The parking box program authorized in 2021 may have benefited some neighborhoods in San Rafael. But the opposite has been true in our neighborhood. We respectfully ask this Council to review its implementation in our neighborhood — specifically the parking boxes just installed for the benefit of 293 Makin Grade over neighbors’ objections.
This may not be the type of administrative action that this Council normally reviews. But we have no other avenue of appeal and we want the Council to be aware of how its ordinance has been misapplied. We have requested an explanation from staff but have not received anything specific as to why these parking boxes were installed on this evacuation route despite the obvious safety hazards and the lack of any need for onstreet parking here. The neighbor in question already has off-road parking spots for at least six and as many as eight vehicles.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
Located between two Open Spaces, there are 10 houses on the northern parts of Upper Toyon and Makin Grade, just after the two streets cross at the top of Makin Grade. The only access to our homes is via a 10-13 foot connecting strip of Makin Grade, indicated by cross hashes:
This photo of the connecting strip is taken from the top of Makin Grade, looking north towards San Rafael. 293 Makin Grade is to the right.
In short, this is a classic “choke point”, not just for evacuation purposes but for other emergency vehicles, delivery trucks and the residents. 293 MAKIN GRADE ALREADY HAS PARKING FOR SIX to EIGHT
VEHICLES; NO ADDITIONAL PARKING BOXES ARE NEEDED OR
APPROPRIATE.
There is one house on the connecting strip, 293 Makin Grade. Its residents have prevailed on the City staff to install a partial parking box on that strip, which will constrict the already narrow strip even more. The parking box will encroach on the street so that less than 12 feet will remain for clearance.
The edge of the road is crumbling, and drops off a foot or so in several places, as shown in these photos.
This narrow, deteriorating strip is exactly the wrong place to allow parking.
It will reduce response times, and impair evacuation. It will make the neighborhood less safe, all for the convenience of one homeowner.
And there is no need to do so, for two reasons:
First, the couple who live there already have parking for at least eight vehicles — in their garage, on their driveway, and three spots on Upper Toyon, and a new parking box at the bottom of their property across from 281 Makin Grade.
These photos show available parking in their two-car garage and driveway (with the connecting strip to the left of the photo) and by the Upper Toyon mailboxes.
The photo below shows the second new parking box, on a blind curve, below 293. It should not have been allowed either. But as long as it remains, it provides room for one or two more cars.
The parking box next to 293 is unnecessary for another reason. To use this partial box, they will need to remove their hedge and construct a platform. As long as they are incurring the expense to do that, they can make it a foot or two wider so that they do not need to encroach on the street at all.
Parking in front of their gate and impeding traffic saves the residents from walking about 20 yards from their other parking spots. That slight gain in convenience to these able-bodied residents is no basis to allow them to encroach on the narrow street and jeopardize the safety of their neighbors.
THE 2021 ORDINANCE
Nothing in the staff report to this Council in 2021 when the parking box program was adopted countenanced allowing parking in these circumstances. Just the opposite.
The staff advised the Council that the city needed “additional parking restrictions” on narrow, hilly streets, especially evacuation routes. The “overarching” “public safety” goal was to ensure that emergency apparatus have “enough room to pass safely” and that the streets do not act as “choke points, which can cause unnecessary backups and delays.” Because the proposed ordinance would “provide limitations on the use of public streets for parking,” the staff advised that it was categorically exempt under CEQA. No analysis was provided of CEQA’s application to the expansion of parking.
The parking box program was sold as a way to mitigate wildfire risks, not to exacerbate them. To quote the staff:
“During a wildfire or other emergent event, the narrow streets present in some of the City’s hillside neighborhoods have the potential to exacerbate fire, due to their potential to funnel winds and debris, threaten lives, hamper evacuation efforts, and choke out responding emergency vehicles.
These dangers are heightened in these high-risk areas by civilian vehicles being allowed to freely park along the narrow roadways, which further restricts access by rendering them impassable to larger fire apparatus and creating single lane access for residents.”
As staff told the Council, the purpose was to improve public safety by reducing “evacuation choke points.”
Consistent with the staff report, this Council found that • “areas in the City of San Rafael with narrow and hilly roads or in territory where access is otherwise difficult are particularly vulnerable to wildfire;” • “the regular parking of vehicles on streets with narrow widths or in territory difficult to access often creates hazards to vehicular and pedestrian travel; and”
• “the width of said roads cannot always safely accommodate the passage of City fire or emergency medical apparatus when vehicles are parked on roadsides.”
STAFF GUIDELINES DO NOT PERMIT A PARKING BOX HERE
The proposed parking box is not just contrary with the Ordinance, it contravenes the guidelines repeatedly espoused by staff in implementing the program.
Staff advised that public that it was “[i]Identify[ing] areas with evacuation challenges — narrow roads, hillside roads, limited egress . . . especially when there is only one exit in and one exit out.” Its goal was to protect “bottlenecks” and “choke points” where “people will definitely have trouble getting out.” Mary Skramstad, Wildfire Mitigation Project coordinator, March 23, 2022, public presentation (minute 13:50) Makin Grade/Upper Toyon clearly meet those requirements as places where parking should be prohibited — the roads are narrow by any definition; they are on the hillside and curvy. There is only one exit in and one exit out. The connecting strip is a “bottleneck” and a “choke point” where residents like us will “definitely have trouble getting out.” Staff says that it considers “visibility, roadway width, traffic patterns, evacuation direction, pedestrian safety” among other factors. None of these factors is satisfied here.
Visibility: There are blind curves on both sides of the connecting strip.
Roadway width: With the partial box, the remaining width is less than 12 feet, as shown in these photos. The stick is 12 feet long.
Traffic patterns: This is a choke point for 10 homes.
Evacuation direction: The proposed parking is opposite of the evacuation direction.
Pedestrian safety: This area is heavily used by hikers walking a loop from Gerstle Park. This photo shows how tight the passage is when a sanitation truck, or delivery truck, is present.
Expanding on the “roadway width” factor, staff has said publicly numerous times that emergency vehicles need a minimum of 12 feet on a road to “get through” but at least 14 feet to actually operate (e.g., exiting the vehicle and accessing equipment.).
When a fire or other emergency occurs here, we want emergency vehicles not only to pass without slowing down or dodging parked cars; we need them to be able to operate wherever needed to fight a fire before it spreads. Impeding their ability to do so just because a resident prefers to park closer than their driveway is unacceptable.
As Quinn Gardner has explained, using the minimum of 12 feet will reduce response times because emergency vehicles must slow down to navigate such narrow passages. So the staff prefers more than 12 feet clearance.
Indeed, the standard for new roads is 20 feet. For that reason, staff has made clear that its goal is to “be looking at how we can create as much of that new space as possible” — referring to approximately 20 foot clearance. Quinn Gardner, public presentation (minute 12:12).
This photo of a Marin Sanitation truck illustrates the problem.
Finally, the affected neighbors deserve an explanation for why the staff allowed this parking box in violation of its guidelines and contrary to the position of affected neighbors? What reasons were given by the residents to justify the parking box? Are those reasons accurate? In response to our inquiries, we were told to try to work it out with the neighbors— as if that were a realistic solution in these circumstances.
Safety is the No. 1 priority for the City to deliver. We ask this Council to intervene and remove this impediment to safety.
Respectfully submitted, Robert Mittelstaedt, San Rafael