HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 18, 1999 H-01CITY OF I,ODI COUNCII. COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Truck Parking Restrictions at Various Locations
MEETING DATE: August 18, 1999
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review current truck parking issues before the City
and determine a plan of action. This report presents the following options:
1. Adopt "no commercial -vehicle parking" restrictions at some or all of the locations described.
2. Authorize the Public Works Director to install longer lengths of no -parking zones and to post
commercial -vehicle parking restriction signs.
3. Modify existing truck parking ordinances to allow parking onl, in specified industrial areas.
4. Take no action. Continue to review each location on a casetIby-case basis.
The following report includes background information, review and discussion of the proposed options.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since 1990, the Public Works Traffic Engineering staff has received
166 complaints related to trucks, or an average of 18 annually. Of
these complaints, 137 (83%) were related to truck parking. Twenty-
two were related to truck travel, and the remaining 7 involved issues
such as inadequate clearance for turning trucks. In response to truck parking complaints, in 1993
Council adopted ordinances prohibiting truck parking in a "residential district" and within 250 feet of a
"residential district" if operating the truck engine or refrigerator unit between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. (Exhibit A). Since then, Council has dealt with specific locations on a case-by-case basis.
Restrictions have been adopted on Elm Street at Lakewood Mall, south Cherokee Lane north of
Almond Drive, Beckman Road north of Vine Street, Kettleman Lane at Vineyard Shopping Center,
Cherokee Lane north of Harold Street, Kettleman Lane west of Beckman Road, Cherokee Lane at
Pioneer Drive, Pacific Avenue north of Elm Street, Kettleman Lane west of Ham Lane, and
Hutchins Street north of Harney Lane. Unresolved truck parking complaints exist at the following
locations and are shown on Exhibit B:
• Harney Lane and Hutchins Street — Shopping Center at northwest corner
• Turner Road west of Rutledge Drive — Plaza Liquors
• Sargent Road west of Lower Sacramento Road — Raley's Shopping Center
• Cherokee Lane north of Poplar Street — Geweke Ford and Plummer Pontiac
• Cherokee Lane north of Kettleman Lane — Sanborn Chevrolet, Perko's Restaurant, Holiday Inn Express
• Kettleman Lane (All) — Subway Sandwiches, various locations
The complaints reviewed included parked trucks creating visibility problems from driveways, blocking the
visibility of businesses making if difficult to see into the business, and aesthetics. The Police Department
was contacted regarding the safety concerns related to the visibility of businesses blocked by parked
trucks. They indicated that they have a visibility concern from the street, especially at locations such as
restaurants and fast food establishments, which can be robbed quickly. There is also a visibility concern
when employees walk to their cars with the night deposit at closing time.
APPROVED:
H. Dixon Flynn -- City anager
CTRUCKPKG99.DOC 08H0/99
Truck Parking Restrictions at Various Locations
August 18, 1999
Page 2
Staff checked these locations at five different times of the day to determine truck parking demand. Staff
also surveyed all of Cherokee Lane and Kettleman Lane, since these are the roadways with the heaviest
truck parking as well as the locations where most complaints are received. The results of these surveys
are shown on Exhibit C. The largest number of trucks observed was 34 during the 8:30 p.m. survey.
Trucks parking during the remaining four surveys ranged from 6 to 12. There were a total of as many as
13 to 14 trucks parked on each Cherokee Lane and Kettleman Lane. Of the locations where truck
parking complaints have been received, the only locations where truck parking was observed on a regular
basis was adjacent to the commercial development at the northwest comer of Hutchins Street and
Harney Lane, and on Sargent Road west of Lower Sacramento Road in front of Raley's Supermarket.
Although truck parking was not observed in front of the auto dealerships on Cherokee Lane, we
understand Sanborn Chevrolet places vehicles along its frontage to discourage truck parking.
REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED OPTIONS
1. Similar to recent actions, Council could amend Traffic Resolution #97-148 to adopt no commercial -
vehicle parking between certain hours. Staff will have a list of the specific locations, distances, and
recommended hours available at the meeting.
