parking distr. - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles

parking distr. - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles

FORM GEN.160 (Rev. 6-80) CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE PPD No. 40 Expansion CD4 DATE: January 21, 2011 TO: The Honorable ...

15MB Sizes 0 Downloads 3 Views

Recommend Documents

°1~(~ - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Dec 2, 2013 - 17. 607 HUNTLEY DR, WEST HOLLYWOOD, CA 90069-5006. TSU IRENE TRUST. NAGY IVAN. 4337-014-056. LOS ANGELES,

5i#j - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
May 31, 2016 - Began broadcast career at KPCC in news department headed by Larry ... host many TV shows, including shows

City of Los Angeles - City Clerk Internet Site
Jun 15, 2016 - herebyGRANT(s)to Charles Arthur Ballard and Kathryn Joy Ballard, ... the following real property in the c

DBS - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Mar 11, 2016 - Building and Safety (the “Department”) investigated and identified code violations at: 323 East 93rd

adopted - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Stein, co-Founder, Sire Records Groups for his Leadership and success in the music ... Seymour Stein born I 942, Brookly

protest - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
May 14, 2008 - among Century City Inc, S. Jon Kreedman and Century Towers Assn. dated Feb.16, 1973. Copies of these agre

Notice - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Dec 29, 2016 - yards of earth from the project site located at 1561 North Blue Jay Way, ... Los Angeles, CA 90012, In ad

budget & finance - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Aug 4, 2014 - Occupation/profession: Special Assistant, Office of Community Planning ... Community Stabilization Trust f

appeal application - City Clerk Internet Site - City of Los Angeles
Dec 17, 2015 - actions administered by the Department of City Planning. 1. APPELLANT ..... The property to the west is d

FORM GEN.160 (Rev. 6-80)

CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE

PPD No. 40 Expansion CD4 DATE:

January 21, 2011

TO:

The Honorable City Council c/o City Clerk, Room 395, City Hall Attention: Honorable Bill Rosendahl, Chair, Transportation Committee

FROM:

r

SUBJECT:

-

Amir Sedadi, Interim General Manager Department of Transportation

~.

~ ~ :J~

EXPANSION OF PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 40 IN THE HANCOCKPARKAREAOFLOSANGELESANDAMENDMENTSTO THE BOUNDARIES (C.F. 88-1436)

RECOMMENDATIONS for Council action: 1.

FIND that the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40, pursuant to Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Section 80.58 .d, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1, Categorical Exemption (Article Ill, Section 1.a.3 of the 2002 Los Angeles City CEQA Guidelines).

2.

ADOPT the accompanying RESOLUTION amending the boundaries of Preferential Parking District No. 40, pursuant to Section 8 .13 of the Council's April 16, 1996 "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts", to include the residential area generally bounded in a clockwise fashion by the following: • • • • • •

3.

Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, Oakwood Avenue between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue, Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue AUTHORIZE any of the following approved PPD No. 40 parking restrictions on residential frontage within the ,expanded portion of PPD No. 40: ,.

a) "NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM MONDAY- SATURDAY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY- SATURDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT" b) "2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY - FRIDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT"

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-2-

January 21, 2011

c) "NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM NIGHTLY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY- SATURDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT"

4.

INSTRUCT the DOT to initiate the necessary procedures for the preparation and sale of parking permits to residents within the new boundaries of Preferential Parking District No. 40, as described in Recommendation No. 2 above, and as specified in Section 80.58 of the L.A.M.C. and that Preferential Parking District 40 be administered pursuant to the "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts" as adopted by the City Council.

5.

DIRECT the Department of Transportation prepare a Notice of Exemption reflecting the Council's actions under Recommendation No. 2 above and file such notice with the City and County Clerks within five working days of the City Council's action .

DISCUSSION:

The Preferential Parking Program is set forth in Section 80.58 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code. It provides for the establishment or expansion of a Preferential Parking District (PPD) by Resolution of the City Council, upon recommendation by the Department of Transportation, and authorizes the Department to promulgate rules and procedures to implement the City's Preferential Parking Program, which must be approved by the City Council. Establishment or expansion of a PPD is initiated by a request from a representative of the affected neighborhood group or by the area's Councilmember. However, the area must meet the criteria set forth in the "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts" (PPD Rules) adopted by the City Council before establishment or expansion may be allowed . Ru les and procedures approved by the City Council require that, to be eligible for establishment of a PPD, petitions requesting such action be signed by the residents living in at least two-thirds of the dwelling units comprising not less than 50 percent of the developed frontage within the proposed area of not less than six full blocks or two curb miles, whichever is smaller. They also require that parking surveys be undertaken by the Department to determine if parking is significantly impacted by non-resident parkers. The surveys must find that, on a minimum of four blocks in the proposed district, at least 25 percent of the legal parking spaces are occupied by vehicles registered to non-residents. For an expansion of an existing PPD, the rules and procedures require that the same percentage of residents on four full blocks of the proposed expansion area petition . Further, at least two blocks must show that at least 25 percent of the legal parking spaces are occupied by vehicles registered to non-residents.

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-3-

January 21, 2011

Residents of the area designated as a PPD may purchase special parking permits. Vehicles bearing such perm its are exempt from the preferential parking restrictions posted within the district for wh ich the permit was issued. The exemption only applies to the preferential parking regulations on those signs, not to regulations of a general nature that may have been installed for traffic movement or street cleaning purposes. PPD No. 40 was established by Council Resolution on October 14, 1988, and consists of the residential area generally bounded clockwise by the following (see attached map): • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

South side of Santa Monica Boulevard between Hudson Avenue and Wilcox Avenue Wilcox Avenue between Santa Monica Boulevard and Romaine Street Romaine Street between Wilcox Avenue and Cole Avenue West side of Cole Avenue between Romaine Street and Waring Avenue Waring Avenue between Cole Avenue and Cahuenga Boulevard West side of Cahuenga Boulevard between Waring Avenue and Melrose Avenue North side of Melrose Avenue between Cahuenga Boulevard and Alley East of La Brea Avenue Alley East of La Brea Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Willoughby Avenue Willoughby Avenue between Alley East of La Brea Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue East side of Las Palmas Avenue between Willoughby Avenue and Barton Avenue South side of Barton Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and Seward Street West side of Seward Street between Willoughby Avenue and Barton Avenue Wi lloughby Avenue between Seward Street and Hudson Avenue Hudson Avenue between Willoughby Avenue and Santa Mon ica Boulevard

At this time, 23 of the approximately 64 blocks that make up PPD No. 40 are posted with any one of the above Preferential Parking Restrictions (for clarity, Parking Restriction c) "NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM NIGHTLY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY - SATURDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT" was added later as a restriction per Council File 96-0376).

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-4-

January 21 , 2011

Section 8.12 of the "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts" approved by the City Council on April 16, 1996, allows the DOT to recommend revisions to a preferential parking district's boundaries provided the following conditions are met: 1.

Submittal and verification of petitions requesting such action signed by the residents living in at least two-thirds of the dwelling units comprising not less than 50 percent of the developed frontage on a minimum of four blocks.

2.

Determination by the Department that at least 75 percent of the legal onstreet parking spaces are occupied on a minimum of two blocks.

3.

Determination by the Department that at least 25 percent of the legal onstreet parking spaces are occupied by vehicles registered to non-residents on a minimum of four blocks within the proposed district.

4.

A public hearing has been conducted for the purpose of rece1vtng comments on the preliminary findings and recommendations of the Department.

The Application The Department of Transportation received a Letter of Interest Form requesting to establish a Preferential Parking District around the Hancock Park area . A formal letter from the Hancock Park Association, dated August 9, 2007, was submitted in support of the establishment within the Hancock Park neighborhood, as well as a letter of support from Councilmember Tom La Bange, 4th District. On May 15, 2009, DOT staff met with CD-4 staff and with the Hancock Park Association (HPA) representatives to inform them on the status of their initial request and to go over the petition process since LADOT had not received the originals. In addition, the staff had explained the Preferential Parking program and the projected expansion timeline of PPD No. 40. Due to a moratorium, staff from Los Angeles Department of Transportation held an informal meeting on May 15, 2009, with the petition organizers, community leaders, and the City Council office to discuss and identify alternative solutions other than creation of a new Preferential Parking, as well as to discuss the proposed boundaries and to review the parking restriction available for the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40. It was concluded the parking problem was caused by patrons of the local businesses primarily a restaurant located at the corner of Highland Avenue and Melrose Avenue. Moreover, the area was surrounded by PPD 40 to the North and PPD 47 to the West. Therefore, the group concluded that expanding PPD 40 would better serve the community than to form a new district and would allow resident's vehicles to park throughout the larger district boundaries which results in less segmentation of parking.

