Calgary parking authority goes too far - Page 3 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Clarkey · 10-07-2009, 08:46 PM

I was backing in to park for the first week to stick it to the man, then I just got lazy and starting parking nose first. I'm glad I stopped that now.

VOTE DR. NO!

4X4 · 10-07-2009, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

Sure. You have to drive past the parking spot, then put it into reverse to back in. I don't like being the guy stuck behind some a hole doing this. Secondly, the average driver can't back in straight so they'll make parking more difficult for the next people. Lastly, it seems self important to me. Maybe it isn't, but I don't care. I've made up my mind on this one.

Well, I definitely agree about the fact that most people can't park straight, but waiting for someone to drive past and then reverse is no different than waiting for someone to parallel park.
As for self important, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

guzzy · 10-07-2009, 08:47 PM

its weak but it's also the rules. The city has made it very clear through media reports and other outlets that you cannot park back-in. The system depends on a scan of your license plate. If it can't scan your license plate than how can it verify you paid?

Also, there are signs up at the parking lots that say front in parking only.

spydermal · 10-07-2009, 08:52 PM

Lot's of companies recommend backing into a spot so you can concentrate on driving forward when leaving. Also had to take a drving course working for ATCO that said the exact same thing.

CrusaderPi · 10-07-2009, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4X4

Well, I definitely agree about the fact that most people can't park straight, but waiting for someone to drive past and then reverse is no different than waiting for someone to parallel park.
As for self important, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Parallel parking is a different matter. You can't get into a small spot pulling forwards. Whereas on a good day I feel like I can get into a spot 3 inches longer then my car going backward.

Chicks dig a good parallel parking job.

Dion · 10-07-2009, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guzzy

its weak but it's also the rules. The city has made it very clear through media reports and other outlets that you cannot park back-in.

Have a link to back up those media reports?

Eddie Bronze · 10-07-2009, 08:56 PM

If you get in an accident in a parking lot it is deemed 50/50...unless you were backing up. Then it's your fault. So if the only way you can get out of that parking stall is to back out, you should let the city know about the real reason you back in, and then let them explain to you how they will take the blame and pay for all the damages when you get smashed into because you can't see backing out in a crowded parking lot.

For a city that's supposed to be working towards promoting the public transit system and working to ease congestion on the roads, they sure are doing a poor job of it and giving it's citizens every reason they need to ignore the trains and buses.

GGG · 10-07-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

I've been parking at park n ride lots for months. Occasionally, there would be slips of paper under people's windshield wipers that back into the stalls. I grabbed one of these and read it, and it said "As of **** (date), backing into stalls will be illegal. You will receive a ticket for backing into a parking stall."

There was fair warning for the people who park in them on a regular basis.

I agree though, if you don't park there often, there's no way you could know unless you read the sign very carefully. The city should make it more clear.

If this is the case I have no problem with the city giving the tickets out. I am a little disappointed that CTV didn't do any research to point out that warnings were given out.

guzzy · 10-07-2009, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Have a link to back up those media reports?

Yes because I spend all day trying to remember links to websites.

When they brought the system in every news channel was talking about how it works. There is still a media outlet they call the TELEVISION

Phaneuf3 · 10-07-2009, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

People "cry" about it because it is a STUPID rule!! Like some posters have said, the person has to get out to check the plate to write the ticket anyways, why don't they punch it in then? This rule is ONLY in effect because the CPA is to lazy to have people get out and check the plates manually. This is there way of smitting the people who back in. Anybody who drives a big truck knows that not only is it easier to back into the stall when parking, but it makes leaving a LOT easier when all you have to do is drive forward and away, and not worry about maneuvering backwards to get out and risk hitting another vehicle. I know a lot of people were looking forward to backing into the stalls in the cold winter days so the guy would have to physically get out and check.

I hope this "rule" causes an uproar with the public and City Hall is flooded with complaints about how stupid this is. It's stupid enough we have to pay $3 to park at the station to take the train. Even stupider that people get ticketed for backing in.

It makes sense though.

The $3 fee is to upgrade services. Upgrading these services cost money. One of these costs is patrolling the lots and handing out tickets. The $3 fee was priced out estimating that checking the lots could be done automatically via camera. If that's not the system people want in place and they instead want the parking authority to walk around the lot, manually punch in plate numbers and check them by hand then the costs will go up. More costs = higher fees and the cycle of bitching continues.

Dion · 10-07-2009, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guzzy

Yes because I spend all day trying to remember links to websites.

Google is your friend.

Quote:

When they brought the system in every news channel was talking about how it works. There is still a media outlet they call the TELEVISION

When they brought the system in it wasn't ILLEGAL to back into the stalls.

What is happening now is a CHANGE to the SYSTEM because of what some drivers are doing.

Dion · 10-07-2009, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

It makes sense though.

The $3 fee is to upgrade services. Upgrading these services cost money. One of these costs is patrolling the lots and handing out tickets. The $3 fee was priced out estimating that checking the lots could be done automatically via camera. If that's not the system people want in place and they instead want the parking authority to walk around the lot, manually punch in plate numbers and check them by hand then the costs will go up. More costs = higher fees and the cycle of bitching continues.

Would it hurt some parking control dude to get out of his vehicle to punch in a few plates of people who backed into thier stalls? Lazy arses if you ask me.

RW99 · 10-07-2009, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eddie Bronze

If you get in an accident in a parking lot it is deemed 50/50...unless you were backing up. Then it's your fault.

Backing up, almost always. But the 50/50 rule depends on the insurance companies involved and any independent witnesses.

But anyway, it sucks the city seems content on a cash grab. But this does save money than have the parking guy out there walking around all the cars. More money towards public transit, health services, etc

DOK · 10-07-2009, 09:42 PM

They could have just made the parking, angle parking, so people had to pull in. Also adding concrete bars between spots would help people not pull through. A little give and take is too much to ask, I suppose.

PowerPlayoffs06 · 10-07-2009, 10:04 PM

I wonder, if you put a front license plate on and backed in would they still give you the ticket because you've backed in, even though they can read your front plate?

My guess is they probably would.

MacDaddy77 · 10-07-2009, 10:06 PM

Here's another question!!

What if there are 2 empty spots , one if front of the other and you drive forward through the one stall to park in the other stall. Then after you are already on the train someone comes and parks behind you.

Technically you didn't back into the parking spot! you drove into that parking spot

ken0042 · 10-07-2009, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheU

its criminal to charge people 3 dollars a day

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheU

i think what bothers people isnt the rule its the enforcement and the laziness of the rule.

OK, so let's say they don't use a van that can check every car in the lot within minutes. They pay people get out, walk around and manually check each and every vehicle.

Who now pays for that? You already say you think the $3 is too much, but then complain that there isn't enough manpower being put into patrolling.

I have never liked the $3 fee, and I also think these people could have been given a warning. But I also remember seeing the signs, and I also remember there being a thread about it here on CP when they announced that it was coming out.

thesmugger · 10-07-2009, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dion

Google is your friend.

Then look them up yourself LOL. You're the kinda guy who gets the ticket, because he can't take a few seconds to check out basic surroundings. Then scream like a spoiled brat when things don't go their way.

SteveToms · 10-08-2009, 12:15 AM

And people wonder why I say I hate Calgary.

Engine09 · 10-08-2009, 12:16 AM

Strange thread, cannot understand the complaints at all unless it's about the size of the sign.

They have a system that scans plates which requires that you must park nose in, that's all there is to it.