41 registered statements
January 1, 2021, 8:08 PM
Creating a permit system deliberately targets renters and single professionals in order to maintain the illusion of an "ideal neighborhood" where nuclear families with small children are favored above others. It also penalizes families with teenage and adult children who still live at home in order to make ends meet. It is, simply put, classist and narrow-minded.
Cooper Merrill ½ to 1 mile
January 1, 2021, 7:16 PM
As a resident I oppose this measure. Parking on this road has posed no problems for me as a resident and making this permit only will make it harder when people come to visit me. This would be incredibly wasteful and inconvenient.
Savannah Raisor more than 2 miles
January 1, 2021, 7:02 PM
Permit parking on Slate Canyon is unnecessary. As a resident of Slate Canyon I disagree with this proposal. Parking is not a problem here, and adding a permit zone will only make it more difficult for my family and friends to come visit me. Please do not pass this program.
January 1, 2021, 6:48 PM
We all know what this is for - this is to curb the amount of singles and drivers within a home. Some on slate canyon have multiple driving kids, some have work and personal vehicles. Some can park all the vehicles to fit their needs in front of their homes without issue. Parking permits are a burden placed on residents unnecessarily. If the concern is that the developer of the townhomes and condos didn’t provide enough parking, let’s make it their problem. The city needs to stand up against the developer and work this out so those on slate canyon don’t pay the price. Many of us went to the neighborhood meetings in the past and most did NOT want permits.
Let’s not make things more difficult just for select groups.
Thad Brown ½ to 1 mile
January 1, 2021, 6:47 PM
I am not in favor of the permit program as proposed. Certainly not the entire length of Slate Canyon Dr. The benefit isn’t worth the cost.
January 1, 2021, 6:37 PM
A full parking permit program sounds like it would be very costly and would be opening a can of worms. I like the idea of reducing parking near intersections and enforcing current parking laws. There is probably a law about not blocking driveways currently on the books that can be enforced.
David Knecht within ¼ mile
January 1, 2021, 6:21 PM
Slate Canyon Drive was designed to be a major collector street for the hundreds of units that have been built along the hillside. Its streetscape is unique in Provo, with small 4,000 sq ft lots and large single family homes. Traditional planning precludes this combination, since it is unsafe to have individual driveways backing out into a collector street. Since the lots are small, it means there are almost twice as many driveways along the street than there is in a regular neighborhood making the situation even more unsafe. Therefore reducing the number of cars on the street, that block visibility for commuters, should be a top priority.
If the Council implements the day time parking restrictions, then the hours should be extended and be from 6 AM to 6 PM. Most commuters leave for work between 6 and 9 AM, which means this is the most dangerous part of the day when they are backing out into traffic.
If the Council implements the night time permit program, and you want to reduce the number of cars that end up stored on the street in the day time, then you may want to restrict each property to only one permit and not allow them to be transferable. Since the homes have double car driveways and garages, each property would then have 4 off street spaces and one on the street.
January 1, 2021, 6:20 PM
This is not a good idea. Each house on slate canyon has a garage and has a drive way. There is enough parking for each resident and their guests. This is also too much money for the police to enforce the permit and their time is better spent elsewhere. Finally, this permit would cause parking problems in canyon meadow, alpine loop, etc. so this would just transfer the problem and not solve it.
January 1, 2021, 6:17 PM
We strongly oppose the alternative two hour program. As a home owner on Slate Canyon it is a major inconvenience for me to not be able to park more than 2 hours during the day in front of my own home. The enforcement hours are too late in the morning to help with the least safe time which is when people leave their homes in the morning to go to work (7-9 am). I would be willing to pay for an annual night time permit so that I and my guests can park. But we would rather have no program at all than a 2 hour limit.
One of the major issues that has not been addressed is the number of residents of Aspen Summit and Canyon Meadows that park on Slate Canyon drive because those dwellings are over occupied or because there is insufficient parking and no on street parking. The cars frequently parked in front of our home are owned by residents of Aspen Summit, we watch them park and cross the street to Aspen Summit each night. The daytime 2 hour enforcement with no night time enforcement does nothing to solve that problem. We would prefer a solution that holds the developers and landlords of the high density housing developments accountable for creating parking issues that bleed onto nearby streets.
I am in favor of reducing the size of the area to allow for parking on Slate Canyon Park Road to allow for overflow parking for canyon use (and use of the park if that is built in the future), since that does not seem to be an issue compared to the parking problems that occur in front of residential homes.
January 1, 2021, 5:26 PM
I think a parking permit program is a wonderful idea. It’s impossible to find parking on Slate Canyon. It would make the neighborhood safer and increase the value of the homes, also it would add revenue to the city I don’t see any downside. It would also make sure those that are not following the occupancy laws for the city would be caught.
Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.