Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 2 TRAFFIC CONCERNS 03-16-87OLD BUSINESS NO. 2 3-16-87 DATE: FEBRUARY 10, 1987 · Inter- Corn TO: FROM: SU BJ ECT: WILLIAH HUSTON, CITY lqANAGER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTINENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION MITCHELL AVENUE - HEATHERFIELD DRIVE TRAFFIC CONCERNS RECOMMENDATION: For the City Council meeting of March 16, 1987. Pleasure of the City Council. BACKGROUND: The residents of Heatherfield Drive surfaced several concerns as outlined in the Engineering Division memo dated 9-17-86 and marked as Attachment "A". Prior to .finalizing this study, staff coordinated the pertinent parking problems with the Police Department and received a response as outlined in their memo dated 9-19-86 and marked as Attachment "B". The residents concerns were presented to the City Council on 10-6-86 and staff was directed to send a letter questionnaire to all potentially affected residents along Heatherfield Drive to determine as to whether they would be in favor of the proposed permit parking program. The letter questionnaire is marked as Attachment "C". The letter questionnaire dated October 7, 1986 was mailed to sixteen residences along Heatherfield Drive. The following is a recap of responses of this survey: For the permit parking program ................. 11 (68.8%) Against the permit parking program ............. 2 (12.5%) No response .................................... 3 (18.7%) Total ~ Prior to this item returning to the City Council for final 1986, the Police Department surfaced new concerns about parking program within the City as follows: action on November 3, implementing a permit Initiation of a precedent for regulation of on-street parking that could be utilized Citywide. o Manpower impacts to provide adequate enforcement on a Citywide basis. The Poli~e Department completed a survey of night time on-street parking Heatherfield Drive for a seven day period of 11-6-86 through 11-12-86. on The results of this survey are outlined in the Police Department memo dated 11-13-86 and marked as Attachment "D". FEBRUARY 10, 1987 PAGE TWO On December 17, 1986, a meeting was held with the neighborhood resident's, Police Department staff and the City's Consultant Traffic Engineer to discuss each group's concerns, etc. As a result of this meeting, it was determined thab a second letter questionnaire be. mailed to the residents to determine if they would be in favor or against total on-street parking restrictions between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. a'long both Heatherfield Drive and Sandwood Place. A copy of this second letter questionnaire is attached and marked as Attachment "E" and was sent to sixteen residences along Heatherfield Drive and eight residences along Sandwood Place as shown on the attached map marked Attachment "F". The results of the survey indicate the following: For the restricted parking between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. - .......................... 4 (16.7%) Against the restricted parking between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. - .......................... 14 (58.3%) No response ......................................... 6 (25.0%) Total ~ The detailed results and comments of the 1-9-87 questionnaire and letters received from residents are attached and marked as Attachment "G". A 'recap of the alternatives studied to date include: 1. Implementation of a permit parking program. 2. Implementation of restricted on-street parking between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. 3. No action, which results in a status quo situation and no change to current parking regulations. Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:jm Attachments Inter-Com FROH: SUBJECT: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER POLICE DEPARTMENT PARKXNG PROHIBITION - HEATHERFIELO ORIVE Recommendation An on-street parking prohibition for all vehicles between the hours of 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. be instituted on Heatherfield Drive. Background The parking situation on Heatherfield as described in the attached memos from the police department and the engineering department, indicate that there are three potential courses of action that may be taken by Council: 1. Implement a parking prohibition between the hours 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. 2. 'Implement a permit parking process. 3. No action, parking to continue, taking no action. of A parking prohibition would eliminate the usage of Heatherfield for overnight parking. The availability of parking until 2:00 A.M. would leave the street available for those residents who have guests to have on-street parking. This prohibition is enforceable in that the hours of enforcement are those hours which are typically low calls for service times for the police department. Option #2, permit parking, will not bring the relief the neighborhood desires in that the heaviest enforcement time, which by necessity would be of a low priority, is during the highest activity times the police department experiences. Alternative #3, no action, is not an option at this point. It is recommended Council adopt a parking prohibition for Heather- field Drive. Chief of Police CRT:dh Inter-Corn WILLIAM A. NUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROH: POLICE DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: PERMIT PARKING - HEATHERFIELO Recommendation A on-street parking-prohibition for all vehicles between the hours of g:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. be instituted on Heatherfield.Drive. Background On December 17, 1986, Heatherfield residents, a representative of the public works department, and representatives of the police department met to discuss the parking issues. The discussion was positive and productive. The Heatherfield residents expressed their frustration over having few available parking spots on their street during the evening hours. The feeling~ was that the available parking was being utilized by non-residents. Their desire was to free the on-street parking for use by residents only. Their suggested method of accomplishing this was the implementation of the permit parking process. They requested this permit parking to be instituted 7 days a week between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M., with 2 on-street guest parking permits per residence. The police department discussed its concerns with the proposed solution, permit parking. Between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and 3:00 A.M. are the police department's h~ghest calls for service time span, particularly with emergency calls for service. Violations of the permit parking would be of low priority. There are also no parking control officers on duty during these particular hours due to a lack of need. The department would not be able to consistently provide the service desired in the enforcement of the permit parking regulations that the residents of Heatherfield would rightfully .expect and demand, due to other' calls for service. It was further explained that a prohibition of all parking on the street between 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. was, for the police department, a most viable solution. Each resident on Heatherfield has 4 off-street parking spaces, 2 in the garage, 2 on the driveway. A parking prohibition between the hours of 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. would provide the opportunity for residents and guests to utilize on-street parking until 2:00 A.M. Non-residents utilizing the street as an all night parking lot, would be unable Page 2 Heatherfield Permit Parking 2/19/87 to do so because of the total parking prohibition. There are 16 residences on Heatherfield which would be affected, and 24 available on-street parking spaces. Two on-street guest parking permits issued per residence would be impossible to accomplish if there w~s a need for more than 24 parking spaces. After much discussion, residents agreed that the parking prohibition between the hours of 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 AM was the best solution. It was also agreed that the traffic engineer would re-evaluate the red curb areas on Mitchell Street, with the view of shortening them to allow for more on-street parking. Based on this discussion, I am surprised at the current reversal of the expressed position of the residents at the end of this meeting. Other Cities' Experience History and experience by other jurisdictions has shown permit parking to be, at best, a necessary evil when there is no other solution. The permit parking process has been used by jurisdictions with facilities that attract a large influx of non-residents into a given area. Anaheim (Anaheim Stadium and the Convention Center areas), Costa Mesa (Fairgrounds and Amphitheater), Fullerton (Cal State University), and beach cities have found permit parking to be necessary to provide residents a place to park. In the beach cities area, this was because off-street parking was not available. Permit parking was the only available method to provide residents any parking and is uti-i-Fi-zed only in problem areas. All jurisdictions utilizing the permit parking process report the same problems: excessive administrative time for issuance of permits, voiding citations, and addressing citizen dissatisfaction when service levels do not meet their expectations. This is particularly when citations are not voided because residents or guests forget to display their parking permit. Each jurisdiction viewed the permit parki~g process as a necessary evil. It was utilized and beneficial because of the clearly apparent unique circumstances. Conclusion Permit parking is not a viable solution to the concerns