Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
East Palo Alto staff outline residential permit parking ordinance, seek council feedback
Summary
City staff presented a draft Residential Permit Parking (RPP) ordinance that would create a process for neighborhoods to request parking restrictions; staff asked whether petition and adoption thresholds should both be 67% and described fee and enforcement options.
City staff on Tuesday presented a draft residential permit parking ordinance and asked the East Palo Alto City Council for feedback on key decision points, including petition and adoption thresholds and whether permit fees should fully fund the program. Senior engineer Betul Azaro and consultant Michelle Hunt (Hexagon) said the ordinance would not itself impose parking restrictions — it would create a process neighborhoods or councilmembers could use to request RPP areas.
"This ordinance won't create any parking, permit parking restrictions tonight," Michelle Hunt said in her presentation, adding that adoption of an RPP area would require a later council action. Hunt described a multi-step process: a resident-initiated petition or council initiation; a staff occupancy study (staff suggested a 75% occupancy trigger used by other cities); a resident survey (staff proposed a 67% approval threshold); and a final council decision. Under the draft staff recommended one free permit per residence, additional permits available for purchase, guest permits and virtual, license-plate–based enforcement technology.
The presentation included preliminary cost and revenue estimates for a virtual permit system and for enforcement staffing. Staff modeled a second-permit fee in the $100–$200 annual range and showed scenarios where revenue from second permits could range roughly from $32,000 to $150,000 depending on uptake and price. Hunt said final fees would be set as part of an upcoming citywide fee study. City Manager Melvin Gaines and staff emphasized the session was informational and that staff would return with revised ordinance language following council input.
Council members and staff flagged enforcement and equity concerns and asked for more analysis and outreach before any adoption. Staff said they would incorporate tonight’s feedback into an updated ordinance and bring it back for a future reading.