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-5-

January 21, 2011

The group concluded that the only alternative available to provide relief to the residents of this area was to pursue the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40. In electing to expand PPD 40, the residents had already provided petitions for four blocks in the neighborhood immediately south of PPD No. 40. A block is defined as a street segment between two intersecting streets. The following blocks submitted petitions representing more than 67 percent of household units on both sides of the street and covering more than 50 percent of the developed frontage on each block: 1 2 3 4

McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street McCadden Place between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue Clinton Street between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place Clinton Street between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue

Subsequent to the analysis and verification of the submitted petitions, the Department identified a proposed expansion area for PPD No. 40 bounded as follows: • • • • • • • •

Centerline of Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Cherokee Avenue Cherokee Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue Rosewood Avenue between the southern intersection of Las Palmas Avenue . and Cherokee Avenue Las Palmas Avenue between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue Oakwood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place McCadden Place between Beverly Boulevard and Oakwood Avenue Oakwood Avenue between Highland Avenue and McCadden Place

A follow up meeting was held on August 12, 2009, with the HPA representatives, who provided DOT with the time when parking is most impacted on the streets - which was mostly daily, towards the evening. DOT provided the representative with a proposed boundary map of the expanded area and was asked to comment on it. DOT indicated receiving the sufficient number of petitioned blocks to qualify for the next step in the process. The parking study was scheduled and since the hours of impact take place during the later working hours, it required DOT staff to work overtime. Although the District boundaries include commercial establishments, preferential parking restrictions would only be posted on residential blocks and only residents of the designated area would be able to purchase permits that would exempt them from the proposed preferential parking restrictions. Parking Analysis On Wednesday, January, 20, 2010, (Preliminary Report stated an incorrect date) a parking impact study was conducted between the hours of 5 PM to 6 PM, with the

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-6-

January 21, 2011

results of the study showing that streets in the area were impacted by non-residents and qualified the process to advance to the public hearing level for further discussion. The day of the week and time of day of the parking study were based on the applicant's estimate of when the neighborhood parking intrusion problem was the most severe. To satisfy the criteria of the parking study, at least two blocks had to have at least 75 percent of the parking spaces occupied and at least 25 percent of those parking spaces occupied by vehicles belonging to non-residents. When determining the percentage of vehicles from outside the area that impacted the parking availability of residents within the proposed Preferential Parking District, vehicles registered to residents within the same zip code, and on a street with the same name as any of the street names within the four blocks of the petitioned area were considered "resident" vehicles. Vehicles registered on a street name more than four blocks away from the petitioned core area, or out of the same zip code were considered as "non-resident" vehicles. The following four blocks satisfied the parking study criteria: East side of Highland Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street East side of Highland Avenue between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue Clinton Street between Highland Avenue and McCadden Place McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street

The Public Hearing The Public Hearing concerning the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 was conducted from 6:45 p.m. to 8:45 p.m . on Thursday, October 14, 2010 at the PanPacific Park Auditorium, 7600 Beverly Boulevard. Kartik Patei,Transportation Engineer for the Department of Transportation, served as the Hearing Officer and prepared a report of the events and concerns expressed by the public at the hearing . (A copy of Mr. Patel's report is attached.) Approximately 40 persons attended the hearing, and each were given an agenda for the meeting, a copy of the preliminary report with boundary map, an information packet about preferential parking, a card to indicate a desire to speak at the meeting, and an opinion card to vote for or against expansion of the District. Mr. Kartik opened the meeting and discussed the rules and procedures for the hearing. He explained that any individual who wanted to speak needed to fill-out and hand the completed Speaker Card to one of the three Parking Permits Division representatives before the comment period concluded. Mr. Yadi Hashemi presented general information regarding the Preferential Parking Program, including the fees for purchase of permits. Felix Valde provided information regarding the history of the expansion including the steps already completed as well as the final necessary steps before it can be expanded.

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-7-

January 21, 2011

Yadi Hashemi and Felix Valde both answered general questions about the Preferential Parking Program, and specific questions about the proposed expansion of District No. 40, including why the area was recommended for expansion from the beginning of the process. Mrs. Nikki Ezhari of Councilmember LaBonge's office also answered questions regarding the surrounding businesses. The floor was then opened to comments from the public. This portion of the hearing was recorded and 22 persons submitted cards requesting to speak. 7 persons spoke against the expansion of the district and 15 persons spoke in support of the preferential parking district's expansion. At the end of the hearing, 40 ballot cards were turned in indicating preference FOR or AGAINST expansion of the District and restrictions desired, if any. 23 persons submitted cards ind icating that they supported the district. 17 persons submitted cards against expand ing the preferential parking district and 2 additional cards were submitted by one person with contrad icting comments/votes.

The Public Comment Period During the 30-day period following the public hearing, LADOT received a total of 185 letters, faxes and e-mails from Los Ange les residents concerned about the expansion of the proposed district. 121 of the items of correspondence were against the expansion and 64 were in support of the proposed expansion of the Preferential Parking District #40. One item received was a neutral comment and no items were received after the public comment period had closed. Many of the residents in support of the expansion attended the hearing and had also submitted ballots in favor and/or made positive comments. The majority of the people opposed did not attend the hearing and resided on the outlying streets of the district that were furthest from the active businesses along High land and Melrose Avenues. Many of the residents who live on Cherokee Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, and on McCadden Place between Oakwood Avenue and Beverly Bou levard submitted comments in opposition to the expansion of the District. These blocks were originally included within the proposed expanded boundaries based on guidelines set forth by the Ru les and Regu lations. However, the residents on those blocks were not being directly affected by spill-over parking from the businesses at Melrose and Highland Avenues and wou ld otherwise have no stake in the district. Therefore, DOT has determined that by reducing the expansion area to streets directly impacted by the parking of non-resident vehicles; the comments, letters and emails received in support of the expansion becomes 42 in favor with 31 against. This indicates the impact from businesses is affecting a 2-3 block area which justifies the reduction of the boundaries, while still covering enough streets for a potential parking spillover.

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-8-

January 21, 2011

Proposed Parking Regulations The residents of the proposed expansion area petitioned for a "NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM MONDAY - SATURDAY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY SATURDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT" restriction; which is one of the three restrictions currently authorized for existing PPD No. 40. It should be noted that it is City Council policy not to authorize resident-only parking on streets adjacent to commercial establishments because of the short-term parking needs of businesses. Generally, one or two-hour parking is provided on such streets with an exemption for residents with permits. Residents of the area designated as a preferential parking district may purchase special parking permits . Vehicles bearing such permits are exempt from the preferential parking restrictions posted within the distriCt for which the permit was issued . The exemption applies on ly to the preferential parking regulations on those signs, not to regu lations of a general nature that may have been installed for traffic movement or street cleaning purposes.

Environmental Clearance . On December 30, 2009, the State adopted new CEQA Guidelines, which became effective on March 18, 2010. The City of Los Angeles, under its 2002 CEQA Guidelines, adopted and incorporated the State CEQA Guidelines and all future amendments and additions as adopted by the State. See City CEQA Gu idelines, Section 2, Article I. The State CEQA Guidelines, contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15300-15332, sets forth projects which "do not have a significant effect on the environment, and . . . are declared to be categorical ly exempt from the requ irement for the preparation of environmental documents." Under Section 15301 for "existing facilities", "operation, repair, maintenance, perm itting, ... or minor alteration existing public or private structures, [or] facilities . .. involving neg ligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination . . . . fal l with in Class 1 [Categorical Exemption]. The key consideration is whether the project involves neglig ible or no expansion of an existing use." Section 15301.c. specifies "Existing highways and streets, sidewalks." on the list of projects that fa ll under the Class 1 Categorical Exemption . Furthermore, it has been determined that parking constitutes a social, not an environmental, impact. The fact that residents of a posted block will get preferential parking is not an environmental effect. Inadequate parking is generally a social and not an environmental impact Under CEQA. See Appendix G, State CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Checklist Form, Section XVI and related December 2009 Final Statement of Reasons, which explicitly removed assessment of the parking impact criteria : http: ceres.ca.govlceqaldocs/Final Statement of Reasons.pdf

PPD No. 40 Expansion

-9-

January 21, 2011

The Staff in the City's Department of Transportation, Parking Permit Division, has conducted an analysis and investigation of this boundary amendment for this existing permit parking district and has concluded that under the State CEQA guidelines the changes are subject to a Class I Categorical Exemption under § 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines because changes in parking restrictions for this district are operational and will not expand the existing use of the streets or change parking demand. Further, displacement of other vehicles is expected to be minimal. The LADOT staff also determined that the exceptions to the categorical exemption for cumulative impact, significant effect, scenic highway, hazardous waste site or historical resource do not apply to this district. See 2002 City CEQA Guidelines, Article Ill, 1.a.3. The initial report was made available for review at the John C. Fremont Library, 6121 Melrose Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90038-3501, (323) 962-3521 for 30 days. The review period ceased at 5 PM on October 30, 2010, and the comment period expired on November 15, 2010. As noted above, the majority of the residents in opposition to the expansion were in areas least .affected by the businesses along Highland Avenue and Melrose Avenue.

FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

The sale of Preferential Parking permits within the expanded area of Preferential Parking District No. 40 will cover the cost of implementation and administration of the expanded Preferential Parking District. The City may gain additional revenue from the issuance of parking citations to violators of the expanded District's parking restrictions.

