►
From YouTube: Pittsburgh City Council Public Hearing - 11/4/21
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
The
record
actually,
madam
clerk,
I
can't
see
if
anyone's
online.
A
The
record
I'm
joined
by
councilman
krauss,
bruce
krauss
and
daniel
lavelle
as
members
as
other
members
join.
I
will
mention
that
they're
here
I'll
periodically
mention
that
so
our
first
word
of
business
will
be
a
presentation
by
director
dash
he's
with
the
he's
the
director
of
the
department
of
of
city
planning,
then
we'll
be
followed
by
a
testimony
from
our
registered
speakers.
C
Thank
you
all
for
joining.
My
name
is
andrew
dash,
I'm
the
director
of
the
department
of
city
planning
here
at
the
city
of
pittsburgh.
You
know
here
to
talk
about
the
bill
which
concerns
updates
to
the
residential
parking
program.
C
C
You
know
impactors,
so,
universities,
hospitals,
institutions,
other
types
of
institutions,
business
districts
that
are
adjacent
to
residential
areas,
and
then
you
know
protecting
those
residents
residential
streets
as
primarily
residential
parking.
It
does
not
at
the
same
time
a
guarantee
specific
parking
for
residents.
It
does
not.
You
know
if
there
are
more
residents,
for
example,
than
there
are
parking
spaces,
it
doesn't
work,
you
know,
guarantee
each
resident
a
parking
space
within
the
district,
but
it
does
try
to
protect
them.
From
the
like,
I
said,
those
non-residential
uses
or
impacts.
C
So
presently,
under
the
current
code,
the
department
of
city
planning
is
the
department
that
you
know
that
authors
the
program.
We
are
the
ones
who
designate
areas
who
change
areas.
You
know
we
recertify
existing
areas
as
a
part
of
the
bill.
You
know
the
impetus
of
this
bill
was
looking
to
transfer
some
of
those
functions
from
city
planning,
and
since
this
transfer
requires
a
change
in
the
city
code,
we
at
this
time
decided.
C
And
so
you
know
this
all
started
back
in
march
of
2021,
where
there
was
a
survey
that
was
released
to
residents
talk
about
the
results
of
that
survey
later
after
that
survey
was
open
for
six
weeks
in
march
and
april.
We
then
took
and
took
that
public
sentiment
worked,
create
amendments.
I
introduced
those
amendments
back
in
october
and
through
a
couple
of
public
meetings
which
all
which
I'll
talk
about
and
then
are
now
at
the
city
council
phase
of
this,
where
city
council
will
consider
adopting
those.
C
C
Feedback
from
residents
we
did
have
approximately
2
400
people
who
responded
to
that
survey,
most
of
whom
were
existing
residents
within
rpp
areas,
and
you
know
and
the
things
that
they
you
know,
that
survey
really
guided
were
five
things
working
to
clarify
the
administrative
process,
which
was,
you
know,
like
I
said,
part
of
the
impetus
of
this
code,
changing
the
process
for
creating
a
new
residential
parking
area,
looking
at
new
types
of
permits
and
looking
at
new
types
of
areas,
and
that's
where
the
hybrid
areas
which
I'll
discuss
will
come
in
and
then
looking
at
different
ways
to
you
know
to
charge
fees
for
permits
in
the
district.
C
C
So
you
know
things
that
you
know
things
in.
The
initial
amendment
that
were
created
was
that
it
was
changed
from
the
department
of
city
planning
to
the
pittsburgh
parking
authority
around
being
responsible
for
future
changes
to
the
code
for
future
administration
districts.
We'll
talk
about
you
know
what
came
out
of
the
public
meetings
and
how
that
you
know,
may
necessity,
may
necessarily
lead
to
some
changes
there.
C
You
know
rpp
areas,
you
know,
and
you
know,
certified
certification
was
then
looked
at
in
the
code
to
go
to
the
facebook
parking
authority,
things
that
will
stay
the
same
parking
studies
will
still
be
required
for
new
permit
areas.
Parking
management
plans
will
be
created
for
new
areas
and
any
changes
to
existing
areas
and
the
pittsburgh
parking
authority
who
presently
does
all
of
the
permitting
will
continue
to
do
that.
C
You
know,
one
thing
you
know
was
the
the
existing
in
under
the
existing
code.
The
only
way
to
create
or
expand
residential
parking
areas
is
through
a
petition-based
system,
and
so
one
thing
that
we
wanted
to
do,
and
then
we
heard
interest
from
residents
in
doing
was
looking
at
creating
different
pathways
to
creating
new
residential
permanent
parking
areas
or
being
able
to
change
that,
instead
of
just
through
a
petition-based
process.
C
So
looking
at
things
like
if
something
has
been
identified,.
F
C
Looking
at
that,
as
a
pathway
to
create
new
new
residential
parking
areas,
looking
at
council
being
able
to
initiate
changes
to
look
at
permanent
parking
areas
and
looking
at
whoever
is
managing
the
program,
whether
you
know
the
parking
permit
officer
being
able
to
start
to
investigate
a
new
permit
parking
area
at
the
discretion.
C
All
of
these
would,
in
you
know,
entail
additional
public
engagement,
including
meeting
with
registered
community
organizations
and
other
public
process
hearings
before
the
planning,
commission
and
ultimately
city
council.
So
this
is
really
around
kind
of
the.
How
how
the
how
changes
to
the
rpp
areas
for
new
rp
areas
can
be
created.
C
One
thing
in
kind
of
you
know
in
our
discussions
around
the
existing
program
was
that
there
are
a
lot
of
times
that
residents
are
looking
for
exceptions
or
that
you
know
there.
Weren't
necessarily,
you
know
permits
that
were
able
to
be
used
for
anything
besides
residents
and
then
the
one
that
we
did
have,
which
is
the
visitor
permit,
but
there
seemed
to
be
a
lot
of
concerns
around
exploitation
of
the
visitor
permits,
and
so
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
look
to
do
with
this
code.
G
C
And
creation
of
new
non-resident
permits,
so
one
thing
it
was
that
you
know
we
did
want
to
create
a
limitation
to
how
much
how
often
a
visitor
permit
could
be
used
for
a
specific
visitor
in
that
the
prior
code
allowed
for
three
consecutive
weekdays
with
you
know,
with
the
way
that
that
code
was
interpreted
plus
weekends,
it
could
allow
people
to
stay
at
as
many
as
eight
days
in
a
row
with
a
one
day
gap.
You
know
under
a
visitor
permit
so
starting
to
limit
that.
C
We
see
this,
especially
in
some
of
the
places
around
hospitals
and
universities.
Where
there's
a
lot
of
you
know,
you
know
maybe
unauthorized
usage
of
visitor
permits
that
was
furthering
you
know.
Parking
in
the
residential
areas
also
looked
at
different
types
of
activities
that
were
going
on
in
residential
areas
that
were
long
enough
that
they
wouldn't.
You
know
that
people
would
be
parking
for
longer
than
a
grace
period
in
all
of
our
residential
permanent
parking
areas.
There's
a
one
or
a
two
hour,
grease
period
where
people
can
park
without
being
ticketed.
C
C
Care
other
quality
of
life
care
you
know
to
allow
for
that
to
occur.
One
was
for
contractors.
This
is
different
than
you
know,
somebody
you
know,
being
you
know,
painting
a
house
which
would
be
something
that
the
expectation
would
be
that
people
would
you
know,
residents
would
use
their
visitors
pass
for,
but
more
for
work.
That
would
be
related
to
a
permit
that
someone
would
be
looking
for
kind
of
larger
construction
projects
to
their
home
remodeling
a
kitchen
doing
electrical
work,
plumbing
things
of
that
nature.
C
That
would
be
something
that
would
take
place
over
a
week
or
weeks
wanted
to
be
able
to
create
an
opportunity
for
contractors
to
be
able
to
park
their
vehicles
while
they're
working
on
that
house
in
a
residential,
perma
parking
area,
child
care
being
another
in-home
child
care,
especially
during
the
pandemic.
Where
you
know,
obviously
you
know
things
have
changed
relative
to
you
know
to
our
circles
and
how
that
relates
to
child
care.
C
So
there
was
interest-
and
you
know
this
is
something
we
historically
have
seen
interest
in,
seeing
permits
for
nannies
or
babysitters
or
other
people
that
are
doing
in
child
care.
