City council voting on getting rid of free parking for motorcycles today

[kiterider]

Why am I not surprised at this result?? I guess by next season, we'll know the outcome for sure. As alluded to above, I hope they don't **** it up.

[knowledge]

I'm not sure if they're considering some kind of sliding scale payment scheme for this either.

This isn't a bad idea, either. They can make our parking tickets valid for 3 times the paid amount (aka pay for a half hour and it's good for 1 & a half or pay for 10 minutes to get 30 minutes of parking). I work for Toronto Parking Authority so I can see this being viable for both sides...

I think it's great that we had free parking. I think a middle-ground would be us paying, but for it to be a reasonable amount. I save so much on parking downtown by taking my bike that as RetroGrouch said, a $100 fee isn't much to ask for. Obviously, I'd like to pay less than that, but even if it were a bit more, it would still be pretty reasonable (+ you wouldn't have the hassle of dealing with lost/stolen ticket portions)

[slogan]

I guess, street parked motorcycles take less than 0.1% (or even much less) of street parking space occupied by cars. I do not see any reason in payed motorcycle street parking - it won't make more space, nor will it make any significant revenue...

[bombshelter13]

So it looks like this passed (i.e., there will be a report on it in February)

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgen...m=2011.MM14.19

[ZX600]

So it looks like this passed (i.e., there will be a report on it in February)

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgen...m=2011.MM14.19

have you read this thread? It hasn't passed yet

[bombshelter13]

Unless I'm missing something, the vote counts in the link I gave, taken today, seem to suggest that the motion to produce a report on this passed.

[jonpurdy]

If motorcyclists were to enter their license plate number on the keypad of the ticketing machine then this might work. The parking person could simply enter the plate number of the bike they want to check and see that it's paid up. This could cover those who don't have cell phones. However, they'd have to install keypads into all of those existing machines. I can't imagine that would be cheap at all.

Despite my suggestion, I'm definitely one for allowing free parking for vehicles which use less physical space and gasoline. Environmentally friendly alternatives to cars should be encouraged as much as possible.

[mindactivated]

Unless I'm missing something, the vote counts in the link I gave, taken today, seem to suggest that the motion to produce a report on this passed.

This is correct.

Nov 30th first vote: Decide whether to permit motion mm14.19 to go forward - passed.
Nov 30th second vote: Refer mm14.19 to the public works & infrastructure committee - passed.
Dec 1st first vote: amend original motion to delete the words "to harmonize them with parking for other motorized vehicles" - passed.
Dec 1st second vote: adopt amended language - passed.

Note that on December 1st the majority of councillors who are against this were not present. Only 2 of them voted against it on Dec 1st whereas on November 30th you had 14 votes.

I also found the ever so slight voting irregularities to be strange....

[soto]

Why are you blaming Ford, he didn't propose this motion.

He admittedly fully supports it. His budget chief is following orders.

[rafiki911]

Sweet I don't need to send him a letter then

So, if it has passed will us going to the Counsel meeting in Feb make a difference? I would like to be present for that.

Update - This arrived this afternoon in my email:

Good afternoon Paul,

Councillor Mihevc will vote to keep the free motorcycle parking in place. He agrees with your position on this.

Regards,

Beth Gosnell
Special Assistant to Councillor Joe Mihevc
Ward 21, St. Paul's West

[Face]

My reply to Councillor Wong-Tam's form letter e-mail to a number of you:

Councillor Wong-Tam

I am one of the people who provided formal correspondence to Council regarding this item. It has come to my attention that you have provided the following response to a number of other people who have written to you regarding this issue. I am concerned that there are serious factual errors in your response, and as your response has been made public through motorcycle and scooter forums, that members of the public may be misled. You wrote:

"Thank you for your email on street parking for motorcycles and scooters.

I have seconded a motion with Councillor Mike Del Grande to request a staff report with respect toparking charges. This report will be presented to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee in February, 2012.

