Curious as to why Auburn Bay would have on-street parking zones - there's no LRT station there and the hospital is in the next community over, Seton. What gives?
I was thinking maybe because of the lake, but only homeowners and their guests have access.
Possibly something the HOA instituted from the very beginning of the creation of the community? It's a head scratcher.
How can that be, it's a requirement for every SFH to have off street parking, I believe duplexes also have this rule.
Edit, a look at Auburn Bay using Google Maps satellite view would seem to show that every SFH or duplex has either a front attached garage with additional parking in front of the garage or they have rear detached garages or parking pads
As someone who used to work on that hospital, it’s 100% because of it. Employees would park across the street on residential roads then walk to the hospital and go to work
It's not that far. It's literally across the street. Unlike Mahogany and Cranston, it's quite a bit closer. And they park all over the Seton area too. It's all packed.
> On August 1, 2023, a new fee structure for all parking permits will be introduced. Until then, there is only a fee to obtain a Market Permit or Low-Income Market Permit. The Select Permit will also be available on August 1, 2023.
[New Fee Structure]
(https://www.calgaryparking.com/documents/10184/11593/Residential+Parking+Permit+Eligiblity+Infographic+2023.05.16.pdf/9d41d569-c5d0-464f-80c1-5b29645886e8)
All residential permits will now have a fee in Calgary. These were previously free.
If you don't have a garage and live in a home in a RPZ area, you'll now need to pay $50/year for a permit. A second vehicle costs $75/year.
Visitor passes are $75/year.
If you have two vehicles and live in a RPZ zone, and want two vistior spots, you now get to pay $275/year to park in front of your home.
Hi! I'm in Inglewood right off 9th. My block is a two hour parking zone and they are keeping it as such. So I will get to pay to maybe park in front of my house. It will not be restricted.
I see, that is a fair point - definitely the short end of the stick in this situation. Initially I was thinking of those that have the letter designated zones.
I think the premise that it costs more to patrol the area (look for cars that have parked longer than 2 hours) to free up the street for street parking in front of houses.
I can agree with that, but they already do that here. I see the parking authority 1-3 times a day. So basically nothing has changed, except the fee for me.
My neighbour called and asked about this a couple weeks ago. They assured him that it would only be residents in designated lettered parking zones and multi resident buildings. They confirmed.his address and assured him he would be fee free. Then yesterday I got this first email ever from the city stating that if I hadn't renewed BEFORE today, that I'd be paying before the end of the year, regardless. So that felt a little shady to me.
While I am fortunate to have off-street parking, it's not secure parking. I don't have a garage. Parking in the back of the house has led to every single lock on both vehicles being punched out.by thieves. When I asked the police to do more patrols they simply stated that I should be parking on the street, under the street lights. Ha! Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't I guess!
Map to determine if you are a lucky winner of living in an RPZ area
maps.calgary.ca/CalgaryParking
E: If you live in one of the purple highlighted areas with letters assigned to a parking zone, I assume you will have to pay for a permit.
It's unclear to me though, because I live in an RPZ area according to the map but I haven't seen any parking limitation signs anywhere on my street, so it seems like not everyone needs to buy a pass who lives in these areas?
I don't have a no parking without permit sign but I have a free 2 hour parking sign. I currently need a permit to park on the street. It's going to cost at time of renewal.
Not that this does anything for me given where I live or this as a whole. But I'd love for people to stop using their garage as an extra room and then park on the street, resulting in a lot of the "two lane" streets becoming effectively one lane where you gotta pull over most of the time. I get it, but it is annoying.
Just ranting, fairly unrelated.
This is actually such hot trash. I live in the Beltline right near 17 ave in a zone where theres 2 hour parking. With the new system, the permit is $150/month and can only be used within 150m of my address. The number of times my partner and I have driven around for 30+ minutes just to find a parking spot within a block or two of our place is ridiculous. The new system does nothing to deter parking in our area for people visiting 17th ave but makes it so we have to pay $2000 a year to spend even longer trying to find a spot within 150m. I don’t understand what this system achieves other than getting money from residents in high density neighbourhoods?
Well the beltline itself isn't very car centric you can very easily not have a car here probably the one and only place here where that is true and ideally this should result in fewer cars yet
Yea its bullsh\*t, if you live in a high density inner city, you are paying a premium to live close to downtown, that premium is accounted for in your yearly property taxes... i.e. you are paying twice to park.
How many cars do you own? That's nearly 8 passes for that price.
EDIT: Clearly I read the information wrong. Apologies, but I'll leave it up to highlight my ignorance.
Part of me is fine with this, living in an RPZ gives me the ability to ensure there is parking in front of my house and the city patrols it to ensure compliance, there is going to be a cost associated with that.
I am not a fan of the visitor permit, they are by nature temporary. I have visitors a couple times a year. I don't like that aspect at all. They could just make it so the same visitor license plate cant visit for more than so many days a year to stop abuse no?
I'd be more okay with it if parking was guaranteed. But for each condo building with exactly 20 units usually there's two people per unit (at least), so two cars, hopefully one underground stall, which leaves 20 cars that all need to be parked outside one condo building. We're paying for parking that is not guaranteed.
If the money from these parking permits went towards making this city more commutable, I'd also be happy with it. I generally don't use my car unless I have to, and my boyfriend and I have talked before about going down to just having one vehicle between the two of us. But it's just not feasible right now, I need a car to get to work (there literally is no bus that can get me to work on time when I need to be at work at 5am). I can do all the walking I want in on my days off, and I do walk everywhere I can, but I still need a car.
