2000-12-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

25O reducing on-street parking from 2 hours to 90 minutes does not require Council's authorization, but the City Manager has asked if Council wants to follow this recommendation. Mr. Gouldman estimated the cost ofsignage changes at $25,000, which would require an appropriation should Council decide to move forward with this recommendation. Mr. Caravati said he feels it would be wise to hold a public hearing on this matter. Mr. Lynch agreed, and said that he would like to look at the delivery needs as suggested by a citizen as well as issuing a permit for business owners to park in two hour spaces. Mr. Lynch said that while reducing the parking time limit is supposed to reduce shuffling, some say 90 minutes is not long enough. Mr. Lynch said he would like to look into recording license plates as an enforcement method. Ms. Richards said she feels we need to ask if shuffling of cars is really a significant problem as the numbers did not appear that high in the parking study. Mr. Cox said he is interested in having the public comment on the recommendations, and said he is not convinced people's routine will change if the time is reduced to 90 minutes. Mr. Cox said he feels we need some help coming up with creative solutions, and suggested that we rally the downtown community to tell how they think we can run a more successful on-street parldng system Mr. Toscano said he thinks a public hearing is essential. Mr. Cox questioned whether it is wise to take a bad idea (reducing the time limit) to a public hearing. Ms. Richards said she would like to think of some solutions for people to use park and ride and a shuttle service, as well as incentives for employers to encourage their employees to use these alternatives. Mr. Caravati asked that suggestions be submitted to staff. Mr. Cox suggested that the Downtown Property Owners Council and Chamber of Commerce be asked to come up with solutions. Mr. Caravati said the public hearing will be scheduled for January 16th. RESOLUTION: LEGISLATIVE REQ~STS Mr. Gouldman said that no clear cut ranking resulted from the matrix circulated among Councilors. Ms. Richards noted that no legislation is needed for hate crimes, but said that light rail and University issues had been left off. Ms. Richards asked if Councilors have any issues that they do not want to move forward this year. Mr. Caravati said he does not support the item regarding University housing, but does support light rail and representation on the University Board of Visitors. Mr. Toscano said he views the University issues as kind of a waste of time. Mr. Toscano said he would like to interject funding for repairs to the Locust and Park Street bridges. Mr. Cox agreed the bridge funding should be ranked high. Mr. O'Connell said the issue is can we be reimbursed for immediate work done to the bridges. Mr. Cox said he would support advancing the living wage legislation as the number one priority.