Question: Does this sign mean I need a permit to park there period?Submitted by wisperino345 t3_126pxf3 in pittsburgh
esushi t1_jeahuso wrote
Reply to comment by chrisms150 in Question: Does this sign mean I need a permit to park there period? by wisperino345
It should since that would be parking over 2 hours in the U zone in one day between 11-6, which is against the rules according to this sign.
AmericanChestHair t1_jeajfoj wrote
Better question is if you parked from 10 to 10:30, they scanned you at 10:10, you leave and come back at 5 and park from 5-6, and they scan you at 5:30. They must assume you parked for 7+ hours right?
doctor_ben t1_jeamc6z wrote
Yes, this happened to me. Had a receipt and everything during the time I was gone.
Challenged it in traffic court, Judge upheld the ticket, but reduced it to a $10 fine and said don't do it again.
AchuTheLegoAztec t1_jeaupho wrote
i guess i got lucky. for me the judge threw it out but i had a similar situation
strub420 t1_jecodiz wrote
This happened to me. I was in the spot for 20 minutes. Left and went to another part of town for a meeting and lunch where I was paying them to park. Came back for 15 minutes to drop something off and got a ticket while inside. I had GPS proof of my timeframe and location. And proof I was actively paying in another zone and still had to pay the full ticket. The judge did not care.
tesla3by3 t1_jeali34 wrote
Yeah that’s how it works. There’s no practical way for them to know you were gone , or at least not for how long.
chrisms150 t1_jeaqmgf wrote
I don't think many people interpret these signs as 2 hours per day. The sign should say per day in that case.
"15 min loading zones" have the same language. Should you only be allowed to load/unload once per vehicle per day?
esushi t1_jeayr1w wrote
That there would be no feasible way to enforce anything but a "per day" rule I guess helps with the implication, at least. (It also does not state that it's referring to the street and not about parking mid-air, for instance)
chrisms150 t1_jeb049q wrote
Plate scanners could record gps coordinates, use an area, then look at times. Was the plate in the same general area at 1pm? Then not again until 5pm with scans at 3 and 4 not registering the plate? Then they weren't there for more than 2 consecutive hours.
Will it have false negatives if as the scanners going across it misses you? (Say, someone walking and blocking the image) sure. But that's a better outcome than ticketing wrongly.
Seems feasible to me?
Re: parking mid air. Please don't start with strawmen. If the ordinance is 2 hours per day, adding per day is not a ridiculous requirement. The signage should convey the ordinances accurately.
esushi t1_jeb13w1 wrote
There is a real chance you're the only person who does not think the 'per day' isn't the only possible implication from that sign. Otherwise, there'd have to be so many other rules about "how long can you leave until you're allowed to park again?". Sooo complicated that there is, truly and surely, no way to enforce it (or communicate it on a little sign).
The way you understand the sign without 'per day' means that it's good for someone to leave and come back again... for how long do they have to leave? How would the sign communicate that? How lucky would the person have to be that the scanner comes the exact point and time that they were gone to register they left and came back? It's so spooky and messy that there's no way that that could be the way that it works, so (nearly) everyone recognizes that must not be the way that it works.
chrisms150 t1_jeb8u27 wrote
https://pittsburghpa.gov/dcp/faqs
Literally the city itself states
"Those without a permit may park for only a limited amount of time, which may be no more than a 2-hour period"
If they mean per day they should state per day. But they don't.
Because that's not what is intended.
The ordinance is to prevent long term parking on the street. Not limit total cumulative time you can be doing business in a zone (imagine, for example, a maid sevice doing several houses in the same parking zone)
esushi t1_jebh6g2 wrote
So it is your genuine reading of that rule that someone can leave for 1 second and then come back because that falls within your dictionary-words-only reading of the policy? Or is there a chance that, in general, policies require the smallest amount of interpretation to see how it would make sense in the real world? Or are you just being a contrarian for fun? If not one second, how long? How can you determine that with it not being written in the policy? With the complete lack of guidance about "how long you're allowed to be away", only "per day" makes sense. There is no other way to read it.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments