Rose Garden Resident
News
New parking rules good for retail, but bad for streets
By Mary Gottschalk
New parking regulations intended to attract more retailers and restaurants in nine of San Jose's business districts, including The Alameda, W. San Carlos Street, Lincoln Avenue and Willow Street, were expected to be approved by San Jose City Council on Dec. 12, despite neighborhood opposition. The decision came after the Rose Garden Resident's print deadline.
The changes, if approved, will distribute the number of required on-site parking spaces evenly among businesses, resulting in fewer parking spaces at some restaurant and retail sites.
The old regulations used a complicated formula, introduced in 1960, where the number of required on-site parking spaces varied from business to business.
The new regulations will even out requirements, making them the same for every ground floor business, requiring one on-site space for every 400 square feet of floor area.
For example, under the old regulations, a 1,000-square-foot retail store was required to have five on-site parking spaces, while a restaurant of the same size was required to have 13 spaces.
Under new regulations, both businesses would be required to have just three on-site spaces each.
While this is good news to developers and building owners hoping to attract more retail and restaurants, residents living on side streets say it is bad news.
Marc Morris, a Martin Avenue resident, tried to delay the implementation of the new regulations by filing a protest of the negative declaration recommended by the planning staff.
Morris said he supports the city's objective, but believes before any parking changes happen, the city needs to mitigate the likely impact it will have on residents on side streets.
"When Pasta Pomodoro and Togo's opened six years ago, it immediately created a problem on our block with spillover parking and traffic," he said.
Morris said it is not unusual for his and neighbors' driveways to be blocked or partially blocked by people who say they'll only be a few minutes picking up an order.
Frequently, he said, cars park so close to the driveways on Martin it is impossible for residents backing out of them to see if the street is clear.
"My wife actually had an accident backing out of our driveway," he said. "She got hit by someone speeding down the street talking on a cell phone.
"This is a festering problem, and the city has ignored it. They've been quite unresponsive.
"When we heard about the proposed parking changes, our initial reaction was that this could make our situation worse, and we don't wish other people living close to neighborhood businesses to undergo the problems we've had for the last six years."
At the Dec. 6 Planning Commission meeting, Morris' protest was considered, and four other speakers from the Rose Garden and Willow Glen areas echoed his concerns.
A Blewett Avenue resident of 16 years said the one-on-site-space-to-400-feet formula was too great and asked the commission to consider recommending one space per 250 square feet.
"We're already impacted," she said, adding that Blewett residents in Willow Glen frequently have their driveways used as turnarounds, and street parking is taken by Lincoln Avenue business employees.
Akoni Danielsen, environmental project manager for the planning department, dismissed the concerns, saying, "It may be annoying to residents, but there is no proof it would have significant social or economic impact."
Those opposing the change were in the minority as 18 speakers strongly endorsed the changes, saying it would make it easier to attract retailers and restaurants to vacant spaces.
Among those speaking in support were Tom Biagini, leasing agent for the new development at the corner of The Alameda and Morrison Avenue, and Larry Clark, president of The Alameda Business Association.
After a discussion lasting more than 21Ž2 hours, the commissioners voted unanimously at 11:15 p.m. to uphold the negative declaration as staff recommended. They then voted, as staff recommended, to recommend approval of the changes to San Jose City Council.
The council, which heard the issue at its Dec. 12 meeting, was expected to pass the new regulations.