CONCLUSION:

Based upon field investigations, analysis of the public hearing comments, written submittals, and input from the residents, the Department has determined that on-street parking in this residential area is adversely affected by non-resident parkers. Although there were a majority of residents in outlying streets against the expansion, they were not within an area being affected by the businesses causing the parking impact. The majority of residents within the affected streets were in favor of the expansion . Therefore, the Department recommends a smaller expansion area. The Department recommends that the Council amend by Resolution the boundaries of Preferential Parking District No. 40 to include the residential area bounded in a clockwise fashion by: • • • •

Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place , McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and Beverly Boulevard,

PPD No. 40 Expansion

• •

- 10 -

January 21, 2011

Oakwood Avenue between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue, Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue

The revised PPD No. 40 would still be subject to all other terms and conditions of the original Resolution including the authorization to use either of the approved PPD No. 40 parking restrictions on res idential frontage within the proposed expa·nsion. The expansion of PPD No. 40 is in agreement with the provisions of Section 8.12 of the Council-approved "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts". The residents of the proposed district are being adversely affected by non-resident on-street parking demand and are therefore entitled to relief from conditions associated with this problem. The expansion of PPD No. 40 will allow the residents a better opportunity to park near their homes while controlling the intrusion by non-resident parkers. Indirect benefits to the residential area will be a reduction of noise and litter. The newly enlarged Preferential Parking District No. 40 will be enforced by the existing DOT Traffic Officers assigned to the area. After Council approves the amending Resolution, the DOT will proceed with the posting of signs, implementing preferential parking regulations upon submittal of valid petitions by the residents as specified in the Council's "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts". FV:fv S: PPD 40 Expansion

Attachments: Resolution PPD No. 40 Expansion Maps Hearing Officer's Report (w/ Public Comments)

RESOLUTION EXPANSION OF PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 40 IN THE HANCOCK PARK AREA OF LOS ANGELES AND SETTING NEW BOUNDARIES WHEREAS, the Los Angeles City Council, by Ordinance No. 152,722, effective September 2, 1979, was revised by Ordinance No. 157,425, effective March 18, 1983 amended by Ordinance No. 161,414, effective July 26, 1986, and further revised by Ordinance No. 171 ,029, effective June 1, 1996, provided for the establishment of Preferential Parking Districts by Resolution of the Council in each case, under Section 80.58 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LAMC Section 80.58, on October 14, 1988, the Council adopted Negative Declaration No. 88-1436 and a Resolution establishing Preferential Parking District No. 40 consisting of the residential area generally bounded clockwise by Santa Monica Boulevard, Cole Avenue, Melrose Avenue, La Brea Avenue, Willoughby Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue, Barton Avenue, Seward Street, Willoughby Avenue and Hudson Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LAMC Section 80.58.k, the Department of Transportation promu lgated "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts", was revised by Ordinance No. 177,845, effective September 30, 2006, the most recent amendment was by Ordinance No. 180059, adopted by the Council on August 30, 2008, which further updated the Permit fees; and WHEREAS, residents within the area of the city generally bounded on the north by the centerline of Melrose Avenue, on the east by Las Palmas Avenue, on the south by Oakwood Avenue, and the west by the centerline of Highland Avenue have petitioned the DOT to be added to the Preferential Parking District No. 40; and WHEREAS, the Department has made the determination that the petitions represent residents living in more than two-thirds of the dwelling units comprising not less than 50 percent of the developed frontage of four blocks; and WHEREAS, the Department has conducted parking studies which indicate that four blocks in the proposed expansion area have a parking occupancy of more than 75 percent of the available legal parking spaces , with more than 25 percent of the available legal parking spaces being occupied by vehicles registered to non-residents of these areas, thus meeting and exceeding the criteria set forth in Section B.12 of the "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts"; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Thursday, October 14, 2010, at the PanPacific Park Auditorium, 7600 Beverly Boulevard, Los Angeles, California, which was attended by interested residents and business people from the area, and the Public Hearing Report, completed on January 3, 2011, details the events of said hearing. WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has determined that the signatures submitted represent at least two-thirds of the dwelling units on the residential portions of the following blocks; which is sufficient to warrant the installation of the requested preferential parking restriction signs upon Council approval of this resolution:

• • •

East side of Highland Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street Both sides of McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street Both sides of McCadden Place between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Los Angeles, that the resolution adopted by the Council on October 14, 1988, establishing Preferential Parking District No. 40, be hereby amended to revise the boundaries of Preferential Parking District No. 40 to include the residential area generally bounded clockwise by the following: • • • • • •

Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, Oakwood Avenue between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue , Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon approval of Preferential Parking District No. 40 through the adoption of this Resolution, the Department of Transportation be authorized to post, or remove, the following preferential parking restrictions on any of the blocks within the District, without further actions by the City Council, upon receipt and verification of requisite petition(s) or as provided for in the adopted "Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts". a)

"NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM MONDAY- SATURDAY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY- SATURDAY; VEHICLES W ITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERM ITS EXEMPT"

b)

"2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAY- FRIDAY; VEH ICLES WITH DISTR ICT NO . 40 PERMITS EXEMPT"

c)

"NO PARKING 6 PM TO 8 AM NIGHTLY; 2 HOUR PARKING 8 AM TO 6 PM MONDAYSATURDAY; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT"

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon approval of Expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 through the adoption of this Resolution, signs with the restriction: "2 HOUR PARKING 8 A.M. TO 6 P.M.; MONDAY TO SATURDAY; NO PARKING 6 P.M. TO 8 A.M.; VEHICLES WITH DISTRICT NO. 40 PERMITS EXEMPT" be posted on the residential portions on both sides (unless noted): • • • • •

East side of Highland Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street McCadden Place between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue Clinton Street between Highland Avenue and McCadden Place Clinton Street between McCadden Place and Las Palmas Avenue

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that DOT be directed to prepare a Notice of Exemption and file such notice with the City and County Clerks' office within five working days of the City Council's action. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all other terms and conditions of the Resolution dated October 14, 1988, establishing Preferential Parking District No. 40 remains unchanged.

PREFl

~ENTIAL

PARKING DISTR. ~ T NO. 40

COUNCIL DISTRICT NO 4 & 5

SANTA MONICA BLVD

ROMAINE ST

BARTO N AV

:;: z

g 0

:> I

z

LEGEND: -

PPD Boundary

-

Council District & City Boundary

D D

PPD NO. 47

IIi

PPD NO. 110

Bancroft Mid School

II5ISi No Parking 6 pm to 8 am

.....

;1n

BEVERLY BLVD

Monday - saturday; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Saturday; Vehicles with District No. 40 permits exempted.

r2Z221

2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Friday; Vehicles with District No. 40 permits exempted.

~

No Parking 6 pm to 8 am nightly; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday- Saturday; Vehicles with Distri ct No. 40 permits exempted./~~!'\

PRE FE. ,cNTIAL PARKING DISTRL. f NO. 40 COUNCIL DISTRICT NO 4 & 5 (Impact Parking Study- %Occupancy & %Non-residents)

ROMA IN EST

> > <( <(

"'"'"'5

"' <(

in

"'0 UJ

"z~

BANCii F MID SCHO

0

1.()

=1:lo

c:i 0

-

-................. ..,-....,._..._.._ BARTONAV

._...,..,

-~

~

PPD Boundary

••• PPD 40 EXPANSION -

Council District & City Bou ndary

D

PPD NO. 110

IIi

Bancroft Mid School

lfillill

No Parki ng 6 pm to 8 am

ln

1 Monday -saturday; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Saturday; Vehicles with District No. 40 permits exempted . ~ 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Friday;

Veh icles with District No. 40 permits exempted. ~

No Parking 6 pm to 8 am nightly; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday- Saturday; Vehicles with District No. 40 permits exempted.

BEVERLY BLVD

PREFL .ENTIAL PARKING DISTR" /T NO. 40

I ICJD F;iD

_j l~ IUUUU

-

iF==

L.;OU ~ '

;(

~ <(

-

0:

w

::;


0

"' :5

L

Jl

DO.. OJ

~

-

COUNCIL DISTRICT NO 4 & 5 LAND USE Hollywood Enforcement

<(

>(/)

II

U 1St1~

(!'

w

g

z

u: fJ)

0

_,.,.,~~~ ROMAINEST

I ULJU~U

~

-f-

_

r-- _

- -

t:1 UU

oo.oo r---

DO __

BANC,Ff~~~BA~RT~ON~A;!V~~

':<

0

Cl

;:;

r- r-

__

w

z<(

MID SCHolll

::;

-r--

t-

v;

...z 5

110

N

A

LEGEND: -

PPD Bounda ry

••• PPD 40 EXPA NSION -

Council District & City Boundary

D

PPD N0. 11 0

IIi

Bancroft Mid School

_R_OSEWO ODAV'---

u L

~~==~-------..--

·---

1 I I I I I I I

lilil!!:'iiil No Parking 6 pm to 8 am Monday - Saturday; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Saturday; Vehicles with District No. 40 permits exempted.

12LZ21

2 Ho ur Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Friday; Vehicles with Distri ct No. 40 pe rmits exempted.

~

No Parking 6 pm to 8 am nig htly; 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday- Saturday; Veh icles with District No. 40 perm its exempted.

