My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2008_0225
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2008
>
CC_Minutes_2008_0225
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/5/2009 3:29:20 PM
Creation date
3/6/2008 1:07:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
2/25/2008
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, February 25, 2008 <br />Page 9 <br />a. Discussion of Parking Ordinance Responses <br />Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided results of the study on a pro- <br />posed parking ban by the City's Public Works, l;nviromnent, and Transportation <br />Advisory Commission, and responses received to-date. Mr. Schwartz provided a <br />map of areas of responses, with 32 responses against such a parking ban; 13 re- <br />sponses in favor of such a ban; one response with no preference; and six re- <br />sponses with no address provided. Mr. Schwartz note that the Commission <br />sought public input from the online issues forum; news articles in the Roseville <br />Review; and additional discussion at the Commission level. <br />Mr. Schwartz advised that, after compiling the resulting continents, the Commis- <br />sion was recommending no change in parking ordinance at this time. <br />Councilmember Ihlan asked that Mr. Schwartz provide an overview of the current <br />process for citizens who have parking concerns needing to be addressed in their <br />neighborhoods. <br />Mr. Schwartz advised that a resident or business owner could call staff to alert <br />them and for staff to attempt resolution of a parking issue, based on existing code <br />application. Mr. Schwartz noted that if the issue was signage related, the re- <br />quester could ask for a review by the City's Traffic Safety Committee for issues <br />typically related to safety or perceived problems that could be addressed at that <br />level. Mr. Schwartz further noted that, if it was determined that this was a <br />neighborhood-wide issue, the issue would be brought by the Safety Committee to <br />the City Council for action. <br />Discussion included examples of Safety Committee outcomes; thresholds for ad- <br />dressing when items are brought to the City Council based on a case-by-case ba- <br />sis; nothing in current code restricting extended street parking in the same spot, as <br />long as a vehicle is properly licensed and operable; and the Commission's sugges- <br />tion that code be amended to specifically address issues for abusive situations. <br />Councilmember Roe suggested that this issue, to address reasonable parking on <br />streets be dealt with specifically. <br />Councilmember Ihlan noted that she had been motivated to initiate this discussion <br />and study based on long-term parking and lack of current code to restrict such <br />parking. Councilmember Ihlan reviewed other alternatives (no parking; no over- <br />night parking; restricted hours) and impacts of such options, based on experiences <br />of other communities. Councilmember Ihlan opined that, while the Commission's <br />consensus may be that there was no need to change the ordinance, their recom- <br />mendation made it clear that awell-defined process for addressing problems on a <br />case-by-case basis was important, to allow relief or resolution for those individu- <br />alized problem areas. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.