CCMIN050200 - Laserfiche WebLink

Kelly Cousins, 3736 Cameron Avenue, indicated two neighborhood meetings had taken place and most property ownera agreed that limited parking on Cameron Avenue was acceptable and staff in the report dated January 18, 2000 was also in favor of that. Although there may have been some controversy about sidewalks, painted bike lanes, and pedestrian lanes, parking was always favored by the majority of residents. She said prior to the road being widened, parking was allowed on the north side of the street and people who parked there were never told to move their vehicles by police who monitor the area. D~tring discussions about the new fence and street widening, it was never mentioned that no parking signs would be installed on the north side of Cameron. She indicated she is a~vare of safety concems and her child walks or bikes to Mohr School along with several children in the neighborhood. There are many adults who walk on the road in the cvcning. People can access the path along Martin Avenue by several streets including Mohr Avenue, which has a sidewalk or surrounding streets which allow parking on at least one side. She has not opposed a sidewalk on the north side, but existing lm~dscaping on the south side would make it difdicalt to install a sidewalk on the developed side of Cameron. She said the undeveloped field on the north side could accommodate the sidewalk and parking and the owner has agreed to that so long as the City maintained the area. Many neighbors surrounding Cameron who access the street to travel to and from school have agreed that parking should be allowed with various restrictions during commute times. Speed limit enfomement seems to be a bigger concern for most of the nieghbors. She indicate the parking needs would be for special occasions like political or school functions~ or social activities that primarily occur in the evening hours. She said there is also a need for parking for gardeners and deliverymen. She believed the lack of parking negatively impacts the market value of her property. She asked Council to approve limited parking so her neighborhood is consistent with surroundidng neighborhoods which have parking on at least one side of the streets. Jed Sussman, 3736 Cameron Avenue, read a letter from Sue Bouchet, 3750 Cameron Avenue, who could not attend the Council meeting. She has lived them for 14 years and asked why the city was over-regulating the arcs regarding parking. She disagreed that Cameron Avenue has always been a no-parking street. She indicated that shc would agree to having a sidewalk on the side of her property ~acing Cameron. She invited staff and Cotmcil to sit on her lawn day or night to count the cars and people who walk or drive on the road. It is not a busy street even before and ai~er school. Some weeks ago, she had a lhn~itare delivery to her home. One of the fathers who was walking his children to school threatened the driver who had parked in front of her driveway that he would call the police to enforce the "no parking" sign. The driver letS. She asked if Council expects delivery people to park on side streets and haul heavy pieces of fumitttre down the road on a dolly? She wondered about the reaction of the father and stated, those trucks, that are able to, do pall into her driveway. She expressed concern about the resale value of the homes and felt Ibis parking limit would cause the needless addition of one more disclosure to the list. Pedestrian safety is supposedly one of the reasons for this restriction and Cameron Avenue is a road without side~valks. Alternate choices are available on Martin, Kamp and Mohr Avenues, which have sidewalks and access every road in the neighborhood. Cameron may be a more direct route, but choosing to walk down a road without sidewalks wben roads with sidewalks are available is an individual Pleasanton City Cotmall 19 05/02/00 Minutcs