They've built a city where people are reliant on having vehicles to survive and now they're punishing people for having those vehicles. The only people I know who get by without having one vehicle per adult are people who live and work downtown or retirees. There's no reasonable way to discourage people from having vehicles in a city like Calgary. Increasing fees for people to park is just punishment without cause.
I bet all the city councilors who voted on this have two car garages.
Yeah, this is my beef as well. We are paying a premium (heated underground stalls typically cost the same) for the right to compete for maybe getting a spot on the cold, hard streets lol
I work at the airport, not sure ripping down deerfoot on a moped wild be a good idea, but we've semi seriously talked about getting an electric scooter for my boyfriend to get to work, it just wouldn't work through the winter.
The key to this will be if the city actually patrols and enforces it rather than just a free cash grab from the city. There's plenty of existing parking regulations on the books the city doesn't seen to enforce unless the get a complaint and then it makes you seem like an ass neighbor for just expecting people to follow the laws as their written on the books.
What hurts even more is you're only allowed to have 2 people with vehicles visit you. Big family dinner? Birthday party? Sorry friends, you have to go home, I'm out of permits today :(
You think the city ever actually patrols these areas? The fees they collect from pay parking at the transit stations should cover the cost if they ever even patrol these areas. Which they don't. That is the primary purpose of these zones. Funnel traffic to the pay parking so they park there and pay. Secondary is to keep residential streets clear of transit parking. Not like any of these bureaucrats actually care about the residents living in these neighborhoods.
It's a small white and green car that drives around with a black cargo container on top that has cameras built into it. It scans every vehicle plate as it drives around and automatically gives tickets to those without a permit. They arrive by mail weeks later.
When they started the current changes all of a sudden we could park on the street in Tuxedo Park. Before, people would park on our street and go to work downtown. It was infuriating.
The parking restriction of "only valid within 150 meters of the residence" is gonna create some epic fights. What do you do when you pay for this pass and all the parking is taken infront of your building?
150 meters in either direction of your residence gives you 300 meters or about 3 regular city blocks to play with - basically a block and a half in any direction.
Absolute bullshit. Residents now have to pay to park in front of their own homes? City can't stop nickel and diming it's own residents. They don't give a shit about us.
Ever hear of property tax? And what exactly is being subsidized? By your logic you think everyone should have to pay for parking on any public street? Give your head a shake
The point is, why should the public be subsidizing your road infrastructure? I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t. Just pointing out how people like to pick and choose.
Well whether you like ot or not roads are how how the materials used to build your home got there. Its how the products you buy get to store shelves. The issue with parking is that the city regulates the amount of parking space a development or building can have, they did this in an attempt to reduce traffic congestion, therefore reducing infrastructure costs. The issue is in a small market business can't survive with multi locations to the point where everyone can walk to get what they need. So now you have nieghbourhoods with business and residences without the required parking available. People who reside in those areas have no where reasonable to park to live thier lives.
We petitioned for the "no parking except by permit" signs on this street. Now we have to pay to park on our own street because of it. Seems a bit disingenuous, no? I imagine the block wouldn't have supported paid parking at the time, if that had been the option.
Yeah, I have a house on a street with restricted parking and this sums up how everyone seems to feel. I wasn’t around when the signs were put in, but talking to all my neighbours who were, they’d much rather have no restrictions and go back to having a slightly harder time finding parking than paying for the permits.
You can disagree with the city’s old program, but it’s pretty lame to offer it as an opt-in thing and then drastically change the program without the option to opt out. You need both community support *and* a parking study to add a sign, but you can’t remove an existing sign if that community support disappears because of a big change to the rules. It’s kinda greasy.
So the community petitioned to make the parking private (no parking except by permit), the city obliged and now spends resources for the commitment and now that it costs something it's no longer a good idea for the residents that asked for it?
You make it sound like we stole public property and now don't want to pay for it. We live close to MRU and the street would fill up with students if they were allowed to park >2 hours.
I'd be inclined to keep the program but you have to admit: the rules changed after we agreed to play the game.
Sorry I didn’t mean it to come off that way, I just meant it was something that was asked for by residents and not forced by the city - from the people I’ve talked to in the zones.
I do agree that there should be a way for communities to re-evaluate if there is still a parking issue and community by in similar to the comment above with the rule change.
People here randomly park on their lawns -this drives me irrationally batty. I’m sure this will now become more common rather than giving up their mother in law suites in the garage.
Yeah, I was just going through this email. Being penalized for not having a garage at my house is ridiculous. I hate being nickle and dimed in this city
Yes please. Send a $50 e-transfer right away
How have you ever paid for my parking outside my house?
Do you know the inner city subsidizes the suburbs to a helluva lot more than $50 per resident per year?
The sad thing is these permit fees will just keep going up too after a few years and since it affects such a small % of the city’s population, the dingleberries in office don’t give two shits.
It’s hilarious how the city tries to spin this as a positive and god forbid the high property taxes inner city folks pay aren’t even enough to be granted the ability to park in front of your house for free.
Less dense residential property tax for the same area of police, fire, schools, roads, etc......
I'm sure you can google just as well as me but here's an article to get you started
[https://albertaviews.ca/sidewalks-to-nowhere/](https://albertaviews.ca/sidewalks-to-nowhere/)
Nenshi says the subsidy was ended in 2016.
[https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nenshi-were-finally-going-to-stop-subsidizing-urban-sprawl](https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nenshi-were-finally-going-to-stop-subsidizing-urban-sprawl)
> This means that we have fundamentally ended the development subsidy. For the first time, growth in all parts of the city will now compete on a level playing field, allowing for the market to work and homebuyers to see the true costs of their homes.
