Paid parking is one of the hot topic issues for Banff’s municipal election – and there’s already a wide range of views on the controversial issue from mayoral and council hopefuls.
The question of whether or not to implement paid parking in the downtown core to deal with Banff’s traffic woes is on the ballot when residents go to the polls Oct. 16.
Some candidates are strongly in favour and others supportive but with caveats, such as free parking passes for residents, or all revenue going to transportation initiatives. There are others outright opposed or wanting to see the outcome of the plebiscite.
Mayor Karen Sorensen said she remains open-minded on the contentious issue, and happy a question on user pay parking is on the ballot.
She said it’s important to note parking in Banff is not free, adding Banff taxpayers cover all costs associated with creating and maintaining parking spots.
“It does make sense to me that the millions of visitors using our parking infrastructure could also help pay those costs,” she said.
“Technology would allow for many scenarios to allow for some user pay parking in certain lots, certain seasons, certain hours, some time at no cost on the front end et cetera.”
Mayoral hopeful Hugh Pettigrew, whose wife, Alanna Pettigrew, heads up Banff Residents Against Paid Parking (BRAPP), doesn’t support paid parking, but said people should have their say on the issue.
He said the community has not been consulted as to whether or not paid parking should be implemented, and said parking that is available has already been paid for.
“We also see that the revised Land Use Bylaw doesn’t recognize the need for parking and doesn’t put a premium on this. Why should we pay for parking if it appears not to be needed when constructing new developments?” he said.
Pettigrew said the real problem is congestion, adding he believes paid parking does nothing to alleviate congestion and will not fix residential parking problems.
“Parking can be managed by using effective time limits,” he said, noting the strategy of user pay parking is simply an additional revenue stream.
“We are fortunate to have many tourists spending their dollars in our community. We do not need to charge them an additional fee.”
The results of a resident satisfaction survey Ipsos did for the Town of Banff shows 57 per cent said yes to user pay parking in select locations during Banff’s busiest times, while 42 per cent said no. Younger residents were more likely to be supportive.
In 1999, the council of the day supported implementing user-pay parking on a one-year trial basis, but the issue was shot down the following year in a plebiscite – with 263 residents for paid parking and 1,138 against.
Council hopeful Allan Buckingham said he’s not 100 per cent saying paid parking should be implemented, but it’s important to seriously consider it in the downtown core to work towards making Banff a sustainable, model environmental community.
“I believe we need to be encouraging modes of transport other than the personal vehicle, and that carrots and sticks are both effective ways of doing so,” he said.
“I also believe, however, that we need to be able to accommodate people with mobility issues, and consider affordability issues for residents and visitors.”
Barry Ferguson is opposed to paid parking at this time.
“I don’t think it is necessary yet. I think the proposal at the train station has changed the parking outlook in Banff,” he said. “I think we need to wait and see what happens with the referendum on election day.”
Incumbent Corrie DiManno said she’s in favour of paid parking in the downtown core, noting it’s a way to manage parking and improve traffic congestion.
“I’m also in favour of exploring a residential parking pass system in tandem with revisiting the discussion of instituting user pay parking,” she said.
Another incumbent councillor, Grant Canning, said he supports paid parking with one condition – that all revenue generated from paid parking goes toward transit and other congestion and traffic related initiatives, not general revenues.
Canning said he also believes it’s wrong and counter-intuitive to allow visitors and residents to park for free downtown, but ask them to pay a fare to take public transit.
“Increasing transit ridership is the best and most effective way of dealing with our congestion and parking issues and the best way to do that is by eliminating fares and increasing schedule frequency,” he said.
“If we are able to lower the need to charge fares on Roam, or even eliminate fares altogether, then I would support paid parking within the downtown core.”
Canning also supports a resident parking pass program to be implemented with a paid parking program, allowing residents exclusive opportunity to park on their streets in close proximity to downtown.
“I think this is important to ensure our residents maintain the right to park on their own street should paid parking push vehicles outside of the downtown area into residential neighborhoods,” he said.
Chris Wong said he’d support continuing with free parking if it’s a sustainable and viable solution, but can see a scenario where paid parking could be a win-win if implemented in a thoughtful way.
If any type of pay-parking scheme were initiated, Wong said he would press for a free parking pass system to ensure the core population of locals and long-term commuting employees would not incur any out-of-pocket costs to park their vehicle.
“Also, I would ensure that revenues accrued from paid parking would either be revenue neutral, or be directly and transparently reinvested back into the community,” he said.
“For example, revenues could be applied to the cost of constructing more parking downtown, and/or could be used to lower municipal taxes for residents. Alternately, revenues could be directly re-invested into improving transit and bike accessibility.”
