Loading...
SR-417-003-01 (96)F:\PCD\Share\CouncilReports2004\prefparkMM#2.doc Council Meeting: February 10, 2004 To. Mayor and City Council From City Staff ~ ~t ~~ Santa Monica, California ~AR 2 3 2004 Subject: Resolution Amending Preferential Parking Zone MM (9th Street between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10~h Street) on currently regulated blocks and Amending City Council Resolution 9344 CCS Introduction This report recommends the extension of the hours of restrictions in parts of the existing Preferential Parking Zone MM, which includes 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay, Grant, and Pacific Streets between Lincoln Boulevard and 10t" Street Background On March 5, 2002, the City Council approved Preferential Parking Zone MM (see Attachment B: Vicinity Map). Residents requested the regulations because of difficulty finding parking due to use of spaces by high school students, employees and patrons of commercial establishments along Lincoln Boulevard and visitors to ~he Clare Foundation, as well as because of noise, trash, and driving anc~ parking patterns attributed to those parkers The regulations adopted by Council were not as restrictive as many residents wanted them to be, because more restrictive regulations were expected to result in significant shifts in parking from some local residential streets to others and also because more restrictive regulations could withdraw parking spaces .. ~ ' `~ ` ""~k 2 3 2004 from use in an area where they are in high demand and few alternatives are available for visitors and employees. When it enacted the regulations, Council asked staff to conduct a review six months after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the regulations and to evaluate the impact of "one-side-of-the-block" preferential parking on 9th Street between Pico and Michigan. A follow-up study was completed and distributed to affected residents. As a result of that study, a subsequent survey, and neighbor comments staff is recommending that regulations be extended to evening/overnight and weekend time periods in the four block 9th and Michigan neighborhood A copy of an information item to the Council on the follow-up study and neighbor comments on it is included as an attachment to this report (Attachment C). Discussion The staff recommendations for parking regulations in this area reflect an attempt to provide parking relief for residents without creating additional parking problems or shifting them from one street to another. In this area, one-side-of-the-street regulations were implemented in an effort to minimize the need for parkers to move from one location to another, especially from regulated streets to Bay, Grant or Pacific Streets west of Lincoln Boulevard where preferential restrictions are impractical, due to the location of these blocks in the Coastal Zone. Following are the policy options considered in response to the follow-up data and residents' comments: 2 Daytime Requlations on East Side of the 1800 block of 9th Street Many residents of 9th Street between Pico and Michigan would like the east side of their street to have preferential parking restrictions. The east side of this block does not have any preferential parking regulations. However, the study results show that daytime occupancies in their neighborhood overall (71 percent) are similar to the other neighborhoods studied Furthermore, when compared to the original study, daytime occupancies have decreased over the four-block area Thus, the preferential parking zone has made it easier for residents to find parking near their homes during the daytime hours. At the same time, daytime parking occupancies have increased in the neighborhood west of Lincoln Boulevard, where the City has not implemented daytime parking restrictions Additional daytime restrictions in the 9th and Michigan neighborhood (i.e. on 51 spaces on the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street) are not recommended because they would likely further spillover impact on the residents in the Coastal Zone. Niqhttime and Weekend Requlations Some residents want restrictions to extend later than 9pm. It appears that evening/nighttime parking occupancies are high, and higher than they were two years ago. Since the residents west of Lincoln Boulevard do not experience high enough parking occupancies (59%) to warrant nighttime restrictions, and parking would be available in about 11 of the 62 spaces on the east side of 9th Street, as well as on 10tn Street and streets further east, it is unlikely that nighttime visitors would shift as a group to one of these locations. Therefore, it would be possible to regulate both sides of the 3 1800 block of 9th Street adjacent to residential uses after 6pm. It is unclear exactly how much of the late night parking is actually due to residents and their guests parking their own cars; if caused by residential parking, permit