HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnonymous - eCommentFrom:noreply@granicusideas.com
To:City Clerk; Yasuda, Erica; Woodward, Carrie; E-Comments
Subject:New eComment for Regular Meeting of the City Council/Closed Session-5:30 pm/Regular Meeting-7:00 pm
Date:Sunday, October 1, 2023 10:24:25 PM
City of Tustin, CANew eComment for Regular Meeting of the CityCouncil/Closed Session-5:30 pm/RegularMeeting-7:00 pm
Guest User submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: Regular Meeting of the City Council/Closed Session-5:30 pm/Regular Meeting-7:00 pm
Item: 8. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 1537 TO AMEND CITY CODE SECTION
5331(N)-(O) FOR THE CITY’S PREFERENTIAL PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM Section
22507(a) of the State of California Vehicle Code grants cities the authority to establish
preferential permit parking on designated streets or portions thereof, during all or certain times of
the day, upon approval by the City Council of an ordinance or resolution containing provisions
that are reasonable and necessary to assure the effectiveness of a preferential permit parking
program. On November 15, 2022, the City Council adopted the Tustin Residential Parking Action
Plan (PAP), identifying policies, procedures, and management strategies necessary to address
the City’s current and future parking needs. On June 6, 2023, consistent with the PAP, the City
Council adopted Resolution 23-26 approving the Preferential Permit Parking Program Policies
and Procedures “Updated Guidelines” and established Permit Parking District 1 and preferential
permit parking fees applicable to all existing or newly established permitted parking areas. An
amendment to Section 5331(n)-(o) of the Tustin City Code is necessary to implement the PAP
on public residential streets and reflect the City Council’s approval of the Updated Guidelines
which also includes the introduction of a Permit Parking District Map encompassing public
residential streets eligible for permit parking.
eComment: As a resident within a permit parking area I would like the council to re-evaluate the
district sizes as they seem overly large and not representative of true walking distances, nor do
they take into account traffic flow. For example the area I live in (Sandfield Pl, Fernbrook and
Shadybrook) are three connected roads with no through traffic as they are all cul-de-sacs. I
would request the evaluation of making this three streets into a stand alone district as one of the
concerns driving permits in this area originally was safety. Some of the parked car owners were
trespassing through yards and hopping over fences to get to their homes instead of walking
around the longer way on the sidewalks. In my opinion the longer sidewalk route was not a
reasonable walk to begin with. The current plan, as I understand it negates most of the solutions
that the parking permit program (at least in my area) provided. I would also request generally
that if some of the streets in a district are permitted, and if any resident within the district can
request a permit, then the entire district should be subject to permits out of fairness and to
reduce overflow into neighboring areas.
View and Analyze eComments
This email was sent from https://tustin.granicusideas.com.
Unsubscribe from future mailings