I am advocating for the creation of dedicated motorcycle and scooter parking to ensure the availability of parking for all motorized vehicles on our city streets, as well as to help reduce the frequency of moving vehicles being driven into pedestrian zones for parking.

There will be no changes to present parking rules until any future report has been written, explored, then voted upon. My hope is that any new rules to be proposed will be inclusive, comprehensive, and account for the historic issues Toronto has faced with past by-laws.

Respectfully yours,

Kristyn Wong-Tam
Councillor, Ward 27
Toronto Centre-Rosedale"

1. The motion, as approved by Council clearly states "City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services to report to the February, 2012 meeting of City Council, through the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee"

The only Council meeting in February is on February 6th & 7th. The first Public Works & Transportation Committee before this Council is on January 4th. I have confirmed that these are the dates referred to by the recommendations, with the Council Secretariat Support Manager in the Clerk's Department. I sincerely hope your reference to the February 2012 Committee meeting (February 15th) was an honest mistake, and not a deliberate attempt to direct potential objectors to a Committee meeting which will be held after Council will have considered the matter.

2. Staff report deadlines tend to be approximately 2 weeks prior to the Committee meetings, and this may be further complicated by the Christmas break. The motion that you seconded gives staff only 2 weeks to study, consult with the affected communities, and prepare their report. And as these 2 weeks are in the weeks leading up to Christmas, it hardly seems like fair "inclusive, comprehensive" consideration will be given to this issue.

3. The motion, as approved by Council clearly states that staff are to report on "options for the implementation and enforcement of parking charges and fees regarding motorcycles and motor scooters", and that they are to "review the City's pay-and-display areas as well as the number of parking permits currently being exempted to determine the financial impact of the recommended changes to pay parking". Staff have not been directed to review "the creation of dedicated motorcycle and scooter parking" or address the issue of "frequency of moving vehicles being driven into pedestrian zones for parking" as you have indicated in your e-mails. The limited issues in the recommendations you seconded only deal with By-law 928-2005, which is a by-law to amend the various by-laws and municipal codes of the former municipalities to "to provide an exemption to motorcycles from payment at on-street parking meters and parking machines", and with the Council approval exempting motorcycles and scooters from permit fees. You can find the By-law and Council Resolutions at the following link.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/bylaws/2005/law0928.pdf

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...6rpt/cl019.pdf

Many of us share your concerns regarding scooters parking on sidewalks, and with scooters driving through pedestrian zones to get to these parking spaces. The recommendations you seconded do not direct staff or Council to address the issues you say you are advocating in your e-mails. On the contrary, if scooter owners are now forced to pay to park on the street, they may be more likely to seek out free parking areas on the sidewalks, worsening the issue you are so concerned about. Motorized scooter parking on sidewalks is currently illegal (not including e-bikes with "pedals"), so your issue is with enforcement, not with the current by-laws. The recommendations you support only increase this enforcement problem, adding increased enforcement costs to the City.

4. It would be helpful if you could elaborate on the "historic issues Toronto has faced with past by-laws". The summary report in the Motion you seconded contains no recitals (whereas clauses) to show the specific reasons for the motion. The last paragraph refers to unfair systems to motorists who drive different classes of vehicles, but no support documentation has been referenced detailing these unfair systems. Could you please provide any reports which have been prepared by the City detailing these concerns? It would also be helpful if you also provide all documentation associated with specific complaints received by the city related to these unfair systems. I suspect the issue really relates only to the last sentence, "a loss in potential revenue for the City".

I would request that you provide me and those others who received your e-mail, with your correction of factual matters presented in error, and with the detailed background data which informed your support for this motion.

Regards,

[peterventure]

What a waste of energy trying to have us pay for parking our motorcycles in Toronto!

[chiller]

This isn't a bad idea, either. They can make our parking tickets valid for 3 times the paid amount (aka pay for a half hour and it's good for 1 & a half or pay for 10 minutes to get 30 minutes of parking). I work for Toronto Parking Authority so I can see this being viable for both sides...