expressed by the. Heatherfield residents. The one thing worse than the current problems would be to have a mechanism in place (permit parking) which could not be enforced to the level of Page 3 Heatherfield Permit Parking 2/19/87 expecation. In this situation, that would be the case. Permit parking would create significant administrative and enforcement work without the desired results. Additionally, permit parking (during concerned hours) places all parking authorization in the control of the resident. No one would be able to park without first obtaining a guest parking permit from one of the residents on Heatherfield. In. essence, the street parking becomes private controlled and public maintained. A parking prohibition between the hours of 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M. would be manageable and enforceable with existing resources and addresses the residents' concerns. I believe this to be the best course of action. C. R. THAYE~/_ Chief of P~qice CRT:dh January 14, 1987 Carol and Lou Bone 14312 Heatherfield Drive Tustin, California, 92680-6328 714-544-6545 JAN 191987 The Honorable Donald J. Saltarelli Mayor, City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California, 92680 Re: Permit Parking on Heatherfield Drive Dear Mr. Saltarelli: On October 7, 1986, the Department of.Public Works/Engineering sent out a survey to the residents of Heatherfield Drive asking them to vote on permit parking. On December 11, 1986, the Department of Public Works issued a letter stating the results of the vote. The results were: 68.8% for permit parking, 12.5% against, and 18.7% no response. The letter also stated that the Police Department had "surfaced a concern regarding the implementation of the permit program.'~ On December 17, 1986, a meeting was called by the Police Department to discuss their concerns with the residents. The concerns as we understood them were as follows: 1. The parking problem would be moved elsewhere. 2. Residents would be upset with the Police Department if they or their guests received a ticket by forgetting to put the permit sign in the car window. 3. The police would not have enough personnel to enforce a 24 hour parking permit program. 4. If Heatherfield ~as granted permit.parking, the rest of the city would want it. 5. Only one other city iN Orange County. has permit parking, and that city's police department does not like ii.. As for concerns ~1, #2, and #3, these were voiced a few years ago ~hen the residents of Heatherfield asked the couacil for, and received, signs prohibitin~ parking on street-s~eepi~g m¢,~.nings. These fears turned oui to be groundless, Also concerning point #3, we only wanted overnight p,,rmit i,arking from 8:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. Chief Thayer said he had enough personnel to enforce an overnight parking ban. -2- Regarding concern #4, we believe that crime would be reduced'if the whole city had permit parking, as it is difficult to flee the scene of a crime without an automobile. Furthermore, at our Neighborhood Watch meetings, the police told us to be wary of cars that did not belong in the neighborhood. A few years ago Tustin had a no parking ordinance from 2:00 A.M. to 6:00 A.M., which was not enforced. Chief Thayer told us that it was no longer an ordinance. On point #§, we know people in Los Angeles County cities who have permit parking with which they are very happy and it seems to work very well. The residents of Heatherfield have mulled over the meeting discussion points, and we would like permit parking on Heatherfield Drive. The Police Department's own s~rvey for a seven-day period in November showed that 70% of parked cars on Neatherfield did not belong to residents. What we are asking for is: 1. Implementation of the Public Works/Engineering Department's recommendation for permit parking, approved by a 68.8% majority of the residents. 2. Permit parking seven days a week from 8:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. 3. Two permit parking cards issued to each residence on a yearly basis, issued only to vehicles which would take up no more than one parking space. Large trucks and mobile homes which would take up more than one space could not have permits. We feel that the city of Tustin is a great place to live and that' we have a fine Police Department. We are concerned ~ith the safety and appearance of our neighborhood. Permit parking has helped in these areas in other cities outside of Or'ang,~ Count)'. We would like to ask you and the Council to supiort the Public Works Department's recommendation to al]o~,' permit parking on H~,at, herfield Drive. We look for~,'ard to hearing f~'om 5-,~u on this matter. Sincerely, Mr. Huston, City Manager Mr. Tha.¥er, Chief of 'Po]ice Mr. Ledendecker, Director of Public R'ork~ {Mr. Crabill, Traffic Engine'er January 20,1987 CITY OF TUSTIN Department of Public Works/Engineering Mr. Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works/City Engineer 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Ca. 92680 ... clVbb · ,,~o ~ ~: ~F~, JAN 2119B? Dear Mr. Ledendecker: This letter is written in response to the revised recon~n'endations for parking control along Heatherfield Drive and Sandwood Place as referenced in your letter dated 1/9/87. There are four (4} residents in the household, and all four are driving a vehicle. We'utilize both places in the garage, and park one vehicle off the street on an area next to the driveway. Therefore there is one vehicle that needs to be parked on the street and the permit parking would be the most logical and we feel the most easily workable method to play musicai cars ana cnecKers wltntne venicies to maneuver =nem in and out of the driveway whenever we have to use the automobiles. When we have guests we do try and put their vehicles in our driveway as it is very difficult for anyone to park on the street under the present conditions of having everyone BUT the residents use the parking spaces at the front and side of our home. We do not feel that the proh'ibition of on street parking from 2 to 6 in the morning {2:00am to 6:00a.m.)would be feasible in the neighborhood. We would like to have the enforcement of the permit system as passed by the .mesidents of our neighborhood in October of 1986. Georgia o ey,, / 14332 Heather(_ield Drive Tustin, California 92680 January 21, 1987 . ~'lJ~TM pH IF' ,~,,e To: From: Subject: JAN 2 3 1987 Mr. R. Ledendecker ~ Mr. and Mrs. Robert D. Weidner Letter dated January 9, 1987, reference 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. Restriction The Weidner family has resided on Heatherfield since February, 1973. The current parking problem has escaled since the curbs on Mitchell were painted red a few years ago. The red curbs caused non-resident cars to seek parking on Heatherfield. Non-resident parking led to signs prohibiting parking on Monday mornings to permit street sweeping. Now we are plagued with visual pollution in the form of signs. Here are a few examples of the problems we have had which requi.red the police to investigate: 1. A large camper (almost R.V. size} parked in front of our house from Friday night until Sunday night. 2. A man living in his car and parked in front of our house all night. 3. People working on cars at odd hours making noise and leaving trash on the street and lawn areas. 4. Cars parked over the 72 hour limit; by the time the pol, ice marked these cars, often times five days had elapsed. He are sure other residents have had, and are having, problems similar to the~e. ) The ~eidner family still wants permit parking on Heat~erfield. We have thought about our problem and what the 2 to 6 restriction will cause us to endure. Here are five of the disadvantages that will affect us. There are more, these are only the first few that occurred to us. Other residents, no doubt, have objections that are pertinent to their situations. 1. Police cars ticketing offenders in the wee hours of the morning with attendant police car noise of engines running, doors slamming, and radios routed through the car's public address system. 2. Non-residents starting their cars and slamming doors prior to the 2 a.m. prohibition, thus awakening residents. 3. Family and visiting guests/relatives not being able to park all night in front of our house. 4. Sometimes we prefer to park a car in the street in front of our house overnight, we do not have this option with the 2 to 6 restriction.' 5. Non-residents parking until 2 a.m. -- strangers walking through our neighborhoods. The number of small chi'ldren that live on Heatherfield has increased. We want street conditions that are safe for our children. We do not want to have to worry about the increasedauto traffic and foot traffic from non-residents. ~ie do not want to be awakened needlessly at odd hours of the night. We do not want strangers walking through our neighborhood when our children are outside. We want permit parkinq. Ji n, cerely yours,,, ' nr.andMrs. Kobert D. 14eidner 14321 Heatherfield Tustin, CA 92680 ELLEN GOODWIN 1882 SANDWOOD.~LACE TUSTIN, CA 92680 January 20, 1987 Mr. Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works/ City Engineer CITY OF TUSTIN 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Dear Mr. Ledendecker: ~¥ JAN 2 21987 Attached is my response regarding parking restrictions on Heather- field and Sandwood between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. I am not against parking in the street but I would like to see signs posted street sweeping. Thank you. Very truly yours, Ellen Goodwin Attach. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION MITCHELL AVENUE - HEATHERFIELD DRIVE TRAFFIC CONCERNS RECOMMENDATION: For the City Council meeting of October 6, 1986. Direct staff to send a l'etter questionnaire to all potentially affected residents along Heatherfield Drive to determine how many residents would be in favor of the permit parking program. BACKGROUND: Residents. of Heatherfield Drive have requested that a cul-de-sac be constructed on Heatherfield Drive just southerly of Mitchell Avenue. This request is a result of the following concerns that were expressed by the residents: On-street parking overflow on Heatherfield Drive from the residents of the condominiums and apartments located along Mitchell Avenue. ° Speed violations of eastbound Mitchell Avenue to southbound Heatherfield Drive. Failure of vehicles to obey stop signs on Mitchell Avenue. An additional concern, which was expressed but not related to Heatherfield, was the truck traffic on Mitchell Avenue. DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the entire area with respect to the closure of Heatherfield Drive by the construction of a cul-de-sac and recommends,against any such street closure for the following reasons: 1. Closure would create a 1,600 foot long cul-de-sac street with only one outlet to Walnut Avenue, which would be in conflict with current City development standards. 2. Potential 'delay for emergency type vehicles servicing the residents of HeatheFfield Drive, Sandwood Place and Cloverbrook Drive. An emergency access could be maintained to Mitchell Avenue which could be gated or blocked with a chain type barrier. However, some delays would be experienced by emergency vehicles in opening the gates or cutt!ng the chain. SEPTEMBER 17, '1986 PAGE TWO 3. Inconvenience to residents desiring to take access to Mitchell Avenue directly. All trips would have to be routed southerly to Walnut Avenue. In lieu of. a street ~losure, staff is suggesting the following: 1. Immediate police enforcement for speed violations and failure to stop at the designated stop signs. 2. "Initiation of a permit parking system'for residents and guests along both sides of Heather'field Avenue. The permit parking could be applied to the entire length of Heatherfield Drive between Mitchell Avenue and Sandwood Place, as shown in blue on the attached map. In the event any additional adjacent area experienced on-going problems, this permit parking area could be extended. The system would provide for parking permits to be issued to each affected resident or their guest for display on the drivers side of the dashboard. Any vehicle parking on the street and not displaying a permit would be cited. This parking permit program has been reviewed with the Police Department and they have 'indicated that they concur with the program. In the event enforcement can not reduce the excessive speeds as they relate to eastbound Mitchell Avenue to southbound Heatherfield Drive, it may be necessary to ins'tall pavement delineation as shown below: · SEPTEMBER 17,'1986 PAGE THREE This type of delineation would restrict vehicles to a narrower lane to complete their right turn movement resulting in a smaller turning radius and hopefully .reduced speeds. This type of installation would require removal of on-street parking in front of each corner residence on Heatherfield Drive at Mitchell Avenue. It is not recommended that this delineation be implemented at this time, but only if the excessive turning speeds persist. In the event a parking permit system is initiated it will be necessary to adopt an Ordinance pertaining to same. The additional issue related to truck traffic on'Mitchell Avenue is most likely due to the limitation of trucks on Walnut Avenue. It is suggested that no specific action be taken on this item at this time, but that staff continue to monitor Mitchell Avenue for any increases in truck useage. Bob Ledend~cker Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:jm Attachment j TT.~CJ-{IV[£#T ".A" Inter-Corn TO: Bob Ledendecker, Engineering FROM: SUBJECT: Sgt. H. Shan~an, Traffic Section Permit Parking Proposal On 9-17-86 Jerry Crabil and I discussed ~he proposed'permit parking for some residential areas as a means of eliminating long standing parking problem areas. I think that if properly worded and used in selected areas, that this type of restricted parking arrangements would be beneficial to not only the area residents ~at are directly affected, but it would help from an enforcement point of view as well. As a'point of personal reference, I lived in several areas in the midwest where this arrangement was very conmon and it was an effective tool in eliminating both parking problems and enforcement efforts. I would be Please keep us informed as to the progress on this issue, as we would be happy to assist in whatever way possible to help with it's implementation. Sincerely, Hike Shanahan Traffic Supervisor cc: Jerry Crabill RECEIVED SEP 19 1986 .... October 7, 1986 Resident · Department of Public Works/Engincrring Tustin, CA 92680 RE: HEATHERFIELD DRIVE ON-STREET PARKING Dear Residenti Over the past few years, the City has