\\

BEVERLY BLVD

\\

c::=J Commercial Area

c::::J Residentia l A rea

CITY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDATION OF HEARING OFFICER PROPOSED PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 40 Hancock Park Area

Council District No.4 Department of Transportation District: Hollywood-Wilshire

Date:

January 3, 2011

To:

Am ir Sedadi, Interim General Manager Department of Transportation

From:

Kartik Patel, Transportation Eng ineer East Valley District Office

Request From:

Area Residents

Subject Request:

Expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 boundaries, within the Hancock Park area of Los Angeles, to be the residential street segments at the centerline of Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue, Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Cherokee Avenue, Cherokee Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between the southern intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Cherokee Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, Oakwood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Beverly Boulevard and Oakwood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue between Highland Avenue and McCadden Place, in the City of Los Angeles

~~~?-~

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

TABLE OF CONTENTS Request and Recommendation Summary of Public Hearing Hearing Officer's Comments Environmental Review Conclusion Append ix A (District Map) Append ix B (Summary of public hearing comments)

Page Page Page Page Pag_ e Page Page

2 3 5 7 8 10 11

REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION

Subject: Expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 in the residential area currently bound_ ed by the street segments at the centerline of Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Ave nue, Melrose Avenue between Highland Avenue and Cherokee Avenue, Cherokee Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between the southern intersection of Las Palmas Avenue and Cherokee Avenue, Las Palmas Avenue between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, Oakwood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Beverly Boulevard and Oakwood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue between High land Avenue and McCadden Place, in the City of Los Ange les (Appendix A). Hearing Officer's Recommendation:Designate:· Las Palmas Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and B~verly Boulevard, Oakwood Avenue between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue and Highland Av~nue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue as the new boundaries of the expanded Preferentia l Parkfng District No. 40 (Appendix A).

Approve: The posting of the following restrictions on residential frontage anywhere within the proposed district, wherever res idents have properly petitioned for these preferential parking control as outlined in Section 80.58 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC). "2 Hour Parking, 8 AM to 6 PM Monday to Saturday; No Parking 6 PM to 8 AM Mon - Sat; District No. 40 Permits Exempt"

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HEARING

The Public Hearing concerning the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 was conducted from 6:45 p.m. to 8:45 p.m. on Thursday, October 14, 2010, at the PanPacific Park Auditorium, 7600 Beverly Boulevard. As persons entered, they were given an agenda for the meeting, a copy of the preliminary report with the boundary map, an information packet about preferential parking, a card to indicate a desire to speak at the meeting, and an opinion card to vote for or against expansion of the District. As Hearing Officer, I, Kartik Patel, Transportation Engineer, opened the meeting and discussed the rules and procedures for the hearing . Next, Mr. Yadi Hashemi, Senior Transportation Engineer of the Parking Permits Division, introduced the Department staff, discussed the enabling ordinance, the traffic surveys that qualified the proposed Preferential Parking District for the Public Hearing, the procedures for adoption, the fee structure for permit issuance, study procedures and related matters. Approximately 40 persons attended the hearing. Felix Valde, Management Analyst, provided background information regarding Preferential Parking District No. 40 as well as a view of the boundary Map . The steps that had been completed ih the expansion of PPD 40 were also discussed as well as the final steps that would be necessary before it can be expanded. Yadi Hashemi and Felix Valde both answered general questions about the Preferential Parking Program, and specific questions about the proposed expansion of District No. 40, including why the area was recommended for expansion from the beginning of the process. Mrs. Nikki Ezhari of Councilmember LaBonge's office also answered questions regardi ng the surrounding businesses. The floor was then opened to comments from the public. This portion of the hearing was recorded and 22 persons submitted cards requesting to speak. 7 persons spoke against the expansion of the district and 15 persons spoke in support of the preferential parking district's expansion . At the end of the hearing, 42 ballot cards were turned in indicating preference FOR or AGAINST expansion of the District and restrictions desired, if any. Twenty-three persons submitted cards indicating that they supported the district. Seventeen persons subm itted cards against expanding the preferential parking district and two cards were submitted by one person with opposing votes.

POST HEARING COMMENTS During the 30-day period following the public hearing, LADOT received a total of 185 letters, faxes and e-mails from Los Angeles residents concerned about the expansion of the proposed district. 121 of the items of correspondence were against the expansion of Preferential Parking District and sixty-four were in support of the proposed expansion of the Preferential Parking District. One item received was a neutral comment and no items were received after the public comment period had closed. Many of the residents

3

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

in support of the expansion attended the hearing and had also submitted ballots in favor and/or made positive comments. The majority of the people opposed did not attend the hearing and submitted addresses from the outlying streets of the district that were furthest from the active businesses along Highland and Melrose and were not being directly affected. There were 3 separate petitions (unverified) submitted during the comment period. 2 were delivered at the hearing and one was submitted via Fed Ex on November 9, 2010. One of the petitions was signed by 13 residents of the 300 block of North McCadden Place (between Beverly Boulevard and Oakwood Avenue) who were originally opposed to the expansion. On November 2, 2010 , the PPO office was contacted by the block captain who had submitted the petitions and he was asking to have it withdrawn after receiving information at the hearing . However, the petitions were already considered "public comment" after they were submitted, therefore, it was suggested that residents favoring a reversa l shou ld make an email comment. Only 5 residents submitted emails asking to rescind their petition before the end of the comment period. However, other comments, emails and letters from 12 residents against the district caused the consideration of the 300 block of North McCadden Place to be omitted from the expansion of PPD #40. The second petition delivered at the hearing contained 64 signatures, however, we cou ld only consider 41 of them after eliminating duplication. All were in favor and they were from residents directly affected by the intrusive parking created by the businesses from Highland and Melrose. The majority who signed also attended the hearing and submitted ballot cards with a few giving verbal comments. 79 form letters were submitted via Fed Ex on November 9, 2010, with each one signed and addressed individually by the respective res idents (See Appendix D for a copy of a form letter). Th is petition was started by a resident at 460 Las Palmas with most petitioners com ing prim arily from Cherokee Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue with add itional petitions from the 2 blocks of McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and Beverly Bou levard. None of the signatures were from McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue (the 500 and 600 block), Highland Avenue or from residents fronting Clinton Avenue between Highland and Mcc:;adden -wh ich is the area directly affected by the local business which is causing the excessive and intrusive parking. The majority of residents who signed and subm itted this form letter did not attend- the hearing. On ly one separate letter against the district was received from a resident living on Clinton between McCadden Place ahd Las Palmas Avenue. Given the overwhelming response from the area, the Department of Transportation recommends scaling back and om itting the following streets from the expansion _of Preferential Parking District #40: • • • • •

Cherokee Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood Avenue Rosewood Avenue between Cherokee Avenue and Las Palmas Avenue Las Palmas Avenue between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue Oakwood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place McCadden Place between Oakwood Avenue and Beverly Boulevard

4

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

When considering the revised district boundaries, the following comments supporting the expansion of PPD#40 are 42 for and 31 against. Add itional letters of support were also subm itted by non-residents (Appendix D): Motion by Councilmember Tom LaBonge (CD #4), Support Letters from Paul Koretz (CD #5), Mazza Restaurant, Mazza To-Go, Va let Girls (Valet service to Mazza), a resident from neighboring Preferential Parking District #4 7, Hancock Park Homeowners Association and Art Rodriguez and Associates. A ll comment and emails from non-residents that were against the expansion came from employees of the local businesses who requested to keep the streets open for their use .

HEARING OFFICER'S COMMENTS The Preferential Parking Program is set forth in Section 80.58 of the Los Angeles Municipa l Code. It provides for the establishment of Preferential Parking District by Reso lution of the City Cou ncil , upon recommendation by the Department of Transportation, and authorizes the Department to establish parking regu lations for a preferential parking district. The establishment and expansion of a preferential parking district are each initiated by a Letter of Intent and a letter of support from the Councilmember or from the Neighborhood Council. However, the area must meet the criteria set forth in the enabling ordinance. Res idents of the area designated as a preferential parking district may purchase special parking permits. Vehicles bearing such permits are exenipt from the preferential parking restrictions posted within the district for wh ich the permit was issued . The exemption applies on ly to the preferential parking regulations on those signs, not to regu lations of a general nature that may have been installed for traffic movement or street clean ing purposes. The Department of Transportation received valid petitions requesting the expansion to the existing Preferential Parking District 40. Residents of the following four (4)· blocks within the above mentioned residential area submitted qualifying petitions to the Department of Transportation: · 1. 2. 3. 4.

McCadden Place between Melrose Avenu~ and Clinton Street McCadden Place between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue Clinton Street between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Plac!= Clinton Street between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue

The petitions received represent more than 67 percent of household units on both sides of the street and cover more than 50 percent of the developed frontage of four blo.cks of the residential neighborhood , which is the minimum number of blocks required for expanding a District.

Recbmmendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

The Department of Transportation conducted several parking impact studies within the proposed expansion area on: September 16, 2009, from 12 noon to 2 p;m., January 20, 2010, between 5 p.m. and 6 p.m. and on January 27, 2010, between 5 p.m. and 6 p.m .. To satisfy the criteria of the parking study, at least two blocks had to have at least 75 percent of the legal parking spaces occupied, and at least 25 percent of the legal parking spaces occupied by vehicles registered to non-residents. The address of the vehicle's registered owner, determined through the Department of Motor Vehicles, was used as the criterion for determining residents or non-residents status. The license plate surveys were done during a specific time frame based on input from the applicant as to when the parking problem in the neighborhood was most severe, as well as the hours that preferential parking restrictions were requested on the submitted petitions. For the purpose of determining the percentages of vehicles from outside the area that were impacting the parking availability of residents within the proposed Preferential Parking District, vehicles registered to residents within four blocks of the petitioned area were considered "resident" vehicles. Vehicles registered more than four blocks away from the petitioned core area were considered as "non-resident" vehicles. On the map showing the "maximum allowable boundaries" of the Preferential Parking District No. 40 expansion, vehicles registered to residents within two blocks of the boundaries were considered as "resident" vehicles. The following 4 blocks had both a m·inimum of 75 percent of the parking spaces occupied and a minimum of 25 percent of the parked vehicles on those blocks registered to non-residents: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Highland Avenue between Clinton Street and Melrose Avenue Highland Avenue between Clinton Street and Rosewood Avenue McCadden Place between Melrose Avenue and Clinton Street Clinton Street between McCadden Place and Highland Avenue

