• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Parking ticket during street sweeping

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I got a ticket for parking on a street that had signs displayed "No Parking 1pm - 4pm first Friday of every month for street sweeping". I parked there during those hours and I deserved the ticket according to the sign, I don't deny that.

My question: is there any good reason to fight the ticket? I disregarded the sign even though I knew it was the first Friday of the month, so it's my fault. But, my excuse is that I personally saw the street sweeper go down the street that I eventually parked on at 1:05pm and I didn't park there until 1:30 pm. I would've avoided parking on that street if there was any doubt that I would have been making the street sweeper's job harder.

I walk residential neighborhoods where I deliver flyers door to door. That's how I saw the street sweeper going down the streets. At 1:30, I had to move my car to another street so I could do some more houses. I could've parked on a different street with no signs posted, but the street I chose to park on had shaded parking and it was hot outside today. Likely nobody cares about my SOB story but there is the option to contest a ticket. Do I have any shot or should I just pay the $50(!!!!!) bucks?
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I got a ticket for parking on a street that had signs displayed "No Parking 1pm - 4pm first Friday of every month for street sweeping". I parked there during those hours and I deserved the ticket according to the sign, I don't deny that.

My question: is there any good reason to fight the ticket? I disregarded the sign even though I knew it was the first Friday of the month, so it's my fault. But, my excuse is that I personally saw the street sweeper go down the street that I eventually parked on at 1:05pm and I didn't park there until 1:30 pm. I would've avoided parking on that street if there was any doubt that I would have been making the street sweeper's job harder.

I walk residential neighborhoods where I deliver flyers door to door. That's how I saw the street sweeper going down the streets. At 1:30, I had to move my car to another street so I could do some more houses. I could've parked on a different street with no signs posted, but the street I chose to park on had shaded parking and it was hot outside today. Likely nobody cares about my SOB story but there is the option to contest a ticket. Do I have any shot or should I just pay the $50(!!!!!) bucks?
Of course you should pay it. The sign does NOT say you are allowed to park there after the street sweeper has passed.
 

BlunterII

Junior Member
As a side note, sometime in 01/2008 the CA legislature
had a proposal to limit all the street sweeping ordinances'
enforcement to those cases where the standing/parked
vehicle actually interfered with the process of street
sweeping - unfortunately it didn't have enough support
and was automatically repealed a month or so later.

My question: is there any good reason to fight the ticket?.....
Do I have any shot or should I just pay the $50(!!!!!) bucks?
That depends on your motivation.

Generally, as a taxpayer, you are already paying for the maintenance of the CA public roads. So, if that and the fact that you saw the street cleaning services pass by before you parked is enough to fuel your efforts to contest the citaton then here are a couple of options:

______________________
First, street cleaning ordinances for their enforcement rely on CVC 22507.6 that states:
Vehicle Code said:
22507.6. Local authorities may, by ordinance or resolution,
prohibit or restrict the parking or standing of vehicles on
designated streets or highways, or portions thereof, for the purpose
of street sweeping. No ordinance or resolution relating to the
parking or standing of commercial vehicles in a residential district
shall be effective
with respect to any commercial vehicle making
pickups or deliveries of goods, wares, or merchandise from or to any
building or structure located on the restricted street or highway
, or
for the purpose of delivering materials to be used in the repair,
alteration, remodeling, or reconstruction of any building or
structure for which a building permit has previously been obtained.
No such ordinance or resolution shall be effective until the street
or highway, or portion thereof, has been sign-posted in accordance
with the uniform standards and specifications of the Department of
Transportation, or local authorities have caused to be posted in a
conspicuous place at each entrance to the street a notice not less
than 17 inches by 22 inches in size, with lettering not less than one
inch in height, setting forth the day or days and hours parking is
prohibited. As used in this section, "entrance" means the
intersection of any street or streets comprising an area of
restricted parking for street-sweeping purposes on the same day or
days and hours with another street or highway not subject to such a
parking restriction
, or subject to parking restrictions on different
days and hours
.
______________________
In case you were delivering the above-mentioned items using a commecial vehicle - you might be able to succesfully challenge your citation

In case there were..:
- any intersections in between signs and
- you parked between the intersection and the sign and
- the intersecting street had no restrictions or different ones from the one you parked on and
- the signs were not posted near the entrance to the street you parked on

...you might also have a chance to get the ticket dismissed (you'd probably need some photos and a diagram of the location in question).

Good luck!