I think it's great that we had free parking. I think a middle-ground would be us paying, but for it to be a reasonable amount. I save so much on parking downtown by taking my bike that as RetroGrouch said, a $100 fee isn't much to ask for. Obviously, I'd like to pay less than that, but even if it were a bit more, it would still be pretty reasonable (+ you wouldn't have the hassle of dealing with lost/stolen ticket portions)

if this option were open and we "only" had to pay $100 bucks and put a sticker on our bike for free parking, I would go for that ...

like a sticker stuck on the fork of the bike or something ... I think some of the european countries have this with there tax discs and stuff

[Face]

Sweet I don't need to send him a letter then

So, if it has passed will us going to the Counsel meeting in Feb make a difference? I would like to be present for that.

You can always send him an e-mail thanking him for his support! Councillor's get sick of always hearing complaints, and a little recognition goes a long way.

The public can't speak to the issue at the February Council meeting. Our chance to be heard is at the January 4th Public Works and Transportation Committee. Please see my earlier post, its #208 on page 11 for detailed info on how to get on the agenda so that you can speak.

[DOHC1]

Occupy the Public Works and Transportation Committee. Bring tents.

[mindactivated]

I think that after reading some of the letters being sent off to Councillors, I've noticed that some of them use arguments that could be easily rebutted and do not provide a stronger stance against having to pay for motorcycle/scooter parking. Could we as a community address them?

I'm specifically referring to:

(1) motorcycles are "greener" because they have lower emissions. Motorcycles don't have cat converters as far as I know and can only carry 2 passengers at the most, though they do use less gas to travel the same distance.

(2) tickets being stolen or blown off is a relevant argument, but I believe they intend on tackling that problem, especially when I saw that ctv video, the budget chief hinted at addressing that concern.


I'm not suggesting that these issues are not brought up, but (1) should focus more on the fact that motorcycles/scooters use less gas and not much else. (2) should be brought up, however with the assumed intent of the city to rectify the issue with some costly initiative: "I understand that the city would have to change ALL of the ticket machines to something similar to Montreal in order to deal with the issue of stolen or lost tickets that cannot be safely secured anywhere on a motorcycle/scooter. This associated cost would not be worth any minute revenue increase from motorcycles/scooters."

I just think that some of those Councillors will have this idea in their head like "motorcycles are green? No way, I saw myth busters!!" or "Tickets getting blown off? Don't worry we'll fix that so I've answered your concern- NEXT!"

Thoughts?

[awyala]

if this option were open and we "only" had to pay $100 bucks and put a sticker on our bike for free parking, I would go for that ...

like a sticker stuck on the fork of the bike or something ... I think some of the european countries have this with there tax discs and stuff

We have the same thing here....that little sticker on your licence plate. That's what the tax disc is in European countries. They call it road tax. It's not meant for parking. Parking for motorcycles is free in those European countries you are citing.

[awyala]

I think that after reading some of the letters being sent off to Councillors, I've noticed that some of them use arguments that could be easily rebutted and do not provide a stronger stance against having to pay for motorcycle/scooter parking. Could we as a community address them?

I'm specifically referring to:

(1) motorcycles are "greener" because they have lower emissions. Motorcycles don't have cat converters as far as I know and can only carry 2 passengers at the most, though they do use less gas to travel the same distance.

(2) tickets being stolen or blown off is a relevant argument, but I believe they intend on tackling that problem, especially when I saw that ctv video, the budget chief hinted at addressing that concern.


I'm not suggesting that these issues are not brought up, but (1) should focus more on the fact that motorcycles/scooters use less gas and not much else. (2) should be brought up, however with the assumed intent of the city to rectify the issue with some costly initiative: "I understand that the city would have to change ALL of the ticket machines to something similar to Montreal in order to deal with the issue of stolen or lost tickets that cannot be safely secured anywhere on a motorcycle/scooter. This associated cost would not be worth any minute revenue increase from motorcycles/scooters."

