News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 676     3 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 240     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 718     0 

Car2Go Illegal Parking - Solutions?

TheOneAbove said:
Paying slightly over $200 a year just for the "right" to park my own car in front of my own home in a non-immediate-downtown area with single family homes? That's kind of crazy.
Click to expand...

I don't know about crazy; but certainly unusual.

Seems on-par with the cost of buying land for a very simple 1-car driveway and maintenance for it.

Land is $1M/acre through much of Toronto, a parking spot is 180sqft (9' x 20' for parallel parking). So 242 spaces per acre roughly equals $130/year for interest only payments @ 3%. Driveway maintenance is about $4/sqft every 20 years, or roughly $31/year. Add in snow clearing, and enforcement overhead to ensure the space is used by authorized permit holders, and the $200/year mark is pretty close to costs the city absorbs for that parking space at the side of the road.

Now, whether that should be in property taxes tied to the house, or as a userfee is certainly debatable. I typically prefer user fees for non-essential services.
 
Last edited:
Not everyone has a parking spot in front of their home - no parking on my side of the street. And hardly enough spots for every house.
 
rbt said:
I don't know about crazy; but certainly unusual.

Seems on-par with the cost of buying land for a very simple 1-car driveway and maintenance for it.

Land is $1M/acre, a parking spot is 180sqft (9' x 20' for parallel parking). So 242 spaces per acre roughly equals $130/year for interest only payments @ 3%. Driveway maintenance is about $4/sqft every 20 years, or roughly $31/year. Add in snow clearing and enforcement overhead to ensure the space is used by authorized permit holders, and you hit the $200/year mark in costs the city bears to provide the space.

Now, whether that should be in property taxes for the house, or as a userfee is certainly debatable. I typically prefer user fees.
Click to expand...

Cost can be debated, there's not much more for me to add to the discussion other than all transport options need reasonable pricing. I can accept in an urban environment there are higher costs to automobile ownership vs suburbs due to the nature of density. I'm not sure why $200 is needed, because the deterrent for over-use and lack of parking space really is the parking program itself. Not to mention that bad public policy/fee price gouging gives rise to demagogues like Rob Ford to become mayor again.

As for the parking program itself being the deterrent for overutilization of parking, for example, they could charge only $50 for a parking permit for the entire year in specific zones around the city just as they are billing over $200 today, and it would serve the purpose of having a program, because the real enforcement comes from visitors and non-residents getting a ticket for using spots when they don't live here, or paying a higher temporary parking fee in lieu of a ticket. That is what ultimately provides for more space for locals who live in neighborhoods in higher density settings, discouraging visitors from parking: the deterrent of tickets and higher temporary parking fees. Not billing local residents who have no other option with extreme fees.

I end the discussion saying, again, its all about balance. I would argue the same viewpoint with regards to transit. Why is it $3.00 to hop on TTC now? It is a public transit service, it should be accessible for cheap. That means a better public funding mechanism to ensure lower fares. I don't want Toronto to turn around and have a $4.00 fare in a few years. The region is being pushed in the direction of distance based fare. Maybe it'll be $2.00 for me to go to downtown or $6.00 to go to Scarborough in the future? That seems a bit pricey to me for public transit, because we don't have the proper base funding or the proper cost constraints at the TTC. Why do they have conductors on the fully automated Scarborough RT, again? LOL

BALANCE! Its an important concept.
 
Last edited:
TheOneAbove said:
I would argue the same viewpoint with regards to transit. Why is it $3.00 to hop on TTC now? It is a public transit service, it should be accessible for cheap. That means a better public funding mechanism to ensure lower fares.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we could fund transit by increasing parking costs to something more reasonable like $500 a year, instead of the extremely crazy low rates they are now!

#WantsTheirCakeAndEatItToo
 
nfitz said:
Perhaps we could fund transit by increasing parking costs to something more reasonable like $500 a year, instead of the extremely crazy low rates they are now!

#WantsTheirCakeAndEatItToo
Click to expand...

The city doesn't have to penalize car drivers and steal money from them to try and coerce people to ride public transport. That's a false choice. We are all adults and can make our own decisions on that as individual residents.

That's literally the last time I'm addressing this topic, because I literally just laughed out loud reading the cake comment right after your concept of shaking down car drivers to support public transport.