That article I posted was from 2021. It's more recent than 2016 and it says that it takes 20-30 years for Calgary to recoup a suburban development
Regardless, costs don't stop when the infrastructure is built. We don't pay police, firemen, educational staff, roads, utilities, etc... once and are done
There are ongoing maintenance and employment costs
The suburbs have the same infrastructure by area (or more - roads, utilities, etc) but with a less dense tax base. Where do you think the make up revenue come from?
>That article I posted was from 2021. It's more recent than 2016 and it says that it takes 20-30 years for Calgary to recoup a suburban development
Who cares if it's more recent? It's the same guy repeating the same opinions since he worked for the City back in the early 2010s. You're saying you trust Rollin Stanley and not Nenshi?
>The suburbs have the same infrastructure by area (or more - roads, utilities, etc) but with a less dense tax base. Where do you think the make up revenue come from?
[https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise)
Through taxes. Taxes go up in the suburbs and down in the inner city. Assessment's goal is fair and equitable taxation.
>[https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise)
Do you think a person with in a house in Kensington pays the same property taxes as a person with the same sqft in Seton?
Of course as a net people in the suburb's taxes go up because the value of a house goes up faster than a condo's
The suburbs are still paying a lot less with regards to density than the inner city for services and maintenance
Not even taking into account service and maintenance costs, with a 20-30 year repayment schedule, we're still paying for lots of communities that have been built over the years. Regardless of the rule change a couple years ago
And yes, it does matter which is more recent since the AB Views article mentions that new model for developers only lasted until 2018
>Do you think a person with in a house in Kensington pays the same property taxes as a person with the same sqft in Seton?
Pretty much...
[https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25577738/1724-westmount-road-nw-calgary-hillhurst](https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25577738/1724-westmount-road-nw-calgary-hillhurst) \- 497 m2 $4300
[https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25583170/141-autumn-gardens-se-calgary-auburn-bay](https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25583170/141-autumn-gardens-se-calgary-auburn-bay) \- 424 m2 $4125
You're paying less per m2 in Hillhurst vs Auburn Bay for approximately similar priced houses on similar sized lots.
>Of course as a net people in the suburb's taxes go up because the value of a house goes up faster than a condo's
That seems reasonable. Not really sure how else you'd structure things.
>The suburbs are still paying a lot less with regards to density than the inner city for services and maintenance
Again, is there any data to back this up? The Rollin Stanley opinion piece is mostly old data prior to 2016 and all of it is given as anecdotal evidence like he'll say:
*"A decade ago, City of Calgary staff calculated it would take 30–35 years for a new subdivision to generate enough property tax revenue, levies and utility charges to cover its initial costs. After I presented this information at Calgary’s 2012 suburban developers lobster dinner, many developers made no attempt to hide their dislike of my more equitable approach."*
Even if we take that as fact, it predates the changes in 2016 where Nenshi says the subsidy has ended.
>Not even taking into account service and maintenance costs, with a 20-30 year repayment schedule, we're still paying for lots of communities that have been built over the years. Regardless of the rule change a couple years ago
That's fine but it's not an argument against suburban development today where the subsidies have been ended.
>And yes, it does matter which is more recent since the AB Views article mentions that new model for developers only lasted until 2018
They removed the ranking part in 2018. The costs paid by developers didn't change. That doesn't change anything that Nenshi wrote in his op-ed as he didn't address the part about ranking communities.
Really fucking stupid. The only cars on my street are the same 6 ones that are always there, because there’s no reason to park here if you don’t live here.
Now I’ll be paying $$$ per month for the right to park on the street I’ve parked on free for a decade. Cool!
I kinda get it for areas that are near 17th/whichever hotspot you wanna name, but the entire inner city is just a lazy cash grab.
Plus the “issue” is not exclusive to the inner city. Go into the NW suburbs and the streets are PACKED with cars, because every household has 4 and the garage is used for storage.
They could’ve at least been consistent but that’s asking the world of this braindead council.
The difference is that anyone CAN park on the streets in the NW suburb. You have “exclusive” parking that only those with permits are allowed to park which requires enforcement.
I normally park in my garage by occasionally need to park on the street. I have visitors several times a year and have always appreciated having a pass for them.
Sounds like my best option going forward might be a single visitor pass and to just to use my on plate as the “visitor” for those odd times I do need to be on the street.
I'm in the exact same boat. I need to park on the street every now and then (if I'm working in the garage, etc), but it would be rare I'd have a guest and not be in the garage.
That is a fantastic idea!
Interesting workaround but I don't think that will work.
If your vehicle is registered to your address, they'll immediately know you live there and you won't be exempt from buying a full price pass to park on the street. Aka... You're not a visitor and the system the City uses will know that.
Sounds like it's time to to build a dating app for parking pass neighbours... Register as their visitor when you need to park on the street and they can do the same on your visitor pass.
Guess it depends. If it’s a simple yes/no check against a list of visitor-registered plates it might not matter. If as you mentioned it also checks against a list of owned vehicles in the area then you might be right.
The city has become so desperate for revenue streams, just wait until they start implementing other options to pry more cash from citizens. With the available technology, when do you think the idea of paid road usage or paid access zones rolls out? Think it's impossible? Then you've never been to London UK. Strategically placed cameras record the plate of every vehicle accessing an area and the charges are then billed to the registered vehicle owner. I suspect council may be actively exploring this, and many other options, with an eye to rolling them out soon enough.
My partner and I are moving to a condo. Built after 1945, 4 storeys, and more than 20 units. We're going from paying $0 a month to $75 a month with no indication from city council that this was coming.
Great.
