern automobiles, permits may be issued for two vehicles. 7_/O COMMENT REGARDING PERMIT CONDITIONS \ It is essential to provide for a phase in of the parking restrictions to allow residents to make the necessary adjustments for adequate on-site parking. To provide for this phase in, permits would be granted to current residents for any vehicles currently registered at that address or any replacement of a current vehicle. New residents would not be issued permits except in accordance with the above rules for granting permits. ADDITIONAL ORDINANCE MODIFICATIONS Some modifications of other ordinances are necessary to prevent random parking in the street yard, creating improper driveways or paving other areas of the lot in order to provide the required on-site parking. EXHIBIT C Parking Management Plan Page 5 �J Public Awareness ' `ICY•: .7a - ...r c.. e general public should be made aware of the Parking Management its benefits to the downtown. t ACTIONS: • Features of tom` ` ment Plan will be publicized through local media before events o • Promotionals, such as gr`` � ngs for the structures, also can announce the anticipated changes':✓\ • Special emphasis will he given totN tive features of the plan and the reasons why changes are exp ec$ occur. • Yarning citations will be issued prior to inc in fines. TIMELINE: Ongoing. Pa cxpatzvn—%n— emen a iztts—an .. _ PO • City s maintain a cooperative relationship with private and public se oyers and employees. ACTION: • Staff will continue to work City's Parking Management Committee as long as it exists and with the Business Improvement Association, Chamber of Comae County staff to review and make recommendations for possible the Parking Management Plan. E. -Ohznin- Residential Parking Districts POLICY: Special Parking Districts should be established as necessary, in residential areas which are congested with vehicles parked by persons not residing in the area, to restrict parking to preserve the quality of life of area residents. ACTION: • After implementation of changes to meters on the streets, parking patterns and habits should be examined to determine if parking districts are needed in surrounding residential areas. Their establishment can be initiated by staff. Council or local residents. TIMELINE: • Review parking habits in the area north of Monterey Street after ' opening of Palm Street Parking Structure (January 1988) . Review parking in residential areas south of Monterey Street after the opening of the Marsh Street Structure (June 1989) • 744 10.36.130-10.36.180 EXHIBIT D Whenever t le - operating air-conditioning or e that an emergency traffic congestion is frigeration units. lik to result from the holding of public or Between often p.m.and seven a.m., priv assemblages, gatherings or functions, or no person shal leave standing on any for o r reasons, the chief of police shall have street or public right vehicle,except a power d authority to order temporary signs to passenger vehicle, with a ng refrigera- be erec or posted indicating that the open- tion or other unit t6-cool,. he dify, or tion,par g or standing of vehicles is prohibited otherwise air-condition the cargoarea a or on such st ts and alleys as the chief of police I Inn ' ?� shall direct ng the time such temporary signs the n are in place. h signs hall remain in place only during the exi nce of such emergency and the 10.3.6.170 Designation of residential parking chief of police all cause such signs to be permit areas—Adoption of removed prompt thereafter. resolution. B. When signs a horized by the provisions of A. The council may, by resolution, designate this section are in p e giving notice thereof, no an area of the city as a residential parking permit person shall operate, k or stand any vehicle area if the council finds that the area is predomi- contrary to the directi and provisions of such nantly residential,that the streets in the area are signs. (Prior code§ 320 2) congested with vehicles parked by persons not residing in the area,and that limiting the parking 10.36.140 Parking of la a or commercial of vehicles along the streets in the area to vehicles vehicles near ersections. registered or controlled and exclusively used by No person shall park any hicle greater than persons residing in the area is necessary in order -� six feet in height, including y load thereon, to preserve the quality of life of persons residing within one hundred feet of a intersection at. in the area. any time. This section shall t apply to any B. In determining whether limiting the park- particular intersection until si or markings ing of vehicles along the streets in the area to giving adequate notice thereof h been placed vehicles registered to or controlled and used as determined appropriate by th ity engineer. exclusively by persons residing in the area is nec- (Ord. 1062 § 1, 1986: prior code§ 9.14) essary in order to preserve the quality of life of persons residing in the area, the council shall 1036.150 Nighttime parking of la consider the effect of vehicles parked by persons vehicles. not residing in the area on ambient noise levels. Between the hours of ten p.m.and se a.m., air pollution. levels and other environmental it is unlawful to park or leave standing up any characteristics of the area; pedestrian and vehic- public right-of-way within two hundred of ular traffic safety in the area;and the burden on any dwelling, any vehicle exceeding (1) tw ty persons residing in the area in gaining access to feet in length, or (2) six thousand you s their residences. (Prior code§ 3209.17) unladen w c 1036.180 Designation of residential parking 3209. �- permit areas—Content of resolution. The resolution designating an area of the city as a residential permit parking area shall describe the designated area along which parking will be (San Luis Obispo 7-86) 208 _. 