HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-553
NOVEMBER 22, 2011 DECEMBER 13, 2011 11-521 11-553 ORDINANCE
FIRST READING SECOND READING
(CARRIED__7-0____ LOST_______ LAID OVER_______ WITHDRAWN_______)
AS AMENDED
PURPOSE: APPROVAL OF PARKING REGULATION CHANGES ON IOWA
TH
STREET (NORTH OF 20 AVENUE) AND MINERVA STREET
(NORTH OF PACKER AVENUE)
INITIATED BY: TRAFFIC REVIEW ADVISORY BOARD
A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OSHKOSH AMENDING SECTION 27-
23(A-11) OF THE OSHKOSH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING
REGULATIONS ON DESIGNATED STREETS AND ALLEYS.
The Common Council of the City of Oshkosh do ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. That Section 27-23(A-11) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code pertaining
to parking regulations on designated streets and alleys is hereby amended as follows:
A-11 PARKING REGULATIONS ON DESIGNATED STREETS AND ALLEYS
IOWA STREET
th
Add Thereto: No parking, both sides, from 20 Avenue to 60 feet
th
north of 20 Avenue.
MINERVA STREET
Add Thereto: No parking, west side, from Packer Avenue to its
northern terminus.
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage, publication and placement of the appropriate signage.
SECTION 3. Publication Notice. Please take notice that the City of Oshkosh
enacted ordinance #11-553 (A GENERAL ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OSHKOSH
AMENDING SECTION 27-23(A-11) OF THE OSHKOSH MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO PARKING REGULATIONS ON DESIGNATED STREETS AND
ALLEYS) on December 13, 2011. The ordinance changes on-street parking regulations
on Iowa Street.
The full text of the ordinance may be obtained at the Office of the City Clerk, 215
Church Avenue and through the City’s website at www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us. Clerk’s phone:
920/236-5011.
Bold & Italics indicates Amendments
CITY HALL
215 Church Avenue
P.O.Box 1130
Oshkosh,Wisconsin
54903-1130 City of Oshkosh
41P)
OIHKO!H
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Christopher Strong, P.E., Director of Transportation
DATE: December 6, 2011
RE: Amendment to the Proposed Parking Ordinance Change (Minerva Street)
BACKGROUND
At its November 22, 2011 meeting, the Common Council had a first reading of a
proposed ordinance which would change parking restrictions on Iowa Street north of
20th Avenue and on Minerva Street north of Packer Avenue.
The request to prohibit parking on one side of Minerva Street was made by a resident,
and was considered and supported by the Traffic Review Advisory Board at its
November 8, 2011 meeting. Since that time, the citizen who made the request and the
other citizen who spoke in support of this request at the November 8 meeting have
asked that this request be rejected. A petition has also been submitted to the City
requesting that the request be rejected. There no longer appear to be citizens interested
in this parking change, nor is there a compelling safety reason to support it.
ANALYSIS
Should Council members wish to amend the proposed ordinance, the following
amendment could be considered.
"I move to amend Section 1 of the proposed ordinance to strike the text
starting with `Minerva Street' and ending with `northern terminus'; and to
amend the ordinance title and publication notice to remove any reference to
Minerva Street."
If the ordinance change would pass with this amendment, parking regulations on
Minerva Street would remain unchanged.
As an alternative, the Council could divide the ordinance and refer the portion on
Minerva Street back to the Traffic Review Advisory Board. Since the Board's
0
recommendation in favor of the parking request was swayed primarily by input from
area residents rather than from specific concerns with traffic safety or mobility, staff
does not believe this referral is necessary.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved:
ci(2/A /reek—/(./014,SA--
hristopher Strong, P.E. Mark A. Rohloff
Director of Transportation City Manager
OJHKOJH
ON THE WATER
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mark A. Rohloff, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Strong, Transportation Director
DATE: November 16, 2011
RE: Explanation of Traffic Regulations Ordinance Changes
SECTION 1: SECTION 27-23(A-11)— PARKING REGULATIONS
A REQUEST FOR NO PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE OF MINERVA STREET FROM PACKER
AVENUE TO ITS NORTHERN TERMINUS. (CURRENT CONDITION: UNRESTRICTED
PARKING.)