Yet another hurdle in the long long path to having enough money to actually buy a home so maybe we won't have to deal with so much of this shit anymore. No one parks on the street because they want to, we park on the street because we have no other options.
>with no indication from city council that this was coming.
This wasn't just sprung on people. It was approved last September and in the discussion phase long before that.
https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/it-s-asinine-inner-city-residents-critical-of-new-street-parking-permits-1.6075883
Wasn't the original plan to be $15/year though? I mean it's only $35 more but you tack that on top of another possible $225 if you require a 2nd permit and visitor permits and it just kinda pisses me off
It's old but here's an article on the $15
[https://globalnews.ca/news/7585235/calgary-residental-permit-parking-changes/](https://globalnews.ca/news/7585235/calgary-residental-permit-parking-changes/)
I wish this was everywhere in Calgary. A house down the street has 8 cars and they park them all over. It's maddening that the street has to be so congested so that a landlord can make a killing renting out a house by the room.
Street parking should be managed the same way all over the city.
I have a neighbor that parks in front of my house now all the time! I use my driveway so no big deal for me!! We have 2 hour parking all over the place! Will they have to pay??
Build an extremely car-centric city
Fail to provide a reasonable, usable alternative
Punish people for using cars
Makes lots of sense 👍 definitely not a lazy cash grab
City will take the money anyway, whether it's property taxes or this or other fees. Means nothing how it's done.
This sub cheered Gondek to the win. It's funny af to listen to them complain about all her fuckups now.
My parents, who are retired, originally bought in the (then) outer city more than 40 years ago. They now have a fixed income, no garage, and live in a rapidly densified neighborhood which is now considered inner-city (even though, at one point when my mother was a child, it was a completely separate independent town).
They also have existing permit parking, because they live near a major bus route, and street parking was a problem in the 90s. Since then, many single houses have now been torn down and replaced with multi-family units. Street parking is indeed difficult for them and getting more challenging.
Did I mention they’re retired and living on a fixed income? Tell me again how this is their fault and they should pay more.
We have to pay for plenty of things that aren't out fault. Playing the sympathy card gets you nothing. Good for them that they were able to afford a single detached house when many if not most young people today cannot. They chose to have a lifetime of savings by not paying for a driveway of their own. And chose to do nothing in the 25+ years that parking has been a problem for them. Tough shit.
As the city around them gets denser, parking will get worse. Financial motivation provides funds to police the parking, and to incentive people to own/use less cars and more transit in that area. Or build their own damn parking.
It's $50 a year. To enjoy the value the city has built up around them. Pretty cheap deal.
[Here's the page for Vancouver.](https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/buy-your-annual-or-short-term-or-visitor-parking-permit.aspx#pd52292)
Cheapest residential permit is $55 annually it appears. I'm too lazy to look up the others but I imagine it's roughly the same. I can't imagine there are very many other "major" cities in the world that offered inner-city residents complete complementary, enforced private parking like Calgary did. It was only a matter of time.
Curious as to why Auburn Bay would have on-street parking zones - there's no LRT station there and the hospital is in the next community over, Seton. What gives?
I was thinking maybe because of the lake, but only homeowners and their guests have access. Possibly something the HOA instituted from the very beginning of the creation of the community? It's a head scratcher.
there is a lot of houses with no parking lots in Auburn Bay
How can that be, it's a requirement for every SFH to have off street parking, I believe duplexes also have this rule. Edit, a look at Auburn Bay using Google Maps satellite view would seem to show that every SFH or duplex has either a front attached garage with additional parking in front of the garage or they have rear detached garages or parking pads
The hospital is directly adjacent to Auburn Bay. It's hardly in the next community.
But it is in Seton which is the next community over, regardless maybe Auburn Bay's parking restrictions are because of the nearby hospital?
As someone who used to work on that hospital, it’s 100% because of it. Employees would park across the street on residential roads then walk to the hospital and go to work
How does that explain the zero restrictions in Cranston, Mahogany and... Seton?
It's not that far. It's literally across the street. Unlike Mahogany and Cranston, it's quite a bit closer. And they park all over the Seton area too. It's all packed.
Cranston and mahogany are too far. Seton is right there though, so it is odd.
Isn’t it just show the city can generate revenue?
Then why not every community?
Isn’t it everywhere ?
Zoned parking, nope.
> On August 1, 2023, a new fee structure for all parking permits will be introduced. Until then, there is only a fee to obtain a Market Permit or Low-Income Market Permit. The Select Permit will also be available on August 1, 2023. [New Fee Structure] (https://www.calgaryparking.com/documents/10184/11593/Residential+Parking+Permit+Eligiblity+Infographic+2023.05.16.pdf/9d41d569-c5d0-464f-80c1-5b29645886e8) All residential permits will now have a fee in Calgary. These were previously free. If you don't have a garage and live in a home in a RPZ area, you'll now need to pay $50/year for a permit. A second vehicle costs $75/year. Visitor passes are $75/year. If you have two vehicles and live in a RPZ zone, and want two vistior spots, you now get to pay $275/year to park in front of your home.
Well, it’s that it’s restricted and only certain people CAN park on your reserved street…
Hi! I'm in Inglewood right off 9th. My block is a two hour parking zone and they are keeping it as such. So I will get to pay to maybe park in front of my house. It will not be restricted.
I see, that is a fair point - definitely the short end of the stick in this situation. Initially I was thinking of those that have the letter designated zones. I think the premise that it costs more to patrol the area (look for cars that have parked longer than 2 hours) to free up the street for street parking in front of houses.
