Before its implementation today, the Visitor Pay Parking Program had some final modifications done to it, last week. Sylvan Lake Town Council enacted a series tweaks to the Visitor Pay Parking Program in response to a number of concerns and issues that had arisen.
Mayor Sean McIntyre, CAO Betty Osmond and Councillors Graham Parsons, Matt Prete, and Jas Payne made a number of decisions at a public meeting on May 31. The meeting addressed concerns deemed too urgent to wait until the planned review at the end of the first season in which the program will run.
Over 20 guests attended the meeting where eight motions were carried that would modify the Visitor Pay Parking Program before its implementation.
Before Council’s discussion and subsequent decisions, residents were encouraged to voice their perspectives on the issue. John Law, one of the guests who spoke, stated he believes everyone should pay for parking, noting “when any other municipality institutes a pay parking program, everyone pays. I think that’s what it should be in Sylvan Lake.”
Another resident expressed his disapproval at only being entitled to two parking permits, given the size of his family, and noting it would be a significant impediment, in the event any family members decide to visit him simultaneously.
Another resident raised the concern the parking system, as it was, would require working people to park at inconvenient, and potentially dangerous distances from work sites to which they could be “carrying ladders and tools about two blocks.”
Free Parking for Residents
Council carried a motion directing administration to prepare a report regarding possible amendments to the Visitor Pay Parking Program restrictions in the downtown area, which will allow Sylvan Lake residents to park the area without charge.
Angled Parking
Council also carried a motion to amend provisions of the Visitor Pay Parking Program to designate 15 angled parking stalls on the west side of 48 Street as visitor pay stalls.
This decision was made specifically to address issues that were anticipated to occur, with churches on or near streets included in the Visitor Pay Parking Program.
Council considered the idea of an informal temporary permitting process for church events, signage and other alternatives - but it was decided the best solution would be designated parking.
“Really, the cleanest option is to make the west side of 48th Street angle parking. From an administrative standpoint, I don’t like the idea of permitting and messing around with that,” said Prete. “Parking on the west side of 48th is going to be the cleanest option we have.”
Handicap Parking
Council carried a motion to amend the Visitor Pay Parking Program to exempt all handicap parking stalls from pay parking - an exemption that would apply to all visitors and residents.
Council subsequently carried a motion to create two handicap parking stalls on the north end of 48 Street. The new stalls are subject to any restrictions entailed in the Provincial Traffic Regulations.
These were decisions that were quite straightforward, because of the accessibility concerns of residents and visitors which they addressed.
Accessibility
Council carried a motion to create one handicap parking stall on the north end of 48 Street, which would be subject to any restrictions in the Provincial Traffic Regulations. Council also carried a motion to amend the Pay Parking Program allowing four parking permits per residence, in all areas within the municipality.
This issue revolved around the fact many residents were concerned the original two free parking permits per resident would be insufficient for them. Council acknowledged there many kinds of of living arrangements where the two permit per residence rule did not sufficiently account for.
Council considered the financial impact of allowing for more permits per residence, and one option given consideration was changing the system to entail per-vehicle parking permits. That option was determined to be too unwieldy a course of action, requiring re-registration and a lengthy time period for reconfiguration, and it was dismissed.
“With [vehicle-based registration], I’m worried about it being used for fraud,” said Parsons. “I want accountability. It should be for people living in [local] residences - not someone’s kid from Calgary coming to visit.”
In response, Prete said it would be “a lot of work scrapping what we’ve already done.”
He added, “There would be accountability issues - how do you make sure you’re not just registering whoever comes to town that day?”
McIntyre referenced 2016 census numbers, stating that 485 households in Sylvan Lake have five or more people living in them.
“Some of those houses have adult children, licensed children, and more than two adults living in one place,” said McIntyre. “When we take those numbers into consideration, I find myself straddling two options. [Two permits per household] are not enough for every resident, but I would hate to change the program and undo the work that’s already been done.”
McIntyre said the best option to him him was to increase the number of permits per household to four, maintaining this decision will still be subject to review after the program runs for a season.
Counties and Summer Villages
Council carried a motion to direct admin to prepare a report presenting options for residents in nearby communities - including the neighbouring counties and summer villages in the area - to purchase seasonal parking passes. The report was required to include rationales for fees, fee charges and geographical boundaries.
This motion was considered after many residents in neighbouring communities expressed their concerns that they weren’t being represented in the program, even though many are employed, shop, volunteer and use the services available in Sylvan Lake.
Council considered a number of options, including registration for free parking, but ultimately decided the best approach would be one that entails seasonal parking passes.
“Those who shouldn’t pay for parking in Sylvan Lake are people who pay taxes in Sylvan Lake,” said Payne, during the discussion. “If there’s going to be a pass, it should come at a cost. I’m not in favour of free passes for non-residents.”
Service Vehicles
Council also carried a motion that directed administration to prepare a report addressing options to exempt service vehicles from paid parking requirements.
samuel.macdonald@sylvanlakenews.com