Lorraine Harder said she does not support paid parking, adding having accessibility to park for free in any parking lot is very convenient for residents and visitors, and in turn, advantageous to local businesses.
“While I do see the benefits in gaining revenue from this source, I think many conditions would have to be implemented in order for it to be acceptable in my eyes,” she said.
“I think paid parking in the downtown core will create more gridlock as people drive around in search of free parking. However, if the vote to bring paid parking in were to succeed, I would bring forth the motion for free parking passes for residents.”
In addition, Harder said she would support a motion to investigate how to implement the cost of parking along with the park passes purchased when entering the town.
“I think creating a scenario where people have to pay to enter the park, and then pay separately for parking, will only create a negative experience during their visit,” she said.
Wade Rettie said paid parking is clearly an important topic for Banff residents, and for this reason would like a bit more time in forming an opinion.
“There are numerous issues and benefits related to paid-parking. I think it would be best for me to review all of the areas affected by creating paid parking before forming an opinion one way or another,” he said.
“Paid parking will certainly be a hot topic this year with strong arguments both for and against. I’m keen to look into things more before responding with what I hope will be a balanced and fair assessment of whether the town should introduce paid parking.”
Chip Olver, who is seeking a ninth term on council, believes paid parking would be a useful addition to initiatives already being tried, pointing to frequent and increased transit, more bike racks and the app banffparking.ca among others.
If paid parking is supported in the plebiscite, she said she would like to form a citizen committee, with differing opinions represented, to determine how best to proceed as there are many possible variations on what it could like.
“My ideas would be for busy times of year and busy times of day only, a low hourly rate, revenue targeted at transportation initiatives and consideration for residents where there is a certain amount of credit or discount applied,” she said.
Incumbent Brian Standish supports paid parking, noting it’s no secret Banff has traffic congestion and parking issues.
“The Town of Banff is committed to being a model environmental community and, given our limited land space, that means we can’t build our way out of this problem,” he said.
“What we need to do is come up with creative solutions to manage traffic volumes, particularly at high peak times. Paid parking is a tool we need to use to help us manage this problem.”
Standish said there is no such thing as free parking and taxpayers of Banff are the ones paying for visitors to park for free.
“In an area like downtown Banff, with high parking demand, when we subsidize its cost and freeze its apparent price at zero, there are many more people who want it than there are spots available – a simple case of supply and demand,” he said.
“Research has shown that pay parking in the downtown core could enhance the visitor experience by improving turnover and alleviating the parking shortage.”
Doug Macnamara said the paid parking issue has elements of tourism attraction, revenue to town for parking management, incentives for good environmental practice, traffic flow-intensity, and resident access to services.
“All that said, I do believe we can find a paid parking/resident and worker pass system that takes into account hours of the day, seasons and encourages walking and biking to work, but also ensures residents can go to the store or post office whenever they need, and provides staff from outside Banff with reasonable employment-parking options,” he said. “I think we also need to consider where RVs can travel in town, and provide reasonable options for parking and transport around town.”
Dave Dickson is not opposed to exploring the options of paid parking.
“Though no one likes forking over their hard earned dollars for a place to park, there is likely a compromise that can be reached,” he said.
Dickson said a compromise plan could see revenue generated by paid parking go to services such as the increased public transit.
“If we want to continue to make Banff better and better we will need to find other revenue streams,” he said.
Ted Christensen, who is seeking a second term on council, said paid parking is complicated, noting he sees it as another tax.
“Not that revenue for the town is not important, but I think we should be clear as to what paid parking will achieve,” he said.
“I don’t think it will change the traffic management situation.”
If paid parking were to be implemented, Christensen said there needs to be clear guidelines on what revenue generated would go towards.
“There also needs to be residential and business parking considerations,” he said.
Jon Whelan spent a lot of time helping Banff Residents Against Paid Parking (BRAPP) in summer 2014 gather signatures on the petition against pay parking.
“Ironically, I supported the concept of pay parking, but I could not support the version that council and administration were trying to ramrod through,” he said.
While he doesn’t like the paid parking question being asked on the ballot, noting part of it is too vague, Whelan said voters’ response to the plebiscite question regarding pay parking will be interesting.
Regardless of the response to the paid parking plebiscite, Whelan said the issue should be put on the backburner or forgotten until after the plans for the Banff train station are fully known.
“That 900-stall parking lot is a game-changer,” he said.
Council hopefuls Peter Poole, Tony Bumbaco and Rob Lillington did not meet the Outlook’s deadline.
