Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Corrales delays no-parking ordinance after extended public comments about Perea Road obstructions and business parking
Summary
Following extensive public testimony about recurring roadway blockages and land-use concerns tied to a local stucco business, the council voted to defer consideration of a proposed no-parking ordinance and asked staff and planning to return with revisions and clearer enforcement criteria.
Residents crowded the council meeting to press elected officials for action on long-running parking and road-blocking issues and to comment on proposed Ordinance 26-02, which would create no-parking or residential-parking-only zones where commercial overflow affects neighborhoods.
Multiple residents described repeated safety incidents on narrow Perea Road, including parked commercial trucks and a large roll-off dumpster at a property used as a construction yard. "This is not about inconvenience. It's about public safety," Carolyn Winn told the council, citing concerns that an obstructed road could delay emergency response. Tessa Davidson urged enforcement after saying the property’s present use — a full construction yard with trucks, trailers and a permanent portable restroom — differs from the uses the parcel was approved for.
Resident Raul Biel and others said prior meetings and planning correspondence had not solved the problem and asked the council to direct administration to produce a written report of enforcement actions taken since 2021. "My interactions have been limited to asking that the vehicles be moved so residents can use the road safely," Raul Biel said, rejecting characterizations that he had been aggressive in previous meetings.
Councilors and planning staff discussed whether the ordinance, as written, provides clear definitions ("street" v. "road"), fair criteria for posting signs, and equitable enforcement. Some councilors said they worry about over-signing the village and unintended consequences, while others argued that targeted signage and enforcement are necessary to protect residents. Planning staff and the police chief explained that, without posted signs and an enforceable ordinance, municipal court remedies are limited.
After lengthy public input and internal debate, Councilor Perquette moved (and a councilor seconded) to return a revised ordinance to the council on June 9 to allow additional work by planning, legal and code enforcement on objective criteria for signage and complaint handling; the motion passed by council vote.
No new ordinance was adopted at the meeting; the council directed staff to continue consulting with planning and to return with a revised draft and recommended objective criteria for when signs or enforcement should be used.