#TerribleIdeas

I wish you a good evening.
 
Last edited:
As someone who pays for street parking... I would support an increase in fees to $500 a year. It's still far less than I would pay to park underground (minimum $1200 a year), and still discounted enough to take into account the inconvenience of parking on a street (blocked in by snow plows, not being able to find parking all the time, coming down to a cold car, etc).

If you don't think $500 a year is reasonable for parking on a city street, then perhaps you shouldn't be driving to begin with?
 
$200 per year is an absolute bargain. There is no private lot that would even come close.

Most GTA municipalities don't even allow street parking. I'm sure if they did people would take advantage of it too.

Even Vaughan, which only allows street parking on 5 designated streets in the entire city charges $50 per month for street parking.
 
Well, I guess the issue of Daimler-Benz parking its rental fleet on our streets has self corrected.

Car2Go to suspend operations in Toronto at end of month
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...nd-operations-in-toronto-at-end-of-month.html

He pointed out that parking permit fees would require companies taking place in a new car-sharing pilot to pay $1,499.02 per vehicle — an “unprecedented” cost, said Car2Go spokesperson Kendell Kelton.
Click to expand...
That's a bit rich when Car2Go's parent company reported all time record revenues and profits in 2017.

http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/18157/daimler-crushes-2017-with-record-sales-and-profits
 
doesn't matter if the parent company is making money - if the division (Car2Go Toronto) is unprofitable - why continue to operate it? There isn't some political vendetta here, Car2Go decided the new rules will make their operations unprofitable, so they are leaving. And it sucks.
 
nfitz said:
Perhaps we could fund transit by increasing parking costs to something more reasonable like $500 a year, instead of the extremely crazy low rates they are now!

#WantsTheirCakeAndEatItToo
Click to expand...

Or perhaps car drivers should pay less gas/license taxes and that transit users should pay for the true cost of public transit. Imagine if transit users had fund their own capital construction costs.

Congestion only happens when everyone tries to go to the same place. Businesses can always be encouraged to move to the suburbs so drivers don’t need to commute all the way downtown. The city core would then inturn lose business taxes to places like Vaughan and Markham.


Let’s see how city residents feel when they lose the taxation funding that they current enjoy from drivers.

Silly ideas go both ways, best to be reasonable and find a middle ground.
 
UD2 said:
Or perhaps car drivers should pay less gas/license taxes and that transit users should pay for the true cost of public transit. Imagine if transit users had fund their own capital construction costs.

Congestion only happens when everyone tries to go to the same place. Businesses can always be encouraged to move to the suburbs so drivers don’t need to commute all the way downtown. The city core would then inturn lose business taxes to places like Vaughan and Markham.


Let’s see how city residents feel when they lose the taxation funding that they current enjoy from drivers.

Silly ideas go both ways, best to be reasonable and find a middle ground.
Click to expand...
Just leave things as they are. I’m fine with subsidizing transit as it clears the roads for me and other drivers.
 
innsertnamehere said:
doesn't matter if the parent company is making money - if the division (Car2Go Toronto) is unprofitable - why continue to operate it? There isn't some political vendetta here, Car2Go decided the new rules will make their operations unprofitable, so they are leaving. And it sucks.
Click to expand...
If they’d followed the original rules city council may have not put new rules in place.

But Daimler decided to use the city’s streets as their fleet depot. Imagine if U-Haul did this, with their orange trucks dumped on residential streets waiting for a truck share pick up.

If bikeshare can work through depots or docks, so can car share.
 
Admiral Beez said:
Well, I guess the issue of Daimler-Benz parking its rental fleet on our streets has self corrected.

Car2Go to suspend operations in Toronto at end of month
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...nd-operations-in-toronto-at-end-of-month.html

That's a bit rich when Car2Go's parent company reported all time record revenues and profits in 2017.

http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/18157/daimler-crushes-2017-with-record-sales-and-profits
Click to expand...

The company didn't park their cars on the street - its users (our neighbours) did. Now they'll buy cars and park on the street all the time, instead of just some of the time. More cars in the neighbourhood. Fewer choices for those who would like to be carless 99% of the time.

This is a loss for all.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top