2. One option is to authorize the Public Works Director to install longer lengths of no -parking zones and
restrict commercial -vehicle parking. Currently, per Lodi Municipal Code (LMC) Section 10.44.020(F),
the Public Works Director can install up to 20 feet of no parking. Increasing this distance to 100 feet
will cover most circumstances where sight distance is a problem. Commercial -vehicle parking
restrictions are currently adopted by Council resolution amending Section 3, "Street Parking
Restriction", in Traffic Resolution #97-148.
Giving staff more authority to regulate parking should expedite response time and allow easy
removal of the restriction should conditions change. We would do so in consultation with the
business and/or property owner. We could establish an internal work group (i.e., Police,
Community Development, Economic Development) to review complaints and take action. In cases
where the person making the request disagrees with staff's conclusion, the City Council would be
available to make the final decision.
3. Another option is to modify existing truck parking ordinances to allow truck parking only in specified
industrial areas. Truck parking in all other locations would be illegal unless the truck is in the process
of making a pick up or delivery.
Only permitting truck parking in selected areas would eliminate the truck parking complaints we
currently have, but is likely to generate some from the businesses in the selected industrial area(s).
Other concerns are related to drivers getting to and from their trucks and whether or not truck
parking would be allowed for extended periods. If truck drivers replace their trucks with the cars they
use to get there, parking would be reduced in front of adjacent businesses. Also, since truck -parking
surveys performed show there are a significant amount of trucks parked during normal business
hours, it is likely the affected businesses would want parking limited.
4. The final option is to take no action and continue to review each location on a case-by-case basis.
This option is the most time consuming to Council and staff. Leaving conditions as they are will
continue to require Council action on all visibility complaints unless they can be resolved by the
installation of 20 feet or less of no parking. While this is often enough in residential areas and on
lower speed streets, it does not work on the busier streets with higher speeds where we have been
receiving truck complaints. Although this option will continue to involve Council, it may expose the
City to the least liability.
CTRUCKPKG99.DOC
Truck Parking Restrictions at Various Locations
August 18, 1999
Page 3
Providing Truck Parking
Nearly every discussion about restricting truck parking has included comments in support of independent
truck drivers who need some place to park. There are no full-service truck stops in the City and
relatively few commercial establishments that provide truck parking. There is at least one private
industrial lot available for parking space rental. While there have been some suggestions that the City
operate a truck parking lot, there has been some concern expressed that the City of Lodi should not get
into the business of competing with others operating truck -parking establishments. And, whether such a
lot is public or private, allowing substantial amounts of on -street parking provides little incentive for use
of a lot. While the City has vacant land that could be developed for this use, the capital costs would
likely exceed $100,000.
One option being explored is a permit system specifying certain streets for truck parking. Streets that
would affect no businesses because the adjacent property is not developable, and are also wide enough
to accommodate truck parking, include the south side of Lodi Avenue east of Beckman Road adjacent to
the railroad line and the east side of Guild Avenue between Lodi Avenue and Pine Street adjacent to the
cemetery. Including streets along vacant lots that haven't been developed yet could be done but would
likely present a problem later.
Security for the trucks could be contracted out to a private firm by the City and funded by fees collected
for the permits. Truck drivers would have to display the permits (stickers) on their trucks to be eligible to
park in the designated areas. Since the drivers are paying for the security of their trucks, there is also
some liability concern related to vandalism. Cost to provide one security guard, in a vehicle, is
approximately $15 per hour. This translates to $55,000 per year for 10 hours of coverage each night.
Assuming 30 permits, this would mean the permits would cost $150 per month at full cost recovery. If
Council chooses to pursue this program, staff will return with a report and recommendation to set a
public hearing.
FUNDING: Installation of signs would come from the Street Maintenance Operating Budget.
ar*�
Richard C. Prima, r.
