Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 20, 1996 (66)1 OCOUNCIL COMMUNICATION LrFb¢�' AGENDA TITLE: Elm Street West of Ham Lane - Parking Study MEETING DATE: March 20, 1996 PREPARED BY: Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review the following request to prohibit commercial - vehicle parking on Elm Street, west of Ham Lane, in front of Lakewood Mall and take the appropriate action. The options include: A. Prohibit parking on all or portions of street segment B. Modify existing commercial -vehicle parking ordinances to prohibit parking in commercial areas C. Take no action BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The following report has been prepared based on concerns received regarding commercial vehicles parking on Elm Street, west of Ham Lane, in front of Lakewood Mall. Stone Brothers and Associates, the property manager of Lakewood Mall, sent the City two letters (Exhibit A) indicating that commercial vehicles parking on the north side of Elm Street are creating visibility problems for customers exiting driveways, as well as obstructing the visibility of the newly remodeled shopping center. Currently, commercial -vehicle parking in the City is regulated under Lodi Municipal Code Sections 10.52.050 and 10.52.080 (Exhibit B). Per Section 10.52.050, commercial -vehicle parking is not allowed in any residentially -zoned areas. Section 10.52.080 further prohibits the parking of commercial vehicles within 250 feet of a residentially -zoned area if either the vehicle's engine or refrigerator unit will be operated between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Commercial vehicles being loaded or unloaded are exempt from the restrictions of these ordinances. Since Lakewood Mall is not a residentially -zoned development, commercial -vehicle parking is permitted on Elm Street and all Mall frontages that are not otherwise restricted. EXISTING CONDITIONS/PREVIOUS ACTIONS The area of concern is on the north side of Elm Street, west of Ham Lane, at the southern boundary of Lakewood Mall (Exhibit C). In June 1994, "no -parking" zones were installed adjacent to both of the driveways serving Lakewood Mali, as well as the driveway across the street at Walgreen Drug Store. These "no -parking" zones were installed based on complaints from both properties that commercial vehicles parking next to driveways were blocking the view of drivers exiting onto Elm Street. The lengths of "no -parking" zones installed were based on our established guidelines. These guidelines consider roadway and travel lane configurations and prevailing vehicle speeds. Two segments of approximately 90 feet and 87 feet currently exist that are available for parking on the north side of Elm Street in front of the Mall. These areas will accommodate approximately eight parked vehicles, four in each segment. APPROVED: �Nlt "111V__X4__V111L1- I 1 H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager CELMHAM2.DOC ­­/ 03/13!96 Elm Street West of Ham Lane - Parking Study March 20, 1996 Page 2 Available accident records for the six-year period from 1990 to 1995 indicate there have been no accidents at the driveways on Elm Street related to visibility problems. The posted speed limit on this portion of Elm Street is 35 miles per hour. Traffic volumes are approximately 7,500 vehicles per day. OPTIONS Staff has identified the following three options addressing the concerns expressed at this location. These options and staff's comments are as follows: A. Prohibit parking on all or portions of street segment This option is to install "no parking" on all or portions of the area on the north side of Elm Street in front of Lakewood Mall that are currently unrestricted. Installing "no parking" in the entire area will eliminate parking for all vehicles. Installing "no parking" on short portions of the street between individual parking stalls will allow passenger - vehicle parking while restricting commercial vehicles with trailers. Due to the length of some tractor portions of commercial vehicles (without trailers), they may still fit into reduced parking areas. Staff has observed tractors parked in the area. The amount of available parking will not be affected by the installation of short "no -parking" zones between parking stalls. B. Modify existing commercial -vehicle parking ordinances to prohibit parking in commercial areas This option is to modify the existing commercial -vehicle parking ordinances to prohibit parking in commercially -zoned areas. This option will require major modifications to the existing truck parking ordinances, as well as at least one public hearing. Since commercial -vehicle parking is basically allowed only in commercially- and industrially - zoned areas, the effects of modifying the ordinances