HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdmin Order 58-10-17ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-10-17
of the
Traffic Engineer of the City of Eugene
EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF RESIDENTIAL PERMIT
PARKING ZONE A IN THE SOUTH UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION (SUNA) AREA; RESTATING AND RATIFYING THE
AREAS PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED IN THE SUNA RESIDENTIAL
PERMIT PARKING PROGRAM; REPEALING PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS REGARDING THE SUNA RESIDENTIAL
PERMIT PARKING ZONE A; AND PROVIDNG A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
The Traffic Engineer of the City of Eugene finds that:
A. Section 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971 (EC) authorizes the City Manager or the
Manager's designee to adopt rules deemed necessary for the administration and enforcement of
provisions of the Eugene Code. In addition, EC 5.040 authorizes the City Manager or the
Manager's designee to take administrative action establishing parking area time limitations,
including the form of permissible parking and imposing conditions upon which the streets and
other public property may be used for parking.
B. Pursuant to the above - authority, the City Manager adopted Administrative Order
No. 58- 92 -07, adopting Residential Permit Parking Zone Regulations, Administrative Rule R-
5.040.
C. Administrative Rule R- 5.040 -C provides that the Traffic Engineer may establish a
residential permit parking zone upon the application by an owner /residential or, in an area for
which no owner /resident application has been received, provided that: (a) establishment of the
zone is necessary in order to meet the objectives of the policies set forth herein; (b) the proposal
would meet the criteria for approval set forth in R- 5.040 -F had an application been submitted;
and, (c) failure to establish a zone would create a hardship for residents in the area or contribute
to traffic congestion in the area.
D. In 1991 the Traffic Engineer established residential permit parking Zone A for
property located within the South University Neighborhood Association (SUNA). Through
subsequent administrative orders adopted by the Traffic Engineer, the Zone A residential permit
parking designation was expanded throughout the SUNA area. Approximately twenty
administrative orders collectively establish the current boundaries of the SUNA residential
permit parking Zone A.
Administrative Order -- Page 1 of 3
E. In accordance with Administrative Rule R- 5.040 -C, expanding the existing
boundaries of the SUNA residential permit parking Zone A is necessary to meet the objectives of
the policies set forth in Administrative Rule R -5.040 and meets the criteria for approval set forth
in R- 5.040 -F. Failure to establish the zone would create a hardship for the area's residents and
would contribute to traffic congestion in the area.
F. As a means of consolidating the previously- issued administrative orders regarding
the SUNA residential permit parking program, the SUNA properties previously designated as
residential permit parking Zone A are set forth in this administrative order, together with the
expanded boundaries established by this order.
On the basis of these findings, I order that:
1. The area depicted on the map attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit
A, and as described specifically below, is hereby established as Residential Permit Parking Zone
A.
19 Avenue: South side between Hilyard and Agate Streets
20 Avenue: North and South sides between Hilyard and Agate Streets
2 1 th Avenue: North and South sides between Hilyard and Agate Streets
22 "d Avenue: North and South sides between Hilyard and Onyx Streets
North side between Onyx and Emerald Streets
North and South sides between Emerald and Agate Streets
23 Avenue: North and South sides between Hilyard and Onyx Streets
South side between Onyx and Emerald Streets
North and South sides between Emerald and Columbia
Streets
Hilyard Street:
Alder Street:
Kincaid Street:
Harris Street:
Potter Street:
University Street:
Onyx Street:
Emerald Street
Agate Street
East side between 19 and 20 Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 23'
Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 23'
Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 23'
Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 23`
Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 23'
Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 22
Avenues
West side between 22 11d and 24 Avenues
West and East sides between 19 and 22
Avenues
East side between 22 " and 23' Avenues
West side between 19 and 22 Avenues
West and East sides between 22 and 23
Avenues
Administrative Order -- Page 2 of 3
Columbia Street: Both sides between 22' and 23` Avenues
2. The area designated as Zone A on Exhibit A and specifically described in
paragraph 1 above, shall allow 2 -hour public parking between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except legal holidays and except Zone A permitted vehicles.