Public Works Director
Prepared by Rick S. Kiriu, Senior Engineering Technician
RCP/RSK/lm
Attachments
cc: Randy Hays, City Attorney
Larry Hansen, Police Chief
Bruce McDaniel, Police Lieutenant
George Bradley, Street Superintendent
Paula Fernandez, Associate Traffic Engineer
Concerned Citizens
Gary Lund
California Trucking Association
CTRUCKPKG99.DOC
EXHIBIT A
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 residentially 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
noncommercial nature, and public utility service buildings where they are
located in a residential district.
B. This section shall not prohibit parking of commercial vehicles in the process
of being loaded or unloaded. (Ord. 1567 § 2, 1993: Ord. 1410 § 1 (part),
1987)
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 commercial 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 a.m. Auxiliary engines
include but are not limited to refrigerator 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 corners or through
private property). The term "residential district" is as defined in Section
10.52.050(A). (Vehicle Code 22507)
B. This section shall not prohibit parking of commercial vehicles in the process
of being loaded or unloaded.
C. This section shall not apply to parking on state highways. (Ord. 1581 § 1
(part), 1993)
y OFACITY OF LODI
w
1FORPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TRUCK PARKING
COMPLAINTS
lid
EXHIBIT B
MIME ■
n
..
all
==Jj���
"MEN
■■■■■111111..,,,
111110uuR...r
7; 77
TRUCK PARKING SURVEY
Locations where truck parking complaint have been received are shown bold
STREET
LOCATION
BUSINESS
9:30 AM
TRUCKS
11:30 AM
OBSERVED
1:30 PM
3:30 PM
8:30 PM
Lot
AYQ
Turner Road
W/Rutledge
Plaza Liquors
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Harney Lane
W/Hutchins
Mall @ NW corner
1
0
1
1
3
6
1
Hutchins Street
N/Harney
Mall Q NW corner
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
Sargent Road
W/Lower Sac
Raley's
3
0
0
2
3
8
2
SUBTOTALI
4
1 0 1
1
1 3 1
7
Cherokee Lane
N/Almond (west side)
Mobile Home Park
0
0
0
1
4
5
1
Cherokee Lane
N/Kettleman
Lodi Academy (west side)
4
3
3
2
8
20
4
Cherokee Lane
N/Kettleman
Sanborn Chevrolet
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cherokee Lane
N/Kettleman
Perko's (east side)
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
Cherokee Lane
S/Poplar (east side)
Holiday Inn Express
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cherokee Lane
N/Poplar (east side)
Geweke Used Cars
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cherokee Lane
N/Poplar
Geweke Ford
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cherokee Lane
N/Poplar
Plummers Pontiac
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cherokee Lane
S/Lodi east side
K -Mart
1
1
1
0
1
4
1
Cherokee Lane
S/Locust (west side)
Del Monte Club
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SUBTOTAI-1
2 1
1 J
1 J
0 1
1
Kettleman Lane
E/Lower Sac (north side)
Old Sunwest Liquors
0
0
1
1
1
3
1
Kettleman Lane
W/dwy (north side)
Big 5, Coco's
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
Kettleman Lane
W/Sylvan (south side)
Retirement Home
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
Kettleman Lane
E/Sylvan (south side)
Under Construction
0
2
2
2
2
8
2
Kettleman Lane
W/WID (south side)
Vacant
1
0
0
0
4
5
1
Kettleman Lane
Bet Lee & Pleasant (north side)
Old Chevron station
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
Kettleman Lane
Bet Lee & Pleasant (south side)
Golden Ox
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
Kettleman Lane
E/Stockton (south side)
National Rental,Geweke R
0
0
1
2
3
6
1
Kettleman Lane
E/Central (south side)
Subway
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
Kettleman Lane
E/Central (north side)
Lodi Academy
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
SUBTOTALI
1 1
2 1
4 1
5 113
TOTALJ
7 1
3 1
6 1
8
21
truck99
N-1
TRUCK PARKING RESTRICTIONS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
City of Sacramento — Illegal to park commercial vehicles with a gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) of 10,000 lbs. or more in a residential district.