C
And
the
last,
which
you
know,
received
a
little
bit
more
mixed,
you
know
feedback
and
then
I'll
talk
about
how
what
the
feedback
in
the
public
meeting
was
around
landlords,
so
understanding
that
landlords
when
they
are
doing
leasing
activity
or
when
they're
doing
work
to
you
know
to
households
in
residential.
You
know,
residences
and
residential
permanent
parking
areas.
C
There
is
a
need
to
be
able
to
to
do
that
on
those
properties
that
takes
more
than
just
the
time
and
the
grace
period
and
so
wanted
to
provide
a
pathway
to
that
again.
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
later
about
how
some
of
the
feedback
that
we've
received
from
the
public
meetings
in
october.
C
Another
item
that
came
through
was
the
you
know:
the
inclusion
of
hybrid
residential
permanent
parking
areas.
What
this
is
is
it
does
allow
for
areas
that
are
close
to
hospitals,
universities,
those
places
where
you
know,
people
would
transit
stations
other
places
where
people
would
try
to
be
able
to.
C
You
know
to
use
residential
areas
more
generally
or
more
frequently,
I
mean
to
create
a
system
where,
instead
of
there
being
the
ability
for
them
to
park
in
those
areas
for
an
hour
or
two
hours,
which
was
the
grace
period
for
free
that
anyone
having
a
non-residential
permit,
anyone
having
a
residential
parking
permit
that
we've
discussed
would
be
able
to
park
in
those
rpp
areas
for
free.
Everyone
else
would
have
to
pay.
Essentially,
you
know
likely
you
have
having
to
pay
through
the
parking
authority's
app
immediate.
C
This
publicly,
so
what
that
does
is
it?
You
know
it
does.
C
Near
their
home,
with
a
permit
and
not
and
not
pay
and
visitors,
without
the
permit
to
be
able
to
park,
but
only
in
a
way
that'll
that
requires
them
to
pay
a
metered
rate
by
introducing
a
metered
rate.
The
intention
is
that
that
will
then
hopefully
drive
them
into
the
off
street
parking
that
exists
around
those
hospitals
around
those
institutions
around
those
stadiums
in
parking
garages
and
things
in
those
districts,
as
opposed
to
you
know,
because
you
know,
because
the
the
free
parking
is
going
away
in
the
residential
district
for
those
those
people.
C
Moving
on
to
pay,
although
this
is
not
specifically
in
the
code,
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
in
the
code
was
move
all
the
fees
after
the
initial
implementation
of
the
code
to
the
fee
structure
that
they're
the
fee
schedule,
that's
approved
by
city
council
annually,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
was
discussed
was
the
idea
of
a
progressive
fee
structure.
There
was
yeah,
there
was
approval
and
more
people
who
were
in
favor.
Of
that.
You
know
when
we
did
the
survey
and
you
know
we
went
through
the
public
process.
C
More
interest
in
the
progressive
fee
structure
saying
all
right
well,
instead
of
you
know
twenty
dollars
being
the
parking
fee
which
that
is
the
residential
permanent
parking.
That's
the
cost
of
a
permit
annually.
That
cost
has
not
changed
in
the
last
40
years,
since
the
code
was
implemented
in
1981,
but
thinking
about
all
right.
Well,
if
you
know,
if
there
are,
you
know,
one
of
the
one
of
the
issues
that
is
seen
frequently
in
university.
C
Related
districts
is
having
multiple
people
living
in
a
house
all
with
a
car
and
then
all
of
those
cars
being
parked
on
the
street
through
residential
permits,
and
so
at
the
same
time
where
we
may
have
that
example,
we
also
may
have
families
with
multiple
teenage
children.
C
You
know
that
may
have
multiple
cars
as
well,
and
so
we
wanted
to
be
able
to
create
a
pathway
that
could
still
happen,
but
that
there
was
a
disincentive
to
do
that,
and
so
you
know
so
looking
at
this
progressive
fee
structure.
So
if
the
first
car
was,
you
know,
twenty
dollars,
the
second
car,
maybe
forty
dollars
and
the
third
car
might
be
eighty
dollars
etcetera.
Moving
on
to
make
it
more
expensive
for
each
permit
that
you
try
to
get
for
a
residence.
C
Enforcement
enforcement
was
something
that
we
did
hear
a
lot
about
not
really
addressed
in
the
code,
but
we
did
look
at
that
relative
to
the
fee
schedule
and
that
there
were,
we
did
look
at
you
know
if
people
were
interested
in
greater
enforcement
in
fee
changes
for
that
also
in
nighttime
enforcement.
You
know
there
what
there
wasn't
a
lot
of
interest
there
at
the
time,
but
then
you
know
that
did
move
into
the
public
meetings.
C
We
did
hold
two
public
meetings,
one
virtually
through
zoom
on
october,
4th
the
second
in
person
at
southside
market
house
at
each
of
those.
We
gave
a
presentation
similar
to
this
one.
Plus
there
was
a
public
feedback
session.
C
We've
used
the
engage
pgh
platform
both
for
the
survey
that
we
did
back
in
march
and
april,
as
well
as
to
post,
not
only
the
recording
of
the
virtual
meeting
but
a
frequently.
We
also
posted
a
frequently
asked
questions
document
that
was
based
on
the
public
comments
that
we
received
at
both
of
those
meetings.
C
Then
there
was
a
public
discussion
of
the
bill
with
city
council
members
last
week
on
october
27th,
leading
into
this
council
public
hearing,
so
things
that
we
heard
from
the
public
meetings.
There
was
a
concern
over
all
operations
moving
to
the
parking
authority
just
in
interest
in
making
sure
that
there
is
accountability
through
city
government
for
the
program
concern
over
the
standards
of
those
nonpresidential
permits
and
making
sure
that
we
continue
to
look
at
that.
You
know
there's
a
lot.
C
You
know
just
ensuring
that
abuse
isn't
something
that
is
occurring
with
those
non-resident
permits,
some
of
the
ones
that
were
specifically
that
say,
we
received
more
feedback
on
where
the
contractor
non-resident
permits
and
the
landlord
non-residential
permits.
C
C
Better
responses
to
the
public
for
the
program
as
a
part
of
that
a
lot
of
people
were,
you
know,
continued
interest
in
the
hybrid
area
option
noting
that
it
is
an
option
that
you
know
would
be
something
that
some
districts
may
choose
to
take
on
and
may
choose
to
have
go
through
a
city
council
process
to
implement
and
others
may
not.
C
And
then
there
was
some
discussion.
I
wouldn't
say
there
was
a
you
know.
I
mean
there
were
lots
of
different
options,
I'd
say
proposed
as
to
methods
of
limiting
rpp
permits.
You
know
where
you
know
I'm
trying
to
trying
to
figure
out
if
there's
some
way,
you
know,
especially
in
some
districts
that
have
you
know
more
permits
than
they
do
on
street
parking
spaces.
C
There
was
some
discussion
of
that
as
well,
and
so
what
comes
next
obviously
there's
this
public
hearing
today,
then,
after
that
there
will
be.
You
know,
obviously,
discussion
between
council
and
the
department
of
city
planning
to
discuss
the
public
testimony
that
occurs
both
from
this
from
this
hearing
in
the
public
meetings.
C
You
know
that
started
last
week
with
the
post
agenda
that
was
held
and
will
continue,
and
then
obviously
I
will
determine
you
know
by
city
council
will
determine
if
there
are
amendments
that
need
to
be
made
to
what
was
initially
submitted
by
the
department
of
city
planning
and
then
go
through
potentially
the
adoption
process.
C
So
again
you
know
all
of
this
information.
You
know
this
presentation,
the
other
presentations
the
recording
are
on
the
city's
engage
pgh
platform,
so
that's
engage.pittsburgh
or
pittsburgh
pa.gov
rpp
program
updates
that
I
will
stop
sharing.
Thank
you.
G
A
A
F
Are
you
there?
I
I
am
here
good
morning,
councilmember
and
good
morning
to
city
council
members
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
testify
today
on
the
following
legislation,
which
would
establish
a
residential
parking
permit
program.
My
name
is
andre
del
valley,
I'm
the
director
of
government
affairs
for
the
pennsylvania
apartment
association,
we're
a
statewide
organization
representing
apartment
owners,
management
companies
and
their
industry,
suppliers
representing
over
37
000
units
and
21
management
companies
here
in
pittsburgh.
F
While
we
commend
the
work
by
planning
director
andrew
dash
and
his
team
throughout
this
process,
the
process
itself
may
have
unintentionally
left
out
residents
as
they
considered
feedback
through
an
email
alert
system.