BlunterII
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Blunter,

Why post red herrings? OP was clear - the STREET had signs posted and the OP wasn't a commercial vehicle (etc.) Your bolded sections mean nothing.

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I got a ticket for parking on a street that had signs displayed "No Parking 1pm - 4pm first Friday of every month for street sweeping". I parked there during those hours and I deserved the ticket according to the sign, I don't deny that.
 

Reta2011

Junior Member
It depends on the town ordinance

I live in jersey city, NJ and here once the street sweeper goes by you can park even before the time on the no parking sign expires, however, I drive a Limo on NYC and over there if the sign say no parking from 1 pm till 3 pm they give you $65 ticket even if the sweeper went by at 1:01 pm. Check your ordinance before you go to court because if you lose in court, they might add extra charge for court fees
 
Thank you for that information BlunterII.

It was not a commercial vehicle, it was my own personal vehicle. The street had signs like every 20 feet. Almost too many signs for a restriction that only takes places 3 hours out of each month. I'm not really sure why they want it so clear for street sweeping anyways. There weren't any particular features that designated these streets from other residential streets in the neighborhood. I don't think I have much of a case but as you already said, I pay taxes and this ticks me off a little bit. But it was a choice that I made which I could have chosen differently.

I was informed by my Dad that contesting the ticket requires you to pay the fine first before they conduct a review anyways and that usually once they have your money they forget about you. However, the ticket says I can contest the ticket in writing and mail it or deliver it in person. I don't have a problem with writing up a statement to challenge the ticket, I just don't think my argument holds any weight. What sort of circumstances do they consider when they conduct this "review". If I put in my statement that I saw the street sweeper pass already but I parked there during the restricted hours posted, it probably means squat to them because the sign says what the sign says.
 
Last edited:

The Occultist

Senior Member
As long as you're not losing out on wages or anything to do so, you have nothing to lose by attempting to fight the ticket.
 

BlunterII

Junior Member
It was not a commercial vehicle, it was my own personal vehicle.
All right...



The street had signs like every 20 feet. Almost too many signs for a restriction that only takes places 3 hours out of each month.
The issue here might not be the number of signs or their frequency but whether they are in compliance with the established regulations.
Regulatory Signs Section 2B.39 said:
“Standard: The No Parking ...street sweeping (R30B (CA)) sign shall be used to inform motorists of a parking prohibition for the purpose of street sweeping. Refer to CVC 22507.6.”
"Standard" means - mandatory (MUTCD 2010, Introduction)
Link to MUTCD, 2010: California MUTCD 2010

So, in essence you would need to show at least one of the elements from CVC 22507.6 to be inapplicable. "At each entrance" could be a good 'candidate' for dismissal unless it was a very short stretch of the road with absolutely no other roads intersecting it.

First, you might want to check if there is any alley or a private road or a driveway (with a stop sign, stop line and/ words ‘STOP’) intersecting the street you parked on. That would establish the needed intersection.
If you need help establishing an intersection, just ask.
(Of course, if there aren't any intersecting roads then this point is moot)


I'm not really sure why they want it so clear for street sweeping anyways. There weren't any particular features that designated these streets from other residential streets in the neighborhood. I don't think I have much of a case but as you already said, I pay taxes and this ticks me off a little bit.
Yes, that is certainly frustrating. Initially in 1940s-1950s the courts used to strike down many cities' parking ordinances that attempted to "extort" money from their citizens for parking on public highways as unconstitutional. Unfortunately, those days are gone; later during the period of 1960s-1990s the situation virtually reversed.



I was informed by my Dad that contesting the ticket requires you to pay the fine first before they conduct a review anyways and that usually once they have your money they forget about you. However, the ticket says I can contest the ticket in writing and mail it or deliver it in person.
Pursuant to CVC 40215(a) you can challenge the citation and ask for a review within the
California Vehicle Code said:
"...period of 21 calendar days from the issuance of a notice of parking violation or 14 calendar days from the mailing of a notice of delinquent parking violation... There shall be no charge for this review"
The link to the relevant CVCs: CA Codes (veh:40200-40230)



I don't have a problem with writing up a statement to challenge the ticket, I just don't think my argument holds any weight.
That depends on the argument



What sort of circumstances do they consider when they conduct this "review".
According to CVC 40215(a)
California Vehicle Code said:
"...If, following the initial review, the issuing agency is satisfied
that the violation did not occur, that the registered owner
was not responsible for the violation, or that extenuating
circumstances make dismissal of the citation appropriate in
the interest of justice, the issuing agency shall cancel the
notice of parking violation or notice of delinquent parking violation."