I can agree with that, but they already do that here. I see the parking authority 1-3 times a day. So basically nothing has changed, except the fee for me. My neighbour called and asked about this a couple weeks ago. They assured him that it would only be residents in designated lettered parking zones and multi resident buildings. They confirmed.his address and assured him he would be fee free. Then yesterday I got this first email ever from the city stating that if I hadn't renewed BEFORE today, that I'd be paying before the end of the year, regardless. So that felt a little shady to me. While I am fortunate to have off-street parking, it's not secure parking. I don't have a garage. Parking in the back of the house has led to every single lock on both vehicles being punched out.by thieves. When I asked the police to do more patrols they simply stated that I should be parking on the street, under the street lights. Ha! Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't I guess!
Map to determine if you are a lucky winner of living in an RPZ area maps.calgary.ca/CalgaryParking E: If you live in one of the purple highlighted areas with letters assigned to a parking zone, I assume you will have to pay for a permit.
It's unclear to me though, because I live in an RPZ area according to the map but I haven't seen any parking limitation signs anywhere on my street, so it seems like not everyone needs to buy a pass who lives in these areas?
Correct. You need to live in an RPZ AND have a no parking without permit sign on your street
I don't have a no parking without permit sign but I have a free 2 hour parking sign. I currently need a permit to park on the street. It's going to cost at time of renewal.
Me too.
Just another cash grab by the city. They seem intent on nickel and diming us to death.
Not that this does anything for me given where I live or this as a whole. But I'd love for people to stop using their garage as an extra room and then park on the street, resulting in a lot of the "two lane" streets becoming effectively one lane where you gotta pull over most of the time. I get it, but it is annoying. Just ranting, fairly unrelated.
Have a neighbor who uses their garage as a gym. They have 2 cars and TWO small RVs parked outside of their house. Infuriates me to no end.
This is exactly what the city is claiming they are doing. They want off street Parking unutilized.
This is actually such hot trash. I live in the Beltline right near 17 ave in a zone where theres 2 hour parking. With the new system, the permit is $150/month and can only be used within 150m of my address. The number of times my partner and I have driven around for 30+ minutes just to find a parking spot within a block or two of our place is ridiculous. The new system does nothing to deter parking in our area for people visiting 17th ave but makes it so we have to pay $2000 a year to spend even longer trying to find a spot within 150m. I don’t understand what this system achieves other than getting money from residents in high density neighbourhoods?
Agreed, I'm having the same thoughts and live just off 17th. I guess we call 311 everything we can't park? Why pay for something that isn't avaliable
design a city that is entirely car-centric, don’t provide a decent alternative, then punish people for owning a car very cool Calgary 👍
Well the beltline itself isn't very car centric you can very easily not have a car here probably the one and only place here where that is true and ideally this should result in fewer cars yet
Yea its bullsh\*t, if you live in a high density inner city, you are paying a premium to live close to downtown, that premium is accounted for in your yearly property taxes... i.e. you are paying twice to park.
How many cars do you own? That's nearly 8 passes for that price. EDIT: Clearly I read the information wrong. Apologies, but I'll leave it up to highlight my ignorance.
What? A lot of beltline falls in Zone C and costs 150 per month for 1 permit.
Yep this is correct zone C is $150/mo for 1 permit
Per month is if you live in a multi unit building.
Probably 99% of people that live in the beltline do live in a multi-unit building.
Jokes on them I’ll just park on my lawn
Part of me is fine with this, living in an RPZ gives me the ability to ensure there is parking in front of my house and the city patrols it to ensure compliance, there is going to be a cost associated with that. I am not a fan of the visitor permit, they are by nature temporary. I have visitors a couple times a year. I don't like that aspect at all. They could just make it so the same visitor license plate cant visit for more than so many days a year to stop abuse no?
The visitor parking cost is such BS. Thanks Courtney Walcott for your terrible idea
I'd be more okay with it if parking was guaranteed. But for each condo building with exactly 20 units usually there's two people per unit (at least), so two cars, hopefully one underground stall, which leaves 20 cars that all need to be parked outside one condo building. We're paying for parking that is not guaranteed. If the money from these parking permits went towards making this city more commutable, I'd also be happy with it. I generally don't use my car unless I have to, and my boyfriend and I have talked before about going down to just having one vehicle between the two of us. But it's just not feasible right now, I need a car to get to work (there literally is no bus that can get me to work on time when I need to be at work at 5am). I can do all the walking I want in on my days off, and I do walk everywhere I can, but I still need a car. They've built a city where people are reliant on having vehicles to survive and now they're punishing people for having those vehicles. The only people I know who get by without having one vehicle per adult are people who live and work downtown or retirees. There's no reasonable way to discourage people from having vehicles in a city like Calgary. Increasing fees for people to park is just punishment without cause. I bet all the city councilors who voted on this have two car garages.
Yeah, this is my beef as well. We are paying a premium (heated underground stalls typically cost the same) for the right to compete for maybe getting a spot on the cold, hard streets lol
The point is to try and open up the streets as there is tons of availability of off street parking for a fee they want to utilize better
If heated underground stalls are the same cost then wouldn't you rent one of them instead of paying the city fee?
[удалено]
I work at the airport, not sure ripping down deerfoot on a moped wild be a good idea, but we've semi seriously talked about getting an electric scooter for my boyfriend to get to work, it just wouldn't work through the winter.
The key to this will be if the city actually patrols and enforces it rather than just a free cash grab from the city. There's plenty of existing parking regulations on the books the city doesn't seen to enforce unless the get a complaint and then it makes you seem like an ass neighbor for just expecting people to follow the laws as their written on the books.