As
we
know,
the
digital
divide
is
very
real
and
something
that
primarily
impacts
our
bypass
rural,
elderly
and
handicapped
populations,
who
may
not
have
access
to
computers
or
the
internet.
F
Given
the
low
return
rates
of
2200
responses
per
survey,
the
legislation
before
you
today
has
raised
a
number
of
concerns
with
the
operationalization
of
the
program
as
currently
written
from
conflicts,
with
definitions
of
a
certified
resident
and
owner
to
the
process
of
reducing,
eliminating
or
amending
existing
residential
permit
parking,
which
we
do
not
believe
takes
into
account.
F
While
we're
grateful
for
the
added
definitions
for
industry,
we
share
concerns
with
the
visitor
contractor
and
landlord
permits,
including
limiting
a
landlord
to
one
non-resident
permit,
which
does
not
take
into
consideration
property
managers,
claiming
staff
and
others
who
could
potentially
receive
violations
for
parking
in
these
zones.
For
contractors
who
received
the
non-resident
permit.
The
legislation
would
allow
them
to
receive
that
permit
for
quote
periods
out
there
performing
work
permitted
by
the
city
of
pittsburgh.
F
However,
contractors
entering
our
buildings,
for
the
most
part,
are
there
for
emergency
situations
to
assess
and
temporarily
rectify
any
issues
which,
for
the
most
part,
does
not
require
a
permit,
but
does
require
hours
of
work.
We
would
urge
you
to
consider
applying
multiple
permits
under
a
landlord
non-resident
permit
to
a
property
address
with
multiple
licenses
license
plates
associated
to
the
address,
rather
than
tying
it
directly
to
an
individual
license
plate.
F
We
ask
this
for
two
reasons:
one
is
due
to
turnover
of
staff
throughout
a
year
which
would
require
a
landlord
to
amend
a
permit
and
second
based
on
the
different
shifts
and
the
number
of
different
staff
went
to
our
members
buildings
throughout
a
24
hour
period.
Where
did
you
please
consider
these
concerns
we
have
expressed
in
our
testimony
and
would
like
to
thank
planning
director
dash
and
city
council
for
your
work
on
this
program
and
welcome
any
opportunity
to
work
with
you
on
the
implementation
of
this
legislation?
Thank
you.
So
much.
A
H
Okay,
all
right,
I
have
sent
three
emails
to.
My
name
is
millie
sass.
I
have
rental
properties
and
I
have
a
residence
in
the
oak
cliff
neighborhood
on
ophilia
street
lawn
streets.
H
I
have
sent
a
number
of
emails
to
individual
council
members
as
well
as
ask
them
to
be
submitted
into
the
city
clerk
office
email.
I
have
a
great
deal
of
concern
with
with
this
legislation,
as
it's
ruled
out.
Please
do
not
pass
this
ordinance
until
it's
revised
and
has
true
and
thorough
resident
input.
There
are
too
many
unanswered
questions,
nebulous
situations,
confusing
statements
and
very
little
input
from
the
residents
who
will
be
affected
all
over
the
city.
There
are
29
parking
areas
with
15
to
20
000
permits.
H
We
hear
different
numbers
and
the
small
number
of
input
from
the
meetings.
I
think
the
zoom
meeting
had
about
a
half
a
dozen.
The
meeting
down
on
the
south
side
had
about
20
people
and
it
had
about
20
people,
but
both
of
those
were
at
six
o'clock
in
the
night,
and
it
was
just
ridiculous
just
not
enough
input.
H
Let's
see
okay
and
I
do
not
like
the
idea
that
people
other
than
residents,
because
it
is
called
a
residential
permit
parking,
can
now
say
what
what
changes
get
made
in
in
a
neighborhood
and
the
non-resident
permits
are
a
big
problem.
I'll
give
you
one
example
from
my
neighborhood
I
have
a
father
of
a
pit
student
who
recently
bought
a
house
on
my
my
street
lawn
street.
He
was
doing
a
lot
of
renovation
with
no
permits.
Yes,
I
could
report
it,
but
I
didn't.
H
I
have
other
things
going
on
in
my
life,
so
he's
clearing
out
the
basement
if
he
gets
a
landlord
permit,
he's
just
gonna
and
registered
his
car
he's
just
gonna
give
that
permit
to
his
son,
so
he's
gonna
have
his
son
living
in
the
basement,
then
he's
going
to
over
occupy
it
to
the
three
or
four
bedrooms
upstairs
and
so
there'd
be
all
these
people
in
and
out
of
that
house.
Now
now,
what
was
my
point
about?
There's
no
way
to
enforce
it.
H
Absolutely
no
way
these
these
landlord
organizations
and
thank
you
for
andrew
lavelle's
contribution
these
landlord
organizations
are
these
same
ones.
I
believe
who
did
not
let
krause's
rental
registration
pass
for
more
than
a
decade,
and
now
they
want
to
be
able
to
park
in
our
neighborhoods.
They
want
multiple
cars
they
want.
They
want
construction
vehicles,
it's
very
nebulous
on
what
that
would
mean,
and
I
know
that
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
people
who
abuse
it
in
my
neighborhood
and
the
child
care
and
guardian
passes
as
well.
H
H
We
were
told
that
there
were
going
to
be
meetings
in
meeting
in
ju
in
may
and
ju
june,
but
nothing
was
scheduled
until
the
4th
and
5th
of
october
ridiculous,
and
why
not
an
increase
in
fee
for
violations,
maybe
as
well
as
an
increase
on
the
number
of
cars
for
a
single
residence.
But
I
think
that
that's
where
the
one
of
the
problem
lies
we
haven't.
You
know
we
need
to
increase
the
fees
for
people
that
park
in
my
neighborhood
for
week
in
and
week
out,.
A
K
Name
is
james
jung
and
I
live
at
214
tennyson
avenue
in
oakland.
We
currently
have
a
workable
parking
system
in
our
neighborhood,
with
the
exception
of
lacks
enforcement
and
insufficient
ticketing
by
the
city.
The
proposed
hybrid
parking
plan
would
be
a
great
detriment
to
us
taxpayer,
residents
of
our
little
neighborhood.
We
are
a
small
quiet,
neighborhood
under
100
houses,
with
several
enormous
commercial
neighbors
who
could
easily
overwhelm
and
disrupt
the
peaceful
residential
nature
of
our
neighborhood
if
they
would
be
allowed
to.
K
In
recent
months,
I
have
noticed
an
increase
of
cars,
parking
on
tennyson
for
eight
hours
or
longer.
I
do
not
recognize
the
drivers
when
I
see
them,
but
saw
that
they
are
wearing
scrubs
and
heading
toward
presbytery.
Last
week,
one
such
driver
parked
on
tennyson
for
more
than
eight
hours,
and
I
witnessed
him
doing
the
same
thing
again
yesterday.
K
K
K
A
small
quiet
residential
neighborhood
should
be
protected,
not
overrun
and
forced
to
provide
this
accommodation
for
these
powerful,
large
and
wealthy
entities.
The
problem
with
the
hybrid
parking
proposal
is
one:
it
designates
our
residential
neighborhood
as
a
commercial
parking
zone,
thus
destroying
the
quiet
nature
of
our
home.
Two.
It
eliminates
the
one
hour
of
free
parking
for
people,
making
quick
visits
or
running
brief
errands
three.
It
encourages
long-term
parking
by
university
and
hospital
personnel
which
for
clogs
our
quiet
streets
and
prevents
our
guests
traits
people
and
our
neighbors
from
finding
parking
near
our
homes.
K
L
My
name
is
elena
zaitsoff.
I
live
in
oakland
in
permit
area
e.
The
issues
surrounding
ordinance
1867
are
many
and
will
adversely
affect
your
constituents
every
day.
Please
do
not
pass
the
ordinance
until
it
gets
a
rewrite
this
time
with
robust
resident
input
so
that
issues
with
enforcement,
which
department
has
what
roles,
how
rpp
areas
get
changed.
Hybrid
parking
and
non-resident
permits
can
be
improved.
That's
a
big
order
that
will
take
time.
The
lack
of
a
robust
plan
for
resident
involvement
before
and
after
the
ordinance
was
written
is
also
problematic,
but
can
still
be
remedied.
L
L
Rpp
holders
deserve
a
more
robust
public
engagement
process
for
a
program
that
impacts
the
quality
of
their
lives
every
day
at
the
market
house
meeting
on
tuesday
october
5th,
when
I
asked
director
dash
why
having
city
planning
give
up
responsibility
for
rpp
was
a
benefit
to
rpp
holders.