If I put in my statement that I saw the street sweeper pass already but I parked there during the restricted hours posted, it probably means squat to them because the sign says what the sign says.
That would be a reasonable common sense argument, although I am somewhat doubtful that the governmental agency in question will apply common sense logic to your situation.



Good luck!

BlunterII
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
OP - feel free to waste your time with Blunter - or not. No skin off my nose.
 
OP - feel free to waste your time with Blunter - or not. No skin off my nose.
LOL. I'll let him construct an argument for me if he wants to. I'm not great at understanding and manipulating every single word of the law. I don't see anything that the city did wrong so far, but I'll post up some specifics.

I was charged with San Jose Municipal Code 11.36.190 which states:
11.36.190 Parking prohibited where use of street is necessary for cleaning, repair or construction of street or installation of underground utilities.

A. Whenever the city traffic engineer or his authorized representative finds and determines that the use of a street or highway, or portion thereof, in the city is necessary for the cleaning, repair or construction of the highway or street, or for the installation of underground utilities, and that the parking or standing of vehicles hereon would prohibit or interfere with such cleaning, repair, construction or installation, he is authorized to erect or place signs, or have signs erected or placed, on such street, highway or portion, in the manner required and subject to the requirements of the Vehicle Code of the state, giving notice that the parking or standing of vehicles upon said street, highway or portion is forbidden, and keep such signs thereon until such cleaning, repair, construction or installation is completed.

B. Upon and after the erection or placing of such signs thereon and until said signs are removed, no person who owns or has possession, custody or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle, or leave such vehicle standing, upon the street or highway or portion thereof upon which said signs are erected or placed.

(Prior code § 3310.22.)
So yes their aim is to be compliance with the state vehicle code. I don't see any obvious ways they violated that.

The ticket (correctly) states I was parked X F (across from) 5416 Walnut Blossom Dr. Here's a street view, 5416 Walnut Blossom Drive, San Jose, CA - Google Maps

There appears to be signs at both entrances of the street as well as at the intersections of the courts/streets that intersect that street. There was a sign behind my car at the entrance of the street, as well as signs farther down. You can't read the writing of the signs on Google but all of the single poles with small signs on them are pertaining to no parking during street sweeping. There are no alleys or extended driveways that come into play on this street.
 

Dillon

Senior Member
Of course you should pay it. The sign does NOT say you are allowed to park there after the street sweeper has passed.
the tickets is unreasonable, as the sweeper had passed already, so its not necessary to keep the space unsued for the public.

unnecessary mean unreasonable - no reason for the tickets to be issued?
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
All the legal arguments aside ... this is a parking cite. It is largely a civil issue handled by a hearing officer or panel. No court will ever hear this unless the OP wants to appeal the first couple of findings (should they go against him), and the OP is willing to risk the court costs of losing such a court appeal (which might more than double the cost of the parking cite).

Certainly, if a legal argument can be made, make it. But, this is not going to be heard by a court, so keep that in mind.
 

BlunterII

Junior Member
I was charged with San Jose Municipal Code 11.36.190 which states:

So yes their aim is to be compliance with the state vehicle code. I don't see any obvious ways they violated that.

The ticket (correctly) states I was parked X F (across from) 5416 Walnut Blossom Dr. Here's a street view...
There appears to be signs at both entrances of the street as well as at the intersections of the courts/streets that intersect that street. There was a sign behind my car at the entrance of the street, as well as signs farther down. You can't read the writing of the signs on Google but all of the single poles with small signs on them are pertaining to no parking during street sweeping. There are no alleys or extended driveways that come into play on this street.
I checked the street view and, unfortunately and surprisingly, they posted the signs at each entrance. The San Jose Code is also rather well written unlike some other cities' - so no loopholes.
It doesn't appear that a valid legal argument can be made under these circumstances.
You can still challenge it (in your Citation Contest) on the grounds that you parked there only after you observed the street cleaners had finished their duties.

But I wouldn't go to court with that.


BlunterII
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I checked the street view and, unfortunately and surprisingly, they posted the signs at each entrance. The San Jose Code is also rather well written unlike some other cities' - so no loopholes.
It doesn't appear that a valid legal argument can be made under these circumstances.
You can still challenge it (in your Citation Contest) on the grounds that you parked there only after you observed the street cleaners had finished their duties.

But I wouldn't go to court with that.


BlunterII
In other words, your "advice" was worthless and you are apologizing for wasting everyone's time. Thanks for that! :cool:
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top