14.POLL RESULTS: PROPOSAL TO IMPLEMENT ALTERNATE SIDE AND

ON-STREET PERMIT PARKING ON PEVERIL HILL ROAD SOUTH,

Ward 28, York-Eglinton.

 City Clerk

July 7, 1998

 Purpose:

 To show results of a poll conducted of residents on Peveril Hill Road South, regarding the above proposal.

 Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

 None.

 Recommendations:

 For consideration and direction of York Community Council.

 Council Reference/Background/History:

 Clause 12 (g) embodied in Report No. 5 of the York Community Council.

 York Community Council, at its meeting held on May 6, 1998, directed that residents on Peveril Hill Road South be polled to determine interest regarding this matter.

 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:24

No. of Replies Received:19

No. of Replies Not Counted: 1

No. of Replies in Favour:3 or 17%

No. of Replies Not In Favour:15 or 83%

 The following is an overall breakdown of responses, according to resident owners, non-resident owners, and tenants:

  Comments from residents are attached hereto as Appendix 1.

 A petition opposing the above noted proposal is attached hereto as Appendix 2.

 Conclusions:

 As noted above, the majority of residents, based on the responses received, are not in favour of the proposal to implement alternate side and on-street permit parking on Peveril Hill Road South.

 Contact Name:

 Steve Brown, Operations Services - Traffic Division

394-2655

394-2758 (fax)

 or

 Jennifer Searle, Assistant Committee Secretary

394-2525

394-2803 (fax)

 (Copies of Appendices 1 and 2, referred to in the foregoing report, were forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the York Community Council meeting of July 22, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the Clerk's Department, York Civic Service Centre.)

  Appendix 1

Poll Results: Proposal to Implement Alternate side and On-street permit parking on Peveril Hill Road South

   Comments from Residents:

 Not In Favour:

 -I do not have any problem or complaint with the parking situation as it presently is. I feel that permit parking on this street will only cause more congestion and future problems. I urge you not to cause problems where they do not exist.

 -This is a ridiculous idea to raise more money!

-To the best of my knowledge, the residents on Peveril Hill South have more than adequate on-site parking. While this may not be the case for apartment dwellers on Bathurst Street, it is not, in my opinion, appropriate for a quiet residential street with many young children to be turned into a parking lot.

 -I definitely do not want permit parking. If people rent out their basements they should provide them with their own driveway parking. It is bad enough with Sabbath and High Holiday's parking, and I do not want (permit off street) parking at any time.

 -Definitely a bad idea.

 - I have lived here for 35 years. There is no driveway opposite my drive on the other side of the street. Most times it is almost impossible for me to get out of my driveway with the constant congestion on the street. I think it is extremely inconsiderate for us to have to be blocked in so outsiders should have parking.

 -There are two Synagogues on Peveril Hill South - both of these need open parking spots on this street for holy days overflows and funerals. The apartment building tenants at Ava and Bathurst would leave cars parked here all the time and there would never be free spaces for our own visitors. They already use the street each night. All houses on Peveril Hill South have a private driveway - many are deep enough to park 3 or 4 cars in a line. They also have a garage each - some double garages. Whose problem is this? I think the tenants on Bathurst Street.

 -This is an unnecessary move that will further confuse people and possibly exacerbate our current parking problem.

 -This proposal would increase parking on the street which is already often overparked with cars from the synagogues. By allowing parking on the east side, I will have even more difficulty with cars blocking easy exit from my driveway. All residents on the street already have adequate parking in their driveways and, in some cases, garages. This proposal will invite additional cars from off the street residents, including nearby apartment buildings, to use our street as a parking lot. This presents an inconvenience to the street residents, who require the street parking for their guests and service people on a casual basis. This also presents an additional traffic hazard, especially for children. The street already attracts many cars visiting the two synagogues at either end. This proposal would limit the availability of such temporary parking and ensure that the street is heavily parked constantly, virtually 24 hours per day.

 -To allow strangers onto a street filled with children is unheard of. Does the city want the responsibility of a child abduction, injury or death caused by a driver who doesn't care? This is a residential street not a parking lot. If you want to collect fees, lower our taxes or give us the "blood" money. Let them park on Bathurst!

-With respect, alternate and on-street permit parking on our street is entirely unnecessary. The demand for parking on our street is minimal. Parking peaks in the morning when students are dropped off at school located at the north and south ends of our streets and during events at the local synagogue and temple. This temporary non-permit parking is essential to the free flow of traffic on and in the immediate vicinity of Peveril Hill Road South. On most evenings, there are a few vehicles parked at the north end of the street and no vehicles parked at the south end of the street.

 It is disconcerting and contrary to our sense of fairness and natural justice that a decision which will affect not only our pocket books but our daily routines appears to have been made "subject to a poll revealing the majority of residents are in favour". It would have been appropriate and fair to give notice to residents and given them an opportunity to make their opinions known to those charged with making this decision before and not after the decision was made. Please confirm that this decision will not be implemented unless "the majority of residents are in favour"; that residents who remain silent will not be deemed to be "in favour" and that the residents referred to in the memorandum dated April 6, 1998 are residents of "Peveril Hill Road South".

 -Peveril Hill Road South is a 1 block street in a residential area. Every house on the street has a two car driveway plus a garage (three cars can park). Several houses have adjusted their driveway to accommodate extra cars. As tax payers, we should have the right to park on our own street without having to buy a permit. We do not need overnight parking. Opening the street to 24 hr parking will make it into a parking lot for people who do not live on Peveril Hill Road South. This action would certainly lower the value to our homes. This permit for 24 hrs, 7 consecutive days will create other problems. Especially in the winter. Snow plows (both private and public) very often clear the snow during the night and early hours of the morning. It would be impossible for them to do a proper job and therefore make it very difficult for the residents to get off their driveways. I have lived here for 50 years and see no reason whatsoever to implement permit parking. Many reasons why not to.

 In Favour

 -I am in favour of alternate side parking regardless of whether it is permit or not. My main concerns are re: unfairness for west side residents as result of excess garbage, noise, inability to conduct street cleaning, leaf collection and snow removal.

 -Until now, the west side of Peveril Hill Road South was never cleaned by the city because of parked cars. The new proposal is a lot better than the current situation.

 -I would prefer no permit parking - I don't think it is necessary and would encourage apartment dwellers to seek permits - as it would be cheaper than paying for parking in their building.