4233 replies to this topic

[Ismo07]

It's been a half-decade since parking rates rose in the City of Victoria.

This morning the Mayor was on CFAX talking up parking revenues, and 'free' youth bus passes.

 

This won't end well for individuals who need to drive in to the downtown core, or those who live downtown and rely on street-side parking for their vehicle.

 

Over the near-term expect more 1-2hr free parking zones to be replaced with meters and I wouldn't be surprised if 2020 saw a parking rate adjustment across the whole network.

Mike when was the last time advertising rates on VV increased?  How do you select rates?  Like is it based on anything in particular?

[shoeflack]

I think CoV parking is far underpriced. I don't have a problem with raising the rates. Frankly, the cost of a monthly parking pass at one of the City parkades is a joke (and one of the reasons why it's next to impossible to get one). And using a metered spot is also pretty cheap, especially if you use the app and only pay for the time you're there, or strategically park on a lower rate street.

 

The problems with parking in Victoria aren't to do with cost. They're to do with capacity. And hey, if increasing cost frees up a bit of capacity, I'm all for it.

 

But let's be clear, the City needs to do more than raise cost to create more capacity. Additional dedicated parking infrastructure is desperately needed downtown. This is one of those "actual duties" of Council, but they don't seem interested. We're well overdue for a new City parkade.

[aastra]

When large & strategically located properties come up for redevelopment (London Drugs block, Capital Iron parking lot, south end of Dockside Green, etc.) the incentives for including a large amount of pay parking should be automatic.

[Mike K.]

Parking spaces are full because the City enjoyed a significant amount of new capacity at the hands of the private sector.

Since so many private lots have disappeared, this has placed significant pressure on the public side of the equation.

And given the cost of private construction (approvals are 20% of the cost, for example) the onus should be on the City to provide supply.

If my business and the business of those who ask me to meet them behind the downtown borders makes no difference to downtown merchants, than so be it, but it would be nice for the mayor and council to say “please consider patronizing businesses in other parts of the city and the region, downtown is perfectly fine with the present base of consumers/visitors/patrons.”

[rjag]

Did you just call me an idiot? 

 

 

HAHAHAHA nope! not you!

 

I am calling our illustrious council idiots that couldn't pour water out of a boot even if the instructions were printed on the heel as they stumble from one controversy to the next!!!

 

You're the poor schmuck that has to deal with the fall out.

[Victoria Watcher]

What’s the price of an on-street parking spot?

 

It isn’t free, and the answer is a lot higher than one might think.

 

One estimation, based on neighbouring land values, puts the cost of an on-street parking spot (measured at 167 square-feet, as according to City of Victoria parking minimums for a standard, square spot) between Foul Bay Road and Runnymede-Redfern at $21,441 (see explanation at bottom of story).

 

And yet, on-street parking is a right that many residents feel entitled to. The problem is, it’s a heavily subsidized use of public space based on an antiquated car-centric culture and causes all sorts of problems. One of those is the City of Victoria’s attempt to build a safe bikeway network, says Fairfield resident Lorne Daniel.

 

 

 

https://www.vicnews....th-in-victoria/

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 17 December 2019 - 05:57 AM.

[Rob Randall]

I think if a developer was offered a parking spot outside their building to do with as they pleased--permanent private parking, micropark, whatever--they would pay more than $21,411.

[Mike K.]

Taxpayers have already paid for that parking spot. It belongs to us, and it was built for a specific purpose. We also pay to maintain it.

This isn’t communism. You can’t take something from someone because you’ve decided to redistribute it in some other way, and then claim objection to you taking it is just entitlement.

Can we use parking spaces in different ways? Sure. But the way the article is framed it’s pitting people against each other, saying you’re either entitled or a great person.

And Vic News is calling car culture “antiquated?” Who even allows that sort of thing to get published in a newspaper?

[FogPub]

 

And yet, on-street parking is a right that many residents feel entitled to. The problem is, it’s a heavily subsidized use of public space based on an antiquated car-centric culture and causes all sorts of problems. One of those is the City of Victoria’s attempt to build a safe bikeway network, says Fairfield resident Lorne Daniel.

The streets belong to everyone, so everyone should have the same rights to park on them where parking space is available - which is why I get annoyed when I see "Residential Parking Only" signs all over the place.

 

You don't own the street you live on.

[Rob Randall]

Is it reasonable to have signs saying "Residential Parking--Non Residents 1 hr. Max". At least in certain areas with shopping districts like CSV and Fernwood.

[FogPub]

Is it reasonable to have signs saying "Residential Parking--Non Residents 1 hr. Max". At least in certain areas with shopping districts like CSV and Fernwood.

That's a partial solution, but still misses the point: someone who lives on (for example) Gladstone Ave* should have exactly the same claim to park on Gladstone Ave as someone who lives on Fairfield Rd or on Oswego St or on Gorge Rd E...or who lives on West 17th in Vancouver.

 

* - off the top of my head I can't remember whether Gladstone is signed Residential-Only or not; for this purpose let's assume it is.