City of Stockton — Illegal to park vehicles having a gross weight limit exceeding three
tons except on designated truck routes. Also illegal to park commercial vehicles for
more than 60 minutes between the hours of 2:30 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. where the abutting
lot is zoned either residential or commercial. Stockton is a charter city.
City of Tracy — By resolution, Council may restrict parking of vehicles with GVWR of
10,000 lbs. or more between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. in a residential district. The
City Manager may grant permits exempting vehicles from the restriction in areas lacking
adequate off-street parking.
City of Roseville — Illegal to park vehicles with GVWR of 10,000 lbs. or more in a
residential district.
City of Galt — Illegal to park commercial vehicles exceeding a maximum gross weight
limit of five tons in residential district. With the exception of two roadways, parking in
other districts is limited to two hours.
City of Livermore — Illegal to park commercial vehicles in residential districts. Truck
parking in other areas handled on a case-by-case basis using vehicle length limitations.
City of Novato — Illegal to park vehicles over five tons except on truck routes.
CTRUCKPKG99SUPLMNTL.DOC 08/18/99
CITY COUNCIL
KEITH LAND, Mayor CITY O F T O DI
STEPHEN J. MANN 1�
Mayor Pro Tempore
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
SUSAN HITCHCOCK
P.O. BOX 3006
LAN S. NAKANISHI
ALAN
PENNING LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
PHILLI(209) 333-6706
FAX (209) 333-6710
August 12, 1999
SUBJECT: Truck Parking Restrictions at Various Locations
H. DIXON FLYNN
City Manager
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
RANDALL A. HAYS
City Attorney
Enclosed is a copy of background information on an item on the City Council
agenda of Wednesday, August 18, 1999. The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. 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. 0. Box 3006, Lodi, California, 95241-1910. Be sure to allow time for the
mail. Or, you may hand -deliver the letter to City Hall, 221 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 Alice Reimche, City Clerk, at (209) 333-6702.
If you have any questions about the item itself, please call Rick Kiriu at
(209) 333-6800, ext. 668.
t d
Richard C. Prima, J .
Public Works Director
RCPIIrn
Enclosure
cc: City Clark✓/
NCTRUCKPKG99.DOC
MR RICHARD SANBORN
SANBORN CHEVROLET
P O BOX 1057
LODI CA 95241
LARAMIE ROBERTS
412 TIOGA DR
LODI CA 95242
MR MIKE FURNISH
1736 S CHURCH ST
LODI CA 95240
PLAZA LIQUORS
ATTN TOM GRAVES
2420 W TURNER RD
LODI CA 95242
MR GARY LUND
P O BOX 22
LODI CA 95241
RALEY'S SUPERMARKET
ATTN MANAGER
333 S LWR SACRAMENTO RD
LODI CA 95242
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSN
ATTN W RONALD COALE
LOCAL GOVT CONSULTANT
3251 BEACON BLVD
W SACRAMENTO CA 95691
LUCTRUCKMG99AOC
PERKO'S RESTAURANT SUBWAY SANDWICHES
ATTN MIKE REZA ATTN BARRY STIRM
1170 S CHEROKEE LN 429 E KETTLEMAN LN
LODI CA 95240 LODI CA 95240
LODI FAMILY TAEKWONDO CNTR TOKAY MARKET
ATTN MANAGER ATTN HARJINDER HUNDAL
523 W HARNEY LN #3 2525 S HUTCHINS ST
LODI CA 95240 LODI CA 95240
JACQUE SUTPHIN MS MARY KAY MEYER
321 E CENTURY BLVD 805 S ROSE ST
LODI CA 95240 LODI CA 95240
GEWEKE PROPERTIES
ATTN DALE GILLESPIE MARILYN HARD
P O BOX 1210 PARKING HEARING TECH
LODI CA 95241
PLUMMER PONTIAC HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS
ATTN GENERAL MANAGER ATTN MANAGER
1011 S CHEROKEE LN 1140 S CHEROKEE LN
LODI CA 95240 LODI CA 95240
VALLEY CINEMAS USA GASOLINE
ATTN MANAGER 2500 W LODI AVE
2750 W LODI AVE LODI CA 95242
LODI CA 95242
SAN JOAQUIN CO PW DEPT
ATTN TOM FLINN
DEPUTY DIR/ENGINEERING
P O BOX 1810
STOCKTON CA 95201-1810
i;1 T Y .: I_ F tR
CIT Y OF L0 1
City Council, City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, Ca 95241
