147 replies to this topic

[Sparky]

verb (used with object), a·but·ted, a·but·ting.

 

 

to be adjacent to; border on; end at.

[gkz]

verb (used with object), a·but·ted, a·but·ting.

 
 
to be adjacent to; border on; end at.

 
I know what the word "abutting" means.
 
It doesn't say
 

in relation to a dwelling on a City block AND abutting that Zone

 
it says 
 

in relation to a dwelling on a City block abutting that Zone

 
and the city block is abutting the zone

Edited by gkz, 17 July 2014 - 08:57 PM.

[Sparky]

There that settles it then.

[sdwright.vic]

I don't see why, when condo and apartment dwellers have to pay to park, home dweller get street parking for free, on property that all people pay taxes on. You want do park, find a place to put a driveway on your property, or ever fiends for parking. No more save-ies.

[Szeven]

I definitely don't understand the entitlement regarding being able to park in the 1 spot outside your house for residential parking. Is that in the rules somewhere? I remember when I lived on the corner of Burdett and Cook, and I parked up Burdett (same block) in front of someones house where I received a threatening note that the person was going to put an ants nest on my car if I didnt move and never park there again.  At the time my friends and I thought it would be go a good idea to have a massive concrete block or junk metal item delivered to the spot, but in hindsight that was not a good idea and I'm glad I did nothing...

[aastra]

 

...in relation to a dwelling located on a City block abutting that Zone...

 

This to me reads unambiguously as: a dwelling on a city block, and that city block is abutting the zone.

So I can park at a residential parking zone abutting the city block on which my dwelling is on.

 

The parking dispute centre said that the zone has to be directly abutting my dwelling....

 

Yes, it's very poorly worded. Methinks the definition of "zone" is crucial here. They seem to want "zone" to mean the individual parking space, which is obviously a very loose notion because the spaces along the curb are unmarked/undefined and vehicles come in different sizes. If a very small car is parked directly in front of a house then what status does the extra space on either side of that small car have? Is that space unavailable to anyone else, unless they too are visiting the same house? It would be much more logical for "zone" to refer to the entire area along the curb on that side of the block that is available for parking. Vehicles park within the zone. The idea that you must park directly in front of a dwelling obviously falls apart for that entire side of the block once any vehicle fails to comply. The next person who wants to visit the "obstructed" residence is obliged to find a space that doesn't directly abut the dwelling, thus cascading the issue.

[Mr Cook Street]

I'm inclined to think the city should start selling residential permits for these residential parking zones. $150 for the year. Otherwise, don't restrict the parking to residents and their guests. 

[spanky123]

I'm inclined to think the city should start selling residential permits for these residential parking zones. $150 for the year. Otherwise, don't restrict the parking to residents and their guests. 

Or some 'entrepreneur' can start selling the 'passes' for $50 to whomever wants one!

[Mike K.]

Aren't these zones in places where people partaking in activities elsewhere will park their vehicles for extended periods while residents have nowhere to park?

As for condos, they come with enough parking for the entire building. If you choose to park on the street or you decided not to buy a parking stall with your unit then that is the choice you made and knew full well your street parking is metered and limited. If you're a renter and have no stall in your building then that is an issue to take up with the landlord, not the City. The City's rigid parking requirements for condos and commercial buildings are the way they are for a reason, I suppose.

[Mr Cook Street]

Or some 'entrepreneur' can start selling the 'passes' for $50 to whomever wants one!

Thats a good point. You can have tickets waived for 'guests' that were 'visiting' if they get a ticket while parked on your street in a residential parking zone. $$$

[sebberry]

Yes, it's very poorly worded. Methinks the definition of "zone" is crucial here.

 

The "Zone" is the parking zone.  Parking zones are usually identified by signs that permit the parking and list any restrictions.

 

Residential parking zones can be used by anyone associated with a house that abuts the zone.  This includes the resident, family, friends, and tradespeople.  You don't have to park directly in front of the building you're visiting. 

 

Now some places get really goofy - I think our member rjag spoke once about a regulation in his neighbourhood that didn't permit visitors to park in front of a house, then walk somewhere with the resident.  The vehicle owner had to remain at the property. 

[aastra]

 

Residential parking zones can be used by anyone associated with a house that abuts the zone.  This includes the resident, family, friends, and tradespeople.  You don't have to park directly in front of the building you're visiting. 

 

Right, but the reply that he received contradicts that. So either we're not understanding it or they're not understanding it. The wording is poor in any case.

[sdwright.vic]

Mike- Why is it the cities job to ensure residential street parking... For free?

I see no issue with someone using any available street parking without limitation if its open and available. If you own a house, build a driveway. If you have more then one car then my tax dollars should not pay for your guaranteed space to park in front of your house.

Edited by sdwright.vic, 18 July 2014 - 11:16 AM.

[lanforod]

Mike- Why is it the cities job to ensure residential street parking... For free?

I see no issue with someone using any available street parking without limitation of its open and available. If you own a house, build a driveway. If you have more then one cat then my tax dollars should not pay for your guaranteed space to park in front of your house.

You must have some prize cats. lions and tigers?

[sdwright.vic]

Oops... cars nor cats.

[Mike K.]

By the same token all tax payers pay to keep downtown clean, safe and aesthetically pleasing. We all share in the costs some of which directly benefit us others not so much.

[Mr Cook Street]

Mike- Why is it the cities job to ensure residential street parking... For free?

I see no issue with someone using any available street parking without limitation if its open and available. If you own a house, build a driveway. If you have more then one car then my tax dollars should not pay for your guaranteed space to park in front of your house.

You end up getting people covering up their driveway with planters and using the street as their primary parking spot.

[Powerforward]

I'm inclined to think the city should start selling residential permits for these residential parking zones. $150 for the year. Otherwise, don't restrict the parking to residents and their guests. 

I'd think that if you charged for permits then some people would tend to be ultra aggressive in reporting illegally parked cars. Great windfall for the city issuing tickets or towing companies though.

[sdwright.vic]

You end up getting people covering up their driveway with planters and using the street as their primary parking spot.

So what if there is a driveway apron every 10 ft. No one can use the street parking anyways.

[G-Man]

There are a lot of houses in James Bay and Fairfield where you could not add a driveway to the house.