 

And, 1 hour isn't long enough if one is trying to have a meal, as I learned via rushing many a lunch at Rosie's Diner (when it was still around) while parked on Cook St.  2 hours would be better.

[aastra]

 

But the way the article is framed it’s pitting people against each other...

 

It's almost as if neighbourhood parking restrictions and blocked streets etc. are more about dividing and segregating communities rather than unifying and integrating communities. If I didn't have complete and total confidence in politicians and their motivations I might actually be wondering about this.

[aastra]

 

However, Richardson is a residential road and wasn’t built as a highway for Oak Bay residents to travel downtown, Daniel points out.

“I’ve had one person tell me, ‘You want me to drive on Fairfield instead and travel through three school zones,’” Daniel said. “I said, ‘Yes, or you don’t have to drive.’ There’s a lot of people in Fairfield who don’t believe our roads are here for Oak Bay residents to commute on.’”

 

I suppose it was inevitable that the relentless ebb-and-flow of intense commuter traffic from south Oak Bay through Fairfield would boil over eventually. Although it seems a bit curious that it would be boiling over now, considering how Oak Bay's population growth has been pretty much flat for several decades in a row, and also considering how retirees account for a larger percentage of Oak Bay's population now than ever before.

 

Age 60+ in Oak Bay*:

 

2006: 5,735
2011: 6,690
2016: 7,285

 

*source: Statistics Canada community profiles for 2006, 2011, 2016

 

Oak Bay residents are concerned about over-densification... Fairfield residents are concerned about the sheer volume of Oak Bay commuter traffic... Would we say these concerns are completely detached from reality or just very nearly completely detached?

 

The only way Oak Bay's vehicle traffic through Fairfield would be less of a real concern is if Oak Bay's population were declining steadily. But if Oak Bay's population were declining steadily you just know it wouldn't matter and we'd be talking about this supposed issue all the same. The actual circumstances are irrelevant. The issues and concerns transcend the reality of things.

[Ismo07]

It's almost as if neighbourhood parking restrictions and blocked streets etc. are more about dividing and segregating communities rather than unifying and integrating communities. If I didn't have complete and total confidence in politicians and their motivations I might actually be wondering about this.

 

Well residential parking is meant to be a little more individual and personal rather than divisive.  The overall reason for this restriction is when coming home from work or whatever that there is street parking available and it's not over utilized on an on-going basis.  So most residential zones are placed near where mass  people may work or where constant events occur.  So that's in it's simplistic form for sure, there may be ways to create some integration with limited time zones and residential permits or even paid zones with the same permits to prevent all day commuter parking on the street. 

 

A 2 hour limit would be great for a shopper/eater but what tends to happen is those 2 hour zones get used up by commuters as well.  They just do not get used as intended and parking availability tends to be non-existent.

[Nparker]

Well residential parking is meant to be a little more individual and personal rather than divisive...

The road to hell is paved in good intentions.*

*unlike many of the roads in the CoV which are barely paved at all

[mbjj]

As we live on Richardson, we use Richardson as a direct route into Oak Bay. I like going to the library over there and some of the shops. I'm not going to use Fairfield Road to get there.

 

As for residential parking, where we live is zoned that yet we see people parking here around 8 am and walking off to heaven knows where, only to return just after 4 pm. So far we haven't had them ticketed, but we could. I've had to have a nurse visit twice a week lately and she had no place to park except way up the street. We saw a vehicle up the block with a ticket and when we snooped it was a vehicle someone had complained about.

[Ismo07]

As we live on Richardson, we use Richardson as a direct route into Oak Bay. I like going to the library over there and some of the shops. I'm not going to use Fairfield Road to get there.

 

As for residential parking, where we live is zoned that yet we see people parking here around 8 am and walking off to heaven knows where, only to return just after 4 pm. So far we haven't had them ticketed, but we could. I've had to have a nurse visit twice a week lately and she had no place to park except way up the street. We saw a vehicle up the block with a ticket and when we snooped it was a vehicle someone had complained about.

We find people will walk quite far for a free space to store their vehicle for the day. I will add that some residential streets have room to perhaps offer 3 or 4 permits to commuters.  Some flexibility can work.  Just conducting some studies on that.

Edited by Ismo07, 19 December 2019 - 11:57 AM.

[rmpeers]

We find people will walk quite far for a free space to store their vehicle for the day. I will add that some residential streets have room to perhaps offer 3 or 4 permits to commuters. Some flexibility can work. Just conducting some studies on that.

Yes, I've noted anecdotally that there seem to be a lot of downtown workers who will park their car for the day on residential streets in Fairfield. Almost certainly impacts street parking for people who actually live on those streets.

[sebberry]

Yes, I've noted anecdotally that there seem to be a lot of downtown workers who will park their car for the day on residential streets in Fairfield. Almost certainly impacts street parking for people who actually live on those streets.

 

Why aren't they bicycling in to town instead?

[rmpeers]

Why aren't they bicycling in to town instead?

They are evil, planet-hating motorists. Not sure but I'm guessing they live significantly further out and like to park and them just walk the last stretch.