This is a citizen request.
This dead end section of Minerva Street has single-family detached housing on the west side of
the street and multi-family apartment buildings on the east side of the street. According to the
citizen making the request, residents in the apartments have been parking an increasing number
of vehicles on Minerva Street, which is becoming a nuisance, particularly with respect to
overnight parking. (The overnight parking appears to be in compliance with the City's permit
requirements.) In addition, the citizen is concerned that this type of parking could cause
problems with snow removal in the winter months.
The following guidelines relate the type of parking restriction that is appropriate for each street,
according to its width.
Street Width Parking Restrictions
Less than 17 feet Both Sides (All cases)
17 to 24 feet One Side (All cases)
25 to 33 feet Valid Petition
34 feet and over None
The street width of Minerva Street in this area is 30-32 feet. For streets of this width, several
factors come into consideration, which in this case could be used to reject or support parking
restrictions. On the one hand, there are no particular concerns with traffic volumes or visibility on
this street where parking removal is necessary to protect vehicular or pedestrian safety.
Moreover, on a local street with no outlet, the existing street is wide enough to support parking
and typical snow removal operations. On the other hand, the properties facing this street appear
to have adequate off-street parking to comply with appropriate City requirements.
In a case like this, the Board typically looks to the interests of local residents in determining
whether a parking restriction on a local street between 25 feet and 33 feet in width is
appropriate. The Department sent out notices to affected property owners on both sides of the
street, so they will be able to provide comment for this meeting.
Page 2 of 3 Explanation of Traffic Ordinance Changes
FROM TRAFFIC REVIEW BOARD MEETING (11-8-11) MINUTES:
Board members received copies of three letters in opposition to this request.
Mr. Kaprelian said this would remove the parking for residents on the west side of
the street. He was opposed to the request.
Mr. Kline said it was a wide street and did not think this was necessary. He felt it
would be detrimental to the single family residences.
Mr. Ross noted the overnight parking appears to be in compliance with the City's
permit requirements and he would not want to remove parking because of this.
Ms. Tanya Beulen, 2743 Minerva Street, lives directly across from the apartments.
She learned from the manager of the apartments in July 2011 that they were
starting to have overflow parking problems. Currently,the tenants are assigned an
outside parking stall and a parking garage. If a tenant is unable to park in either
space, they were told they needed to get a permit to park on the street. The
number of vehicles parking on the street has increasingly grown. Because of this,
Ms. Beulen and her husband have difficulty exiting their driveway. She said there
is the noise factor and the difficulty with snow removal to contend with. She said
the three to five houses closest to Packer Avenue are impacted the most. She
noted there is also a vacant lot farther down the street, which is slated for another
apartment building in the near future; this could make the existing problem worse.
Ms. Stacy Howe, 2733 Minerva Street, is in agreement with Ms. Beulen. The first
two to three houses toward the southern end of the block have problems caused
by on-street parking. The parties in opposition to parking removal live near the cul-
de-sac at the northern end and don't have the problems caused by the on-street
parking.
Mr. Seybold said the problem will only get worse after the other apartment building
is built.
Mr. Ross noted if parking is removed from one side of the street, no overnight
parking permits can be issued.
Mr. Kaprelian felt the removal of parking would just drive the tenants to park further
south.
Mr. Schuster questioned if we could remove parking on part of the block and not
punish the people down by the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Kaprelian said for him to support the request, parking would have to be
removed the whole length of the block.
Ms. Howe said she understands their concerns but a partial restriction would just
push the apartment tenants in front of their homes. She feels it is up to the
apartment building owners to provide adequate parking spaces for their tenants.
Ms. Beulen said with the layout of the cul-de-sac, there are only two on-street
parking spaces available in the cul-de-sac. She told the Board this request was
the result of trying to remove overnight parking on the street.
Mr. Hamilton felt if the parking were removed, this will create problems for all
residents. He said the problem sounded more of an issue at night than during the
day.
Mr. Kaprelian observed seven to eight vehicles parked on the street last night.
Page 3 of 3 Explanation of Traffic Ordinance Changes
Because the residents, who spoke at this meeting, realize they will lose parking,
they have changed his opinion.
