Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Traffic commission approves list of multifamily properties as noneligible for residential parking stickers
Summary
At its June 12 meeting, the Revere City Traffic Commission voted to add a list of new or proposed multifamily residential developments to the city ordinance as locations ineligible for residential parking stickers.
Get email alerts on the Parking Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Revere City Traffic Commission on June 12 voted to designate a set of multifamily residential properties as noneligible for residential parking stickers under the city's parking ordinance.
The commission approved a motion to update Section 10-34-020 to list the following properties as noneligible: 8 Avon; Amaya at Suffolk Downs (also referenced as 50 Salt Street); 650 Beach Street; 5153 Centennial; 21 Green Street (also referenced as 349 Lee Burbank Highway); 1510 North Shore Road; 1499 North Shore Road; 1198 North Shore Road; 1473 North Shore Road; 110 Ocean Ave; 100 Riviera Street; 571 Riviera Street; 8 Riviera Street; 451 Riviera Beach Boulevard; 450–459 Rivera Beach Boulevard; 37 Rivera Beach Boulevard; 133 Salem Street; 163 Shirley Ave; 38 Walnut Ave; and 55 Walnut Ave.
The item was presented as a housekeeping update to bring the municipal code into alignment with newly built or proposed multifamily developments listed by staff. A commissioner noted two clarifying alternate addresses during the hearing: Amaya at Suffolk Downs is also recorded as 50 Salt Street, and 21 Green Street is also known as 349 Lee Burbank Highway.
No members of the public registered opposition or support during the public hearing. The chair called for a vote and recorded the item as approved.
The ordinance change affects eligibility for on-street residential sticker parking at the listed addresses; the commission framed the vote as a technical update to existing regulations rather than adoption of new parking restrictions.
The commission did not discuss additional enforcement steps or a timing schedule for changing signs at the meeting. Staff follow-up to implement the ordinance amendment was implied by the vote.