3. Persons residing in or owning residential property within Zone A designated
herein may apply for a permit entitling the holder thereof to preferential long -term parking
within the designated zone. Permit fees shall be established in accordance with Section 2.020
and Chapter 5 of the Eugene Code, 1971.
4. All previously adopted administrative orders establishing the boundaries and /or
parking times for the SUNA residential permit parking Zone A are hereby repealed.
Administrative Order No. 58 -10 -16 establishing Residential Permit Parking Zone H for specified
areas within the SUNA area remains in full force and effect.
5. If, by action of a hearing official having jurisdiction to review this administrative
order, any portion of this administrative order is stricken or the boundaries of the SUNA
residential permit parking Zone A is modified, such action by the hearings official shall have no
effect on the validity of any other section or provision hereof, all of which will remain in full
force and effect.
Dated and effective this Z5 day of February, 2011.
Thomas C. Larsen
Traffic Engineer
Administrative Order -- Page 3 of 3
W
0
c
0
Z
D
7,
rD
iz
0
D
St
v
u
7
5
7
D
U
7
2
7
D
D
D
� f7
7 <
D O
3 M
v
3 Q
m
D �
y N
C �t)
ry
W IN
H
o�
0
m
University St
Emerald St
rd St
g IN
i
i
MINE 0
Moll
T
_ D
Columbia St
Hilyard St
Alder St
Kincaid St
!'E
Harris St
Potter St
t�D
t'D
N
0
0
0
c'
M
N..k•
0
0
0
t'D
RECEi VED
JUN 14 1011
EUGENE HEARINGS OFFICIAL
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NUMBER 58 -10-17
EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING IN
THE SOUTH UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD
Appellants: Greg Bryant Sheryl and Volker Engelbert
Date of Administrative Order: February 8, 2011
DECISION: Administrative Order 58 -10 -17 was promulgated in accordance with
Administrative Rule R- 5.040— C.2(b) and is upheld except as it is applied to
Tax Lot 2400, Lane County Assessor's Map 18-03-05-24; Tax Lot 2500,
Lane County Assessor's Map 18- 03 -05 -24 (fronting Alder Street and E. 22
Avenue); and Tax Lot 3700, Lane County Assessor's Map 18- 03- 05 -13.
Findings
1. On February 8, 2011 the Eugene Traffic Engineer issued Administrative Order No
58- 10-17, expanding the boundaries of the Residential Parking Zone A in the
South University Neighborhood association (SUNA) area. During calendar year
2010, four residents of the SUNA requested that a residential permit parking zone
be expanded but city staff convinced them to withdraw their request in lieu of a
more comprehensive proposal by the City Traffic Engineer.
Finding E. of Administrative Order 58 -10 -17 concludes that "...expanding the
existing boundaries of the SUNA residential permit parking Zone A is necessary
to meet the objectives of the policies set forth in Administrative Rule R -5.040 and
meets the criteria for approval set forth in R- 5.040 —F." It further states that
"Failure to establish the zone would create a hardship for the area's residents and
would contribute to traffic congestion in the area."
The findings included Finding F, which included a statement that Rule 58 -10 -17
met the criteria for approval set forth in Administrative order R- 5.040 —F. Finding
F also included the statement that "Failure to establish the zone would create.
hardship for the area's residents and would contribute to traffic congestion in the
area."
Administrative Order 58 -10-17 also contained Order 5. "If, by action of a hearing
official having jurisdiction to review this administrative order, any portion of this
administrative order is stricken or the boundaries of the SUNA residential permit
parking Zone A is modified, such action by the hearings official shall have no
effect on the validity of any other section or provision hereof, all of which will
remain in full force and effect."
