27.PROPOSAL FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ON-STREET PERMIT PARKING ON PENDEEN AVENUE, BETWEEN BEXLEY CRESCENT AND JANE STREET

 The City Clerk

(March 18, 1998)

 Purpose:

 To provide results following polling of residents to determine majority interest with respect to implementation of on-street permit parking on Pendeen Avenue, between Bexley Crescent and Jane Street.

 Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

 None.

 Recommendations:

 For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

 Council Reference/Background/History:

 The Council of the City of York, at its meeting held on December 9, 1997, directed that the Director of Council Services and City Clerk conduct a poll of residents on Pendeen Avenue regarding the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on Pendeen Avenue.

 Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

 The following is a breakdown of residents polled based on the number of replies returned:

 Total No. Polled:69

No. of Replies Received:12 or 17%

No. of Replies In Favour:4 or 33%

No. of Replies Not In Favour:8 or 67%

 Comments from residents are attached hereto as Appendix 1.

 Conclusions:

 As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are not in favour of the proposal to implement on-street permit parking on Pendeen Avenue, between Bexley Crescent and Jane Street.

 Contact Name:

 Steve Brown, Operations - Traffic Division

394-2655

394-2758 (fax)

 or

 Valerie D=Alessandro, Assistant Committee Secretary

394-2522

394-2803 (fax)

  APPENDIX 1

 Comments from Residents:

 In Favour:

 a)We feel we are in a unique position by being one of, if not the only residence with absolutely no off-street parking facilities, be it a driveway, shared drive, front yard parking, etc.

 b)Tenants at our triplex would like to be able to park on the street.

 Not In Favour:

 a)Received the proposal for on-street parking on Pendeen Avenue. In your covering letter, comments and suggestions were welcome.

 As a resident of Pendeen Avenue for more than forty years, I can recall a previous attempt at Apermit parking@. A petition against this was circulated to the residents of Pendeen Avenue. It was turned down.

 Now for the comments:

 i)How could the Committee even consider a proposal for parking from a non-resident of Pendeen Ave.? This same person wanted a fire hydrant removed to have a parking space!

 ii)The results of the poll are only to serve as a guideline. Why bother with thepretence of democracy (poll)?

 iii)We are to call the Committee for its decision. This allows favouritism--first come, first served.

 iv)On page 4: AConclusions: If permit parking is allowed on Pendeen Ave., there will be an additional fifteen (15) (out of thin air)curb side parking spaces.@ This means that Bexley Crescent residents without parking where they want will be allowed to park on Pendeen Avenue Awithin the designated block@. This is against the procedure as it now exists.

 There are 34 parking spaces on Bexley Crescent. Only 18 are in use. This leaves 16 unused spaces available. The Committee is willing to cause conflicts in the neighbourhood if it allows their proposal to go through. All of this disruption because the City won=t remove a fire hydrant for the person that would use that space won=t drive to an available spot (16 of them) via Jane Street.

 Now the suggestion: Send this back to the Committee for reconsideration. In other words, scrap it!

 b)I petitioned all Pendeen neighbours on this street several years ago (1981). The conclusion: most of us had a driveway, three didn=t, so there was no need for this sort of permit parking. I still feel the same. Who needs a big truck or van in front of their house every day and night?

 As a homeowner of Pendeen Ave. for 49 years now, I recall in May, 1981, one person from Pendeen Ave. had no driveway and he applied for permit parking. I took up a petition to the residents and presented it to the Township. There are 48 homes on our street. Everyone had a driveway, except two or three persons. This petition was signed by forty-two residents of Pendeen Ave. against overnight parking. Enclosed is my letter that I received from you (with your signature on it). This letter was sent to inform the residents that permit parking was turned down.

 Comments:

Your letter states sixteen spaces are still available for permit parking on Bexley Cres., so why not use those spaces instead of changing the parking on Pendeen Ave.?

 Where are the fifteen parking spaces on Pendeen Ave.? We have three triplexes on our street. I hardly ever see many empty spaces.

 There are two parking spots in front of my house. I can never park there. Drivers park too close to my driveway, making it difficult for me to turn out and if they are large vans or trucks they block my view to oncoming traffic. The garbage they leave behind is something else.

 I=m not in favour of removing hydrants.

This decision would be a change in procedure and you would support this change. I really don=t know how it avoids neighbour conflicts.

I do hope that you will reconsider this proposal for permit parking on Pendeen Ave.

(Above-mentioned letter from the Corporation of the Borough of York, dated May 14, 1981, is on file in the Clerk=s Office).

c)If this goes through, which I hope it doesn=t, I think people with driveways and garages should >not= be able to get a permit. It is hard enough for guests to find a parking space.

 Please don=t do it. We don=t want our street to be a parking lot.

 d)People often park too close to driveways and we have a problem getting out of the driveway and trying to turn into the street.

 e)There are 48 houses on our nice, quiet street. Everyone has a driveway, except two houses. In 1981 a survey of our street took place and almost everyone voted against permit parking, so it didn=t go through.

 Our street is okay as is. Last summer, a car parked across from us for six days and never moved. It had a stale permit parking sign on its window. It also was too close to a driveway on Pendeen Ave.. I=m against permit parking and removing hydrants.

 f)Would not stop the children from running across the road. They have no other place to play.