Panel Asks for Revised Parking Plan : Congestion: An unpopular proposal to charge residents of high-density areas to park in front of their homes goes back to the drawing board.

Bowing to public opposition, the Glendale Parking Commission told the city’s traffic engineer Monday to rewrite a proposal to charge residents of high-density areas for permits to park overnight in front of their homes.

After its fourth public hearing on the unpopular proposal, the commission’s members said that they hoped Traffic Engineer Tom Horne could add incentives that would pacify the more than 100 speakers who criticized the idea as elitist, unfair and unnecessary.

The commission, with no other business to attend to, called off its November and December meetings but will schedule an evening hearing in January to allow public comment on the revised proposal.

To accommodate the expected large turnout, the meeting will be held in the Glendale Civic auditorium.

The proposal, first presented by Horne as a draft ordinance in March, was aimed at easing parking congestion in densely populated neighborhoods by forcing residents to park cars in their garages. It called for paid permits for residents parking on the streets between 2 and 6 a.m.

The fees would have ranged from $15 to $120, depending on the number of permits per household and the amount of available off-street parking.

But on Monday, Horne said that the new draft would probably include a restructuring of the fee scale.

Commission and city staff members said the new proposal will also probably include fee exemptions for the handicapped, senior citizens and maybe for applicants requesting their first permit.

To avoid the appearence of discrimination, the proposal would make the parking restrictions citywide, as opposed to neighborhoods zoned for apartments and condominiums, as was intended in the original draft, officials said.

These officials hope that the added incentives, along with a stepped-up publicity campaign, will turn the tide in favor of the parking permit plan. Last week, at a planning retreat in Oxnard in Ventura County, Glendale City Council members instructed the city manager to negotiate with New Image, a Glendale public relations firm, a promotional package for the city proposal.

On Monday a subdued audience of about 30 residents attended the commission hearing at the Glendale Public Library. Although the turnout was considerably smaller than at previous hearings on the matter, speakers were as adamant as ever in their opposition to the city plan.

Two speakers voiced support for the proposal, but the others restated arguments heard throughout the hearing process: that there are no problems in their neighborhoods that merit a parking fee, that the proposal amounts to taxation of the poor and that the council is responsible for the parking crunch by allowing too much development and should therefore shoulder the cost of any solution.

Kay McKenzie handed commissioners a petition with 40 signatures opposing the city proposal. She said after the meeting that her group, the newly formed Citizens Against Parking Permits, had already submitted 400 signatures to the commission and that thousands would be gathered throughout the city.

Four police officers stood guard at the auditorium entrance to prevent a repeat of the scuffle that took place Sept. 18, when a police patrol in riot gear was called in to control a vociferous, emotional, and at times unruly crowd of 300 that packed City Hall to oppose the proposed parking restrictions.

Monday’s meeting began with a stern warning by commission Chairman James Cashion, who advised the audience that such behavior would no longer be tolerated.

But the warning seemed unnecessary. In contrast to the constant clapping and yelling that characterized earlier hearings, Monday’s audience applauded only once.

That came in reaction to a statement by Bob Minahan, one of the speakers: “If anybody in this commission has any political aspirations he should make a motion right now to strike down the parking proposal. He will probably be elected mayor in the next election.”