parking would not ease parking congestion on this block. Restrictions can also be placed on both sides of this block during the weekend days and nights, for the same reasons that they could be extended in the weekday evenings. Survey Results In September 2003, Transportation Management staff sent a new survey to residents of the four block 9th and Michigan neighborhood asking if they would like extended restrictions weekday on evenings/nights (and until what hour), and if they want more stringent restrictions on the weekends. It also specifically asked if residents want weekday evening/nighttime and weekend restrictions on the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street. This survey yielded a 29 percent return. The results of the survey show that a majority of residents do want enhanced restrictions. Eighty-two percent of respondents want restrictions extended during the weekdays on blocks that already have restrictions, and 75 percent want these restrictions extended overnight. Likewise, 78 percent want restrictions extended on weekends, with 79 percent requesting "no parking" restrictions on both Saturdays and Sundays. A majority of these people want 24-hour restrictions on the weekends. As far as the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street, 80 percent want weekday evening/nighttime restrictions, with 74 percent requesting overnight restrictions. 4 Seventy-six percent want weekend restrictions, with 86 percent of those requesting "no parking" restrictions on both days of the weekend. Again, a majority want 24-hour restrictions on the weekends. Both the survey and the survey results are included with Attachments D and E, respectively. Zone MM South of Pico Boulevard The residents south of Pico Boulevard have not objected to the current regulations. In only one of the three streets has chosen to petition and implement regulations. The regulations (currently implemented on Bay Street only) are: "Two-hour parking 7am-9pm Monday-Friday, and two-hour parking 9am-6pm Saturday, except by permit" (north side of block only). The 800 blocks of Bay, Grant and Pacific Streets were pre- approved for only one side of the block for the same reason as was the 1800 block of 9th Street. Spot checks of parking occupancies in this neighborhood show that Bay and Streets have occupancies in the mid-80 percent range during the weekday evening hours, while Pacific Street has a lower average occupancy, at 64 percent. During the weekend midday hours, Bay and Pacific Streets have occupancies in the upper 60 percent range, while Grant Street averages 86 percent full Communitv Input A neighborhood meeting was held on January 15, 2004. All residents from Zone MM were invited, as well as residents of the 600/700 blocks of Bay and Grant Streets west of Lincoln Boulevard Businesses and property owners were also notified and invited, as were officials, parents, and students from Santa Monica High School. The vast 5 majority of attendees were residents from the 9th and Michigan neighborhood (who are unhappy about the current restrictions), and parents and students from Santa Monica High School, who stress their need for some parking accommodation. A few residents from the Coastal Zone attended the meeting, and stressed the lack of parking in their neighborhood. There were no representatives from Zone MM south of Pico. Discussion revolved mostly around the lack of parking availability for students. Comments from this meeting are summarized in Attachment F. New Recommendations for Zone MM The objective of these amended regulations is to alleviate the parking pressure on residential streets during the weekday evenings/nights and on weekends. These new restrictions on weekday evenings/nights and weekends on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street may displace only a small number of employees from surrounding businesses to the larger area. Maintaining and extending two-hour restrictions during weekend days will allow for continued customer parking and will also ease the weekend burden of dealing with permit parking for short-term visitors and guests to residents on the blocks. The following amended regulations are proposed 1) No parking between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday-Friday; Two-hour parking between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Saturday and Sunday; No parking between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m. Daily, except by permit on: i • Michigan Avenue between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street, • 9tn Street between the Santa Monica Freeway and Michigan Avenue, and • 9tn Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard (west side only). 