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 2 of 9
2. On March 17, 2011, Greg Bryant, owner of properties at 2173 and 2193 Alder
Street (Tax Lots 2400 and 2500, Lane County Assessor's Map 18-03-05-24)
filed an appeal of Administrative Order 58- 10-17. Mr. Bryant's appeal of the
administrative order included several issues, among which were a general
objection to the inconvenience for guests of residents of the expanded parking
zone and a general objection to the lack of a poll of residents.
3. An undated appeal to Administrative Order 58 -10-17 was filed by Sheryl and
Volker Engelbert of 1065 E 22 Street (Tax Lot 3700, Lane County Assessor's
Map 18- 03- 05 -13). The Engelbert appeal objected particularly to the creation of
parking restrictions on their block. They asserted that the analysis for their block
was incorrect, and that it did not need the restrictions because there was no
shortage of parking spaces on their block: The Engelberts did acknowledge that
other blocks in the area needed the parking restrictions.
4. The University is bordered on three sides by residential areas. Over the years,
existing parking on the University have been replaced by classrooms and other
University buildings. In addition, new student housing facilities have been
constructed and the need for parking spaces generated by these structures have
often exceeded that required by the zoning code. The reduction of campus parking
spaces and the increase in the cost of parking permits and parking meter charges
have contributed to the desire of University faculty and students to utilize nearby
unregulated parking spots during the school week.
5. In June of 2010, the SUNA Board of Directors discussed a proposal to expand the
Residential Permit Program in the area. The City of Eugene mailed out flyers on
July 30, 2010 that contained information about the proposed expansion of the
Residential Permit Program. The flyer went out to 1,374 addresses, including
properties located within 100 feet of the proposed district. Feedback from the
flyer consisted of 21 responses in support and 9 responses in opposition. The issue
was also covered in the August 5, 2010 Eugene City Council newsletter and the
SUNA Fall newsletter (mailed October 4, 2010). On February 7, 2011, a postcard
was mailed to 670 residents affected by the proposed change in on —street parking.
After notification of the proposed administrative rule, the City received five
responses in favor and three responses in opposition.
6. Administrative Order 58 -92 -07 was adopted in 1992 to establish and govern
Residential Parking Districts and set out rules (R- 5.040) for the implementation
of the Residential Parking Program. The stated purpose and intent of the rule was
to: "eliminate commuter parking in established residential areas; minimize the
adverse impact of motor vehicles on local residential streets, minimize spill —over
parking from nearby high—employment sites; and the promotion of transit and
alternative modes of transportation by discouraging long —term employee
parking."
7. An event parking district was established for the Fairmount Neighborhood in
August of 2010 through Administrative Order No. 58- 10-15. The district
regulates parking Monday through Sunday, 7:00 am to 11:00 pm. Since the
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 3 of 9
imposition of the district, the amount of vehicle cruising in the Fairmount
Neighborhood has dramatically decreased although it is understood that a portion
of the vehicle demand shifted to the SUNA.
8. The enforcement of parking restrictions is provided by personnel who mark a
vehicle's tire with chalk and then return to the same parking spot in a little more
than the length of the parking restriction; normally two hours. A person in a two —
hour parking space may have their tire marked near the end of a two hour period
and by the time the parking enforcement person returns the car, if it remains, will
have been parked for almost four hours. Thus, a three—hour parking restriction
would theoretically allow a car to be parked for up to nearly six hours and a four —
hour parking restriction would theoretically allow a car to be parked for up to
nearly eight hours, without being ticketed.
Procedural issues
The appeal by Mr. Bryant asserted that there is no popular desire or need for the
expansion of parking restrictions in his neighborhood. This assertion is directly relevant
to Administrative Rule R- 5.040 —F(d) which requires the consideration of "the desire
and/or need of residents of the area for establishment of permit parking zones." In his
April 12, 2011 Preliminary Decision on the Scope of Appeal, the Eugene Hearings
Official (Milo Mecham) opined that the appeal of the administrative order was not
confined to the residential blocks where the appellants reside but rather is relevant to the
validity of the order in its entirety. Accordingly, a hearing on the two appeals was
scheduled for June 3, 2011.