7-/3 10.36.190 limited(1) to vehicles registered to or controlled and exclusively used by persons residing in the area, and(2) vehicles registered to or controlled by and exclusively used by visitors to persons residing in the area,and shall set forth the hours and days when parking will be limited to those vehicles. (Prior code § 3209.18) 1036.190 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 r j 2208-1 (San Luis Obispo 7-W 7-i� 10.36.200-10.36.235 parking permit area, the city traffic engineer 10.36.220 Residential parking permit— shall cause appropriate signs to be erected along "' Issuance. the streets identified in the resolution which Upon the application of any person residing - 1 shall give notice of the limitation on the parking in a residential permit area, the finance director of vehicles in the area as provided in Section shall issue a residential parking permit for each 10.36.170,and shall indicate the hours and days vehicle described in Section 10.36.180(1). Fur- when such limitations shall be in effect. (Prior ther, upon application of such person the code§ 3209.19) finance director shall issue no more than two additional residential parking permits for each 1036.200 Limitations on parking in a residence address for use by visitor vehicles des- residential permit parking area. ignated in Section 10.36.180(2).Each residential It is unlawful for any person to stop, stand or parking permit issued by the finance director for park a vehicle on any street identified in a reso- a vehicle described by Section 10.36.180(l)shall lution adopted by the council designating a resi set forth the license number of the vehicle for dential permit parking area during the hours which it is issued,and shall be valid for a period and. on the days set forth in such resolution of one year, or for a shorter period as may be except: prescribed by the council by resolution. A per- A. Those vehicles described in Section mit issued for visitor vehicles shall be denoted as 10.36.180 displaying a valid permit issued as a visitor permit, shall set forth the name and provided for by Section 10.36.220; or address of the resident to whom it is registered B. An emergency vehicle, including, but not and shall be valid fora period of one year,or for a limited to, an ambulance, fire engine or police shorter period as may be prescribed by the coun- vehicle; or cil by resolution. (Prior code § 3209.21) C. A vehicle which is under the control of a person providing service to property located in 10.36.230 Residential parking permits— the designated residential permit parking area, Display required. including but not limited to a delivery vehicle. Parking permits issued under Section (Prior code § 3209.20) 10.36.220 shall be displayed on a vehicle in a. manner prescribed by the finance director. 10.36.210 Residential parking permit— (Prior code § 3209.23) -- Application—Fee. Applications for residential parking permits 1Rpgrrirt shall be filed with the city finance director in a form prescribed by the finance director, shall be on shall stop, stand, park or leave accompanied by proof in a form satisfactory to standin for vehicle in any city parking lot the finance director of the applicant's place of where vehic rking has been restricted by a residence and in the case of application for the resolution ado the council provided. resident's vehicle, proof of registration or use that signs specifyin trictions, or condi- and control of each vehicle for which a residen- tions under which park ermitted, shall tial parking permit is sought, and shall be have been posted at all entra such prop- accompanied by a fee in an amount fixed by erty. Such signs shall be approv` as to resolution of the council as per schedule on file wording and posting by the chief ce. with the finance director, no part of which shall be refundable to the applicant. (Prior code § 3209.22) 209 (San Luis Obispo 7-84) I 7-/5 C� EXHIBIT E TO: David F Romero FROM: Wayne Peterson SUBJECT: Preferential Parteing Guidel.ines DATE: May 10, 1989 The Parking Management Plan and Municipal Code Sections 10. 6. 170-190 provide guidance to staff as to how and when preferential parking areas should be established. 1. Preferential Parking districts should be established when necessary, in residential. areas congested by parked vehicles owned by non residents. 2. Preferential Parking districts should be established to preserve the. quality of life of area residents. 3. Preferential Parking districts can be ini'ti'ated by residents, staff or council . 4. Council must consider the effect of non resident parked vehicles on ambient noise levels, air pollution, pedestrian, and vehicle safety and the burden on persons residing in the area in gaining access to their residences. _aff interpretation of these guidelines is as follows; 1. Preferential Parking districts should only be considered for residential areas where the residents want them. Determination of the desire to have a district should be established by the passinq of a petition which describes the district and the type of pa.rkinq restriction that will be. applied. , ' , ' •,. L•..= Staff will activily assist residents prepare the petition to assure that it is clear and reasonable. 4. Staff will support districts that have reasonable boundaries. They should not be so small that the problem is moved from one block to the next. The parking restriction should be easy to enforce. The district shows promise of solving a problem. 5. Other solutions should be explored. 6. After receipt of a petition staff will study the area and vgirify that the problem exists and would be solved with the establishment of a district. 7. Staff will meet with the neighborhood petitioning for a district and attempt to work out a mutually agreable district, S. Staff will schedule a public hearing before the Council to take testimony and assist Council in making a decision as to the formation of a district. 9. If a district is formed. Staff will sign the district as required and enforce the district restrictions as required on a complaint basis. 10. Generally districts should be formed only in areas predominately 'ngle family in character. 