CC_Minutes_2014_0421 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,April 21,2014 Page 8 Mr. Munson clarified that the proposed amendment sought to address long-term storage, as noted on Attachment A, while still allowing temporary parking of those items for a maximum of four days in each and any calendar month. Mr. Munson noted that parking of these units in driveways was still permitted at this time; as well as extended parking of smaller units and/or vehicles on streets if permitted. Mr. Munson clarified that enforcement was proposed to be done reac- tively after a public complaint was received by the Community Development, Po- lice and/or Public Works Departments; but not proactively. Mr. Munson antici- pated owners would comply to avoid impound charges and other administrative fees for violations of this section of the City's Nuisance Code. Councilmember Etten thanked staff for bringing this forward; and specific to line 15 of the RCA, sought clarification of the actual amount of time allowed, whether 4 days, 5 days, or a week. Mr. Munson advised that, if staff observed and confirmed the violation, they would continue the process, but the process would halt once the offending unit was gone, with no specific action then taken. Councilmember Etten observed that this appears to be largely complaint-driven, with Mr. Munson confirming that it would be basically complaints of the public, or Police or Public Works Departments based on safety issues. At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Munson confirmed that former pub- lic complaints heard about not knowing whom to direct their calls to have been addressed in this proposed process. At the request of Councilmember Etten as to how to verify the length of parking to initiate the process, Mr. Munson advised that the time would be structured for City staff, with two hours or more constituting one day, verified by photo evi- dence as staff confirmed the problem unit, also reviewing the adjacent neighbor- hood to ensure the unit had not simply been relocated in the same vicinity. Mr. Munson noted that this would require more staff inspections than a typical nui- sance case, but expressed his confidence that staff would be able to verify those violations. At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Munson advised that this portion of code related to the size and type of vehicle would be consistent with other areas of code specific to dual axles or tires. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Munson advised that the City's entire public nuisance section is enforced reactively, with staff not typically look- ing for violations other than when performing the Neighborhood or Business En- hancement Program (NEP or BEP) inspections, but using a complaint-driven or reactive process.