News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 7.4K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.5K     0 

Pay Parking in Public Parks

Supply and demand or another cash grab?

---
A bit of both I imagine.

Similar to the province and the fees for crown land. Demand has gone way up for everything outdoors across the board, so this helps mitigate it, but given all the new fees on everything, I think people are beginning to be fee fatigued.
 
A bit of both I imagine.

Similar to the province and the fees for crown land. Demand has gone way up for everything outdoors across the board, so this helps mitigate it, but given all the new fees on everything, I think people are beginning to be fee fatigued.

Nickel is already trying to gaslight the populace over this
 
I tend to agree with this policy. A reasonable fee for parking still makes outings to park and these establishments great value. Whether the revenue goes towards park maintenance or general revenue is fine by me. I tend to value gov't revenue coming more out of user fees, than of taxes, especially in this case.

For lower income families, I believe you could offer them a discount or reimbursement, like the program (still running?) that discounts city golf courses and attractions for those under a certain income threshold.
 
^^^^
as noted elsewhere, for it to be a cash grab the city would have to collect more money than it will spend to collect it.
also as noted elsewhere, i find it hard to reconcile the addition of pay parking for parks at the same time the city is proposing to eliminate pay parking for downtown. the lack of consistency and the strange priority over which would be free and which would need to be paid for is hard for me to reconcile.
 
Well I guess we'll see what happens but I wouldn't be surprised too see usage numbers go down.

I am on a strict budget so going to some of these places was already a challenge, now add paying for parking, I can't afford more expenses.
 
Taproot By Michelle Ferguson

Coun. Bev Esslinger put forward a motion to cancel the planned parking fees at five city sites after hearing concerns from several Edmontonians over the proposed Reimagine Services plan. Council is scheduled to vote on the motion July 5.
 
They will not be proceeding with paid parking at these sites.

It doesn't seem the following was well communicated as part of this proposal. People still had two hours of free parking before any fees became applicable.

"Iveson said there was a lot of misunderstanding about the proposal, after city administration outlined it as an option in its reimagine services plan to save and make money.

The proposal still included two hours free parking at those facilities, he noted, and wasn't intended to take in a lot of money.

"It's actually about making sure that people aren't parking at a park and then walking to work or walking to an LRT or bus station or something like that."
 
Last edited:
Emily Murphy Park, Rafters’ Landing, Muttart Conservatory, Fort Edmonton Park and the Telus World of Science were the proposed locations. Everytime I've passed by those locations on a week day I have never seen any issue of the parking lots being full. I highly doubt they are trying to curb people parking at the parks and walking to work or LRT. Where would someone be going to work if they parked at Fort Edm Park? Everywhere around Telus world of Science has its own parking or ample street parking. I think the explanation is pretty lame trying to save face when this idea was really just a simple cash grab attempt.
 
Emily Murphy Park, Rafters’ Landing, Muttart Conservatory, Fort Edmonton Park and the Telus World of Science were the proposed locations. Everytime I've passed by those locations on a week day I have never seen any issue of the parking lots being full. I highly doubt they are trying to curb people parking at the parks and walking to work or LRT. Where would someone be going to work if they parked at Fort Edm Park? Everywhere around Telus world of Science has its own parking or ample street parking. I think the explanation is pretty lame trying to save face when this idea was really just a simple cash grab attempt.
Emily Murphy park is being used by U of A. That's why the east lot is almost always full. Rafters landing is being used by poeple worling downtown, I've seen it almost full and no boat sailings. Have no idea about he others, I do known before COVID Brewery District was having this problem and all you need to look at the old P club lot on 109 and 111 Ave.
 
Emily Murphy park is being used by U of A. That's why the east lot is almost always full. Rafters landing is being used by poeple worling downtown, I've seen it almost full and no boat sailings. Have no idea about he others, I do known before COVID Brewery District was having this problem and all you need to look at the old P club lot on 109 and 111 Ave.
And I wonder when the valley line LRT is in operation if that will impact the available parking at the Muttart?
 
Well where parking is close enough to employment areas time limits can be set, as well as resident passes could become thing like in the u of a area. Boaters going to rafters landing could have some sort of pass allows free parking if using the area for boating.
 
Emily Murphy Park, Rafters’ Landing, Muttart Conservatory, Fort Edmonton Park and the Telus World of Science were the proposed locations. Everytime I've passed by those locations on a week day I have never seen any issue of the parking lots being full. I highly doubt they are trying to curb people parking at the parks and walking to work or LRT. Where would someone be going to work if they parked at Fort Edm Park? Everywhere around Telus world of Science has its own parking or ample street parking. I think the explanation is pretty lame trying to save face when this idea was really just a simple cash grab attempt.
I’ve definitely found it challenging in the past to find parking at TWoS
 

Back
Top