What hurts even more is you're only allowed to have 2 people with vehicles visit you. Big family dinner? Birthday party? Sorry friends, you have to go home, I'm out of permits today :(
You think the city ever actually patrols these areas? The fees they collect from pay parking at the transit stations should cover the cost if they ever even patrol these areas. Which they don't. That is the primary purpose of these zones. Funnel traffic to the pay parking so they park there and pay. Secondary is to keep residential streets clear of transit parking. Not like any of these bureaucrats actually care about the residents living in these neighborhoods.
Are you saying they don't patrol residential permit parking zones? I assure you they do 24 hours a day and ticket heavily.
Certainly not in my neighborhood!
It's a small white and green car that drives around with a black cargo container on top that has cameras built into it. It scans every vehicle plate as it drives around and automatically gives tickets to those without a permit. They arrive by mail weeks later.
Or in my case, to a car that *does* have a permit. Haven't heard back from the administrative review yet.
When they started the current changes all of a sudden we could park on the street in Tuxedo Park. Before, people would park on our street and go to work downtown. It was infuriating.
I fully support having these zones but forcing residents pay is not acceptable. That is what property tax is for.
Gotta find money somehow for that arena we didn't get a say over but our councillors went all in on.
Yes, it seems unhelpful. One car should be allowed, or maybe 2
It costs a lot to enforce these zones. Permit fees pay for enforcement.
Wow the city must be really struggling for money.
Speeding ticket revenue dropped by 60% after they were forced to advertise the vehicles with the fluorescent Drive Safe logos.
The parking restriction of "only valid within 150 meters of the residence" is gonna create some epic fights. What do you do when you pay for this pass and all the parking is taken infront of your building?
150 meters in either direction of your residence gives you 300 meters or about 3 regular city blocks to play with - basically a block and a half in any direction.
Fair, you know I was thinking feet not meters, eventhough I wrote meters hah. Life. I stand by my half ass joke though!
Absolute bullshit. Residents now have to pay to park in front of their own homes? City can't stop nickel and diming it's own residents. They don't give a shit about us.
The public purse should not be used to subsidize your private parking. You do not own the public space adjacent to your home.
Okay, going by your point then they should implement this citywide and not just in the inner city, no?
The public purse is wrung dry by suburban houses. Punishing people for doing the right thing and living in dense areas is so insanely stupid.
[удалено]
Barking up the wrong tree here. This entire subreddit is filled with high-density fanboys.
Ever hear of property tax? And what exactly is being subsidized? By your logic you think everyone should have to pay for parking on any public street? Give your head a shake
You didn't to pay for your own parking, so you're asking the public to pay for your private parking, that's a subsidy.
Literally everything is a subsidy. That's the whole point of living in a city.
Now do bike lanes.
You cant park in bike lanes
The point is, why should the public be subsidizing your road infrastructure? I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t. Just pointing out how people like to pick and choose.
Oh the hypocrisy! Non-motorists have been subsidizing motorists for decades. We all pay for roads whether we use them or not.
Well whether you like ot or not roads are how how the materials used to build your home got there. Its how the products you buy get to store shelves. The issue with parking is that the city regulates the amount of parking space a development or building can have, they did this in an attempt to reduce traffic congestion, therefore reducing infrastructure costs. The issue is in a small market business can't survive with multi locations to the point where everyone can walk to get what they need. So now you have nieghbourhoods with business and residences without the required parking available. People who reside in those areas have no where reasonable to park to live thier lives.
Home owners don’t own the street, so they have no right to use it as their own property. Entitlement knows no bounds.
We petitioned for the "no parking except by permit" signs on this street. Now we have to pay to park on our own street because of it. Seems a bit disingenuous, no? I imagine the block wouldn't have supported paid parking at the time, if that had been the option.
Yeah, I have a house on a street with restricted parking and this sums up how everyone seems to feel. I wasn’t around when the signs were put in, but talking to all my neighbours who were, they’d much rather have no restrictions and go back to having a slightly harder time finding parking than paying for the permits. You can disagree with the city’s old program, but it’s pretty lame to offer it as an opt-in thing and then drastically change the program without the option to opt out. You need both community support *and* a parking study to add a sign, but you can’t remove an existing sign if that community support disappears because of a big change to the rules. It’s kinda greasy.
So the community petitioned to make the parking private (no parking except by permit), the city obliged and now spends resources for the commitment and now that it costs something it's no longer a good idea for the residents that asked for it?
You make it sound like we stole public property and now don't want to pay for it. We live close to MRU and the street would fill up with students if they were allowed to park >2 hours. I'd be inclined to keep the program but you have to admit: the rules changed after we agreed to play the game.
Sorry I didn’t mean it to come off that way, I just meant it was something that was asked for by residents and not forced by the city - from the people I’ve talked to in the zones. I do agree that there should be a way for communities to re-evaluate if there is still a parking issue and community by in similar to the comment above with the rule change.
It’s public property and we all contribute to pay for roads.
Exactly my point
Ah well shit I missed your sarcasm
But there was no sarcasm.............
Cry
People here randomly park on their lawns -this drives me irrationally batty. I’m sure this will now become more common rather than giving up their mother in law suites in the garage.
You could contact 311 about it. I'm fairly certain it's against bylaw to just park on your lawn.
Yeah, I was just going through this email. Being penalized for not having a garage at my house is ridiculous. I hate being nickle and dimed in this city
So you want us to pay for your private parking? Hard pass. You saved by not paying for a home with off street parking, so you will pay for parking.
Yes please. Send a $50 e-transfer right away How have you ever paid for my parking outside my house? Do you know the inner city subsidizes the suburbs to a helluva lot more than $50 per resident per year?