The residents of the proposed district have petitioned in writing for the installation of the following preferential restrictions:

"2 Hour Parking, 8 AM to 6 PM Monday to Saturday; No Parking 6 PM to 8 AMMon- Sat; District No. 40 Permits Exempt" At the public hearing, two residents submitted written comments on their ballots with additional parking restrictions: •

"No Parking _6 PM to 8 AM; 2 Hour Parking 8 AM to 6 PM; District No. 40 Permits Exempt"



No Parking 6 PM to 8 AM; Nightly; 2 Hour Parking 8 AM to 6 PM; Monday to Saturday; District No. 40 Permits Exempt"

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

It should be noted that it has been City Council practice not to authorize resident-only parking on streets adjacent to commercial establishments because of the short-term parking needs of businesses. Generally, one-hour or two-liour on·-street parking is provided on such streets with an exemption for residents with valid permits. Preferential parking restrictions are not to be posted in front of any commercial locations. Preferential parking restrictions may be approved for school or church locations if requested by the school or church officials and the residents of the blocks involved . Other existing parking restrictions approved and installed for safety, mobility needs, or street clean ing, will continue in these areas.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW On December 30, 2009, the State adopted new CEQA Gu idelines, which became effective on March 18, 2010. The City of Los Angeles, under its 2002 CEQA Guidelines, adopted and incorporated the State CEQA Guidelines and all future amendments and add itions as adopted by the State. See City CEQA Gu idelines, Section 2, Article I. The State CEQA Guidelines, contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regu lations, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15300-15332, sets forth projects which "do not have a sign ificant effect on the environment, and . .. are declared to be categorica lly exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents." Under Section 15301 for "existing facilities", "operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, . . . or minor alteration existing public or private structures, [or] facilities .. . involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination .. . . fa ll within Class 1 [Categorical Exemption]. The key consideration is whether the project involves neg ligible or no expansion of an existing use." Section 153D1.c. specifies "Existing highways and streets, sidewalks." on the list of projects that fall under the Class 1 Categorical Exemption. Furthermore, it has been determined that parking constitutes a social, not an environmental, impact. The fact that residents of a posted block will get preferential parking is not an environmental effect. Inadequate parking is generally a social and not an environmental impact Under CEQA. See Appendix G, State CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Checklist Form, Section XVI and re lated December 2009 Final Statement of Reasons, which explicitly removed ass~ssment of the parking impact criteria: http: ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf The Staff in the City's Department of Transportation, Parking Permit Division, has conducted an analysis and investigation of this boundary amendment for this existing permit parking district and has concluded that under the State CEQA guidelines the changes are subject to a Class I Categorical Exemption under § 15301 of the State CEQA Gu idelines because changes in parking restrictions for this district are

7

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

operational and wi ll not expand the existing use of the streets or change parking demand. Further, displacement of other vehicles is expected to be minimal. The LADOT staff also determined that the exceptions to the categorical exemption for cumu lative impact, sign ificant effect, scenic highway, hazardous waste site or historical resource do not apply to this district. See 2002 City CEQA Guidelines, Article Ill, 1.a.3. The initial report was made available for review at the John C. Fremont Library, 6121 Melrose Avenue, Los Angeles. CA 90038-3501, (323) 962-3521 for 30 days. The review period ceased at 5 PM on October 30. 2010.

CONCLUSION

The results of the parking studies indicate that the expansion of a Preferential Parking District for th is residential area is justified. Based on the surveys conducted by the Department of Transportation , on street parking in this residential · area has been adversely impacted by non-resident parking within this proposed district. The purpose for the expansion of this district is to limit intrusion of non-residential and commuter parking and to enhance the quality of life within the residential neighborhood. District residents who choose to purchase permits will be exempted from the preferential parking restrictions. The use of permits will give res idents a better opportunity to park near their homes . The indirect benefits to the res idential neighborhood will be the preservation of normal uses of residential properties, and in some cases the additional parking restrictions may help reduce noise and litter. Therefore, based upon data obtained from the studies conducted by the Department and the review of the comments made at the public hearing, it is the recommendation of this Department that Preferential Parking District 40 , be expanded and that the added boundaries of the District should be the residential area, bounded by Las Palmas Avenue between Melrose Avenue and Rosewood ·Avenue, Rosewood Avenue between Las Palmas Avenue and McCadden Place, McCadden Place between Rosewood Avenue and Oakwood Avenue, Oakwood Avenue between McCadden Place and .Highland Avenue and Highland Avenue between Oakwood Avenue and Melrose Avenue. The expansion of this Preferential Parking District is in compliance with the provisions of Section 80.58 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, and with the Council-approved Rules and Procedures for Preferential Parking Districts. The residents are being adversely affected by nonresident on-street parking demand and are therefore entitled to rel ief from cond itions associated with this problem. The following parking restriction will best serve the needs of the residents and the businesses in this proposed preferential parking district: "2 Hour Parking, 8 AM to 6 PM Monday to Saturday; No Parking 6 PM to 8 AMMon - Sat; District No. 40 Permits Exempt"

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

When posted on the residential streets these restrictions will keep employees of several businesses, valet cars and non-res idential vehicles from parking all day or from parking during the evening hours, depending on the restriction preferred by the res idents of each block. It should be noted that if the City Council approves the proposed expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40, it will be necessary for residents to submit petitions to the Department informing the Department of the Preferential Parking restriction that they wish posted on their block. Only those blocks that submit the required petitions, requesting specific parking restrictions that have been approved by City Council, can be posted with Preferential Parking restrictions. Residents must sign the petitions, with at least a two-thirds majority of the residential dwelling un its covering fifty percent or more of the residential frontage within the block requesting the restriction.

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

APPENDIX A PROPOSED BOUNDARIES AT TIME OF HEARING PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 40 COUNCIL DISTRICT NO 4 & 5 Hollywood Enforcement

10

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

APPENDIX B PROPOSED BOUNDARIES AFTER COMMENTS RECEIVED

PRE.-:ER~NTJA ~RKING DISTRICT NO. ~-0 COUNCIL DISTRICT NO 4 & 5 Hollywood Enforcement

I i~ J U rLJ~JU

~



,_il= (.l

2 -

-· = : J J

1

;I ~-

1 I~

I~

"r

"'- ··:



·

r'

11

1

tq i

~~

'

r.
BANCfl ''110 ~~~;If

-~- -- -- - l

'D · ~-~0-,

L



~PPDB~,,.~

PPD 40 EXPANSION Dl<>lrict & City Boundary

~ Council 0 D •

aa

I

PPDN0.47

I

!

~:;a::i: ::h:o~

,,,

I

EZZ2] 2 Hour Parking 8 am to 6 pm Monday- Friday;

Vehicles Y~th District No. 40 pennits exempted .

·

Il-l\ 1 •

I;

I

. . •,\ \ I

0 1 1;

.r--~

r----

J•

I (

\

1 1\

\

..;c.1Yuv>----\ \

-

\ \ 1

,~---

II

I

Jl:~ li

,• •, \ 'jt

Monday· Saturday; Vehicles Ylith District No. 40 permits exempted.:-..::.;

11

~I _

,

I

\\

'\ • 1 1

1 I 1

.J L -_..J l --:,.-:... ~-- 1

.

I

(! //===:./1

'J I

ll

1 \ 11

m!l:il!l No Parking 6 pm to 8 .1m nighdy; 2 Hour Parking 8 .1m to 6 pm

cttt.lot . .,.l

i I

. I'

I\ •

r

\

,II

I'

\ \,

))' 7i'o ~ \1

\..\

·. /

~l;~ !r___ __J~

am _; Monday . Saturday: 2 Hour Parking ( 8 am to 6 pm Monday - Saturday; Vehicles with District No. 40 pennits exempted.

l(

W:U>"'tAV

1

i(-~ - !

I

t

:

1-

PPD NO. 110

I

I

J.

I

r

'I I

'----.J

1

r--

~~,l\

I ~ ~ 1

!"l . 71 I i c:::-

-1.-'='- ~j

~

Du.l E . lL[.

~

~ oo·· nr~ nrr-·"- ~E · .. I _ll ~, I i ~ E

1•

Q~o;.w;.C~;JAv

'= 1...

! -, -=

J-.-- . I n \ ' ,~----\ 'J IL lu?

A - n·n ~ ~

LEGEND:

1-

1

~: ~n~D, i a . . -~ . I! l_ .~[

,

.--1 r-;!e#4:o·~ l

: i

J

II I!. L J ! I I~ _ - [

;~ njun aoqIE~ !

_

r-

JDLIJCOlJLLL~

-

_

;

.,..,...,.,,,1

I 1

QCJC::Cr.:-::llll

n~

.

'

II

n~'· === ·~ ~·

I

~

;

~

_i

!:;;

:_____

IUl ~-u~~~ ~

,~o~l rn~irnr ~~·-·-~: ~·

;~ - Coup~il~~1o r i ~ ~ J 1-

J1isedBoundary

Co\1 ~~1 Disti]pl #4

·

~

i

j,...., \

,;'.

----::--.:_-:_-__--.:__:_-::::..;:::.-:... ( -

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

APPENDIXC COMMENTS PURING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 40 HANCOCK PARK AREA OF LOS ANGELES ON OCTOBER 14,2010, AT THE PAN-PACIFIC PARK AUDITORIUM FOR FOR FOR FOR FOR FOR FOR FOR AGAINST AGAINST AGAINST AGAINST FOR FOR

FOR AGAINST

Situation of McCadden/Clinton has become horrifying since Mozza opened. Situation is unettenable. Resident at "Ground Zero" Patron leave trash, are drinking - loud even at 500 block of McCadden Place. Met with Mozza and they were difficult Mozza creating the problems- have to park 2 Y2 blocks from their house and have tried to deal with the restaurants and they have good lawyers. PPD only solution Block captain for 500 block of McCadden- echoes others sentiments. Problem will shift from 600 block and potential to spread. Lives at intersection of Clinton and McCadden. Submitted statement that was signed by 30 homeowners all in support No Comment Expansion of district will be an insurance policy for others should the problem spread Cause (source) identified- solution is PPD and already has to park far from home. Asking neighbors to support the expansion Problem is Mozza and the city needs to enforce the codes. PPD will not solve problem but shift it to another area. Lives on 300 blockofMcCadden. Not a solution and problem will spillover. Permits are inconvenient Permits are problematic. Parking Permit Office is a hassle and inconvenient Sorry for the neighbors impacted but it's a Land Use issue that needs to be solved by the Councilmember. We're not solving the problem since it will move to other areas. Need more creative solutions. Valet company to Mozza representative - PPDS work and in favor. Handle 700 vehicles/day. Although not directly impacted (Past President). Anything dealing with Land Issues will take a long time to resolve. Each households support is vital and cooperation is the key. Had their trashcans moved from cars parking. They've experienced disturbances and filth. PPD is the only solution until a better one can be found. Lives at 500 block of Cherokee and have no idea why this issue is coming up.

AGAINST

No problems with the area (lives on 500 block of Highland)

AGAINST

(resides on the 400 block of June Street) There are alternate ways to fight this and Mozza. Works as a lawyer and can make their life miserable. This may be an insurance policy but the community will not benefit. Permits are

12

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

inconvenient and a nightmare FOR

No Comment

FOR

It's a serious problem. Garbage is an issue and they park blocking the driveway. Its an unfortunate situation but 4 blocks have voted (petitioned) for permits.

FOR

Parked cars present a dangerous situation

FOR

Block captain - no comment

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer APPENDIX D

October 19~ 2010 Dear Neighbor Re: Expansion of Prefere ntial Parking District No 40 Hello We are the Marks Shpall fam ily and live at 460 North las Pa lmas, the corner of Rosewood and Las Pal mas. We are very distressed by t he proposed expansion of preferential parking onto Las Pal mas and surrounding streets. If you have not seen the attached Notice Of Public Hearing, please review it ·carefully. We think it outrageous that a few vocal residents could successfully restrict parking on public streets where we

anhave invested our Jives. That we would have to pay for the privilege of our friends,

associates, service t rucks, gardeners and others parking to come to our homes Is elitist and discriminatory to the extreme. In our case we would have to purchase passes for our children to park in front of the house where they grew up~ Please fill out the bottom portion of this and drop it into our mailbmi:"l>lease ask our other neighbors to do likewise. We will arrange for them to be delivered to the Department ofTra11Sportation in ach,ance of the deadline. We can and must stop this. Thank you very much. Sherry Marks Bill Shpall

We t he undersigned are NOT"in favo r of expanding t he Preferential Parking District# 40 as described in the attached Notice Of Publh: Hearin

·~----

- 1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

APPENDIX E MAY 2 8 20!0

!0- {Y1::?3 C..0 .if.

q:.:;-l,;·.L)F\.)K iP.·,·.~ If'"

MOTION

~~~ %!-!ti:~~~~ District (PPD) No. 40 wns established in 1988 and was last expanded

in 1996. Since 2006, res idents bounded b.y Melrose, North Highland, Oakwood and North Cherokee Avenues have sought ro expand PPD No. 40 to address parking intru5ion. Affected community members have signed the necessary petitions and submitted this paperwork to ihc Los Angeles Department of Transpom1tion: The environmental review is uuderwny by City staff: after which, if no significant opposition is registered at a public hearing, the Department can prep~re the necessary documents for Council approval of the PPD No. 40 <::Xp
I ·mEREFORE MOVE thnt the Council instruct the Los Angeles Department of Tnmsportation to expedit.iously implement un expansion orPrcfen::n li<1l Parkin g Dis trict Num ber 40 to inc lude the ureo bounded by Melrose, North Highland, Oakwood and Nonh Cherokee Avenues to address parking intrusion issues.

Councilmcmber, 4Lh District

l/

( .!~.~&-~~~·~--------SECONDED BY :~-;~

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

Cih Tl nll Oni
100 N. Spring S!rerl Ch»ir ~~u i.J ils

R\IIJLII 440

&

L usi\" ~c l o,,C,.,

G()\'Cl1UllCUl:t l

900 12

<21.3) 47:1-70115

~rtki t:ucr

(21J) 973-1150 F>l, V i ~cCh uir

\':1 ll c:yOn:i.::c: 1:i76n Veunuu Blvd .•

P~I'S('Innel

Suii<> 1020

Mcn1ber Bud.r~cl ~~:

Finnncu

)

Hne!!rgy & EnviTm1ment T r1.1 mpott~tion

W.r:hsit~:

ht!p:!.'cd5.1r.cily.org

Emui!: l 1 i:lui .Ku rc\:;;{1}hu:lly.o l~

PAUL KORETZ Coundhncmb~r.

r-ifth District

E"o;nu, CA 91436 !8 16) 971-JOS8 {XIR) ?lill-92 10 Fax

Wcsl L.A. Office: 822 S. RoborNm Blvd,. Suke 102

Lo• Anglll.;,, CA 9C03$ (310) 289·()353

1.\ IOi 2lt9-I!J~5 Fo-.:

October 6, 2010

Felix z. Valde, Management Analyst Los Angeles Department of Transportation City of Los Angeles 555 Ramirez Street, Suite 315 Los Angeles, CA 900 12 Re: Proposed Expansion of Preferential Parking District Number 40 Dear Mr. Valde: Preferential parking for the residents of the City of Los Angeles is an important tool for protecting the integrity and quality of life within Los Angeles' vibrant neighborhoods. In light of the residential location, and outpouring of community concern, we are writing in full support of the expansion of preferential parking district number 40.

It is worth noting that this proposed parking district does not fall under the Fifth Counci1 District. My support comes from the importance of knowing that working together is essential to help preserve the quality of life in our neighborhoods. Therefore, I support Councilmember Tom LaBonge and his effort to help the residents of his district who border fue Fifth Council. Thank you :tor your consideration of this letter. If you need further assistance or have questions, please feel free to call my field deputy, John Darnell, at (310) 289-0353, or emaH him at

john. [email protected] .org. Sincerely,

C?~lrfi Prwdly U r>iny.1ll( COJI!Inl.ll'litk~ of o~t Alr~ Bc~'o:l'i ~· Ln:.>L., Be;.-cr1~\l.-ll\)d. C;jJiforniJ COUI Itly Clllh, Cmthr:y Cirdto. Cun-UH)' Cilyt Cl:o\•iot 1-li!Ja, Cmll:'illK' k Hms:. Er~dnn., Fntrt~. H1>~1ywc;; od, Mar \-1!:\U. Mt"irO.!I!'. O<~'li.f~.rcs\ C:my~'Vl, J•.a!ill$. r' lt;"•l·Rnl!t>nson, llU!3-."(!lll;lfe. Shtmnan 0Jkl; , Sll~:!l:.tn V:ll:tgc, s~: ltf:O Cit;, TtJ.;t 7.2-M. Yillh:·)' V !!ill~,;,'. Wt,st {'lr W.:stWUI').I, \Yl"'t~itii! Vjl ht ~. W--.~wootl, \V..~t\\ ll\lt l G:lrclt~I:S.. Wc:stw..J\-:.d $ti•..Ld! uf Sa;11:l Mm •il·:1.

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

Page 1 of l f,t .,., ll(}

OJJ'ICI.U t

,.

.b l lti:CTDIU:.

Q"'d~~~·~AJ..l'IS.~................ .\ltiA.'f"-*D:II·.. "'I\.'!"tntu.lrl•

Slll!t:AA.A7a..L

ltt"')ftiU Dd'i~IU.lk--t31J ~•nli(t

'-'\)l'ft<1

I:T~ItrL"f1!.CIN:II't1JtN5un:.,t,.

