[FNTS]

But on my street in Cabbagetown, they are parking where it is explicitly illegal, see my pic at top, where it's clearly illegal to park without a permit, same (though far more morally reprehensible and fine costly) as if I parked in a handicapped spot without a permit.

And they do condone it, essentially saying on their site and in the media that the city hasn't ruled in our favour, so we'll do what we want.

It's not illegal to park on residential streets without a permit up to 3 hours, and Car2Go has a system to try to avoid going over that as much as possible. I insist, anger is making you read too fast. From Metro.ca:
http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...-introduce-on-street-parking-in-toronto-.html

"With its latest request denied, the company is planning to move ahead anyway. Effective March 31, Car2Go’s will be able to leave vehicles on all streets except in metered parking spaces and those otherwise restricted by the city — such as near a fire hydrant or in a school zone.
(...)
By leaving cars on residential streets without permits, Car2Go risks getting tickets for breaking a city bylaw that bans on-street parking for more than three hours at a time. It’s a risk the company’s willing to take."

 

[Admiral Beez]

It's not illegal to park on residential streets without a permit up to 3 hours,

It is, AIUI, illegal to park, for even 5 mins, in a zone marked No Parking 12:01am-10am.

 

[TheOneAbove]

Are you the gentleman that called the police to report the Car2Go so they could enhance revenue generation? LOL

Parking is certainly a premium. I am in the west Bloor area and I had to go through many hoops just to get a parking permit since I can't use the facilities the landlord here owns for parking. When I got a permit, there is usually only a 50/50 chance - at best - that there is any parking at all in front of my building. I understand the frustration completely, but car sharing services won't be going anywhere. They aren't the cause of parking problems.

I'm more concerned with the fact that there seems to be no traffic flow in much of Toronto. I'm about as pro-transit and pro-walking as you can get, I don't know why people would opt to drive to the office if they have a reasonable and fast option for taking transit. The last thing I want to do with my income is waste it on transportation getting to/from the office, and often gas costs are high. But at the same time, I'm less concerned with where Car2Go is and more concerned with the fact that neighborhoods in Toronto are on lock-down.

In the west/northwest part of the city, you have the streets around Eglinton, particularly south of Allen Rd, completely arranged in a way where you can't navigate without being forced onto the street construction. Seems less safe for everyone... Pedestrians are less safe, drivers are less safe, buses can't traverse the streets fastly due to increased congestion, people sitting in traffic burning more hydrocarbons than needed so its anti-green.

Why not fight the bigger battles? You can always rent that Car2Go for a few minutes and repark it in a GreenP location. Toronto claims to want to be a green city, but forcing cars onto construction-reduced capacity thoroughfares does nothing but increase congestion and wasted hydrocarbon burn. Why not fight for opening up streets for through traffic to get around congestion?

This map represents one of the most insane traffic flow maps I have ever seen:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6921324,-79.4352052,16.38z?hl=en

Between Arlington and Alameda there's nothing but south one-way traffic flows. How does any that lives there get around?!?

And another super, super dumb format: turn into Winona from St Clair, and it is a street literally to nowhere. You must turn around and re-enter St. Clair, running over pedestrians passing by.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.680782,-79.432763,18.23z?hl=en

Toronto has some very, very asinine and dumb flows and layouts. I love this city, but I'm perplexed by how dumb (and unsafe, and anti-green) some of this stuff is. Trying to make some of the side streets more pedestrian friendly by forcing cars to turn around and practically run over people to get back onto a main thoroughfare is ... the definition of idiocy. The only people who will be turning onto Winona from St. Clair will be your out of town visitors - often out of the city without city driving skills - in a panic and hitting the gas too fast as they return to St. Clair and right into the path of pedestrians along St. Clair. It is an accident waiting to happen, all because of poor planning.

 

[Megaton327]

It is, AIUI, illegal to park, for even 5 mins, in a zone marked No Parking 12:01am-10am.

You understand it incorrectly. It is legal to park there for up to 3 hours any time between 10 AM and 12 AM. Car2Go allows its members to park there, if the car looks like it will be left over 3 hours or into the permit parking period (as opposed to another member simply picking it up a few minutes or a couple of hours later) then they will move it to avoid a ticket. If they do not, the city issues a ticket, and Car2Go pays it.

 

[Admiral Beez]

If you're right, then yes, my understanding is off. I always thought the signs were pretty clear, no parking between those times. The sign says nothing about a 3 hour grace period. But so be it, now I know.

I'm more concerned with the fact that there seems to be no traffic flow in much of Toronto.iting to happen, all because of poor planning.

Agreed. In my world, we'd have no left turns without dedicated turn lanes, roundabouts where they'd work in place of lighted intersections, no on street parking on streetcar routes unless road is wide enough for a lane for streetcar and cars, in additional to the street parking, sychronised traffic lights to improve traffic flow, no dump trucks or tractor trailers on the DVP from 7am to 9am, and 4pm and 7pm. Rush hour recognized to 7pm, with no on street parking until 7pm, commercial trucks (shredders, couriers, etc.) parked blocking lanes immediately clamped with second offense fine worth 50% of vehicle's value, removal of one side of on-street parking on main roads, replacing with two-direction separated bike lanes. Imagine Queen St. like the below from Vic Park to Dundas West (but 2-way, with street car tracks and on side of on-street parking to the right).

