Laserfiche WebLink
<br />school where parents might park to drop off and pick up their children, and the City would not be <br />in a position to issue permits to these parents; technically parents would be in violation of <br />permitted parking. In lieu of permitted parking, staff asked the community if it would accept a <br />four-hour parking zone and it was this discussion that occurred at the Staff Traffic Committee <br />meeting and the residents present indicated it was acceptable. The primary issue as mentioned <br />this evening is the preference to allow permitted parking. <br />In response to an inquiry by Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Wilson said Council could choose to <br />amend the ordinance; however, once the ordinance was amended, it would apply throughout <br />the City and extend beyond the existing school zones. <br />To address the school drop-off issue, Mr. Sullivan asked if it would be possible to have a <br />four-hour parking zone and permitted parking? <br />Mr. Wilson said the issue would be enforceability and the ordinance would need to be <br />amended because currently, there is no language in the existing ordinance that allows for both a <br />four-hour parking zone and permitted parking simultaneously which does not allow for <br />weekends and enforcement during the summer season. <br />Mr. Sullivan believed the ordinance could be amended to state that a four-hour parking <br />zone and permitted parking would be granted on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis as <br />most neighborhoods do not have a problem of a significant amount of vehicles parking on their <br />streets that do not necessarily reside in that neighborhood. <br />Mr. Wilson pointed out that the ordinance would expand permitted parking beyond <br />school zones. <br />Mr. Sullivan asked if the City could adopt an ordinance that would prohibit people from <br />parking vehicles on City streets with a for-sale sign? <br />Mr. Roush said no as it is not permissible for a city to adopt an ordinance to prohibit a <br />person from parking his or her vehicle on the street as long as it is not in violation of the 72-hour <br />rule. The problem becomes one of enforceability in terms of trying to decipher what is the <br />primary purpose of parking vehicles on the streets. <br />Mr. Brozosky asked public safety staff to address the issue of enforceability. <br />Tim Neal, Police Chief, said public safety staff is sympathetic to the problem. He noted <br />that one public safety staff member is assigned to vehicle abatement; however, all public safety <br />staff provides parking enforcement services 24 hours a day, seven days a week. At Council's <br />last meeting, it authorized by resolution, the use of volunteers to engage in parking enforcement <br />and the Police Department plans to utilize these volunteers. He noted that permitted parking <br />has created a solution to the Foothill High School problem and the issue as presented was not a <br />car-for sale problem but a school issue and the problem is rectified during the summer season. <br />The 72-hour rule is enforced and vehicles are towed. Staff does its best to try and get the <br />vehicle owners to comply with the spirit of the law. From an enforceability standpoint, it would <br />be the same in monitoring whether it were a four-hour parking zone or permitted parking. <br />Mr. Brozosky asked if would be harder to enforce if both a four-hour parking zone and <br />permitted parking was established? <br />Pleasanton City Council 9 11/01/05 <br />Minutes <br />