7-l(� MFETING AGENDA PIS MEMORANDUM D�. .' _ITEM # June 11 1993c° i=tet' (E! 9G10 r-.0 r To: City Council From: John Dunn Subject: Cbnuersa-tiiwith Mr.Henry Case regarding the RON proposal for restricted nighttime parking in the Alta Visa neighborhood adjacent to Cal Po'l Summary: After a thorough discussion, Mr.Case and I agreed that it is better to slow the process down and allow RQN representatives an opportunity to work with Mr. McCluskey and Mr. Peterson to "file off the rough edges", and that the matter should be continued at this time and heard by the City Council at the first meeting in October, for a suggested effective date of January 1, 1994. As the Council is aware, the matter was submitted for staff evaluation, and is currently business item No. 7 on the June 15 agenda. Discussion: Henry Case and I have known one another since Monterey days, and we had a thorough and a good chat on the issue. Mr. Case explained that the existing parking district for the neighborhood has daytime parking -restrictions which, after the first week,of each quarter and the issuing of some citations, apparently works quite well the rest of the time. Their proposal is to amend the existing regulations to prohibit parking between 2 to 6 a.m. in order to control the density of residents living in the area. He said that the 6+ ordinance is good but that it is very difficult to enforce. He gave high marks to Rob Bryn for doing the best job he can. Mr. Case thought that the ordinance would probably be declared invalid by the State Supreme Court at some future time. He said that the number of 6 may be.viewed as arbitrary. He said that certain attorneys in the State are working hard to invalidate these types of ordinances. He indicated that the State Department of Housing and Community Development has filed a Friend of the Court brief against some of these ordinances. According to HCD standards, Mr. Case indicated, you could put up to 9 people in a two-bedroom house and up to 17 persons in a three-bedroom house. They feel that, unless you are willing to "pack them in", there will be inadequate housing within the State, particularly for newly arriving immigrants. He cited a fairly recent example of a fire in Oxnard which involved 44 people living in a three-bedroom home, which killed two of the occupants. It was later determined that there was no violation of health or safety laws. He felt that our ordinance will be validated or modified in the future. However he mentioned that the courts have consistently,,said that cities have the right to control parking as a legitimate means to control density. On the specific parking prohibition proposal, he indicated that .Wayne Peterson initially didn't have the information about neighborhood support fc,_ &he nighttime prohibition but that _ and Wayne have been working together and, based on their discussion, that RQN has modified their proposal to simplify it and ensure that the parking program is consistent throughout the parking restriction district. I explained one of the chief staff concerns is that the enforcement of such a parking prohibition not be manpower intensive; we simply didn't have the personpower to engage in an intensive nighttime parking enforcement program. However, we agreed that there could be a program of some spot enforcement after 3 am, after Police Officers have concluded more critical law enforcement responsibilities in the community. We agreed that the program, in order to be most effective, would have to be almost self-enforcing, and appropriate signing was the key to this. He indicated that RQN is continuing to work on getting additional petition signatures to demonstrate neighborhood support for the proposal. He handed me the latest neighborhood nighttime parking restriction proposal (attached). Mr. Case explained that parking permits would be granted to existing residents only, both long-time residents, students, etc. However, when someone moves out, the new resident couldn't obtain a parking permit unless the residence provided sufficient off-street parking. He said that the intent of the program was to force property buyers and renters to buy or rent properties that provided sufficient off-street parking space on the property or, if not, reduce the number of cars that the property can accommodate through the permit issuance system. He said that the neighborhood is close enough to the campus that students living in the area can walk to campus and don't really need cars. We discussed the further consultation that was necessary in order to attempt to develop a. mutually-acceptable program. -Though he didn't believe that this was a "student issue", he said he realized that there would be others who would view it that way. He was aware of the criticism that the City had received in the past because we had considered matters impacting students when the University was not in session. We agreed that getting a real solution for the long-term was the goal, and he agreed that consideration of this matter should be rescheduled for the first meeting in October, and that implementation on or about January 1, 1994 was acceptable. JD:mc Attachment C. Henry Case Mike McCluskey Wayne Peterson Jim Gardiner Jeff Jorgensen Ken Hampian- h/case - i PROPOSED R-1 STREET PARKING DISTRICT REVISION AMENDMENT TO THE PARKING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO In recent years there has been a marked increase in the numbers of automobiles parked on R-1 zone residential streets in the city. Residential streets have been designed, built and intended to support local traffic and incidental, as opposed to permanent, parking for visitors and residents. Of particular interest is the existing preferential parking district roughly bounded by Slack Street, Grand Avenue, Frederick Street, Longview Lane, Bond Street and Hathway Street. This parking district is characterized by curved streets with restricted visibility causing concern for children, pedestrians and bike riders. Many streets are very narrow and have no curbs. Multiple parked cars restricts space for passing of vehicles traveling in opposite directions and for emergency vehicles. To mitigate this problem we propose that the parking district be amended such that parking would be allowed only by permit between 2 AM and 6 AM and between 8 AM and 5 PM, Monday through Friday. All other hours no permit would be required. • One or two 4 day nonresident guest placards per household would be available for the current fee. This would be a continuation of the present practice, except the same placard would be used day or night. • During the two months after the effective date of the ordinance, all residents could obtain permits for.street parking of their vehicles for the current fee . Thereafter, only renewal of previous permits would be issued. This would provide for a gradual phase in so as not to create a hardship. i Special need parking would be available by arrangement. This would include older properties that do not meet current standards for off street parking and live in health care workers if adequate off street parking is not available. 0 Enforcement by complaint or random patrol.