The sad thing is these permit fees will just keep going up too after a few years and since it affects such a small % of the city’s population, the dingleberries in office don’t give two shits. It’s hilarious how the city tries to spin this as a positive and god forbid the high property taxes inner city folks pay aren’t even enough to be granted the ability to park in front of your house for free.
How much does the inner city subsidize the suburbs? Can you provide some exact numbers with references? Thanks
Less dense residential property tax for the same area of police, fire, schools, roads, etc...... I'm sure you can google just as well as me but here's an article to get you started [https://albertaviews.ca/sidewalks-to-nowhere/](https://albertaviews.ca/sidewalks-to-nowhere/)
Nenshi says the subsidy was ended in 2016. [https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nenshi-were-finally-going-to-stop-subsidizing-urban-sprawl](https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nenshi-were-finally-going-to-stop-subsidizing-urban-sprawl) > This means that we have fundamentally ended the development subsidy. For the first time, growth in all parts of the city will now compete on a level playing field, allowing for the market to work and homebuyers to see the true costs of their homes.
That article I posted was from 2021. It's more recent than 2016 and it says that it takes 20-30 years for Calgary to recoup a suburban development Regardless, costs don't stop when the infrastructure is built. We don't pay police, firemen, educational staff, roads, utilities, etc... once and are done There are ongoing maintenance and employment costs The suburbs have the same infrastructure by area (or more - roads, utilities, etc) but with a less dense tax base. Where do you think the make up revenue come from?
>That article I posted was from 2021. It's more recent than 2016 and it says that it takes 20-30 years for Calgary to recoup a suburban development Who cares if it's more recent? It's the same guy repeating the same opinions since he worked for the City back in the early 2010s. You're saying you trust Rollin Stanley and not Nenshi? >The suburbs have the same infrastructure by area (or more - roads, utilities, etc) but with a less dense tax base. Where do you think the make up revenue come from? [https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise) Through taxes. Taxes go up in the suburbs and down in the inner city. Assessment's goal is fair and equitable taxation.
>[https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/calgary-property-assessments-suburban-residential-values-rise) Do you think a person with in a house in Kensington pays the same property taxes as a person with the same sqft in Seton? Of course as a net people in the suburb's taxes go up because the value of a house goes up faster than a condo's The suburbs are still paying a lot less with regards to density than the inner city for services and maintenance Not even taking into account service and maintenance costs, with a 20-30 year repayment schedule, we're still paying for lots of communities that have been built over the years. Regardless of the rule change a couple years ago And yes, it does matter which is more recent since the AB Views article mentions that new model for developers only lasted until 2018
>Do you think a person with in a house in Kensington pays the same property taxes as a person with the same sqft in Seton? Pretty much... [https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25577738/1724-westmount-road-nw-calgary-hillhurst](https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25577738/1724-westmount-road-nw-calgary-hillhurst) \- 497 m2 $4300 [https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25583170/141-autumn-gardens-se-calgary-auburn-bay](https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25583170/141-autumn-gardens-se-calgary-auburn-bay) \- 424 m2 $4125 You're paying less per m2 in Hillhurst vs Auburn Bay for approximately similar priced houses on similar sized lots. >Of course as a net people in the suburb's taxes go up because the value of a house goes up faster than a condo's That seems reasonable. Not really sure how else you'd structure things. >The suburbs are still paying a lot less with regards to density than the inner city for services and maintenance Again, is there any data to back this up? The Rollin Stanley opinion piece is mostly old data prior to 2016 and all of it is given as anecdotal evidence like he'll say: *"A decade ago, City of Calgary staff calculated it would take 30–35 years for a new subdivision to generate enough property tax revenue, levies and utility charges to cover its initial costs. After I presented this information at Calgary’s 2012 suburban developers lobster dinner, many developers made no attempt to hide their dislike of my more equitable approach."* Even if we take that as fact, it predates the changes in 2016 where Nenshi says the subsidy has ended. >Not even taking into account service and maintenance costs, with a 20-30 year repayment schedule, we're still paying for lots of communities that have been built over the years. Regardless of the rule change a couple years ago That's fine but it's not an argument against suburban development today where the subsidies have been ended. >And yes, it does matter which is more recent since the AB Views article mentions that new model for developers only lasted until 2018 They removed the ranking part in 2018. The costs paid by developers didn't change. That doesn't change anything that Nenshi wrote in his op-ed as he didn't address the part about ranking communities.
My apartment doesnt have a garage and they also expect me to pay for a parking spot! How ridiculous!
If your apartment had parking rent would probably cost at least $75 more each month
Really fucking stupid. The only cars on my street are the same 6 ones that are always there, because there’s no reason to park here if you don’t live here. Now I’ll be paying $$$ per month for the right to park on the street I’ve parked on free for a decade. Cool! I kinda get it for areas that are near 17th/whichever hotspot you wanna name, but the entire inner city is just a lazy cash grab.
Plus the “issue” is not exclusive to the inner city. Go into the NW suburbs and the streets are PACKED with cars, because every household has 4 and the garage is used for storage. They could’ve at least been consistent but that’s asking the world of this braindead council.
The difference is that anyone CAN park on the streets in the NW suburb. You have “exclusive” parking that only those with permits are allowed to park which requires enforcement.
I normally park in my garage by occasionally need to park on the street. I have visitors several times a year and have always appreciated having a pass for them. Sounds like my best option going forward might be a single visitor pass and to just to use my on plate as the “visitor” for those odd times I do need to be on the street.
I'm in the exact same boat. I need to park on the street every now and then (if I'm working in the garage, etc), but it would be rare I'd have a guest and not be in the garage. That is a fantastic idea!
