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.