Upset Oaklanders Returned to the Piedmont City Council Seeking Parking Relief from Newly Imposed Restrictions
At the February 5, 2018 Piedmont City Council meeting, Oakland residents once more addressed the Council during Public Forum in regard to the parking restrictions on Rose and Kingston Avenues adjacent to their residences. The City of Piedmont, with Council approval, installed signage restricting on-street parking on several blocks of Kingston, Lake, Linda and Rose Avenues.
Oakland and Piedmont single family home residents each receive two resident on-street parking permits. Oakland residents of small, older, multi-family buildings received one permit for each apartment unit. However, Oakland multi-family buildings with more than eight units receive no permits.
The Parking District wording is, “Dwelling units in large complexes greater than eight units are excluded from receiving parking permits.” The three 15-unit buildings located at 775, 777 and 779 Kingston were built after the Oakland code required off-street parking for each unit. The current fee is $100 per month in addition to rent to use the off-street parking.
The City Council voted in a late night meeting (1:30 a.m.) October 16, 2017 to impose the restricted parking on Kingston and Rose Avenues at the border of Piedmont/Oakland. Friction was present at that meeting and has persisted as Oakland neighbors have publicly stated hardship and safety issues resulting from the restrictions. The Piedmont City Council approved $60,000 to fund the new Parking District.
Council action states:
“Vehicles are prohibited from parking within the Parking District between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., 7 days a week, holidays included, unless an approved resident parking permit is displayed on the vehicle.”
Some of the complaints made by Oaklanders at the February 5, 2018 meeting were:
- Oakland apartment residents were not adequately notified prior to approval of the restrictions.
- Oakland and Piedmont single family residents can get 2 on-street permits, plus park in their garages or driveways.
- Safety has become an issue for many Oakland residents who come home late at night or leave early in the morning to go to work.
- The approach by Piedmont is not neighborly.
- Piedmont, rather than Oakland, has jurisdiction over the street on the north side of the 700s/800s block of Kingston Avenue.
- With the new restrictions, many parking spaces are left open each night indicating there is no need for the restrictions to accommodate Piedmont needs.
- One woman announced she had been sexually assaulted near her apartment.
- The parking restrictions need to be placed on a Piedmont City Council agenda for reconsideration of the matter and additional input.
City Administrator Paul Benoit, who has been administering the new Parking District, was not present at the meeting to respond to the Oaklanders concerns and the Council could not discuss the unagendized matter during Public Forum. Mayor Robert McBain stated he did not want to be lectured to by the commenters.
Watch the February 5 Council meeting> here.
~~~~~~~~~
The October 16, 2017 detailed staff and consultant report can be read > HERE.
Approved Council minutes of October 16, 2017 relate the action taken and are copied below:
Lake/Linda/Kingston/ Rose Avenue Preferential Parking District
City Council Minutes October 16, 2017
The Council thanked the residents who expressed their opinions on these proposals and had dedicated so much time to this issue.
Councilmember Cavenaugh announced that she must recuse herself from the consideration of the Linda/Kingston/Rose Avenues Preferential Parking District because her residence is within 500 feet of the proposed District. She left the Council Chambers.
City Administrator Benoit introduced the concept of a preferential parking district located along Lake, Linda, Kingston, and Rose Avenues.
Public Works Director Chester Nakahara reported this issue has been under consideration for several years. He stated that initially, 24 of the 36 parcels along Kingston Avenue had signed a petition requesting a preferential parking district. He indicated that from this initial petition, neighborhood interest had grown and the proposed district had expanded to include several other streets.
Mr. Nakahara reviewed the process of indicating that staff and the traffic engineer started collecting data including a neighborhood survey, town hall meeting, and identification of parkers to determine if they were residents or not. He reviewed the discussions about the possible inclusion of Greenbank Avenue in the district. He continued explaining the process, including a second town hall meeting. He described the difference in opinion between different blocks within the proposed district regarding when the parking impacts are worst and what the best remedy in terms of parking restrictions would be. He explained that each block segment had selected a representative and that the representatives had come to a consensus on the parking restriction which is proposed tonight. He recommended parking restrictions from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. with review after six months.
Mr. Nakahara noted that on Rose Avenue, the City limit runs on the northerly edge of the street, meaning that the housing on the north side of the street was in Oakland, but that vehicles parked on this side of the street are in Piedmont. He indicated that residences on the Oakland side of the street would receive parking passes.
Resolution No. 83-17
RESOLVED, that the City Council extends the meeting to 12 a.m. Moved by Rood, Seconded by Andersen
Ayes: Andersen, King, Rood, McBain
Noes: NoneRecused: Cavenaugh
Amy Lopez, representing traffic engineer Kittleson & Associates, presented the data collection methodology, the community meetings, and the conclusions reached.
Public Works Director Nakahara referenced the dwelling unit inventory and inclusion of Oakland residents that live on Rose. He stated Piedmont would enforce parking on both sides of Rose Avenue and he clarified the parking district areas.