received various complaints regarding overflow parking on HeatnerTield Urive. This overtlow parking is a result oT the Mitchell Avenue condominium and apartment residents utilizing Heatherfield Drive due to insufficient parking within their own developments. In order to alleviate this parking problem, staff is recommending the initiation of a permit parking program on both sides of Heatherfiel'd Drive between Mitchell Avenue and Sandwood Place. This permit parking program would include the installation of notification signing on each side of the street. The program would also provide for parking permits to be issued to residents and their guests to display on the drivers side of the dashboard of the vehicles. Any vehicle parking on the street and not displaying a permit would be cited. Prior to considering implementation of this program, the City Council has directed staff to send a letter questionnaire to each of the affected residents along Heatherfield Drive to determine how many residents would be in favor of the permit parking program. Letters are being sent to all residents along Heatherfield Drive as marked in blue on the attached map. Please indicate your preference on this matter in the space .below and return one copy of this letter in the self-addressed stamped envelope by October 24, 1986. In the event there are any questions on this matter, please call me at anytime (544-8890, ext. 280}. Very truly yours, 'Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:jm Attachment In favor of the implementation of a permit parking program along []] Heatherfield Drive between Ilitchell Avenue and Sandwood Place. Against the implementation of a permit parking program along []] Ileatherfield Drive between Ilitchell Avenue and Sandwood Place· 300 C¢,~tennial Way Tustin, Cahfornia.°2680 · (714) 54,~-8590 Inter-Corn Chief C. R. Thayer FROM: Captain Fred.Wakefield SUBJECT: Heatherfield Parking A survey of nighttime on-str.eet parking on Heatherfield has been completed to determine the extent of the problem. The survey was fo6 seven days, 11/06/86 through 11/12/86. Two counts were made. daily at 7:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m. Daily averages and range of parked vehicle numbers are as follows: Daily Average Range Total Vehicles 16 23-8 ,R/O Heatherfield 5 8-2 R/O Other Tustin 1 (6%) 4-0 R/O Other 6 (38%) 11-3 Parking Spaces Available 24 Full Size Parking does not, appear to be a problem from a legal'standpoint. Illegally parked vehicles were not found during the survey period. There is adequate spaces for the vehicles. Permit parking would not solve a problem. In this area, it would create one. There is nowhere for the overflow of vehicles from Mitchell Street to go for parking. At best, this program will be a displacement of a perceived problem and creation of an enforcement problem for the Police Department where none currently exists. Fred Wakefield, Captain Commander, Operations Division FW:jo January 9, 1987 Department bf Public Works/En,,qinccrin,~ Resident Tustin, CA 92680 SUBJECT: REVISED RECOHHENDATIONS FOR PARKING CONTROL ALONG HEATHERFIELD DRIVE AND SANDWOOD PLACE Dear Resident: This letter is intended as a follow-up to recent discussions concerning the control of unwanted parking along Heatherfield Drive and Sandwood Place. As you know, a parking permit system was evaluated by the ,City's Traffic Engineering section with intentions of being submitted to Council with a recommendation for implementation. However, concerns as to enforcement of the system were raised by the Police Department and the above submittal to Council was postponed. A subsequent meeting was held at Tustin City Hall wherein the Traffic Engineer summarized the permit parking evaluation and the Police Department expressed their v~ews as to enforcement problems. While numerous issues were discussed, another alternative was suggested by the Police to replace the permit system. This alternative calls for the installation of signs on both Heatherfield and Sandwood that would prohibit all on-street parking from two to six in the morning (2 a.m. to 6 a.m.). Since a residential poll was conducted as part of the permit system, it was requested that a similar procedure be performed for this alternative. Therefore, should you be in favor or against the measure (total on-street' parking prohibition from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.), please so indicate in the spaces below. Very truly yours, Director of Public Works/City Engineer BL:jm In favor of total on-street parking restrictions between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. (along Heatherfield and Sandwood) Against total on-street parking restrictions between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. (along Heatherfield and Sandwood) 300 Centennial Way Tustin, Cahforma 92680 · (714) 544-8890 1438~ RI:lA V~$TA N IAiOO ,'4-111 ~4~21 AVENUE ~.~2~ ~---~ ' x