Mr. Schuster is inclined to go along with the opinions of the residents, who spoke
at the meeting.
Mr. Hamilton felt this is a problem between the apartment complex and the
residents. He is opposed.
PASSED BY TRAFFIC REVIEW BOARD(5-1)
A REQUEST FOR NO PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF IOWA STREET FROM 20TH AVENUE TO
60 FEET NORTH OF 20TH AVENUE. (CURRENT CONDITION: UNRESTRICTED PARKING.)
This is a citizen request. (Rob Faust, 1639 Iowa, 237-1674)
The Department has received complaints from several citizens about parking on Iowa Street that
is too close to the intersection with 20th Avenue. The concern is not that vehicles are restricting
sight distance, but rather that the presence of vehicles close to the intersection makes it difficult
for vehicles to turn safely onto or off of 20th Avenue.
Iowa Street is a local street, 32 feet in width; therefore, the same guidelines apply here as did
under the previous item. Our department does not have record of any reported crashes on this
block of Iowa Street involving on-street parking, and sight distance is adequate. However, traffic
volumes here (on both streets) are likely higher than those at the intersection of Minerva Street
and Packer Avenue. This is a factor which would tend to provide greater support for on-street
parking restrictions.
The proposed ordinance would extend the no parking space slightly further away from the
intersection, eliminating two parking spaces on each side of the road. This should have little
impact on adjacent properties, but it may provide some additional room near the intersection to
help prevent accidents involving vehicles turning onto Iowa Street from 20th Avenue.
FROM TRAFFIC REVIEW BOARD MEETING (11-8-11) MINUTES
Board members received a copy of a letter in favor of this request.
Mr. Kline said theoretically the vehicles will move down the street but he
understands the reason for the request.
Mr. Ross asked how many vehicles park on the street. Mr. Strong replied there are
vehicles parked about two-thirds of the way down the block.
Mr. Schuster sees no problem with 60 feet. Mr. Kline asked who had requested the
60 feet. Mr. Strong answered it was requested by the Police Department.
Mr. Kaprelian has observed the difficulty vehicles have making turns at this corner.
Mr. Kaprelian suggested notifying Oshkosh Truck Corporation that if this continues,
they will be losing the parking on the surrounding streets.
PASSED BY TRAFFIC REVIEW BOARD (6-0)
U
Ulf
Liars
o ci
N `rt
11-11-1 c�
cp
g N --..,,s._ ( ......_
co-
I Ulf CI-
+' 1 1 1
Cr- 1.1-11 �
N .. .4 -.1 ..A-- 4
•i ''-N ,
tn
. (.:, Q) ,-__•-)
0 --..k„
..
_, ____,,.
i- 1
, ,._____
t 7 i
E c , .-- te) 11
2 to
in k.... ...4
To Pr
o v �� k ��
i i S r.� trill �- Ri1
l4 `;5 rtS W a, `J /�,
W OG ` 1 , 1 U ��' + �j ,
cc t _c 0 v ` 'J o 6 C� C3
o a, lV ` �� o /
c m
o
o a,c o -:- -
C Q Q U '3 E Y E yn Z c�
1 L
..c E Z 2 ? 0
N S , +
v l
Cr
u _c 0 ,z- (A. _____),
1' -a- ''') ) 1 . ' .______
of ��
±-_-' -o 4.. .-Tr?"--- C.,.
= - \I% ---,', i ,.._- r W - .....1 A 'si\ i
I 0 cu to
Y E U ZlT ' t
I
U)
+r
to
c
E
o
to
0 c--6 �_
o
on
o !
Q -d ,. A/ —
tu
cu
tn
SE C k-. -§
- ,1/ li .k "1"11111
C.Nib -F��N L
QN
to , C14')\-.
= V '1
To ct
640 <1
0.
2 L !) .T" �' N N c�
t.
f `•c' C�M v m
w
c ✓✓
c c
oL c �
d v
-Tr
�' Ct, (-CI; Y
- E ,--
o OL �, 1'
L C ^
. ems' 1
n
fl o
G
JO .,, '
>• 000 )- j�
0 5-\ ;.--
N C1J R LL
■
0
3 n z ‘,...--- c-
-' �i
<-..) ,-<' p .--N