Dear Council Members,
Plaza Food and Liquor
2420 W. Turner Rd.
Lodi, Ca 95242
I am writing in response to you adopting a "No commercial -vehicle parking
zone" on Turner Road, west of Rutledge Drive, in front of my business, Plaza Food
and Liquor.
I have a number of reasons to ask for your support in this matter:
1. Large trucks parked in front block of the store block visibility - this in turn
affects sales. This also adds to security concerns when the front of the store
cannot be seen by passing motorists.
2. Customers leaving by the West exit onto Turner Road cannot see to their
right when a large truck is parked there. To make matters worse, the Grape
Line Bus Stop going East on Tuner is to the left of this exit. When a bus is on
one side, and a truck is on the other, using this exit can be very dangerous.
3. When a large truck is parked in front of the store, cars trying to turn left
from Rutledge Drive onto Turner Road cannot see the on coming traffic.
This creates a very dangerous driving condition for residents in the
surrounding neighborhoods.
4. Directly across the street from my business is the Grape Line Bus Stop
going West On Turner Road. I see people crossing Turner at the corner of
Rutledge several times a day to get this bus stop ( there is no crosswalk at this
corner). When a truck is parked there, not only can the pedestrians not
see the traffic, the drivers cannot see the pedestrians. There are also many
students from Woodbridge Middle School that do this. I believe this is the
most important reason that you approve the "No Parking Zone", it could
prevent a terrible accident.
I would like to add that I have instructed my employees to park their vehicles
in the front of the store to prevent the trucks from parking there, this has been a
reasonable temporary solution. I am sure this is the reason that your survey said
that no trucks were observed at this location.
In closing ,I would like to note that with all of the growth that is happening to
the west of Lower Sacramento Road, traffic on Turner will only get worse. We are
not talking about losing an extensive amount of truck parking, there is only room
for one at a time to park here.
Lets do the right thing and prevent a serious accident in the future.
Thank you,
—i,44 "
Tom Graves, Owner,Plaza Food and Liquor
C '"'ED
City Council,'; `^ ! 7
City of Lodi
CiTY CLERK
Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council, 1 1 T Y I L DID I
I am a retired truck driver, so I [more so than you] can see the writing on
the wall regarding tracks.
First o$ Trucks park on Lodi streets because they can and it's free, and
they'll take as much as they can get for as long as they can. Other cities post
"no commercial vehicle parking" signs and force trucks to park in the
industrial area, or into another city. Ever wonder where these trucks parked
before they parked in Lodi? Well about 35% of diem parked in Stockton
on and around West Iane before they posted "no parking" signs. A lot of
other trucks have their own yards, but choose to clutter the streets so they
can walk from their track to their house. I had to furnish my own
transportation to a from work, how about you?
The names of these trucking firms that have their own yards and park on
Lodi streets are: Frank Alegre trucking [Lodi], Gannon trucking [Lodi],Swift
Transportation [Stockton], Cherokee Freight Lines [Stockton], Valley
Materials [Stockton], and California Bulk [Stockton].
There is no reason whatsoever, that the city of Lodi should pull any
money out of their pocket to furnish parking places for any of these
trucks.They are a business and if they can't afford to rent a parking space for
there business, then they should raise their razes and if they can't do that then
they shouldn't be in business.
It was said by one of the councilmen [at the last meeting about trucks]
that they feel that the city of Lodi owes them a place to park because they
haul Loch's freight into town Well believe me they don't do this service for
nothing, as a matter of fact they get paid very good, and besides just about
98% of these trucks haul elsewhere and not into Lodi.
