North York winter by-laws in effect

[Rob MacLennan]

Snow removal is done when it NEEDS to be done. So why aren't we banning street parking when the snow needs to be removed. Isn't it a little backwards to wait until 2am the next day to get the job done completely?

It's common sense that there is less traffic overnight, but that doesn't necessarily translate to an easier removal job as arteries get done first. Should residential streets be left to 2am the next day in order to facilitate easier removal? What I suggest is ticketting people for impeding a snow plow regardless of the time, get the vehicles off the street when they need to and let these guys work much more efficient.

Good. So let's ban on-street parking. Will that satisfy your sense of 'justice'?

I'm done here.

[kellen]

Good. So let's ban on-street parking. Will that satisfy your sense of 'justice'?

I'm done here.

Yeah, he just doesn't get it. lol.

[kellen]

Snow removal is done when it NEEDS to be done. So why aren't we banning street parking when the snow needs to be removed. Isn't it a little backwards to wait until 2am the next day to get the job done completely?

It's common sense that there is less traffic overnight, but that doesn't necessarily translate to an easier removal job as arteries get done first. Should residential streets be left to 2am the next day in order to facilitate easier removal? What I suggest is ticketting people for impeding a snow plow regardless of the time, get the vehicles off the street when they need to and let these guys work much more efficient.

Wow. So when does the snow get removed from the street parking areas? Just wait for it to melt?

[mat2312]

Good. So let's ban on-street parking. Will that satisfy your sense of 'justice'?

I'm done here.

It's not my sense of 'justice' it's common sense. Why allow vehicles to park on the street when snow removal is occuring yet ban them when it isn't occuring? I want fair parking enforcement but I also want efficient and effective snow removal.


Just because I don't agree with you guys doesn't mean I don't 'get it', we have a difference of opinion as to how to approach a problem. You guys believe we should keep the enforcement curfew as it gives the city a window of 'free movement' to get various snow removal operations done and it impacts the least amount of people. I'm saying the window doesn't really matter because removal is being performed at other times and having an unused window is just inconveniencing people who work the 3rd shift unnecessarily. I'd really like to get some kind of snow-specific enforcement done out there to target people who ignorantly leave their vehicles on the road during storms.

[caboose483]

Snow removal is done when it NEEDS to be done. So why aren't we banning street parking when the snow needs to be removed. Isn't it a little backwards to wait until 2am the next day to get the job done completely?

It's common sense that there is less traffic overnight, but that doesn't necessarily translate to an easier removal job as arteries get done first. Should residential streets be left to 2am the next day in order to facilitate easier removal? What I suggest is ticketting people for impeding a snow plow regardless of the time, get the vehicles off the street when they need to and let these guys work much more efficient.

You're actually suggesting idiocy. There is nothing wrong with the current system of parking enforcement in regards to snow removal.

Kellen and Rob were unable to explain it to you, i'll give it a try.

Main roads are a priority, residential and feeder roads are secondary. Whenever the snow is falling, is when these roads get plowed. Many of these roads will have parking lanes which may or may not be occupied by parked cars when the plows go by. If they are occupied then that section of road goes unplowed. The same goes for residential roads and feeder roads, there will invariably be parked cars that the plows will have to move around. Again, this leaves unplowed sections of the road. These small unplowed sections will be ALL OVER THE CITY. Once the bulk of the snow has been removed, the plow crews go back and clean up all these little spots. There HAS to be a block of time when they should be able to rely on these spaces being clear, that's the difference between a plow having to make one trip down a side street to clean it up and a plow having to make 7 trips to accomplish the same thing.

Does this make sense to you?

[joelsephstalin]

Arguing on the internet is like running in the...

[mat2312]

You're actually suggesting idiocy. There is nothing wrong with the current system of parking enforcement in regards to snow removal.

Kellen and Rob were unable to explain it to you, i'll give it a try.

Main roads are a priority, residential and feeder roads are secondary. Whenever the snow is falling, is when these roads get plowed. Many of these roads will have parking lanes which may or may not be occupied by parked cars when the plows go by. If they are occupied then that section of road goes unplowed. The same goes for residential roads and feeder roads, there will invariably be parked cars that the plows will have to move around. Again, this leaves unplowed sections of the road. These small unplowed sections will be ALL OVER THE CITY. Once the bulk of the snow has been removed, the plow crews go back and clean up all these little spots. There HAS to be a block of time when they should be able to rely on these spaces being clear, that's the difference between a plow having to make one trip down a side street to clean it up and a plow having to make 7 trips to accomplish the same thing.

Does this make sense to you?

No cause I'm an idiot spouting off my idiocy.

[caboose483]

No cause I'm an idiot spouting off my idiocy.

This mature response is brought to you by

For All Your Insurance Needs

[mat2312]

This mature response is brought to you by

Referring to someone's ideas as 'idiocy' is a sign of immaturity. If you do not agree with me, great...counter the argument. We share a difference of perspective, I respect that but to declare my idea 'idiotic' and by extension, declare me an idiot is a sign that you do not respect the individual you are debating. My idea isn't out of the realm of possibility, it's not like I'm declaring the human race evolved from rocks. So extend me the same courtesy you'd extend to someone you agree with.

I'm done with this discussion, some of us disagree on certain fundamental points and we'll leave it at that.

[Rob MacLennan]

Stating that a specific idea is idiotic is not calling the poster idiotic, by extension.

However this thread is starting to skate very close to the edge, so consider this a warning to all.

[kellen]

Referring to someone's ideas as 'idiocy' is a sign of immaturity. If you do not agree with me, great...counter the argument. We share a difference of perspective, I respect that but to declare my idea 'idiotic' and by extension, declare me an idiot is a sign that you do not respect the individual you are debating. My idea isn't out of the realm of possibility, it's not like I'm declaring the human race evolved from rocks. So extend me the same courtesy you'd extend to someone you agree with.

I'm done with this discussion, some of us disagree on certain fundamental points and we'll leave it at that.

You're right, it isn't out of the realm of possibility...it just makes absolutely no sense as caboose clearly explained.

[caboose483]

Referring to someone's ideas as 'idiocy' is a sign of immaturity. If you do not agree with me, great...counter the argument. We share a difference of perspective, I respect that but to declare my idea 'idiotic' and by extension, declare me an idiot is a sign that you do not respect the individual you are debating. My idea isn't out of the realm of possibility, it's not like I'm declaring the human race evolved from rocks. So extend me the same courtesy you'd extend to someone you agree with.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/idiocy

An act lacking intelligence or sense; an instance of senselessness; extremely foolish behaviour.

I believe your proposed method lacks forsight, and you have not properly examined or understood the current system. As such i'm forced to think the only reason you're suggesting any change is to avoid parking tickets, not in order to facilitate easier snow removal in any way. Given that, the term "idiocy" is directly applicable.

You're in no position to criticize anyone else's debating technique. While i could be "nicer" in the methods i use, the content of my rebuttal is sound. I thoroughly address your points, and provide a concise and logical counter argument to each of them. The intent of my initial post in this thread was to help illustrate why your suggestion is flawed, but you appraently could not make it past the 4th word of that post. You rebutted against the technique i use, but not the content included.

The current system has merit and i have outlined that already. You have yet to explain how your new system would be advantageous beyond you not getting parking tickets.

I'm done with this discussion, some of us disagree on certain fundamental points and we'll leave it at that.

I'm not entirely sure this is a discussion. Several people have proposed counter arguments to your idea, but you don't respond to those counter arguments. You just keep reiterating your initial idea.

[roadtoruin]

please allow me...

[ace6061]

Amusing at the very least!
You must have been hell on your teachers throughout your education.