will be significant. C. Take no action This option is to make no changes to existing conditions. Parking for any type of vehicle will continue to be permitted. DISCUSSION Commercial -vehicle parking within the City has always been a controversial issue. Option A, the elimination of all or portions of the available parking in the area, will affect commercial -vehicle parking in the area; however, since "no -parking" zones already exist adjacent to the driveways, staff does not consider this to be a safety issue. It should also be noted by Council that past practice indicates that the commercial vehicles displaced by the installation of "no -parking" zones will not go away, but just move to alternate locations. In this case, they may just move to the south side of Elm Street fronting Walgreen Drug Store. The existing commercial -vehicle parking ordinances represent our efforts to balance the needs of the community to the greatest extent possible. Due to the time and effort put into these ordinances and the sensitivity of this issue, staff is reluctant to modify these ordinances based on this single situation (Option B). Due to the nature of this issue, it would be next to impossible to produce an ordinance that would satisfy all concerns and circumstances. CELMHA 12.DOC 3/13196 Elm Street West of Ham Lane - Parking Study March 20, 1996 Page 3 Option C, taking no action, will allow all vehicles to continue to park in this area. Based on the visibility study performed in 1994, the amount of parking eliminated provides sufficient visibility for drivers entering Elm Street. While eliminating additional parking in the area would obviously improve visibility, according to the method we have adopted to determine lengths of parking zones, the elimination of additional parking is not needed. Stone Brothers has indicated that while they would rather eliminate commercial -vehicle parking while retaining passenger -vehicle parking, they would not object to removing parking for all vehicles, as they feel sufficient customer parking exists on site. RECOMMENDATION Based strictly on the adequacy of visibility from the driveways on Elm Street, staff does not feel the removal of additional parking is justified. The decision for removal of commercial -vehicle parking would primarily be for aesthetic reasons. If Council chooses to eliminate truck parking in this area, staff would recommend that all parking in the area be removed. We do not recommend installing short segments of "no -parking" zones to eliminate truck parking as it may only partially resolve the concern of commercial -vehicle parking. Eliminating parking in all or portions of this segment of Elm Street will require a Council resolution. Staff does not recommend that Council modify the existing commercial - vehicle parking ordinances by prohibiting parking adjacent to commercial uses. FUNDING: Not applicable. r Ja k L. Ronsko Pubic Works Director Prepared by Rick S. Kiriu, Senior Engineering Technician JLR/RSK/im Attachments cc: City Attorney Police Chief Stone Brothers and Associates Walgreen Drug Store CELMHAM2.DOC 3/13/96 STONE I[IBROS. February 9, 1996 Mr. Jack Ronsko Director Public Works Department City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 Re: Lakewood Mall Street Parking Dear Mr. Ronsko: Exhibit A FEB 14.1996 - On November 21, 1995,1 sent the attached correspondence regarding Lakewood Mall. Subsequently, I heard from Dave Warner acknowledging receipt of his copy. 1 also spoke with Rick Kiriu regarding the nature of the ordinance and what we might do to resolve our concerns. As you may know, we are continuing to expend considerable dollars to enhance the corner of Ham Lane and Elm St. We remain very concerned about the issues addressed in our letter to the Council. As I told Rick Kiriu, our primary interest is to modify this specific area so that automobiles may continue to park along Elm Street but the truck and trailers may not. As our letter states, we do feel we now have a hazard with the trucks and trailers blocking visibility for long periods of time. As our project rears completion, we would like to finally resolve this concern along Elm Street. We believe that by eliminating the truck parking we only strengthen the neighborhood and enhance the appearance of this intersection in Lodi. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. ticerely, I . u0ju, - Richard C. Forster Property Manager cc: D.Wamer/R. Kiriu 1024 WEST ROBINHOOD DRIVE TELEPHONE (209) 478-1791 STOCKTON, CA 95207 FAX NO. (209) 952-1654 L_JIBROS. STONE November 21, 1995 City Council City of Lodi c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Re: Street Parking Ham Lane at Elm Street Dear Council Members: We represent the ownership of Lakewood Mall at the comer of Ham Lane and Elm Street in Lodi. We have appreciated the support the Lodi community has provided this project for nearly 30 years, and are currently in the process of remodeling the property. In planning the remodel, we worked closely with our architect to develop a concept which would enhance the Lakewood neighborhood. We feel we have been successful in designing a project for which Lodi can be proud. We fully expect to provide Lodi with.additional unique merchants which will enhance the community's retail environment. There is one matter in which we need your assistance. Currently, commerical truck parking is allowed along Elm Street on the North side. On many week days and evenings, and all weekends, there are commercial trucks and trailers parked for multiple days. This type of parking presents a visibility blockage for our merchants and creates a safety concern for our customers exiting Lakewood Mall. 1024 WEST ROBINHOOD DRIVE TELEPHONE(209)47&1791 STOCKTON. CA 95207 FAX NO. (209) 952-1654 10.52.050 Parking restrictions. A. It is unlawful to park a commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight of ten thousand pounds on any street in a residential district. For the purposes of this section, "residential district" means residen- tially zoned areas designated by the city zoning code (any "R" district) and includes schools. parks, playgrounds, community centers, churches, museums, golf courses (excluding miniature golf courses) and similar recreational uses of a noncommer- cial nature, and public utility service build- ings where they are located in a residential district. B. This section shall not prohibit park- ing of commercial vehicles in the process of being loaded or unloaded. (Ord. 1567 § 2, 1993: Ord. 1410 § 1 (part); 1987) Exhibit B 10.52.080 Parking noise restrictions. A. It is unlawful on any public right of way to stop, park or leave standing for more than five consecutive minutes. a com- mercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross vehicle weight rating of ten thousand pounds within two hundred fifty feet of a residential district while operating diesel and/or auxiliary engines between the hours of ten p.m. and seven am. Auxiliary en- gines include but are not limited to refriger- ator units. This distance shall be measured in a straight line within the public right-of- way from the engine to the nearest point on the district boundary (i.e., not around cor- ners or through private property). The tern "residential district" is as defined in Section 10.52.050(A). (Vehicle Code 22507) B. This section shall not prohibit park- ing of commercial vehicles in the process of being loaded or unloaded. C. This section shall not apply to park- ing on state highways. (Ord. 1581 § 1 (part), 1993) Exhibit C CITY OF LO D I LAKEWOOD MALL VICINITY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT EXISTING PARKING LOCKEFORD ST I I TRAILER I PARK j I Q U U a LAKEWOOD MALL r90' i sr 0 21 ELM ST�•.� i 155' RES WALGREENS i EXISTING NO PARKING ZONES — — EXISTING PASSENGER LOADING ZONE v EXISTING FIRE HYDRANTS NOT TO SCALE CITY COUNCIL DAVID P. WARNER, Mayor PHILLIP A. PENNINO Mayor Pro Tempore RAY C. DAVENPORT STEPHEN J. MANN JACK A. SIECLOCK CITY OF LODI CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET P.O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 952 41-1 91 0 (209) 333-6706 FAX (209) 333.6842 March 13, 1996 Stone Brothers and Associates Walgreen Drug Store Attn: Richard C. Forster 75 N. Ham Lane 1024 W. Robinhood Drive Lodi, CA 95242 Stockton, CA 95207 SUBJECT: Elm Street West of Ham Lane -Parking Study H. DIXON FLYNN City Manager JENNIFER M. PERRIN City Clerk RANDALL A. HAYS City Attorney Enclosed is a copy of background information on an item on the City Council agenda of Wednesday, March 20, 1996, at 7 p.m. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chamber, Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street. This item is on the regular calendar for Council discussion. You are welcome to attend. If you wish to write to the City Council, please address your letter to City Council, City of Lodi, P. O. Box 3006, Lodi, California, 95241-1910. Be sure to allow time for the mail. Or, you may hand -deliver the letter to the City Clerk at 305 West Pine Street. If you wish to address the Council at the Council meeting, be sure to fill out a speaker's card (available at the Carnegie Forum immediately prior to the start of the meeting) and give it to the City Clerk. If you have any questions about communicating with the Council, please contact Jennifer Perrin, City Clerk, at (209) 333-6702. If you have any questions about the item itself, please call Paula Fernandez or Rick Kidu at (209) 333-6706. Jac�onsko ',Public,, Works Director JLRIpmf Enclosure cc: City Clerk NCELMHAM.DOC