His
reply
was
that
one
entity
would
be
in
charge,
but
at
your
october
27
post
agenda.
It
was
mentioned
that
the
department
of
mobility
and
infrastructure
would
be
involved
in
addition
to
the
parking
authority.
L
So
what
do
we
believe
director
dash
saying
one
entity
would
be
in
charge
or
what
was
said
at
the
post
agenda
since
domi
is
not
mentioned
anywhere
in
the
ordinance
and
wasn't
mentioned
today
and
the
vague
answers.
The
director
of
domi
and
dave
honorado
and
gwen
bowden
from
the
parking
authority
gave
it's
clear
that
the
roles
between
the
city
and
the
parking
authority
have
not
been
worked
out
with
conflicting
stories
on
who
will
be
in
charge
and
vague
answers
by
the
authorities
who
may
be
in
charge.
L
How
can
we
be
expected
to
accept
or
support
this
legislation?
For
this
reason
alone,
the
ordinance
needs
revision
representatives
from
both
domey
and
the
parking
authority
pointed
out
that
more
staffing
would
be
needed.
Was
money
included
in
the
budget
for
this
and
for
the
necessary
software
revision
regarding
the
non-resident
permits
being
proposed
for
landlords.
These
are
the
landlords
who
have
been
fighting
the
rental
registry
holding
it
up
in
court
for
years.
If
they
don't
want
to
be
considered
as
a
business
for
that
purpose,
then
they
aren't
a
business
for
this
purpose.
L
Their
fighting
the
rental
registry
bill
has
caused
over
occupancy
to
get
worse,
which
has
caused
more
permits
to
be
issued,
not
to
mention
their
lack
of
concern
for
safety.
This
ordinance
needs
to
be
held,
so
more
time
can
be
given
for
resident
input.
City
planning
had
it
for
two
years.
Why
are
we
given
barely
a
month?
This
ordinance
needs
to
be
held,
so
it
can
be
rewritten
city
residents
deserve
better.
Lastly,
I
would
like
to
update
the
letter
I
sent
to
city
council.
L
J
Thank
you.
My
name
is
janet
squires.
I
live
at
4301
dailo
and
I'm
speaking
as
the
president
of
the
schindler
farm,
civic
association,
you've
actually
already
heard
of
one
of
our
members.
You
know
we're
a
pretty
active
little
group.
I
was
going
to
address
mainly
the
creation
of
the
hybrid
rpp
and
the
reaction
of
our
neighbors,
as
many
of
you
know
we're
in
historic
neighborhood
in
oakland
we're
directly
across
from
the
ed's
and
meds.
J
When
the
recent
newspaper
article,
I
talked
about
the
potential
change
to
rpp,
I
admit
it
could
be
our
fault,
but
there
was
no
one
in
our
neighborhood
that
had
known
anything
about
it.
We
didn't
have
any
input,
it
caused
quite
a
stir,
lots
of
emails,
lots
of
calls,
and
finally
there
was
enough
interest
that
we
actually
had
a
neighborhood
zoo
meeting.
So
I
appreciate
this
opportunity
just
to
talk
about
some
of
the
concerns
of
my
neighbors
in
this
specific
oklahoma
neighborhood.
J
The
initial
reaction
was
universally
negative
to
the
I
want
to
speak
only
about
the
hybrid
rpp,
please
forgiving,
it's
universally
negative.
It
reflects
anxiety
about
parking
in
general
and
in
oakland,
specifically,
and
everybody
remarked
that
our
streets
are
already
so
heavily
parked
that
there's
the
obvious
concern
that
it
will
take
up
spaces
from
residents
for
paying
patients
paying
parkers.
In
our
discussion,
though,
we
quickly
acknowledge,
we
don't
know
who
really
parks
at
our
streets
anymore.
We
became
an
rpp
in
2014
and
we
loved
it.
J
J
There
is
a
general
perception
that
enforcement
is
inadequate
and
not
as
effective,
even
though
we
acknowledge
the
pandemic,
some
of
the
neighbors
articulated
their
understanding
that
traffic
into
oakland
is
already
maximum
and
that
are.
We
should
be
talking
about
things
that
encourage
public
transportation
and
not
doing
things
that
would
encourage
more
for
single
occupancy
cars,
or
at
least
that
should
be
considered,
and
some
people
did
articulate
that
they
worried
that
paid
parking
would
benefit
institutions
and
businesses
at
the
expense
of
residence.
Finally,
there
are
unintended
consequences
and
mainly
that's
traffic.
J
When
cars
peruse
your
neighborhood
looking
for
parking
spaces
that
increases
traffic,
we
already
have
a
lot
of
pedestrian
traffic,
including
the
increased
pit
student
traffic
coming
through
our
neighborhood
from
upper
bigelow.
Finally,
we
all
know
this
neighborhoods
are
different
for
those
of
us
near
hospitals
and
schools.
Paid
parking
is
sought
early
in
the
day,
which
is
very
different
than
those
near
sports
venues.
So
our
request
essentially,
is,
as
you
consider
changes
around
parking
regulation.
J
We
just
asked
to
be
a
heavy
emphasis
on
monitoring
and
enforcement,
and
we
would
like
to
ask
for
some
transparency
and
the
ability
to
get
data
for
our
specific
neighborhoods
about
and,
as
you
go
forward,
the
thought
of
hybrid
rpp.
Do
we
have
enough
data?
Do
we
know
how
many
spaces
could
be
available?
Do
we
know
how
many
would
take
away
from
residency
and
can
be
there
to
be
a
process
to
monitor
if
residents
are
being
adversely
affected?
J
So
overall,
my
neighbors
at
this
spot
of
a
hybrid
rpp,
expressed
two
themes:
concern
that
in
general
it
might
take
spaces
from
residents
it
would
increase
traffic
to
our
streets
and
that
there
was
sort
of
little
trust
that
the
changes
could
be
effectively
implemented
and
monitored
with
the
current
parking
authority.
I
want.
A
A
I
did
not
see
dana
either
we'll
go
to
norman
cleary.
M
As
you
just
heard,
my
name
is
norm.
Cleary
I
serve
as
chairman
of
the
schenley
farm,
civic
association,
institutional
and
government
relations
committee,
and
I
reside
in
permit
area
ff
I'll
apologize
in
advance
because
you
may
hear
some
of
the
same
themes
that
you've
been
hearing
already
this
morning.
M
Our
seven-year
enforcement
experience
with
the
parking
authority
suggests
probably
not
by
way
of
background
a
little
more
specific
than
what
you've
heard
already.
Today,
we
joined
the
rpp
program
in
february
of
2014,
and
the
program
got
off
to
a
really
rocky
start,
due
to
intermittent
and
unpredictable
parking
authority
enforcement
enforcement
continued
in
that
same
manner
through
2017,
when
dan
gilman
proposed
elimination
of
window
stickers
and
the
use
of
license
plate
scanning
and
by
relinquishing
the
ability
to
turn
to
determine
resident
parkers.
M
Relying
on
technology
to
improve
efficiency
would
probably
be
worth
giving
it
a
try.
We
started
with
a
little
better
enforcement
and
then
it
ultimately
reverted
back
to
the
same
erratic
enforcement
pattern.
Just
this
summer
and
into
the
fall.
The
volume
of
parking
on
our
streets
has
not
changed
since
pit
students
returned
in
august.
M
The
latest
statistics
that
I
will
was
able
to
get
from
erica's
office
is
amazing.
In
august,
when
our
streets
were
packed
with
cars
from
new
jersey,
new
york,
west
virginia,
you
name
it
23
license
plates
were
scanned,
and
only
five
tickets
were
issued
in
september
that
accelerated
to
691
scans
and
the
city
earned
thousands
of
dollars
in
in
fines
because
94
tickets
were
issued,
but
then
in
october
it
dropped
back
to
about
half
that
number
382
and
62
tickets.
M
A
Welcome
back
to
john,
I
don't
see
him
on
our
our
panel,
our
attendees
list
here
next
speaker
is
phillistidano
didiano.
N
My
name
is
phyllis
dudiano
and
I
live
in
beechview
area.
T
I'm,
president
of
the
beechview
area,
concerned
citizens.
Thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
speak
about
this
and
the
work
being
done
and
has
been
done
going
through
two
counselors
chairing.
Actually,
I
appreciate
the
topics
brought
up
by
previous
speakers.