..."l:.t'lWA 'IIU:!tU'S, TonA.,I

•r.n:.\I'J\&IICM,..._...,.,...,.,.,....,,.

(\III~II!!Jittlft.

l"J ~ i.C".Ai:..x&.\SR

~r.,-..;w , QII.,

"\AJO!J,"'!i~'iTC.

·~·; ~

_,;
~D-l*W•'-.Ji

~"N.l'l"r.JI',\~~ ~\I. ,, ~•.J.S.<.Y

/t;'n)l(fffn,UL\,

C:."LV.;q],iV:'f

i:c\liSJ.~l:R.

k:v.TH.YIII.

'i"'-'!tii':).I~-;Jit.i "f('miQAVIC',OC~U

W!:tt,..\U'

PPO 40 exp ComJl'ler.t5 C/0 Fe.llx Val!.!<;

Department of Transportation 555 Ramirez Street, spa~e 315 L•l~ Ang~les.

Ca. 90012

octoller ·ro , 20·ro R.e;

Expansicn

or PPD N0 . 40

Dear Mr. Vat de: 1 am writing on belletween Highland and Las Psfmas. In !he last tour years 1his area or H;mcock Park nas undergone a number ot changes th.st /lave resulted in a I
Susan Gre ssman Chair, HPHOA, est ·J948. Par'c
cc:

Nlltkl Ezl'larl. councilman Tom LaBOn!JP.'s Representative

https://docs. go ogle. com/a/lacity .org/v iewer?attid=-'0 .1 &pid==gmail&thid=12 b9d66cd84b2...

10/13/2010

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

Pagel ofl ti

October l, 2010

PPD 40 cxp Comments c/o Felix VaJde Department ofTrnnsportation 555 Ramirez Street, Space 315 Los Angeles, Ca. 90012

Mr. Valde,

Mazza LLC. dha Pizzeria Mazza and Osteria Mozza is in full support of the proposed expansion of Preferent:hli.P:uking in District No. 40. This is something OUI' n::sidcnti.."ll neighbors have desired for some time and will assist in providing them with more adequate street parking. !t is our hope that this can finally become n reality, and remain available if there is anything we can do to assist in the process.

Sincerely,

Nancy Silverton Partner

Mona L.L.C.

https://docs.google.com/allacity.org/viewer?attid=O.l&pid=gmail&thid=l2b7dc84311 021. ..

10/5/201 0

./

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

tilil!ll.hfto.s.Av~ne

bf Al'lr
VNM .Ii1d.a..ill2t;o.cam

october 5, 2illO

PPO 40 C!)lp

C~w.imlllts

c/o Feli:xVa!d!!

Department of Transportation SSS RamorelStreet,Space 31.5

Los Angel~, Cfl 00012

O~a r

M r Valde,

I Atn writing on behaffof 6610 Melros.? Man~geml!llt U.C ~s the Gener:~l Manager l!t'Moz.zu2GG. we areJn

·fun supp<>rt of !his prop residing In District No. 40. It IS our uo derstand
t b!J proposed parking expamion-

Sincer~iy,

Page 1 ofl

leah

Ellswort~

CleJJ eral Manager

Morra2Go

1/3/1 1

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

City of Los Angcle~ Mail· Re: the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 in tb... Page I of2 If

IJ0

Felix Valde

Re: the expansion of Preferential Parking District No. 40 in the Hancock Park area of Los Angeles 1 message

Brad Saltzman To: "[email protected]"

Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:02AM

Dear Mr. Yalde,

As the President of a valet parking company that provides the valet perking services to 4 restau rants and one take out eatery within 1 block of the intersection of High land & Melrose I am in strong support of the requests to expand the Preferential Parking District 40 in the Hancock Park aiea of Los Angeles.

Within the businesses my company provides the valet parking for, there are over 300 employees and on any given day and night 500+ guests who come to the area. I do not believe it is fair for the homeowners in this area to have to park distances from their homes because either employees or patrons of not just restaurants .but other local bu sinesses have decided to park in their neighborhood .

As a 3rc1 generation "Angelino" I can tell you growing up in Los Angeles in your"neighborhood" ca n be wonderful and a great experience, but if your "neighborhood• becomes flooded with cars parking for neighboring businesses, it really is no longer a ·neighborhood." Now your street (s) has become a well sought after parking space, and to the homeowners in this "neighborhood• that is simply not right, it's not fair and it's not the great LA I grew up in.

I hope that you

wil mak.e it a priority to implement the Preferential Parking prog ram In District 40.

Sincerely,

Brad

Brad Sal!zman 1 President Residential Hospitality Services, Inc. Valet Girls Parking

https:l/mail .google.corn/allacity .org/?ui=2&ik=3eecb968cc&view=pt&q=valct&search=qu. .. 1015/20 10

...--

...--

£2

Page 1 ofl Ill

...

../

ND

ART RODRIGUEZ AND .ASSOCIATES 201£. Cotom!l))lvci.. Sill~ 200 • had.1c.a, CJUIIOJ • T•l (SOD) .5!3-72)'1 • f"u (6ZIJ) 88:.:.!·.:. '"=.'- - -

October 12, 2010

h:Jix Valde

Dept ofTranspol1lltlon

Depilrtment of1'ransportation 555 Ranoir« St1.tt~ Sp•<;c 315 Los 1\ngck•, CA 90012

City of Los Angeles I00 S. Maio Sl, 9th floor Lo.• Angele>, CA 90012 Re:

H:u~cock

Pork Per.nined l'lll'king

Dear Sin: This lcttc:r ia in anticipation of the Orctobcr 14th Public Meeting ccnccmin& the proposed pcnniHed pmijng within the Hencock Park nei&hborhood. Our office sm>ngly su-rts the Jlrulling ofpd
been an improvement o'l/er empty tenant spaces, it bas c,.uscd an increased slnlin on tho alread;ilimited street parking avnHOOJe in the area. The result is the increasing possibility o.f confrontations between the locol residents Dnd busin.c&e3. ~

~· tE

0

0)

c ·c: ro

By grantini: this are11 penni~d parking sbdu!l 1 a major obsl:lde to the peaceful coexistence of local bwinesses and TeSiderus em be addressed.. To lha.t end, our office rupports the gr.mt..ing of permitted parlcing to this portion of the Hancocl< Park ncighborilood.

<:Zir w-/1 Feel free to contnct our offic"' sho

Thank

/7

:ou require ony additionol iDformotion.

Q)

0

Bm.Engsrro~n

.Q

-ro c Q) E

L'"ltodr~:@euthllnk.nfll

E 0

(.) Q)

0:::

h) pt.ovide sufficient parking fm tlaeir c.ust.omers without intrUding o.n the adjacent noighbnrhond. [ tru:;r the expansion request will be. gramed and expcdired siracc: lhts (lroces.." hac; alrend~· kept the re.sideots in limbo iUr Jbur y~am. Thi\Dk you for your time nnd consic1enllion in this maltc.r. Sincerely,

~-a::-r 1- A., CA 90036

c

"'0

1 WX:t 1\.."t.'Cntly scot a uot.icc of a Public. Hcariu: re&::miing: tbe .exp;msion of Pr.!ferentiaJ Plll:king District No. 40 10 be held on Th""""'-y, October 14''· Alk!ents in the arco respect the right of business~• to be there. we also feel !..bat Ole onus is on them

600N. Citru; A\'en\le

I

..._

De2rMr. VaJde:

https:/ldocs.googlc.com/w'lacity .orglviewer?ottid~O. 1&pid-gmail&tbid-12boc76287c~48... 10/1412010

Nl

1/3/11

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

APPENDIX F PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA

.AGENDA FOR Pi!JBl.IC HEARING EXPAN:SillN OiF PRE:!Fi::~IENTIA~ PARKING tHSTRICT NO. 4D JiM THE HA:I'I.ICOCK iPA.RK AREA OIF LOS AN~ELI::S P;m"Pacif:>;! P:.J1:·At.>;litomJm

LOCATION:

7B:O ~1erly lk•.il ~··~ r ;;l Lc-s J.tl {;~!es, CA ~ODJ5

D-ATE 15.

t

m,u;: t'IIJ.Iii. CJJ J 'lJCTRl~ ;\c""D DlSCU'S~O:'i OF II:E:.\.Rf:\"G r:RO.C~'IWPR~S

RULES .<\."'lD

(lk6- o:S~J

He;~Jing Cffic~ r ~ kol~ik f'all;:io 'f,:;r..spcrt.Jtl::n ~rf'r.iGicr, PO~~ t::~sl VolH;;~·

Ci::ot>l::: Dfft:e

2.

P'R~r.JMC'(\:KY

Rtl"'KI

~)~·

'r.E:re EXI".-\.."\:S.HJi."'i Oli

(6;5~- ':";il:S)

PREF[R.J::\r"TVU. l"..!o .F:Kf;51:!! . P ::i r !o:~ ~ rrJb: r; r.,.~sbn

.3.

QU:Ell.TI~:J NS &'1> ,o\,."1~\~t~; ~s {7~(}5- '7;~5~ Th."s ~r.c w~l bll ~~ c rJ~ ~Jr ~~m~!mt t\'!~1m:t&l f'ilt't.I!IQ D~i;t c{" ihe P'rderer.H:.r· Parf.;in!l Oisltfcl ;:mi.Cies. ,@OJ•) e ·D:I!T'F.:!rrl:.