Justification for the Decision
This is an appeal of Administrative Order 58- 10 -15. This issue is one of whether the
administrative order is consistent with the regulation authorizing its action, Eugene
Administrative Rule R- 5.040, and not the legality of that administrative rule. In this
context, Eugene Administrative Rule R- 5.040 —C.2 provides: The Traffic Engineer may
establish a residential permit parking zone in an area for which no application has been
received providing:
1. Establishment of the zone is necessary in order to meet the objectives of the
policies setforth herein;
Administrative rule R -5.040 does not have any explicitly stated policies, and
Section R- 5.040 —B POLICY only notes that the " ...regulations govern the
establishment of or the withdrawal from residential permit parking zones within
the City." Administrative Order 58 -10-17 establishes the residential permit
parking zone within an expanded portion of the SUVA.
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 4 of 9
The establishment of Residential Permit Parking Zone A in the SUNA is
consistent with Demand Strategy 2.5 of Transportation Demand Management
Policy #2 of TransPlan', that provides:
"Manage overflow parking impacts in residential areas through
residential parking permit programs."
The objectives of the policies embodied in Administrative Order 58 -10-17 can be
identified in the "finding" found on page 7 of Administrative Order 58- 92-07,
which established Administrative Rule 5.040. This finding identified the "purpose
and intent" of the rule as being threefold:
Eliminate commuter parking in established residential areas;
The SUNA is an established residential area and is neighborhood
association recognized by the City of Eugene. Testimony from residents
document that commuters to the University utilize unregulated parking
spaces in the SUNA. Experience in other areas around the University
where the residential permit parking has been employed has demonstrated
that commuter parking is mostly eliminated where the residential permit
parking has been employed. This is because most University classes are
close to 80 minutes in duration and the two —hour restriction does not
provide sufficient time for a student or faculty member to travel to the
University, attend class, and travel back to the parking space to move their
vehicle.
2. Minimize the adverse impact of motor vehicles on local residential streets,
minimize spill —over parking from nearby high — employment sites; and
The University is a high— employment site that creates spill —over traffic in
adjacent residential neighborhoods. Testimony and photographic evidence
has documented that the adverse impact of motor vehicles on local
residential streets that have been subject to the two —hour, residential
permit parking zone have been minimized.
3. The promotion of transit and alternative modes of transportation by
discouraging long —term employee parking.
The imposition of the two—hour, residential permit parking zone has
proven to discourage long -term parking of University employees and
students. By making it impractical or .inconvenient to park in
neighborhoods subject to the residential permit parking zone, University
' Lane Council of Governments, TransPlan: The Eugene—Sl2rindield Transportation System Plan (July
2002), Chapter 3, page 98.
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 5 of 9
faculty and students are encouraged to take transit or to use alternative
modes of transportation to access the University.
The expansion of the residential permit parking by the Traffic Engineer
satisfies the above - described policy objectives and these objectives are
relevant to the entire area covered by Administrative Order 58 -10 -17 as
well as the Appellants' properties.
2. The proposal would meet the criteria for approval set forth in R- 5.040 -F had
an application been submitted;
Eugene Administrative Rule R- 5.040- Fprovides that approval of an
application for establishment of a residential permit parking zone shall be based
upon consideration of the following factors:
a. Whether there is consistently a significant amount of long -term spill-
over parking from nearby high employment site or traffic generators,
As a prelude to the adoption of Administrative Order 58- 10-17, the
Eugene Traffic engineer considered the responses to the July 2010 mailing
to 1300 addresses in the area affected by the proposed residential permit
parking zone restrictions. The SUNA Board of Directors has expressed
concerns about the significant impact on parking spot demand occasioned
by University students and staff and due to special events held at the
University.