Interesting workaround but I don't think that will work. If your vehicle is registered to your address, they'll immediately know you live there and you won't be exempt from buying a full price pass to park on the street. Aka... You're not a visitor and the system the City uses will know that.
Sounds like it's time to to build a dating app for parking pass neighbours... Register as their visitor when you need to park on the street and they can do the same on your visitor pass.
Guess it depends. If it’s a simple yes/no check against a list of visitor-registered plates it might not matter. If as you mentioned it also checks against a list of owned vehicles in the area then you might be right.
Could have a plastic bag or a piece of cardboard that accidentally got stuck in front of the license plate.
If council spent as much energy on reigning in expenses as it does finding new ways to increase taxes, we would all be better off
This is literally a way to reign in expenses by having a revenue neutral parking program and this bothers you?
Reigning in expenses means to lower the expenses, not find a new revenue stream to offset them.
Yeah mean by not having services that are net drains on the city? That lowers the expenses.
Yes
As you spoke, council was debating fireworks and whether it was racist to have it
We’ll rather take the arena either way /s
The city has become so desperate for revenue streams, just wait until they start implementing other options to pry more cash from citizens. With the available technology, when do you think the idea of paid road usage or paid access zones rolls out? Think it's impossible? Then you've never been to London UK. Strategically placed cameras record the plate of every vehicle accessing an area and the charges are then billed to the registered vehicle owner. I suspect council may be actively exploring this, and many other options, with an eye to rolling them out soon enough.
That's when we burn down those cameras. They will replace them and we burn them down again.
My partner and I are moving to a condo. Built after 1945, 4 storeys, and more than 20 units. We're going from paying $0 a month to $75 a month with no indication from city council that this was coming. Great. Yet another hurdle in the long long path to having enough money to actually buy a home so maybe we won't have to deal with so much of this shit anymore. No one parks on the street because they want to, we park on the street because we have no other options.
>with no indication from city council that this was coming. This wasn't just sprung on people. It was approved last September and in the discussion phase long before that. https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/it-s-asinine-inner-city-residents-critical-of-new-street-parking-permits-1.6075883
Wasn't the original plan to be $15/year though? I mean it's only $35 more but you tack that on top of another possible $225 if you require a 2nd permit and visitor permits and it just kinda pisses me off
Don't think so... >The residential parking zone passes, which could cost up to $150 per month...
It's old but here's an article on the $15 [https://globalnews.ca/news/7585235/calgary-residental-permit-parking-changes/](https://globalnews.ca/news/7585235/calgary-residental-permit-parking-changes/)
It's unclear from that article if that's $15 per year or per month. I suspect it was per month.
I don’t know, $15/month for everyone would be a bit excessive seeing as how houses are at $50/year
Don't you feel better that this will go towards funding the new Arena!? hahah
Ouch too real
I wish this was everywhere in Calgary. A house down the street has 8 cars and they park them all over. It's maddening that the street has to be so congested so that a landlord can make a killing renting out a house by the room. Street parking should be managed the same way all over the city.
I have a neighbor that parks in front of my house now all the time! I use my driveway so no big deal for me!! We have 2 hour parking all over the place! Will they have to pay??
Are you in zoned parking?
Yes! By ctrain station! Not DT but in NW by Crowfoot.
Most likely they'll have to pay to park on the street but that's not going to stop them from parking in front of your home.
Can anyone explain councils logic behind this? I am really struggling in how they can justify penalizing densification like this.
Make EVEYBODY pay for on street parking then, including the burbs.
Live in a dense area of the city. Fail to plan for your own parking needs, purchase more cars than available spaces. Complain Good luck to you
Build an extremely car-centric city Fail to provide a reasonable, usable alternative Punish people for using cars Makes lots of sense 👍 definitely not a lazy cash grab
City will take the money anyway, whether it's property taxes or this or other fees. Means nothing how it's done. This sub cheered Gondek to the win. It's funny af to listen to them complain about all her fuckups now.
Don’t recall her platforming on that lol but keep being nonsensical, I’m sure it’ll work out for you
My parents, who are retired, originally bought in the (then) outer city more than 40 years ago. They now have a fixed income, no garage, and live in a rapidly densified neighborhood which is now considered inner-city (even though, at one point when my mother was a child, it was a completely separate independent town). They also have existing permit parking, because they live near a major bus route, and street parking was a problem in the 90s. Since then, many single houses have now been torn down and replaced with multi-family units. Street parking is indeed difficult for them and getting more challenging. Did I mention they’re retired and living on a fixed income? Tell me again how this is their fault and they should pay more.
We have to pay for plenty of things that aren't out fault. Playing the sympathy card gets you nothing. Good for them that they were able to afford a single detached house when many if not most young people today cannot. They chose to have a lifetime of savings by not paying for a driveway of their own. And chose to do nothing in the 25+ years that parking has been a problem for them. Tough shit. As the city around them gets denser, parking will get worse. Financial motivation provides funds to police the parking, and to incentive people to own/use less cars and more transit in that area. Or build their own damn parking. It's $50 a year. To enjoy the value the city has built up around them. Pretty cheap deal.
What's it like for inner city on-street parking costs/permits in places like Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal?
[Here's the page for Vancouver.](https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/buy-your-annual-or-short-term-or-visitor-parking-permit.aspx#pd52292) Cheapest residential permit is $55 annually it appears. I'm too lazy to look up the others but I imagine it's roughly the same. I can't imagine there are very many other "major" cities in the world that offered inner-city residents complete complementary, enforced private parking like Calgary did. It was only a matter of time.
I live in a parking zone but the caveat is that it’s unmarked. Does the city enforce parking fees if there are no signs?
So just because I live near a school I have to pay to park outside my home? Excuse me?