2) No parking between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m. Daily; Two-hour parking between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, except by permit on: `:141 ; I • 9tn Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard (east side only). s 3) Two-hour parking between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Monday through Friday; Two-hour parking between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Saturday, except by permit on: • Bay Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10tn Street (north sides only). [unchanged] , Budqet/Fiscal Impact The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or financial impact. CEQA Analvsis The proposed project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Article 19, Section 15301 ( c) which was recently amended to define Class 1 exempt projects in the following way: "Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving little or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. ." This exemption lists as an example of "existing facilities:" "( c j Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities." Preferential parking zones involve only the issuance of permits for the use of an existing public street and include negligible or no expansion of this existing use. Recommendations It is recommended that the City Council ~ Approve the attached resolution amending Preferential Parking Zone MM (9th Street between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street) and amending Resolution 9344 CCS (Resolution of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica Re-Establishing Various Preferential Parking Zones) by replacing Exhibit A. Attachments: A B C D E F Resolution Establishing Preferential Parking, Exhibit A- Preferential Parking Zones ~~ ~~d ~, N~ ~3 ~C~S\1 Vicinity Map ~~ August 29, 2003 Information Item September 2003 Survey September 2003 Survey Results Summary of Comments from January 15, 20( Neighborhood Meeting Prepared By: Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning and Community Development Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager ek, ,_,~,: Beth Rolandson, Senior Transportation Planner ~ ~~~ ~x ,, Ruth Harper, Transportation Planning Associate ~°' ~~~.~~ ~ ~~~2 ~ ~_~ 8 ~~~~ ~ m ~ z w ~ _ ~ F-- Q ~ ~II ,3~ ~ 3 ~~ ~ unco~n r~~o ulTCOLNHLVD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0•2 0 0.2 0.4 Miles ATTACHMENT C F:\PCD\Share\Info Items\prefparkMMfollowup.doc August 29, 2003 Santa Monica, CA AIID #316 INFORMATION ITEM Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Results of Follow-up Parking Occupancy Study of Preferential Parking Zone MM Introduction This information item addresses the results of follow-up parking occupancy studies for Preferential Parking Zone MM, which includes 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay, Grant, and Pacific Streets between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street, Staff has prepared this report in response to Council's request for a follow-up study after implementation of this zone. Backqround On March 5, 2002, Preferential Parking Zone MM (see attached map) was approved by Council. Many of the non-residential parkers involved were Santa Monica High School students, though customer parking from nearby businesses also created difficulties for the residents. The preferential parking regulations approved by the Council affect approximately 94 previously unregulated on-street parking spaces. They prohibit parking between 7am and 9pm Monday-Friday, and allow two-hour parking on Saturdays from 9am to 6pm, except by permit, on 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway and on Michigan Avenue between Lincoln Boulevard 10th Street. On 9th Street between Pico and Michigan, only the west side has permit regulations, leaving approximately 51 residential-adjacent parking spaces and 10 commercial-adjacent spaces on the east side unregulated and available to all. This was done to contain possible spillover into the Coastal Zone (Bay/Grant Streets west of Lincoln) by Santa Monica High School student parkers. The streets in the "southeast area", Bay/Grant/Pacific between Lincoln and 10th Street, are pre-approved for two- hour restrictions Monday-Friday 7am to 9pm, and 9am to 6pm Saturdays on the north side of the block. To date, one qualifying petition has been received from a block south of Pico, specifically from the 800 block of Bay Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street. This block was implemented in July 2003. At the Council meeting on March 5, 2002, Council asked staff to conduct a review six months after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the regulations and to evaluate the impact of "one-side-of-the-block" preferential parking on 9th Street between Pico and Michigan. This information item presents the results of that review, which included collection of follow-up parking occupancies by an outside consultant, analysis of that data by City staff, presentation of data results to residents of the 9th and Michigan neighborhood for comment, and review of data and conclusions