Twelve persons testified at the June 3, 2011 hearing on the appeals of
Administrative Order 58- 10-17. Five of these individuals testified in
favor of the administrative order, seven, including the three appellants,
testified in opposition.
b. Whether residents frequently find it difficult to park on street within
close proximity to their residences;
The City Traffic Engineer considered the feedback from the July 2010
flyers where numerous individuals complained that the presence of
unregulated parking made it very difficult for them or their guests to find a
parking spot near their residence. in most cases during the work -week, the
spaces filled up early in the morning and remained that way until after
5:00 pm. The effectiveness in creating parking spaces through two -hour
parking restrictions was demonstrated by a photo display of Potter Street
submitted by Appellant Sheri Engelbert.
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 6 of 9
G ' The proximity of public transportation to the area,
The City Traffic Engineer has pointed out that there are two bus routes
through SUNA.
d. The desire and/or need of residents of the area for establishment of
permit parking zones;
The desire and need of the residents in the affected portion of SUNA
varies but the response to the July 2010 flyer was two to one in favor of
the two —hour restrictions. Those in opposition have several concerns, not
all of which are relevant to the imposition of the residential permit parking
zone. For instance, several individuals testified that the cost of acquiring
permits for contractors were very expensive and inconvenient. However,
the parking permit requirement for contractors is a city—wide regulation
and is only $5 per day. Further, it seems like the permit issue would be
largely irrelevant if there were no convenient place for them to park due to
the presence of continuously occupied unregulated parking spots during
weekday work hours.
One individual testified in opposition because the two —hour restrictions
made it very difficult for employees working out of her residence to find a
place to park. It must be pointed out that City of Eugene zoning
regulations require that businesses provide on —site parking spots.
Several individuals testified that they might support three— or four —hour
parking restrictions but information provided by the Traffic Manager
indicated that these alternatives would result in de facto long —term parking
because of parking enforcement procedures. (See Finding of Fact #9,
above.)
e. The local and area —wide needs with respect to clean air, and the
requirements offederal and state laws and regulations;
The amount of vehicle emissions is closely associated with vehicle miles
driven. It has been recognized by the Traffic Engineer that cruising to find
long—term parking spots occurs in non — regulated parking areas, primarily
in the mornings, as University staff and students vie for the these parking
spots. While this parking frenzy subsides after the long—term parking spots
are taken, the parking spots still attract additional traffic during the day in
anticipation of one of the spots opening up. Once an area is posted as two —
hour parking, the initial parking frenzy and subsequent cruising
substantially dissipates, as the area is no longer suitable for University
staff and students. However, it has also been pointed out that the parking
restrictions have had the effect of pushing traffic to a different location.
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 7 of 9
Prior to the adoption of Administrative Order 58- 10-17, the City has
imposed the residential parking program to residential areas west, east,
and southeast (Fairmont Neighborhood) of the University. In response to
these restrictions, students and faculty looking for unregulated (i.e. long—
term) parking spaces have gravitated to the SUNA. With the adoption of
Administrative Order 58- 10-17, the residential permit parking zone now
extends six — blocks south of the University. The operating assumption is
that at some point it will be more logical for the students and faculty
affected by the restrictions to change their behavior, either find alternative
transportation modes or pay for parking at the University. Whether the
restrictions imposed by Administrative Order 58 -10-17 will change the
behavior of most of the individuals seeking long —term parking remains to
be seen but it will clearly reduce vehicle emissions within the SUNA. If
the restrictions are not effective enough in changing behavior then the
Traffic Engineer will consider further expanding the residential permit
parking zone.
f. Whether the designation may result in a reduction in total vehicle miles
driven within the City;
Similar to the impact on air quality, the question of whether the
designation will result in a reduction of total vehicle miles driven is
dependent upon whether the depth of the residential permit parking zone
restrictions is sufficient to change behavior. It has been shown that the
imposition of two —hour parking restrictions reduces the amount of traffic
circulation in the areas subject to the restrictions but it has also been
pointed out that the parking restrictions have had the effect of pushing
traffic to a different location. Only time will tell whether Administrative
Order 58 -10-17 will reduce total vehicle miles traveled through a forced
change in driving behavior or whether the residential permit parking zone
will have to be extended to neighborhoods farther away from the
University. The former is the stated assumption and hope of the Traffic
Engineer.