I just think that some of those Councillors will have this idea in their head like "motorcycles are green? No way, I saw myth busters!!" or "Tickets getting blown off? Don't worry we'll fix that so I've answered your concern- NEXT!"

Thoughts?

A motorcycle is by far greener than a single occupant car. A fully loaded 4 person car is however more efficient. But how is that car poolin going? Taking off isn't it? Secondly, compare the green credentials of the top of the line performance car with the bike equivelent, not an econo-mini-compaq-1.4 L car. Compare a 1000R to a porche and get back to me on that issue. Then compare a 250cc or 150cc scooter to a Kia rio. You will find scooters and bike are by far a greener option with marked personal freedom and flexibility at the expense of storage space and exposure to the elements and of course safety. Next time you're on the Gardener, roll down your window in gridlock and ask the 3 cars you might crawl past if they would consider car pooling with you the next day given that you all seem to be heading home in the same direction. See how that works out.

I commute every day 34km round trip, part highway, part downtown traffic, I spend $21 a week for my commuting using premium fuel. How does that compare to your let's say....run of the mill Ford focus or Honda Civic?


Just for the sake of comparing apples to oranges, the new Kia Forte with added "optional Fuel Economy Package adds low resistance silica tires, a more efficient alternator, a five-speed automatic transmission, and aerodynamic enhancements to increase fuel efficiency. With the Fuel Economy Package, the Forte EX has a 27 mpg_-US (8.7 L/100 km; 32 mpg_-imp) fuel consumption in city driving and 36 mpg_-US (6.5 L/100 km; 43 mpg_-imp) in highway according to United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)."

Where as a standard out of the box rip your arms out of the sockets 2004 ZX10R consumes an average 6.25L/100km (that's not optimum, that's average) The eco-Forte is looking in the ballpark of 7.5L/100km for its average.

So forget the eco package, forget that it's a run of the mill compact sedan. Go compare the average car in town to the average bike, something like a 600 commuter, or compare it to a 150cc Vespa (which is 2.7L / 100km by the way!!!)

What's a Porche's economy you ask? 11.2L/100km (average)

So put a single dude in a Porche 911 Carrera, with all its power and glory, and sit him in traffic next to me on my comparable performance ZX10R and I'll use less fuel and be home 20 minutes faster, ultimately using even less fuel than an idling Porche.

[Rick CH]

"I understand that the city would have to change ALL of the ticket machines to something similar to Montreal in order to deal with the issue of stolen or lost tickets that cannot be safely secured anywhere on a motorcycle/scooter. This associated cost would not be worth any minute revenue increase from motorcycles/scooters."

This looks to be the soundest argument. I'm just guessing, but a study into the feasibility of implementing a system to securely charge parking fees to motorcycles would probably find little revenue gains, at least in the short term.

[aircooled5]

That one lone councilor proved that an idea is a mighty thing. His son was constantly getting ticketed and he was wasting time going to metro hall to show his receipt. Its was discriminatory
that one class of vehicle that has no secure place to leave their pay and display receipt receives parking tickets when the paid for receipt was being stolen by others for their own use. Add in the notion that motorcycles and scooters take up less space and use less fuel and you have a sensible solution...free parking. However I note that in Chicago they use the same pay and display machines and those receipts have a peel off portion so that the receipt must be affixed to the motorcycle headlight. Further they stipulate that we have to write down our motorcycle plate number on the receipt that is afixed to the headlamp so that no one will be tempted to steal that receipt. Great now we stick things to our bikes. And for those that think we can take up a full car space just to annoy the parking people, note that there will be regulations specifying that we must park at 90 degree's to the curb or as close to that as possible to allow others to make use of the extra space that a motorcycle doesn't take up. Lots of red tape and sticky things. Glad I'm retiring soon so I won't have to deal with this. However you can bet that the industry lobby group will be active in fighting this including the scooter importers and retailers.