I
would
like
to
discuss
some
of
them,
but
I
I
went
door-to-door
petitioning
when
we
were
trying
to
get
permit
parking,
it's
a
difficult
task,
I'm
very
familiar,
and
it
will
not
make
you
very
popular.
So
I
appreciate
this
opportunity.
N
I
did
have
some
knowledge
two
years
ago,
when
my
counselor
arranged
a
meeting
with
parking
authority,
and
I
had
the
impression
that
they
had
more
technology
available
and
that
they
were
thinking
about.
You
know
taking
more
involvement
in
the
permit
parking
program,
but
then-
and
I
had
very
high
hopes,
but
then
I
heard
nothing
after
that,
I'm
calling
for
transparency.
I
know
kova
delayed
and
complicated
many
things,
but
when
the
survey
was
finally
released
it
was
evident.
N
There
were
plans
in
place
and
a
lot
of
discussion
had
been
had
it's
very
hard
to
get
by
and
if
there's
no
trust,
if
we
can
live
within
a
half
mile
radius
to
walk
to
a
transit,
stop
non-residents
can
walk
more
than
to
the
curb
to
provide
services
to
our
residents.
There
should
be
equal
footing
for
all
and
changes
fees
etc
need
to
be
explained
and
input
actually
considered.
N
Please
do
not
make
them
exorbitant
and
scare
away
even
more
residents,
I'm
not
very
confident
about
the
non-resident
hybrid
parking
that
it
will
be
equitable,
especially
to
the
residents.
Coincidentally,
our
designation
is
t
for
cars,
as
in
light
rail
transit
t
cars.
Well,
they
run
through
the
center
of
our
community
and
we're
impacted.
N
So
that's
why
we
got
the
permits,
I'm
a
big
proponent,
of
permit
parking
prior
to
that
one
of
our
residents
had
someone
parking
in
front
of
our
house
until
10
p.m,
but
it
has
to
serve
all
the
residents,
and
I
think
now
that
in
beach
view
we
have
traffic
calming
installations,
we
have
to
be
sustainable
about
our
parking,
we're
impacted
by
light
rail
riders
riding
the
line
before
downtown
to
avoid
paying
parking
downtown.
We
have
yellow
lines
because
the
transit
stops.
N
Scooters
now
are
taking
parking
spaces
street
cleaning,
no
driveways
in
some
blocks:
disability
parking
and
businesses
interspersed
within
our
residential
areas.
We
also
have
people
on
nearby
streets
that
park
when
the
weather
changes
and
we're
going
to
get
inches
of
snow.
I
don't
recall
that
these
issues
were
on
the
survey.
Our
current
hours
were
set
by
10
people
that
attended
a
community
meeting
and-
and
when
I
questioned
on
a
saturday
nine
to
twe
two
o'clock
hours,
I
thought
it
was
not
ideal
and
dehumanizing.
O
Can
you
hear
me
yeah?
My
name
is
aaron
richards.
I
bought
my
first
home
with
my
wife
from
southside.
Over
a
decade
ago,
we
were
in
primary
cc,
based
off
the
information
I've
read
about
the
new
proposal.
I
think
it's
absolutely
ridiculous
that
land
boards
would
be
required
to
get
their
own
permits
to
access
their
properties
at
a
fee
of
25
a
month.
O
That's
absolutely
insane
yeah!
You
don't
want
people
abusing
the
permit
system
for
sure,
but
that
is
an
exorbitant
fee
for
someone
who
is
just
trying
to
maintain
their
property.
O
O
We
are
residents
of
this
area
and
for
us
to
not
be
able
to
have
the
freedom
of
having
guests
come
and
go
to
our
property
for
varying
reasons
and
have
that
somehow
arbitrarily
limited
to
14
days
makes
zero
sense
whatsoever.
O
O
You
don't
want
people
to
abuse
it
and
maybe
there's
other
ways
that
we
can
address
the
issue
of
visitors,
past
abuse
by
some
people,
but
as
far
as
rental
properties
go
myself
among
many
others
operate
instead
of
a
conventional
lease,
we
have
airbnbs
or
similar
ventures
that
are
essentially
are
many
short-term
leases,
so
you
might
have
someone
coming
to
stay
for
a
day
or
a
week
or
somewhere
in
the
middle,
and
for
these
people
the
visitors
pass
is
simply
what
they
would
use.
O
In
fact,
as
far
as
part
tight
parking
goes
in
neighborhoods
airbnb
is
actually
beneficial
because
you
don't
have
a
permanent
resident
at
the
address
that
is
constantly
using
their
day-to-day
parking
permit
as
a
resident.
Instead,
what
you
have
is
intermittent
occupants
of
a
unit,
so
you
know
that
will
occasionally
use
the
visitors.
Pass.
Airbnbs
actually
have
less
of
a
parking
impact
on
a
neighborhood
than
a
conventional
resident,
and
these
small
business
owners
are
going
to
be
just
raked
over
the
coals.
With
this
new
limitation.
O
O
The
reason
people
are
parking
in
the
neighborhoods
are
because
there's
nowhere
else
to
go.
Carson
street
is
full
the
limited
amount
of
parking
authority,
lots
that
are
available
are
full.
South
side
gets
packed
on
the
evenings
and
weekends.
There's
nowhere
else
to
go
so
changing
that
from
a
two-hour
time
limit
in
an
rpp
area
to
a
metered
parking
space
isn't
going
to
change
anything
for
the
residents.
D
D
Nearly
all
of
my
shayside
properties
are
located
in
just
three
residential
parking
permit
zones
that
over
time,
have
morphed
into
monsters
that
stretch
for
blocks
and
blocks
in
all
directions,
for
example
in
residential
parking
area
x
alone,
which
consists
of
a
large
swath
of
eastern
shadyside.
We
have
60
buildings,
we
are
a
small
family
owned
company.
We
employ
four
skilled
apartment,
maintenance
technicians,
each
of
whom
also
have
specialized
training
from
hvac
to
plumbing
on
any
given
day
using
their
franklin
westing
for
work
vans.
D
D
D
While
I
appreciate
the
time
and
efforts
that
obviously
went
into
these
amendments,
I
still
feel
that
greater
clarification
is
needed.
A
number
of
the
proposed,
amended
defined
terms
are
not
only
confusing
but
contrary
to
their
ordinary
plain
english
definitions,
for
example,
certified
resident
and
owner
other
terms
of
arts
that
are
not
currently
defined
should
be.
The
various
permit.
Classifications
are
haphazard
and
confusing.
D
It's
essential
that
this
conflict
be
addressed.
This
provision
detrimentally
affects
those
who
own
more
than
one
property
rental
property
within
a
single
residential
area.
Moreover,
this
provision
focuses
solely
on
property
ownership
and
excludes
property
managers
like
me,
and
indeed
for
pro
for
property
owners
who
contract
with
the
management
company
to
manage
their
properties
is
the
management
company
whose
employees
would
be
providing
the
maintenance
release
and
services
instead
of
strictly
and
arbitrarily
limiting
the
number
of
permits
that
may
be
purchased
annually.
D
D
Overall,
it
is
in
the
best
interest
of
everyone
that
property
owners
and
managers
be
able
to
maintain
and
care
for
their
assets.
Such
bright
line,
arbitrary
limitations.
Don't
do
anyone
any
good?
Finally,
I'm
concerned
about
this
that
the
survey
upon
which
these
amendments
based
are
were
overly
targeted
and
a
very
low
response
rate.
P
Okay,
sorry,
I
guess
we're
competing
on
mutes
there
yeah
hi,
so
my
name
is
allison
keating
I
live
in
manchester,
which
is
not
an
rpp
area.
I
understand
that
seems
weird,
but
I
had
have
a
lot
of
thoughts
about
this.
I
want
to
thank
the
folks
who
put
all
the
work
into
this
and
and
finally
addressing
this
streamlining
government
services
is
always
a
really
good
idea.
P
It
helps
to
make
things
easier
to
understand
and
then
to
hold
the
proper
people
accountable,
and
then
that
builds
community
trust.
The
current
system
is
obviously
convoluted.
You
know,
and
but
one
of
the
more
worrying
things
is
that
the
all
parking
authority
users
are
forced
to
foot
the
bill
for
this
specific
program,
because
the
cost
of
the
permits
isn't
enough
to
cover
the
cost
of
the
enforcement
that
they
they
either
do
or
should
receive.