in light of residents' comments. Discussion Preferential parking restrictions were initially implemented in the 9th and Michigan area north of Pico in April 2002. The follow-up occupancy study was completed on Wednesday, October 23, 2002, six months after preferential parking was implemented, 2 on a school day. Vehicle counts were conducted throughout the day, hourly between the hours of 7am and midnight. As shown on the attached map, three areas were studied: 1) the 9th and Michigan area, 2) the Coastal area (Bay/Grant west of Lincoln), and 3) the area to the southeast of the Lincoln and Pico intersection (Bay/Grant east of Lincoln). Staff reviewed the consultant's data, corrected some apparent errors, conducted some "spot checks" to determine whether these errors significantly affected the occupancies observed in particular locations, and summarized the data, In April 2003, staff compiled the results into a report and mailed this report to 175 residents of the Pico and Michigan neighborhood to solicit their feedback. Staff received 18 comments (10% return), as follows: 1 One resident felt the parking situation was fine and that preferential parking restrictions on the east side of 9th Street were unnecessary, 2 One resident felt that there should either be restrictions on both sides of the street or on neither; 3, 14 residents mailed in a form letter stating that parking was still very difficult, that noisy conditions existed, that drivers were rude and often practiced unsafe driving behavior, and that trash was often left on the street, and 4, Two residents wrote long letters expressing their displeasure with the City's follow-up parking study-they felt that the study did not adequately describe the conditions in their neighborhood One of these residents performed his own survey of the neighborhood on Wednesday, April 30, 2003, and presented these 3 results to the City. This resident surveyed parking occupancies in all three areas shown on the map, City staff has analyzed the consultant's follow-up study and information provided by the residents. A number of errors in the consultant's data set included apparent misrecording of vehicle license plate numbers, inconsistent recording of the number of parking spaces on several blocks, and possible miscounts on two blocks with street sweeping restrictions. Staff identified and corrected some but not all of these errors prior to release of the report to residents (see Appendix A) The corrected consultant data and the data collected by the resident surveyor are substantially similar during the daytime hours (before 5pm), and appear to be within the range of occupancies that could occur in this area on a day-to-day basis throughout the year. For the purpose of this information item, and to be responsive to the concerns of people who reviewed the original report, staff uses solely the data collected by the resident as the basis for all the statements about occupancy levels contained herein. As noted, analysis of both the resident survey data and the consultant's data verified by staff are similar. Although a few residents commented on the data, most resident comments addressed the parking policy. Residents of the 9th and Michigan neighborhood, who were surveyed, continue to express the view that preferential parking should do more than make spaces on their block available to them; it should be used to limit negatives that go along with visitor parking, specifically, noise, trash and traffic violations. Other interested groups, including residents of the Coastal area and some high school 4 students and parents, have contacted the City about the negative impact the current parking regulations have on them Parkinq Occupancv Results The entire four-block 9th and Michigan area has an average occupancy of 75 percent, with occupancies ranging from a high of 88 percent after 10pm, to a low of 56 percent at 4pm. The 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico and Michigan averages 85 percent full (82 percent daytime/91 percent nighttime). The west side of this block, which has preferential parking, has an overall average of 66 percent occupancy (daytime average 56 percent, nighttime average 83 percent), while the east side which is unregulated, averages 95 percent. Clearly, the east side is used very heavily, however, this study shows that residents can still find parking on the west side of this block or within the remainder of the whole 9th and Michigan area The overall average weekday occupancy of the entire study area is 72 percent. The table on the following page summarizes the percentage occupancy results based on the survey data collected by the resident. 5 _ -- , _ ~ N+e' h ,., h ; 1 9th and Mich ' ~ 156 71°~ i 8196 a ~ ~ ~19~ ,: - ,~' 32 . ~ g3~6 , . ~ 62 gg b ~ .