;ma

~ti~i~~"'':t)t,it Pif.!;t~!:.::!.C-~~~.,c.Jp'""~In-~. Pl'\M'thal fdlm'ti-s . ~.

(.!l:fJO- ~ ,j 5)

fl'BIJC CO::\cf:MT.X'T l;r.litGTi

T.lta!>::l y/."Y.J ~\~11: 1~· ~~k ~ ffi ;:L-t >0! e1,1,Ji; c;A!;:Et ;<~ ~;:Q;"l i!!< ~[!J;J, t;!",d Jl:l):Hn lhern b:l 01 C~!:'!: lhs'l M~ net s re.s~~· b<:et1 c:r:I;'>;fe~l. 1:\lbwing ~ man~• 1790~~ ·~~ r. ~~la t.Q JI'Olii?Ot ~!JaiJ G;.l\1 OOHiOi' ld•lli Tt"''l> 15 8 U~ lirnH af 2 mn:r!~ FY r<:J"!lrrcrJ! :mn:;r.r.

.

fn'El..!•:W CA~[:;IJ 111~ ~ ~<;':liTtiXI to 01 ·l:!ar.;~'tn
1M D~l!l8fllt'l2nl r.~F Tr.ln!SF-o.ttit:n '.!!i'.hb :!I) d~t'!i of ~Tim>:rl.\s t:~t Na1'8moor Hi. :i!.OHJ.Io.

'l., iS hl!>:ri.:i:J. A:lm:::;:;, ·-rir"!n ·

.:m

i"f'D t;;;•p•;;::;~mrr~1:; ,z.•o F~~·,.-:a l::1 (1 ·D~~.;n;:'ll r::n: at Tr,;'J n:;pr::Mnlhm o~il R:~mh!z .S!!rct -Sll::n:~ 1~

a

l o:; ,l.nsr.:~. CA 000. 12.1.0:""~

i'F:!::~ EI9ENT:l•L P,I,RKJN.G. S:i:T!0.\1 flA~JNG S\FOR;::EM~T. HCl,J,.\'"t.'QO OA~f,,!,

P.AAXI~J3 ENFO.;;r:.S t.'t~NT, R~.l"l·:::• :,O I !':P~.Tr, H F~OPM

L'WT., .-PLL'YloVC•D D-W~:.S H <~ 01$TRfl.".<'i ·~ff i::E COUNCIL l'i8!.8EFi TOt.l L,l,:=!O~~;' .:(1' COOI'i~ l ~ r::JS<."'ICT

22

· c;:·i~J ~rJ~2s:J ~~~J [1 1 :J...i~~ [~i~1 .o!il~it-i

i':~?.,i1 ~H~:~ ~~7~1 ~

1/3/1 1

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

APPENDIXG PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING EXPANSION OF l'llEFEREN:TIAL PARKIJifG DISTRICT NO. 4D The City Gf Lvs Angeles Dep:!.nm~r.t of TrJnS;Jo.li>•ti<'Jl wiJ! t:e I:Ollli'ac~ing a Pub lie Ht;~rlrtg fot ttu: pu."POSI: of answcrln~ quc~tions a:ld ~c~;nins commc:nts on 111~ prelimirury findl ....gs and reL'tllllrilt:ndatiutiS M tbe D~n."UTlent re!lnrdin_g the cx;xm.si<")JJ of P'rcfetent¥31 P~rking. Di~1ri.:t No. 40 In the HIL"K:O<:k Park ill"~a .of Los ..!ul,!;des. The Depnn:ment hll-~ ~1abl.isheci th~ "Max[tnual Allowable Boamdailes" oflhc prop~<:d c::tp11sion. of the P!cfcrential .l'nrldng Dlstrict 1\-o. 4"0 to!:)( tho ro.~id~utia.l :!tte~tu:e between Rosewood Aven~ rmd Oakwood Avenue, Oal,.'\..-(lod A\·enuo bctwe
Since l.lw rcsidecnts of at lca~t 4 ~:pt~c:rus wilflrn tlte ahovc-mcotioncd :rn:a nave subminoo petitions ti.>~ me .exp:;msh~n of PteEieremlo..l PartJztg D[~ lrk:t.No. 4{1. !he Depa.rttr<.x;nt will accept l11p-ut trom the rc>tdcr.ts .llfld non·r~idcnts in the -eren to dm~mfinc \~h::ther 11t~ proposed n:ll~ii:JiUitHUlcwa~.Jc bmuulmc.; are ~c.capn;:h~~ Of oc:~.;l tQ be D;duce~~ ~od to get a _gcJte:ti1-f [~ of the WVel of community ~lljl-j>Pft lor fi:JJs proposal, Tile par~ in"', ra:::;trir.-tii>TlS for 1he ~~:pa.~..kd aN~ will .rernsill :lie sa!fl~ ~~~ w iiltinlllJJ (;l)undl adopriotl (}[ the e;~p;an~illD (>[ Pn:J\:rtt: ati~f ParkiEg l>lstrict N~>. 40, r~sid~ol~ (}f the: ~.x p:md;::d arm will t:.u !Ill:!~ 10 J:.{tr.Cb~se up tn 411r~ Anmml P~t·mJ f& fcnnks 11rc IIIstl n~·ailsbl~ for $22.50 ~2~!:], r~new~!Jl e ~~:::1] tou.r mon::hs, wi!b ;~ maxhtntm of two per houscimlil. An un1im1r~d nurnbu or ooc,;!ay Gu~st Pcrmi;s ar~ ~!.'; O nvatlall·l..: to rcsldt11-B for $2.50 each per da}'. A!t.hoo~ any =idem.~ of th~ District ~r~ cli.gibla ~o p!:~!cha..~c p~(t$, Pr.efe:e.~ti:~! Pm-king r<::51Tic.tiom wilJ orrly he posted on those bli!cli9 wlJ,qc th. T'ermif;; l!Je NOT l'equiroed to !)art on srrem SC!glnijnls within the Dislrlct

tll
Time/Place ofPubJic He
6:45llM to 8:45 PlVl., Thursday, October 14~ 2010 Pan Pacific Park Auditorium 7600 Be-veri,• Boulevard

Los Angeles, CA 90035 WriU~n

comments will :dsu be accepted on this nuttl!r, in cnse you c1umot attend dJe h(;aring.

Written comments must b~ received by:

I November 15, 1010.

r

Address v.:rit1 ~n commrnts ·to:

PPD40 exp Comments c;/o F-elix Vahle Department ofTrrmsporlation .

:iS5 Ramirez Street. Space JlS Los Angeles, CA 90012 Fax: (213) 473-8260

Email: LADOT. Pre f}'[email protected] ocg:

Recommendation of Hearing Officer

1/3/11

---,

f•'·krl lrfjuir<~:l

RE.ctxc:r:m,c P.l:f.JUI::i-rru:;. tr:.' ..:.F!l1:1AD- n.::>· LO'$· ANti !; l,'g$ 01\ I I,.Y JOUFlNAL - :<;b'..'CE: l 001'1 L'l~ El"IR~t ~ ~; Lt-.i .o;.~ t,z:~ C-"' Ka:!rl~ ~~illir.t~.•nw:a·:.~': P.U. u::r ;$~oc.~ LIT.I. r\r9•u,~.• ('~~ !);f.(,l t%'~ Tll'l.t4tr~•·: .;;!:.~t.Z?~!:L):tt.i tl'!.ll _ _ f1.::. _ .,...,.,_ ..._Z~ftr.f£0 _ _ _1 _ _ _ _ __J

,JU:iaA""'&''I' (:!TY Of LA,GI'JY ·ClCRf(, .1\DMit-.1 ~~R :?>'J!:I N SI"R i t~t~ ST FiO:'::\M ~;15

LCii ;J~GC't
PROOF OF PUBUCAT ION ::;~.ok: ~~

e,;Jil:mc.,

J

C4Ff!' o."'! Ia.~ ,'11,~-t:~

J.-l"ll,. ~'Jn~ i-11

\:in! UF.J

~;c~

L"r.t'l:!oj

)~

:JI-l~~

i!J1;..J l~~·(!•lfZ ·.tt 5i'""-: :;:r.:nu

.:f.C.a•~·~ l ~n

r:r_;lil·h 11 ~~·.n::r :'t,~.::s~.=-1 p...,rtr~;; ·;;.: ~1~::m.n,1 rr!t ~~~ I.M.lN 1-;,.~81 1k u! t..:;:< "'"' .vo:1 p _l:ltli'S

~ L'1rJY1'1iJ"

r~ 'M ~J I) I I }:::~ .l.t·K~EU:.S. r;:.m;t tet· u~: Mi3Et£"!i, ~d-•~~;11o'JJ AL , ..,.,..._~.., cl I ~-~ '.!~~o,;;l l;rjl"'t !l'M:' .;.! 'itJ.l :;f•Y.o ill C.:.~!ll... l"J> !I;;. ~... j:, .:.0:<1:1 X'i' ~J;= (J.4.f1:f..1'1tt4. ·~"t:: 1-JU. !W ~ - 11L'II ·I:O:e·;rcf~• ~ f)"' •,yr,i
"""'to

CITY

CLE'~W;