 

[Megaton327]

If you're right, then yes, my understanding is off. I always thought the signs were pretty clear, no parking between those times. The sign says nothing about a 3 hour grace period. But so be it, now I know.

Sorry, that's still not it--apologies if my explanation wasn't very clear. Let me rephrase it--so, that sign says "no parking 12:01 AM-10 AM except by permit", which means:

12:01 AM - 10 AM: no parking, for any amount of time, unless you have a permit. If a C2G is present in such a zone during that time, it can be ticketed, and C2G has publicly stated they will pay the ticket.

10:01 AM - 12:00 AM: anyone without a permit may park for up to 3 hours. If a C2G is parked here during this time, unless another member happens to take the car in under 3 hours/before 12:00 AM arrives, then A) C2G must send an employee to move the car, or B) C2G will pay the ticket if the car receives one due to staying too long.

You had said "It is, AIUI, illegal to park, for even 5 mins, in a zone marked No Parking 12:01am-10am" which is incorrect, as you implied that sign applied to the entire day, i.e. only people with a permit can park there at any time. At least that's how I understood what you wrote.

 

[TheOneAbove]

Well, maybe someday traffic can flow in Toronto. There's hope.

 

[Admiral Beez]

New poll in Cabbagetown on this issue https://cabbagetowner.com/quick-pol...il&utm_term=0_6040ea8f73-6666cf1d2c-219210737

Seems to mirror the opinions here, mostly that the service be accommodated.

 

[dowlingm]

In my neighbourhood (Coxwell-Danforth) there are several schools with car parking and at least one decent size church car park that are idle between 2000-0700. Wouldn't solve every problem but I bet it would solve some, if some of that parking could take pressure off city streets.

 

[Admiral Beez]

if some of that parking could take pressure off city streets.

I've lived in Cabbagetown since 1998, always with on-street parking, and for the most part I never have trouble finding a spot. If I did, I'd be more annoyed with corporations like Daimler AG using our streets as a a fleet depot.

 

[Megaton327]

I've lived in Cabbagetown since 1998, always with on-street parking, and for the most part I never have trouble finding a spot. If I did, I'd be more annoyed with corporations like Daimler AG using our streets as a a fleet depot.

Actually, it would be your neighbours using their streets for parking cars, except far fewer and smaller cars (mostly) than they would be parking if they chose to purchase their own full-size vehicles. So, you should really be thanking Daimler and your neighbours.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Actually, it would be your neighbours using their streets for parking cars, except far fewer and smaller cars (mostly) than they would be parking if they chose to purchase their own full-size vehicles. So, you should really be thanking Daimler and your neighbours.

That's certainly consistent with the spin Daimler's marketeers and their supporters put on it; so I can see why you'd feel this way too.

 

[Megaton327]

That's certainly consistent with the spin Daimler's marketeers and their supporters put on it; so I can see why you'd feel this way too.

It's also consistent with facts. Your disagreement with this is certainly consistent with the NIMBY spin, wherein people think the absolute pittance they pay for a parking permit entitles them to ownership of a specific spot and even the whole street, and that their huge contribution to gridlock and global warming as single-occupant vehicle drivers is perfectly fine. Suffice to say, I find that attitude dangerous.

 

[dowlingm]

It's also consistent with facts. Your disagreement with this is certainly consistent with the NIMBY spin, wherein people think the absolute pittance they pay for a parking permit entitles them to ownership of a specific spot and even the whole street, and that their huge contribution to gridlock and global warming as single-occupant vehicle drivers is perfectly fine. Suffice to say, I find that attitude dangerous.

Many people want to stick with private vehicles because it's what they want. These people don't want to share, they want a car they selected. These would be the people above.

But there are other groups of people for whom car-sharing can't be depended on. On my street there are some work vehicles. There are people who need to use the highways and would be terrified at the notion of sharing the 401 in a SmartCar with an 18 wheeler. There are vehicles which carry those with family members with mobility or other issues, for whom a walk to the nearest bus stop will simply result in only the most necessary journeys being taken given the limitations of WheelTrans.

As it stands, a permit only gets you a spot in the area designated, and assuming permits haven't been oversold. In my neighbourhood, only one side of the street parking is permitted and in the winter the available space is further compromised by snow humps.

Maybe on-street permits are too cheap but if they got more expensive than they are, people would want more from them such as the "guaranteed spot" described above.

 

[TheOneAbove]

Maybe on-street permits are too cheap but if they got more expensive than they are, people would want more from them such as the "guaranteed spot" described above.

Each person is entitled to their own views on this, and I would simply state that spending over $200 per year, which is the current rate for a standard parking spot, is a bit pricey. At the price I pay currently, I should be guaranteed a spot... But as we know its a crapshoot at best.