+ ' 21 6"l~i t~396 ; c 8 ~ ~ 16 4? S5% d , ~ ?' ~5 _ 5~ :;~ ~ 800 /Gra ' ,$2 ~ •j{, ,, , 600/700 / . , ~, : ~ 01 ~yb ~ ~atire Stu , ,: ~; ~$39 7~ ~ _ 7596 This table shows that overall, the three neighborhoods experience about the same daytime parking occupancies. Evening/nighttime occupancies are similar and fairly high in areas `1' and `2' east of Lincoln Boulevard. The evening occupancy in the Coastal area is much lower, at 59 percent. These conditions represent a slight improvement, in the four-block area taken as a whole, compared to survey data collected by the consultant before implementation of ~I ~arking in t~e. ~~' ~ Mich~an area~ The following graph represents parking occupancy hour by hour throughout a weekday in Area `1', 6 Specifically, daytime on-street parking occupancies have decreased by about 15 percentage points in the 9th and Michigan area, indicating that residents are now able to find parking in the area during the daytime. The original study did not count past 9pm. Occupancies are now higher in the evening hours (5pm to 9pm) than they were two years ago. In the adjacent coastal area, conditions are worse for resident parkers. The following graph compares the parking occupancies hour by hour on the 600/700 block of Bay Street. This block also petitioned two years ago for preferential parking, but the City did not implement restrictions due to its location in the Coastal Zone. 7 Parking occupancies have increased significantly on the 600/700 block of Bay Street in these two years, presumably due to the shift of student parkers to this area since Preferential Parking Zone MM was implemented in March 2002. Interestir~~~t, there is no~ a de~r conn~n befiiveen parkir~~ ~k~ilii~~~rr~ Michigan area and parking occupancy on 600/700 Bay Street. As residents of gtn Street point out, on Fridays between 9am and 11 am when street sweeping regulations are in effect on their block, there is no significant increase in parking occupancies on 600/700 Bay Street. However, the occupancies on 600/700 Bay Street have increased to 95% at 10am, so there is not much room on this street for more parked vehicles. Policv Options Da.ytin~e Rsgula~ions o~t Ess~ Side of 9'~' ~-treet Mar~t~idents of 9~' Str~et be~n Pico and Michigan w~~~~'th~ e~~ c-f:~ 8 street to have preferential parking restrictions. However, the study results show that daytime occupancies in their neighborhood (71 percent) are similar to the other neighborhoods studied. Furthermore, when compared to the original study, daytime occupancies have decreased over the four-block area. Thus, the preferential parking zone has made it easier for residents to find parking near their homes during the daytime hours. At the same time, daytime parking occupancies have increased in the Coastal Zone, where the City has not implemented daytime parking restrictions Additional daytime restrictions in the 9th and Michigan neighborhood (i.e. on the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street) would likely further spillover impact on the residents in the Coastal Zone, Nighttime Regulations Some residents want restrictions to extend later than 9pm. It appears that evening/ nighttime parking occupancies are high, and higher than they were two years ago Since the residents of the Coastal Zone do not experience high enough parking occupancies (59%) to warrant nighttime restrictions, it would be possible to regulate both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street adjacent to residential uses after 5pm without inducing spillover effects on adjacent neighbors. Restrictions coutd extend to midnight, or overnight (to approximately 6am the following morning) It is unclear exactly how much of the late night parking is actually due to residents and their guests parking their own cars; if caused by residential parking, permit parking would not ease parking congestion on this block. Restrictions could also be placed on both sides of this block during the weekend days. Restrictions in the evenings or on weekends would not 9 negatively affect the residents in the Coastai Zone as they are generally affected by daytime, weekday student parkers only. Two years ago, the Transportation Management Division sent surveys to the Zone MM residents asking how late in the evening they wanted restrictions. At that time, respondents were split between wanting restrictions to extend to either 6pm or 9pm. Residents were not asked if they wanted restrictions to extend even later in the evening Transportation Management Staff will send a new survey to residents asking if they would like restrictions in the evening/night (and until what hour), and if they want more stringent restrictions on the weekends. If the response to the survey indicates that a majority of residents would like some combination of later restrictions on both sides of the street and on the weekends, staff would then schedule a neighborhood meeting to solicit further feedback, and finally, would return to Council recommending a modification in the hours of the regulations. High School Parking Parking