Our Lodi merchants have to rent places for their business, so why should
the truckers be allowed to do business off the streets?
I recommend option # 1, Adopt "no commercial -vehicle parking"
restrictions at all of the locations described.
Thank you,
Mike
1736 So. Church St.
Lodi, Ca 95240
Dear Council Member,
Lodi's truck parking problem is not about Lodi truckers. It is about
truck drivers who prefer to ve in Lodi.
Check the names on the ctors and vans. Also, see what state issued
the license plates.
You don't rind Lodi trucking companies, such as: Alberg; Allegre; Gannon
Kishida; Teresi or Vaz. What you will fmd is a profusion of out of town
and some out of state names and licenses from companies that
contribute little or nothing to Lodi's economy.
This parking not only spreads over public areas, it also invades private
property, without the consent or knowledge of the owners (i.e. the bare
Land south of F&M bank in the Raleys shopping area).
To the rest of the business world, commuting and parking fees are a
normal part of the cost of doing business or earning a living.
There is no reason why the taxpayers of Lodi should subsidize
the convenience of these people or their employers.
Jon Withers
2448 Corbin Lane
Lodi, CA 95242
334-5040
Aug -18-99 07:14 P_01
G*REM,iNc.
DEVELOPMENT. CONSTRUCTION, MANAGEMENT
August 18, 1999
SENT via FAX ONLY
Honorable Mayor & Council Members, and
Richard Prima. Public Works Director
FAX 209 333-6710
RE: Truck Parking - Agenda item for August 18'h City Council Meeting
Dear Mayor, Council Members, & Mr. Prima:
1 am in receipt of Mr. Prima's Council Communication regarding truck parking.
Hopefully, you have read my letter sent to you last week. Other commitments do not allow me to
attend the Council meeting tonight, however, upon reviewing the Council Communication, I have
some additional comments.
# 1. Although not specifically stated in the report, it would appear, based on the survcy
results for South Cherokee Lane, that no truck parking problem exists. I can assure you, that we
and the other business owners in this area have enough other business to attend to than call and
write letters complaining about truck parking - if it wasn't a problem, you wouldn't be hearing
from us! There is a significant problem of truck and trailer combinations blocking the view and
endangering the egress from our facilities as they are parked.
#2. As the owner of both developed, (Century Self Storage -NW corner of Century Blvd.
& Stockton Street), and undeveloped, (Beckman & Kettleman area), M 1 and M-2 property, we
are strongly opposed to allowing truck parking on these streets. For example, one semi truck and
trailer combination parked on Stockton Street in front of Century Self Storage, (M-2 zone),
totally blocks the view of our facility from Southbound Stockton Street. The same size truck
parked on our Century Boulevard frontage totally blocks the view from Northbound Stockton
Street. When trucks are parked in both of these locations at the same time, (it is happening!),
most new customers cannot find us. The same problem was occuring at Beckman Road and E.
Kettleman Lane, until the Council approved a no -parking zone on these two streets. Now that
"new" Beckman Road is nearly complete, we are in the early stages of developing a
business/technology park on our M-1 property North of E. Kettlernan Lane. No office space user
or high-tech firm is going to locate in an area where the streets are lined with trucks.
P.O. BOK 1210 • 920 S. CHEROKEE LANE. SUITE A 9 LODI. CA 95241 (209) 333-4565 • FAX (2o9) 334.1828
Aug -18-99 07:15
U. In regards to the various recommendations made in the Council Communication, we
are vehemently opposed to the City getting in the business of truck parking. Of the options
presented, we feel a combination of 1 and 2 are viable. There are many areas where parking
between the hours of 9:00 PM and 6:00 AM would not be objectionable. I think the Zed option of
allowing a 100 foot no parking zone at the discretion of the Public Works Director is a must for
the safety people trying to exit businesses where semi trucks are parked.
1 appreciate the opportunity to comment on this issue_
Sincerely,
Dale ZNGillespie
cc: Daryl Geweke
P.02