P
P
A
lot
of
the
complaints
that
we've
heard
really
come
from
just
a
a
few
main
sources
like
like
the
underfunding
of
the
program
or
like
really
niche
like
individual
concerns,
real
or
imagined
and
or
or
basic
misunderstanding
of
the
purpose
of
the
program
which
director
dash
stated
was
to
protect
residents
from
the
commercial
parking
pressure,
and
you
know
I
wanna,
I
wanna
point
out
like
like
the
first
man
brought
up
folks
with
disabilities.
P
You
know,
and
and-
and
I
guess
my
question
would
be
is
where
is
that
concern
for
folks
with
disabilities?
Right
now?
You
know
like
this.
This
tends
to
be
something
that
folks
trot
out
when
when
they
when,
when
they
don't
like
some,
they
don't
like
change.
You
know
you
know
like
these.
Are
these
are
things
that
we
hear
over
and
over
again,
the
hybrid
area.
The
concern
for
the
hybrid
areas
is
a
little
strange
to
me,
because
what
the
city
is
acknowledging
is
that
these
areas
are
underparked.
P
P
So
what
the
city
is
doing
is
they
want
to
capture
more
money
which
so
that's
actually
a
good
thing,
and
then
and
then
that
would
also
also
couple
with
increasing
enforcement,
which
is
you
know
what
folks
keep
talking
about,
but
there's
a
couple
folks
who
say
that
they
want
the
violators
to
pay
more.
So
when,
when
your
policy
wants
your
violators
to
pay
more
like,
then
you
want
more
violators.
P
So
these
folks
are
kind
of
missing
the
point
that
they
actually
need
to
pay
a
little
bit
more
to
get
the
proper
enforcement,
and
then
they
won't
have
to
hunt
for
parking
nearly
as
much
because
there
will
hardly
be
any
violators,
and
I
think
you
know
like
like
like-
and
I
think
that
this
is
one
of
the
struggles
with
with
prop
with
community
engagement.
Is
that
folks
are
not
experts?
They,
don't
they
don't
think
things
through
totally?
P
You
know,
and
and
and
this
is
not
to
denigrate
anyone-
it's
just
it's
just
how
how
humans
are
you
know,
but
you
know
we
need
to
acknowledge
that
folks
need
to
pay
more
for
this
finite
resource
and
that
this
program
is
these
are
all
actually
really
good
changes
and
and
yeah.
That's
all.
I
have
to
say
thank
you.
A
Thank
you
next
speaker
is
james
m.
I
can
lob.
G
Okay,
can
you
hear
me
yes
good
morning?
My
name
is
jim
eichenhall
and
I
serve
as
the
executive
director
for
the
apartment
association
of
metropolitan
pittsburgh.
His
operations
are
based
in
2041
boulevard.
The
allies
in
the
uptown
section
of
pittsburgh
organization
represents
200
companies
engaged
in
rental
housing
business
collectively
our
members
are
going
didn't
manage
over
50
000
rental
units
within
the
city
of
pittsburgh.
G
G
The
city
has
taken
aggressive
steps
to
identify
standards
for
which
landlords
and
property
management
companies
are
required
to
maintain
properties
further
requiring
these
businesses
to
pay
a
fee
to
access
these
properties.
For
the
purpose
of
meeting
these
standards
and
performing
routine
maintenance
is
unreasonable
and
further
burdens
landlords
from
engaging
contractors.
They
utilize
to
perform
regular
maintenance
activities
such
as
snow
removal,
as
well
as
specialized
repairs
to
the
properties.
G
How
will
new
construction
and
major
remodeling
be
treated
given
these
businesses
operate
in
various
parts
of
the
cities,
these
fees
will
be
excessive
and
a
financial
burden
to
their
businesses.
Also
troubling.
Is
that,
given
the
requirement
for
contractors
to
provide
a
permit
authorizing
the
work
to
be
done,
any
legitimate,
necessary
work
being
done
by
contractors
would
be
prohibited
from
obtaining
a
contractor
non-residential
permit?
A
Thank
you.
I've
been
checking
through
people
that
we've
skipped
over
because
I
don't
see
them
on
the
attendee
list.
I've
checked
it
again.
I
don't
see,
I
don't
see
anyone.
That's
joined
us
so
that
has
exhausted
all
our
speakers
and
at
this
time,
I'd
like
to
turn
it
over
to
council
members
to
to
make
comment
if
they'd
like
I'll
start
with
councilman
krauss
I'll
start
in
the
order
that
I've
seen
people
show
up.
E
Thank
you
councilman.
I
really
don't
have
much
comment.
I
want
to
thank
everyone
who
provided
testimony
as
well
as
those
who
have
emailed
me
their
thoughts.
I
would
also
just
ask
that
if
you
would
have
director
dash
email
of
all
of
counsel,
the
powerpoint
presentation
they
presented,
that
would
also
be
helpful,
so
I
could
use
that
to
compare
against
a
lot
of
the
testimonial
receive,
but
I
want
to
thank
you
for
hosting.
A
A
Q
Thank
you
councilman
and
mr
chair.
I
I
want
to
thank
everyone.
Who's
taken
the
time
to
speak
today
and
to
offer
comment
and
has
really
studied
this
bill,
and
I
understand
the
concerns
I've
heard
and
I
have
a
couple
of
thoughts.
One
is
that
some
of
the
concerns
seem
to
be
wrapped
up
in
the
actual
changes.
Q
The
legislative
changes
that
have
been
proposed,
while
a
whole
set
of
other
concerns
seem
to
be
around
the
implementation
and
enforcement
and
the
need
for
assurances
that
enforcement
and
implementation
will
be
adequate,
which,
as
some
residents
have
experienced
over
the
last
several
years,
has
not
been
the
case.
Despite
changes
to
technology
has
covered
and
the
sort
of
changes
that
were
made
to
give
people
some
leeway
as
they
were
parking
to
go
to
work
affected.
Q
This
absolutely,
but
I
think
we're
we're
at
a
point
where
we
can
start
to
where
we
can
continue
to
enforce
as
we
intended
to
and
ensure
that
any
changes
that
are
made
are
done
so
as
seamlessly
as
possible.
Q
The
other
thing
I
would
like
to
bring
up
and
I'm
happy
to
continue
this
conversation.
There
are
a
lot
of
different
elements
and
I
think
some
tweaks
that
we
can
consider
based
on
some
of
the
comments
I've
received
by
emails
and
some
really
legitimate,
I
think
smaller
issues
that
are
easy
to
easy
to
get
at
whether
they're
fees
or
whether
they
are
you
know
tweaks
to
the
language.
Q
Whether
or
not
the
person
who's
parking
in
there
as
a
visitor
or
as
a
sticker
holder
actually
is,
has
a
parking
permit,
a
registered
parking
permit
so
many
times
people
are
frustrated
with
the
amount
of
what
they
perceive
to
be
outside
residents
parking
for
eight
hours
on
their
street
and
they
have
no
way
to
determine
whether
they,
those
people
who
are
parking
on
their
street
are
indeed
you
know,
permitted
parkers,
permanent
drivers
or
whether
they
are
not
in
the
past.
They
were
able
to
call
the
parking
authority,
get
a
very
quick.
Q
Q
It's
not
really
the
case
because
they
call
and
they're
they
have
to
leave
a
message
and
they're
not
getting
called
back,
so
one
idea
would
be
to
have
again
not
for
the
sake
of
issuing
violations,
but
for
the
sake
of
being
able
to
show
their
neighbors
some
sort
of
a
placard
or
some
sort
of
a
sticker
that
they
can
use
just
to
really
show
their
neighbors
that
they
are
permitted.
So
I
wanted
to
throw
that
idea
out
there.
Q
But
again,
you
know,
I
think
we're
we're
getting
close
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
having
a
program
that
is
primarily
implemented
and
kind
of
held
by
one
entity.
So
it's
a
little
less
convoluted
and
I
think
there
are
some
really
really
important
changes
that
will
help
to
make
this.
Q
This
whole
program
more
efficient,
and
I
look
forward
to
continuing
to
dig
into
the
details-
and
you
know
make
this
the
best
possible
change
that
that
we
can,
while
also
keeping
an
eye
on
the
implementation
part
of
this,
that
is
a
little
outside
of
the
purview
of
city
council.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
councilwoman
gross.
R
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Yes,
I
also
want
to
really
thank
all
of
the
speakers
for
some
really
good
deep
dives
into
all
of
these
sections
of
this
pretty
big
change
to
rpp
and
also
for
the
really
thoughtful
emails
that
we've
all
received
as
well.