Resolution No. 84-17
RESOLVED, that the City Council extends the meeting to 12:30 a.m. Moved by Rood, Seconded by King
Ayes: Andersen, King, Rood, McBain Noes: None
Recused: CavenaughPublic Testimony was received from:
Andy Skov, representing Kingston Avenue, supported the formation of the district. He summarized the process and the frustration with the Kittleson study because it did not evaluate the district block by block.
Doug Paton and David Weiner expressed support for the district and discussed the possible impacts to Greenbank Avenue
Max Woodruff-Madeira suggested the overnight restriction start at 11 p.m.
Arden Hall expressed frustration with overflow parking in his neighborhood and inability to park overnight in front of his home.
Rem Kinne indicated opposition to the proposed parking district and discussed the need to consider pedestrian safety.
Martin Hall stated that residents of Greenbank Avenue did not see a parking problem and did not see the need for a preferential parking district. He expressed concern that the Greenbank representative was not included in the proposal and would not be included after the trial period.
Councilmember King read a statement from Debra Dinerman expressing frustration with lack of parking.
Resolution No. 85-17
RESOLVED, that the City Council extends the meeting to 1:30 a.m. Moved by Rood, Seconded by Andersen
Ayes: Andersen, King, Rood, McBain
Noes: NoneRecused: Cavenaugh
Council discussed the proximity of the proposed district to the city limit and notification of both the elected officials and staff of the City of Oakland. Mr. Benoit stated staff should have and would make notifications to Oakland, although the parking restriction would be to its benefit.
The Council expressed concern with the cost of a pilot program, the findings necessary under the City Code to create such a district, and potential unintended consequences. Mr. Benoit suggested updating the code provisions regarding preferential parking districts.
Assistant City Attorney Herrington noted a correction to the resolution indicating both Vehicle 22507 and City Code section 11.80 should be referenced.
Resolution No. 86-17
WHEREAS, on-street parking on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue in the City of Piedmont (“City”) is congested; and
WHEREAS, since July of 2015, the City has conducted several studies and held several public forums to discuss the possibility of creating a preferential parking district pursuant to City Code Section 11.80 and Vehicle Code section 22507 on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue.
WHEREAS, on-street parking congestion on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue creates substantial inconvenience for the residents of those streets; and
WHEREAS, on-street parking on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue constitutes a safety hazard; and
WHEREAS, use of existing off–street parking spaces on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue is inadequate; and
WHEREAS, creating a preferential parking district on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue will not adversely affect the neighborhoods next to the proposed parking district; and
WHEREAS, creating a preferential parking district will not adversely affect the general safety and welfare of the residents of the City as a whole.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PIEDMONT AS FOLLOWS:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this Resolution as findings of the City Council of the City of Piedmont.
2. Pursuant to City Code Section 11.80 and Vehicle Code section 22507, the City hereby establishes a preferential parking district on Kingston Avenue, Rose Avenue, Lake Avenue, and Linda Avenue, as more particularly depicted on Exhibit A (“Parking District”).
3. Vehicles are prohibited from parking within the Parking District between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., 7 days a week, holidays included, unless an approved resident parking permit is displayed on the vehicle.
4. City staff is hereby directed to implement all necessary measures to install signage to notify residents and visitors of the parking restrictions and to distribute approved parking permits to residents within the Parking District.
5. Two parking permits will be issued to each dwelling unit within the Parking District. Residents may not obtain additional permits. Dwelling units in large complexes greater than eight units are excluded from receiving parking permits. The dwelling units on the north (or Oakland) side of Rose Avenue will be entitled to receive parking permits. This includes the following addresses on Rose Avenue: 1075, 1069, 1063, 1057, 1051, 1045, 1039, 1053, 1027, 1021 (four units), 1015, 1007, 1001, 995 (three units), 957, 951, 945-943, 939-937, 933, 927-925, 921, 901(four units), 849, 847, 843, 839-837, 785 and 781. The three dwelling units on 142 Echo Avenue will also be entitled to receive parking permits.
6. Subsequent to the installation of approved signage, City staff is directed to establish an effective date of enforcement and to notify the affected residents of that effective date.
7. $60,000 is hereby appropriated for the cost of permits and parking sign installation.
8. The Director of Public Works is directed to report back to the City Council, approximately six months after the effective date of enforcement, on the effectiveness of the District as well as the potential impacts to adjacent, non- regulated streets.
9. The Director of Public Works is directed to reach out to colleagues in the City of Oakland to apprise them of the creation of this preferential parking district. The Director of Public Works shall forward his six month report to the Council on the effectiveness of the district to the City of Oakland.
9. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.
10. All portions of this resolution are severable. Should any individual component of this Resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable by a body of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining resolution portions shall be and continue in full force and effect, except as to those resolution portions that have been adjudged invalid. The City Council of the City of Piedmont hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, clause, sentence, phrase and other portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section subsection, clause sentence, phrase or other portion may be held invalid or unconstitutional.
Moved by King, Seconded by Andersen
Ayes: Andersen, King, Rood, McBain
Noes: None
Absent: Cavenaugh
(0735)Councilmember Cavenaugh returned to the Council Chambers and took her seat at the dais.