availability continues to be problematic for some high school students. Although only a small percentage of high school students drive to school, parking spaces are at a premium for them The school makes some spaces available to students by lottery, and encourages students to carpool and use public transit service provided by Big Blue Bus. The City, in conjunction with the high school, has modified parking and loading regulations adjacent to the high school to facilitate drop-off. Given 10 resource and space constraints at the high school, there are no current plans to invest in additional parking resources for high school students. Other Parking-Related Problems In general, residents from the 9th and Michigan area have continued to contact the Transportation Management Division about their neighborhood. The majority of comments center on continued rude and unsafe parking behavior exhibited by the Santa Monica High School students, as well as some illegal permit abuse, and illegal parking of U-Haul trucks by customers. Staff has worked with residents on all of these issues. Parking enforcement has increased the ticketing of students who are misusing permits Staff is in contact with U-Haul to prevent their customers from parking commercial vehicles of a certain height or width on residential streets. The Police Department is enforcing regulations prohibiting such parking. Summarv Preferential parking is a tool the City can provide to help residents find parking near their homes when non-residential parking regularly interFeres. This tool has helped the residents in Zone MM, They can generally find parking on their block or within a two- block radius of their homes, Parking occupancies are lower overall in their neighborhood during the daytime hours than they were two years ago, but they have increased on the (unregulated) east side of 9th Street and in the 600/700 Block of Bay Street. If permit restrictions were enacted on both sides of the 1800 block of 9t" Street in the evenings and on weekends, this could make parking easier for residents during 11 these hours. It could also help with the U-Haul parking issues. Staff is surveying residents to determine their level of support for night and/or weekend regulations and will recommend these regulations to the City Council if there is resident support for them Attachments A Analysis of Data Errors Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning and Community Development Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager Beth Rolandson, Senior Transportation Planner Ruth Harper, Transportation Planning Associate 12 Appendix A: Analysis of Data Errors Number of spaces on various streets Because many of the parking spaces on these streets are unmarked, estimates of the number of spaces on each street can vary. Indeed the number of cars that can be parked can vary, depending on the size of each vechicle and the skill and courtesy of its operator. Staff identified potential problems in the consultant's data on the number of spaces on some blocks and corrected these numbers prior to issuing the preliminary follow-up report for the area. On all but one block, staff used the number of cars reported by the consultant and the actual base number of spaces on the street. Staff assumed that the consultant did in fact count all the parked cars on an entire block; spot checks on one block and data collected by the resident surveyor show that the consultant's numbers were reasonable for daytime hours. On one block, 900 Michigan, the number of spaces identified by staff was significantly different from the number given by the consultant (40% too few spaces), staff not only modified the base number of spaces to correct it, but also conducted "spot" checks for seven hours during the day to determine whether there was likely a problem with the car counts on this block or just with the base number of spaces. The "spot" checks produced data points substantially similar to the consultant's occupancy data together with the corrected space numbers. However, staff decided to use its own spot-check data in the follow-up report, along with interpolated numbers for the hours which staff did not count. The resident's data for this block is also very similar, as follows: Average number of cars-consultant: 13.2, staff: 10.6, resident: 13.8. Incorrect license plate numbers The purpose of recording license plates is to determine how many cars are on the block and to provide some insight into how many of the cars that are parked stay parked for a particular period of time. Staff did not review or verify individual license plate numbers, as these are not material to the conclusions of the study. The resident's observation that some plates may have been poorly and incorrectly recorded is valid, however, it does not affect the results of the study. Cars shown on Bav and Grant Streets During Street Sweepinq Cars are recorded on Bay and Grant Streets during the hours when parking is restricted for the purpose of street sweeping. The resident implies that this data, and other data provided by the consultant is fabricated. There are many locations in the City where motorists park up to and after the street sweeping occurs. Staff cannot determine what actually happenned on the days of the counts. However, the similarities befinreen the resident's data, the staff "spot checks" and random observations of the neighborhood suggest that the data as a whole, as corrected by staff during its review, provides a reasonable description of the parking occupancies in the neighborhood. 