R
There
are
lots
of
parts,
and
what
I
hear
from
feedback
is
that
there's
a
real
tension
between
parts
of
the
city,
I
think
that
are
under
daytime
economy
pressure,
which
you
can
kind
of
feel
like
are
the
big
hospitals
or
big
daytime
employment,
centers
and
parts
of
neighborhoods
that
are
under
maybe
nighttime
economy
pressures
with
busy
main
street
parking,
especially
in
the
evenings.
You
know,
of
course,
we
classically
think
of
carson
street,
but
there
are
other
areas
as
well,
and
it's
going
to
be
our
job.
R
I
think
to
for
those
sections
of
the
changes
to
really
kind
of
weigh
the
benefits
and
detriments
to
the
impacts,
and
if
we
can
negotiate
that
somehow.
R
But
I
do
hear
a
lot
of
positive
feedback
and
I
do
think
it's
it's
definitely
time
to
try
something,
because
this
this
program
has
been
pretty
static
for
40
years,
while
the
amount
of
city
that's
covered
by
it
has
grown
and
grown
and
grown.
So
there
is,
we
do
need
to
make
some
changes
to
the
way
it's
administrated,
I
think,
reducing
that
four-year
waiting
period.
Nobody
was
happy
with
that.
So
it's
really
good
that
we're
trying
some
changes.
R
Maybe
we
don't
get
them
perfect
in
this
in
this
implementation,
but
I
I
think
we've
got
a
lot
of
different
facets
to
grapple
with,
so
we've
got
a
lot
to
think
about
as
council
members.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
I
Yeah
no
thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
apologize
I
didn't
come
on
today.
I
think
I
have
the
beginnings
of
a
of
a
of
a
cold
and
I'm
not
at
my
best.
So
I
just
a
couple
things
I
would
like
to
share
first.
I
really
would
like
to
give
a
shout
out
to
councilman
wilson
for
having
the
courage
to
tackle
this.
I
This
is
not
an
easy
conversation
to
have,
and
I
remember
very
well
when
I
first
came
to
the
council
when
patrick
dowd
was
representing
councilwoman
gross's
district.
He
and
I
tried
to
wrestle
with
this
because
of
university
and
hospital
creep,
and
it
was
an
incredibly
incredibly
difficult
conversation
that
we
ultimately
surrendered,
because
we
could
not
find
a
solution.
So
I
appreciate
the
efforts
of
councilman,
wilson
and
director
dash
and
the
parking
authority
for
the
the
courage
and
the
willingness
to
undertake
this.
I
I
It's
a
discussion.
We've
had
for
an
incredibly
long
time
when
those
that
are
familiar
with
the
south
side,
south
side,
the
southside
plan,
the
the
it
was
formed.
The
planning
form
actually
formed
here
on
the
south
side
about
25
26
years
ago,
and
when
it
formed
it
was
actually
created,
as
the
parking
forum
to
try
to
find
some
kind
of
solution
resolution
to
to
the
issues
around
parking.
So
the
the
conversation
at
least
here
has
been
going
on
for
quite
some
length
of
time.
I
The
the
two
biggest
areas
for
the
that
are
being
impacted
by
rpp
and
and
over
abundance
of
vehicles
in
the
in
the
third
council
district
really
is
the
neighborhood
of
oakland
and
the
neighborhood
of
southside
flats.
I
Those
are
the
the
two
biggest
ones,
and
one
of
the
reasons
that
the
residential
program
parking
program
actually
came
to
fruition
in
the
southside
flats
is
the
realization
that
much
of
the
parking
that
was
being
taken
up,
at
least
in
the
daytime,
was
really
by
commuters
that
were
coming
in
with
their
cars,
leaving
their
cars
behind
and
then
taking
the
bus
downtown.
I
And
so
there
was
a
gentleman
that
spoke
about
his
dissatisfaction
with
the
idea
of
actually
charging
that
meter
fee
if
you
will
for
people
that
have
parked
within
residential
areas.
I
do
like
I
do
kind
of
like
that
idea
and
I'd
really
like
to
explore
that
a
little
bit
further
for
those
that
would
be
coming
into
the
city
from
outside
from
suburban
locations
that
work
downtown
and
like
to
leave
their
cars
in
residential
areas
and
then
take
the
bus
downtown.
I
That
certainly
would
drive
those
commuters
to
a
meter
and
I'm
sure
we're
we're
all
aware
of
the
the
importance
of
meter
revenue
as
it
relates
to
city
operations.
Our
pension
fund,
the
stabilization
of
our
pension
fund
and
the
importance
of
making
certain
that
people
that
are
are
commuting
coming
in
are
actually
using
the
the
meters
and
not
clogging
residential
streets.
So
and
then
time
of
day
I
know
is
a
really
big
challenge,
especially
here
in
the
south
side.
Flats.
I
Oakland,
though,
is
pretty
much
crippled
any
hour
of
the
day
or
night
in
terms
of
clogged
residential
areas
with
vehicles
and
so
somewhere
along
the
line.
I
would
like
to
see
if
we
could
not
bring
the
conversation,
especially
in
areas
that
are
impacted
in
as
educational
residential
areas,
the
idea
of
vehicle
reduction
and
how
we
go
about
encouraging
the
reduction
of
vehicle
as
a
compliment
or
a
co-partner
to
the
idea
of
providing
for
for
additional
parking
everywhere
everywhere.
I
think
all
members
go.
I
We
are
were
constantly
encouraged
to
find
additional
parking,
which
I
I
for
one
and
I
think
most
members
are-
are
happy
to
oblige,
but
I
do
believe
it
goes
hand
in
hand
with
vehicle
reduction
and
we
need
to
have
that
conversation
as
well
and-
and
I
believe
that
current
administration
and
I-
and
I
hope
the
future
administration
will
continue
to
explore
alternative
modes
of
transportation,
that
we
have
and
explore
benefits
for
pedestrian,
vehicular
and
public
transportation
to
help
with
the
the
cause
of
vehicle
reduction,
but
appreciate
all
the
speakers
that
came
out
this
morning-
and
you
know
especially
to
wrestle
around
this
incredibly
difficult
topic
for
for
everyone.
I
But
I
do
think
there
were
a
lot
of
good
points
that
were
made.
And
again
I
appreciate
councilman
wilson.
I
appreciate
director
dash
for
willing
to
their
willingness
to
to
wrestle
with
this,
and
and
as
I
like
to
say,
I'm
here
to
help
so
whatever
it
is
that
we
can
do
to
make
this
be
the
best
that
it
can
be.
Please
count
me
in
so.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
appreciate
giving
me
the
time.
A
Thank
you
councilman,
and
I
know
it's
not
typical,
but
I
think
at
this
time
you
know
I'd
like
to
make
a
comment,
but
I'd
like
to
make
that
after
I
welcome
director
dash
to
give
us
any
input.
I
believe
the
public
has
mentioned
him
quite
enough
and
I'd
like
to
give
him
some
time
to
respond
to
some
of
the
comments
made.
C
Sure,
just
just
a
couple
of
things
for
you
to
note
for
some
of
the
comments
that
were
made
yeah
one
was
around
the
opportunity
for
disability
parking.
You
know.
I
would
like
to
note
that
that
is
a
process
through
our
department
of
mobility
and
infrastructure,
and
nothing
with
residential
parking
in
this
program
impacts
the
ability
for
people
who
have
a
physical
disability
and
need
to
get
a
disability
parking
space
on
their
street
on
their
residence
on
the
residential
street
to
be
able
to
do
so.
C
So
you
know
that
is
that
is
separate
from
from
this
program,
so
I
did
want
to
be
able
to
to
provide
some
clarity
there
yeah
there
were
some
comments
around.
C
You
know
some
discussions
around
the
department
of
mobility
and
infrastructure
versus
the
parking
authority
it
just
you
know
I
mean
the
legislation
that
we
are
discussing
is
the
legislation
as
it
was
introduced,
which
was
to
move
these
operations
to
the
parking
authority.
However,
due
to
further
conversations
and
due
to
resident
input,
there
has
been
discussion
around
you
know
if
the
if
some
of
this
may
be
better
suited
to
be
still
within
the
city
department.
C
So
I
think
those
are
discussions
that
are
ongoing,
that
ultimately,
city
council
would
be
the
ones
to
determine
through
amendments
what
direction
it
wanted
to
take
if
it
wanted
to
introduce
the
department
of
mobility
and
infrastructure
into
the
role
that
the
department
of
city
planning
was
playing
or
have
the
parking
authority
do
that
there
were.
