HomeMy WebLinkAboutA005 - Letter dated January 8, 1993 to City Council from Steve Padgitt FILED
Date: January 8, 1993
FAMN 0
To: City Staff and Council me ers ,
CITY CLERK .. J
���I CITY OF AME3,IQWA
From: Steve Padgitt
327 Hickory rive 292-2870, 294-1122
Re: Ordinance of"No Parking at 327 Hickory Drive
At the risk of having my concerns further eroded and extending a saga of miscommunication, I
would like to make the following points:
1. My major concerns on Hickory Drive remain safety and pleasant residential living, and I am
willingly agreeable to make reasonable accommodations for this to occur.
2. While I noted I prefer no cars parked in front of my home, neither do I have any major
objections if cars to park there. Clearly, parking on residential streets is an accommodation
and need for many families, including mine.
3. 1 felt Scott Logan and I had a productive and cordial discussion when he called me after the
December 28 Council meeting. I thought that discussion ended with an agreement the "no
parking" sign would be placed just to the north of my driveway, but still allowing for 2-3
vehicles to be parked in front of my property on the north side of the drive.
4. After my conversation with Mr. Logan, I requested and received a copy of the proposed
ordinance for the first time. I was much surprised to learn no parking was being extended
over the entire frontage of my property. 1 oppose this, and I don't think it can be justified
based on safety/visibility concerns unless the agenda to make Hickory Drive an
arterial drive. Further, I am unaware of any restrictions being requested by neighborhood
residents for the north side of my drive. if Mr. Logan thinks such is my desire, we have not
communicated. I respectfully request parking remain on the north side of the driveway,
if not the whole frontage of the property. Indeed, increasing no parking along that area will
needlessly start to place a hardship on some residents.
5. I trust increasing the parking area along my property is not a punitive response to my previous
letter and appearance before the Council.
6. I still find the language "should be relocated" and "should be implemented" to be stronger than
"only suggested." I am not fully apprised of legalistic nuances between "should" and "shall";
nonetheless, I feel I do not deserve the ridicule implied in the latest staff report.
7. Finally, my employment frequently requires my absence from Ames. Such will be the case
on January I I and most likely January 25. I regret I will not be available to avoid further
miscommunication.