g. The zone is a minimum of one block and is in a residential area; and
The residential permit parking zone created (extended) by Administrative
Order 58 -10 -17 is more than one block in size and is located within the
South University Neighborhood Area.
h. The ability of the City to recover all costs associated with the
establishment of the permit parking zone through permit fees and fines
for violations thereof.
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 8 of 9
The City Traffic Engineer has opined that permit fees and parking
violation fines pay for the establishment of the residential permit parking
zone.
The standard is that the Traffic Engineer must consider the above — listed
factors. Based upon the testimony offered and the June 1, 2011
memorandum from the Traffic Engineer, I must conclude that these
_factors were considered in his decision to. impose residential permit
parking through the adoption of Administrative Rule 58- 10-17.
3. Failure to establish the zone would create a hardship for residents in the area
or contribute to traffic congestion in the area.
For the most part, opponents and proponents of Administrative Order 58 -10 -17
agree that most SUNA residents that live in close proximity to unregulated
parking spaces experience traffic congestion during workweek mornings and, to a
lesser degree, during the day. They also seem to agree that the residential permit
parking zone will reduce traffic congestion in the SUNA. The question of whether
the presence of unregulated parking spaces creates a hardship largely depends
upon the individual situation of the resident. For instance, those residents who
have long driveways and adequate on —site parking are less inconvenienced than
those who find it necessary to park in the street. It appears from the feedback
received from the July 2010 flyers that residents experiencing some hardship from
the presence of unregulated parking outnumber those who do not by a ratio of two
to one. It is clear from. the experience gained through the implementation of the
residential permit parking zone in other areas around the University that the
imposition of the zone will remove existing hardships for a majority of residents
and lessen existing traffic congestion in the area.
The appellants do not feel that unregulated parking adjacent to their properties
constitutes a hardship. Testimony from Appellant Sheryl Engelbert was that if
forced to choose between unregulated parking and two —hour parking, she should
would select the former situation. The Engelbert's house takes access onto East
22 Avenue and prior to the adoption of Administrative Rule 58- 10 -17, an
unregulated parking area fronted their house. I do not believe that the record
contains sufficient evidence to conclude that failure to impose the residential
permit parking zone along this portion of East 22 Avenue would create a
hardship for the resident's in this area, or the Engelberts in specific, or
significantly contribute to traffic congestion.
The Appellant Greg Bryant owns two properties at the southeast corner of the
intersection of East 22 Avenue and Alder Street. Prior to the adoption of
Administrative Rule 58- 10-17, an unregulated parking area was located in front
of these two properties. As with the Engelbert appeal, I do not believe that the
record contains sufficient evidence to conclude that failure to impose the
SUNA Parking Zone Appeal
June 13, 2011
Page 9 of 9
residential permit parking zone along this portion of Alder Street or East 22 °d
Avenue would create a hardship for the resident's in this area, or resident's of the
Bryant properties in specific, or significantly .contribute to traffic congestion.
Conclusion
The adoption of Administrative Rule 58- 10-17, as a whole, is consistent with the criteria
of Administrative Rule R- 5.040 —C.2. The evidence in the record, however, does not
establish that the criterion R- 5.040— C.2.(c) has been satisfied as it is applied to the
appellants. Therefore, the unregulated parking spots that front the property of the
appellants shall remain unregulated.
Judicial Review
This decision, which is otherwise final upon the below — listed date, may be appealed by
Writ of Review as provided by ORS 34.010 through 34.100.
Dated, issued, and mailed this 13th day of June, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
Gary Darnielle
Eugene Hearings Officer