C
A
couple
of
you
know,
comments
around
the
landlord
permits,
and
you
know
that
being
an
additional
burden
on
landlords-
and
you
know
I
did
want
to
clarify
that
you
know
that
is
something
that
isn't
permitted
in
the
residential
parking
program.
You
know
currently,
so
you
know
that.
Would
you
know
if
that
were
to
be
something?
You
know
that
that
was
something
that
was
proposed
in
the
legislation
and
the
edits
to
the
program.
C
If
that
were
to
happen,
although
obviously
there
were
comments
around
fees
and
things
of
that
nature,
the
allowance
of
permits
for
landlords
would
be
ones
that
you
know
that
would
be
new
to
the
program,
an
additional
where
they
currently
cannot
park
in
the
residential
permanent
parking
districts,
otherwise
as
to
public
engagement
and
some
other
public
feedback.
Obviously,
as
this
continues
to
go
on,
you
know
I
am
available
to
meet
with
organizations.
I
know
there
were
a
number
of
folks
from
places
you
know
places
like
chevrolet
farms.
C
You
know
that
we
can
talk
ab
talk
about,
you
know
who
did
respond
and
that
we
can
provide.
You
know
kind
of
greater
insight
as
to
some
of
the
questions
that
were
brought
up.
So
you
know,
my
email
address
is
just
my
my
name.
Andrew.Ash.
C
Pittsburgh
pa.gov,
so
you
know
I
mean
you
know
I
am
available
for
that.
You
know,
as
you
know,
to
to
be,
you
know.
If
there
are,
you
know,
organizations
that
you
know
want
to
have
further
discussions
on
this.
You
know-
and
I
know
that
you
know
that
you
know
that
you
know
so.
C
That
is
something
that
we
can
provide
as
well
and
yeah,
and
be
able
to
answer
further
questions
that
residents
have,
as
we
look
towards
trying
to
make
final
edits
to
the
legislation
that
fit
with
the
needs
of
city
council
and
the
feedback
that
we've
received
from
the
public
and
be
able
to
you
know,
be
able
to
create
a
program
that
is
more
easily
administerable,
clearer
and
hopefully
better
meets
the
needs
of
residents
than
the
current
program
does.
A
A
I
also
want
to
point
out
that
there's
a
lot
of
comments
made
about
the
hybrid
parking,
the
additional
you
know,
the
new
hybrid
parking,
a
model
and
just
for
clarification,
you
know-
is
everyone
that
may
comment
to
this
this
you
know
it
doesn't
mean
that
there
will
be
hybrid
parking
just
immediately
in
anywhere
that
there
is
rpp.
A
Out
of
our
you
know
our
neighborhood
streets,
where
we
don't
have
parking
meters.
A
There
would
be
like
a
sign
that
would
say
you
know,
walk
to
the
main
street
and
or
here
is
that
here
is
the
number
to
plug
in
your
phone.
You
know
for
the
for
the
for
the
paid
parking
zone
and
they
would
just
pay
as
they
parked
there.
I
guess
it
would
be
ultimately
for
overflow
if
the
main
street
was
was
full
of
paid
parking
vehicles,
so
this
hybrid
mode
offers
that
option.
A
C
That's
correct,
and
so
what's
being
proposed
in
the
code,
is
allowing
us
to
pursue
the
hybrid
district
option,
but
you're
correct
in
that
it
would
require
city
council
to
actually
you
know,
to
to
then
separately
change
a
district
to
make
it
a
hybrid
district.
So
in
that
allegheny
west
example,
for
you
know,
you
know
just
following
that.
City
council
would
ultimately
make
a
decision
on
this
bill,
which
would
say
now
we
can
create
hybrid
districts.
C
If
we
want
to
and
then
at
a
later
date,
allegheny
west
could
go
to
area
g
and
say
you
know
with
area
g,
and
you
know
and
say
this
is
what
we
want
to
do
and
then
we
would
take
that
through
a
separate
public
process
and
and
ultimately
have
that
be
determined
by
city
council
as
to
whether.
E
A
Thank
you
yeah.
I
just
want
a
clarification
for
even
you
know,
people
in
oakland,
even
though
it's
not
my
district
I've.
I've
worked
there
and
done
the
school
there,
and
I
see
some
of
the
challenges
with
the
parking
in
that
area,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
people
don't
think
that
the
the
hybrid
option
is
going
to
be
created
so
that
people
that
work
in
the
hospitals
can
then
just
pay
to
park
on
your
street.
That's
just
not
that's
just
not
true,
and
we
want
to
you
know.
A
This
is
really
complaint
based
coming
from
residents
who
pay
into
the
program
and
just
want
to
further
clarify
that
also
for
contractors.
Apparently,
there
is
no
process.
The
process
is
that
you
would
have
to
call
into
the
the
I
mean
there
is
no
option
for
your
contract
at
a
park.
I
guess
you
I'm
not
sure
what
what
options
have
been
available,
but
you
know
which
way
you've
been
able
to
figure
it
out
on
your
own.
But
you
know
this.
This
allows
a
process
where
it
would
be.
A
C
Yes,
you
do,
I
mean
presently
the
option
is
that
you
know
if
somebody
knows
that
they
could
call
the
parking
authority
and
request
a
variance
that
they
do
and
if
not
contractors
either
have
to.
You
know,
park
outside
of
residential
parking
areas
or
risk
being
ticketed
by
by
parking
in
those
areas.
If
they're,
if
they're
doing
work
on
a
house
in
a
residential
parking
area,.
A
All
right,
thank
you
and
then
there
was
a
call
in
maine
about
airbnbs,
and
that
is
something
that
I
brought
up
during
the
post
agenda
that
I
am
interested
in
in
trying
to
alleviate
that
issue
as
well.
I
think
that
is
a
good
point,
and
that
is
something
that,
although
is
not
regulated
by
the
city,
you
know.
Maybe
there
is
even
for
the
owner
of
that
property
there
they
still
have
to
get.
A
A
I
would
like
to
just
thank
director
dash.
Oh
I'm
sorry,
I
do
have
one
one
one
clarification
left,
which
is
you
know
people
are
commenting
about.
There
wasn't
enough
outreach
and
I
want
to
go
back
to
the
original
way
that
we
envisioned
the
outreach
which
was
to
send
use
the
email
that
people
use
to
that.
We
have
on
file
for
people
that
you
know
register
for
rpp
and
director.
A
Could
you
just
loosely
go
over
that
that
number,
because
I
think
the
people
that
were
left
out
were
the
ones
that
don't
there's
there's
some
other
way
that
they
can
sign
up
for
but
not
provide?
You
know
their
email
address.
That's
a
very
small
number.
Can
you
elaborate.
C
Sure
so
for
outreach
to
the
initial
survey,
what
we
did
was
we
emailed
every
residential
permanent
parking
holder
who
renews
their
permits
online.
C
We
notified
them
via
email
and
then
everyone
who
does
not
renew
their
permits
online
or
via
email,
and
you
know
that
we
sent
a
mail
postcard
to
them,
notifying
them
of
the
survey.
And
then,
in
addition
to
that,
you
know,
I
mean
through
city,
social
media
and
other
things
tried
to.
You
know,
try
to
provide
other
means
for
for
outreach
and
did
the
same
thing
again
with
the
two
public
meetings
which
we
had.
You
know
across
the
two
public
meetings,
the
virtual
meeting
and
the
in-person
meeting.
C
I
believe
we
had
85
attendees.
We
had
60
at
the
first
meeting
and
25
at
the
second,
but
we
did
that
same
thing
there,
and
then
we
have
had
all
this
through
this
through
this
process.
We've
had
this
on
the
engage
pgh
platform,
where
residents
who
did
fill
out
the
survey
you
know-
or
you
know,
even
if
they
didn't
fill
out
the
survey
you
know
could
sign
up
for
updates
from
the
website
itself.
So
anytime
we
edited
the
upside.
C
The
the
website
added
new
material
or
added
additional
dates
for
the
public
meetings
for
this
public
hearing.
You
know
that
they
would
get
notification
that
way
as
well.
A
A
I
also
want
to
thank
my
staff
has
been
working
on
this.
I
want
to
thank
the
pittsburgh
parking
authority
for
an
engagement
on
this
and
also
domi
before
I
leave
this
before
I
adjourn
the
meeting.
Are
there
any
other
members
that
have
any
further
comments.