Blog

Posts Tagged ‘pay’

Proposed Parking Strategy

Thursday, May 31st, 2012

Minutes have now been posted from the meeting of Richmond City Council regarding proposed parking strategy for Steveston Village:

(1) That Option 1 to retain free public parking on City-managed parking spaces in the Steveston Village area, as described in the report, be endorsed as a trial strategy and that staff report back on its effectiveness after the trial period in Fall 2012;

(2) That Council send a letter to the Steveston Harbour Authority (SHA) and the Steveston Merchants Association expressing its support of the two parties working together to facilitate employee parking in the SHA lot on Chatham Street on a temporary basis from June 11 to September 30, 2012, as generally proposed in Attachment 2;

(3) That staff be directed to negotiate the renewal of the City’s licence of occupancy for 3771 Bayview Street with the Steveston Harbour Authority and report back on the outcome of these discussions as soon as possible;

(4) That, as described in the report, staff be directed to:

(a) develop short- and long-term streetscape visions for Bayview Street and Chatham Street and report back by the end of 2012; and
(b) undertake the supplementary improvements to support other travel modes.

(5) That staff investigate the possibility of accommodating the parking needs of those that paid into the Steveston Parking Fund and report back.

ADOPTED ON CONSENT

Pay Parking Update

Sunday, May 27th, 2012

“Victor Wei, Director, Transportation, provided background information and thanked all those involved in the preparation of the proposed parking strategy for Steveston Village, noting that everyone involved had valuable input. Also, Mr. Wei advised that he was recently notified that the Steveston Harbour Authority approved the notion of long-term parking permits for Steveston Village employees.

The Chair thanked all the stakeholders involved in the preparation of the proposed parking strategy for Steveston Village, in particular Robert Kiesman and Jim Van Der Tas.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Wei, accompanied by Wayne Mercer, Manager, Community Bylaws, provided the following information:

-the City would not be involved with the proposed parking permits for Steveston Village staff as this initiative is a partnership between the Steveston Merchants Association and the Steveston Harbour Authority (SHA);

-Parks and Recreation staff anticipate reporting on the potential future use of the City-owned lot at 4320 Moncton Street (directly across the street from the Steveston Community Centre) at an upcoming Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Committee meeting as they examine the long-term needs of the community centre;

-a dedicated officer for increased enforcement in Steveston Village is unique to the proposed parking strategy for Steveston Village;

-currently staff’s primary focus is on Bayview Street and Chatham Street as these streets have the highest potential for parking reconfiguration; however, once staff embark of a streetscape vision exercise, staff would also examine other streets that would benefit from streetscape improvements;

-special event parking will also be examined as part of the streetscape exercise;

-if an average of fifteen tickets a day were issued in Steveston Village, the cost of the dedicated Bylaw Officer would be offset by the violation revenue; and

-the Steveston Parking Fund is active and currently has approximately $300,000 in funds.

Discussion ensued and Committee suggested the following information also be considered: (i) if the two City-owned lots (Lots 9 and 10) were disposed of, the resulting revenue also be considered to redesign Chatham Street with angled parking; (ii) the City not retain the use of the lot owned by the SHA located at 3771 Bayview Street (Lot 11) and have that lot be pay parking as it is in the Village core and parking there is very convenient; (iii) existing parking regulations in residential neighbourhoods adjacent to Steveston Village should be strictly enforced, however perhaps not during special events such as the Salmon Festival; and (iv) as part of the streetscape visions for Bayview Street and Chatham Street, staff consider accommodating a tram route from the Steveston Community Centre to the Gulf of Georgia Cannery.

Discussion further ensued and the Chair remarked that staff consider examining different hourly restrictions on Bayview Street and Chatham Street in light of the convenience of parking along Bayview Street. In addition, staff was requested to examine centre-street parking along Chatham Street.

Loren Slye, 11911 3rd Avenue, stated that as a Steveston resident, the parking adjacent to his home is rarely available to his guests on weekends as others visiting Steveston Village have occupied the space. Mr. Slye was of the opinion that three-hour parking would be more suitable for Steveston Village and stated that Bayview Street should remain as-is until the City addresses the dyking issues. Also, Mr. Slye commented on the Hepworth Building, noting that an opportunity to create parking adjacent to that site would be beneficial and aid in the protection and preservation of the building.