13 14 ATTACHMENT D ~~ ~ ~~~Y o, Santa Monica'" Transportation Management Division 1685 Main Street - Room 115, PO Box 2200 Santa Monica, California 90407-2200 310/458-8291 • fax: 310/576-9170 September 16, 2003 Preferential Parking Survey-Residents of 9th and Michigan Neighborhood The City of Santa Monica would once again appreciate your help in obtaining information about parking in your neighborhood and what types of regulations you feel would best meet your area's needs. Residents in your neighborhood have expressed interest in restrictions which extend later in the night on weekdays, and are more extensive on weekends. Restrictions could also exist on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and Michigan Avenue (adjacent to residences) after 5pm and on weekends. As always, residents with permits are allowed to park on blocks within a two-block radius of their homes that are also designated for permit parking. Please complete and return this survey by Wednesday, October 8 to: City of Santa Monica, Transportation Management Division By mail: Room 115, PO Box 2200, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2200 or by fax: 310/576-9170 (You can re-use this form--simply re-fold and mail: see reverse) Name Phone Address Unit # 1. Would you like weekdav restrictions to be extended on all blocks that currently have restrictions? ^ Yes ^ No If ves, how late would you like these weekday restrictions to extend? (mark one) ^ Until midnight ^ Overnight, until 6am the following morning 2. Would you like weekend restrictions to be extended on all blocks that currently have restrictions? ^ Yes ^ No If ves, how late would you like these weekend restrictions to extend? (mark one) ^ 2 hr parking, including Sunday (except by permit) ^ No parking on Saturday (except by permit). How late? (hour) ^ No parking on Saturday and Sunday (except by permit). How late? (hour) 3. Would you be in favor of restrictions on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and Michigan Avenue after 5pm on weekdays? ^ Yes ^ No If ves, how late would you like these weekday restrictions to extend? (mark one) ^ Until midnight ^ Overnight, until 6am the following morning 4. Would you be in favor of restrictions on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and Michigan Avenue on weekends? ^ Yes ^ No If ves, how extensive would you like these weekend restrictions to become? (mark one) ^ 2 hr parking, including Sunday (except by permit) ^ No parking on Saturday (except by permit). How late? (hour) ^ No parking on Saturday and Sunday (except by permit). How late? (hour) Additional Comments: Espanol: Su opinion es importante para nosotros. Para una encuesta sobre el estacionamiento en espano/, favor de llamar a Elsa Gonza/ez al numero 310-458-2275. ATTACHMENT F Comments from Neiqhborhood Meeting~ Januarv 15 2004 • Could meters be installed in Coastal Zone on residential streets west of Lincoln? • What options exist for the Coastal Zone in general? • Why can preferential parking passes not be used in all preferential parking zones in Santa Monica? • Need to think of all consequences of decisions. • Could permits be granted to businesses in the area? • Santa Monica HS does not provide as much parking as they should. • Coastal Zone: has a lot of student parking, students speeding, and other bad behavior, and they sometimes park illegally. • Why can't students park at the Civic? • Students should be allowed to park at the Civic. • Students could park at beach lots and take a shuttle. • Some students need to drive because they are involved in after hours activities at the school. • There are only 40 student parking spots at SAMOHI. • Students can't afford to pay a lot for parking. • Why was parking lot replaced with a playing field at SAMOHI? • Difficult to maintain consistent policies and goals with student turnover and some residential turnover. • Priorities for the SAMOHI PTSA are very low on the City of Santa Monica list. • Need parking on SAMOHI campus. • We live in an urban environment but need to make it easier for people to walk and cycle. • Nobody is happy with the current zone restrictions. • Allowing student parking at the Civic has to be made a priority. • Make the new parking structure at the Civic larger to allow student parking.