Jim Kojima, 7611 Moffatt Road, President of the Steveston Community Society, cited concerns related to parking at the Steveston Community Centre lot. He noted that many of those parking in the lot are neither users of the Centre nor of the Library. Mr. Kojima stated that he would like to see proper signage for that lot and that the parking regulations for that lot be enforced. He echoed Mr. Syle’s comments regarding three-hour parking for Steveston Village and having Bayview Street remain as-is until the City addresses the dyking issues.

Pat Talmey, Steveston building owner, stated that he has been building in Steveston Village since 1965 and has periodically opted to pay into the Steveston Parking Fund in lieu of providing parking. As such, Mr. Talmey stated concerns related to restricted parking areas such as the proposed permit-only parking along the three north-south lanes. He stated that the City should consider a separate agreement related to parking permits for those that have paid into the Steveston Parking Fund.

Peter Mitchell, 6271 Nanika Crescent, commented on the previous delegates’ request to expand parking from two-hour to three-hour, noting that the switch would require approximately 50% more parking spaces. He spoke of the misconception that there is a lack parking in Steveston Village and suggested that the City clarify and relay this information to the public accordingly. Also, Mr. Mitchell agreed with the suggestions put forth by Committee, but stated that parallel parking may be more suitable due to its ability to maintain view corridors versus the suggested angled parking. He was of the opinion that there was no reason to commence works along Bayview Street until the City determined its dyking strategy. Mr. Mitchell agreed with staff’s comments regarding motorcycle parking, however did not believe that parking stalls should be utilized for additional bicycle parking.

Linda Love, 3031 Williams Road, expressed her support for staff’s comments regarding bicycle parking, noting that there is a lack of bicycle parking in Steveston Village. She spoke of the various users of the bicycle parking and commented on how cyclists navigate throughout Steveston Village. Ms. Love stated that bicycle parking in Steveston Village is neither safe for cyclists nor the pedestrians trying to manoeuvre around the cyclists.

The Chair summarized the various delegates’ comments and in reply, Mr. Wei provided the following information:
-Steveston Village’s dyking requirements will be part of the streetscape visioning exercise;
-staff have not yet determined where the proposed bike corrals would be installed, however when an exact location is identified, staff will take precautions in an effort to minimize impact on existing parking;
-staff have examined the possibility of three-hour parking and have determined that it is not feasible due to various factors such as (i) re-facing all the two-hour signage, (ii) creating confusion among the public and thus difficulty with enforcement; and (iii) the possibility of reverting back to two-hour parking at the conclusion of the pilot program;
-if the proposed recommendations are approved, staff would launch an expansive public awareness campaign to notify the public of the various parking changes;
-staff anticipate holding a meeting with staff at the Steveston Community Centre in an effort to address their concerns related parking;
-in regards to the future of Lots 9 and 10, the two properties could potentially be disposed of with the resulting revenue invested towards a joint partnership between a developer and the City to improve and consolidate parking for the public;
-the existing two-hour time limit from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. should not affect the dinner crowd as in theory those parking from 4:01 p.m. onwards would not be restricted by the two-hour time limit; and
-staff can examine the numerous blips at the corners as part of the streetscape visioning exercise.

It was moved and seconded
(1) That Option 1 to retain free public parking on City-managed parking spaces in the Steveston Village area, as described in the report, be endorsed as a trial strategy and that staff report back on its effectiveness after the trial period in Fall 2012;

(2) That Council send a letter to the Steveston Harbour Authority (SHA) and the Steveston Merchants Association expressing its support of the two parties working together to facilitate employee parking in the SHA lot on Chatham Street on a temporary basis from June 11 to September 30, 2012, as generally proposed in Attachment 2;

(3) That staff be directed to negotiate the renewal of the City’s licence of occupancy for 3771 Bayview Street with the Steveston Harbour Authority and report back on the outcome of these discussions as soon as possible;

(4) That, as described in the report, staff be directed to:
(a) develop short- and long-term streetscape visions for Bayview Street and Chatham Street and report back by the end of 2012; and
(b) undertake the supplementary improvements to support other travel modes.
(5) That staff investigate the possibility of accommodating the parking needs of those that paid into the Steveston Parking Fund and report back.

CARRIED

These minutes are directly quoted from the minutes posted at http://www.richmond.ca/cityhall/council/agendas/pwt/2012/052412_minutes.htm