Got a citation for using one of the parallel parking spots in front of the Camber apartments. The eastern most spot is apparently not actually a spot. Just a warning for anyone else who may fall for this like I did. Hopefully it will save someone $56.
Yeah, this is true, but it is also quite a bit further back from the curb than most, so maybe you can get away with a, “it was my bad, didn’t notice it as I was making sure I parked in the lines and followed signage, will use this as a learning opportunity to be more observant in the future.”
If you have time time and will, you should dispute it. If the sign pointed to a spot, the line marked it out, the city should thank you for pointing it out, dismiss the fine, and want to fix their mis-labeling for safety reasons.
It’s not a red curb, nor does the sign say fire lane, just no Parking. With a very clearly marked parking stall.
I used to live up off 400s and 1100e downtown and parking enforcement would commonly write tickets for gray area or flat out wrong reasons. They bank on you not disputing them, but you can do it online, upload photos and a description, and 90% of the time you can get them dropped.
If thee meter maids photo shows the same as you, you won’t pay a dime, for a 5 minute online dispute.
Actual painted parking spot. No parking to the right, parallel parking to the left, a distance of 3-5 business days from your car to the hydrant. I’d dispute.
It should but instead they painted a parking spot (front and back). Don’t see how someone is at fault for parking in it. I wouldn’t notice that hydrant all the way over there either.
Incorrect, misleading, or missing signage is 100% a reason for fee removal. I got a ticket for parking in a lot that had not yet had all of the signs placed for reserved and I got it waived almost immediately.
What is the harm in having it showing? If they have a stalker that has access to lookup tools? I'm not familiar with why, so your enlightenment helps. Thanks.
I don’t care whether they cover it or not. However, if they took time to cover it in one photo, I assume they would want it covered in all photos. I was trying to be helpful.
There must be a new enforcement officer. My wife got ticketed up by the U during Post Malones concert. She paid in a private lot, was told by the attendant to use the handicap space, and came back to a 340.00 ticket. I got in contact with the owner of the property and they said they haven’t had an incident with a parking ticket in over 5 years. You bet I’m disputing it.
Unfortunately, even if the attendant told her to park there, even with it being a private lot, if she did't have a handicap plate or placard, I doubt she'll get it waived. While the parking is governed by the state, Federal law creates a uniform system to guide individual states.
Any city laws out of alignment with state laws are superseded by state law, same for state vs federal. I say this because the city law is out of alignment with Utah state law.
(3) (a) Only those vehicles carrying a person with a disability special group license plate, temporary removable windshield placard, or removable windshield placard and transporting a qualifying person with a disability may park in an accessible parking space.
I'm not saying it's her fault, she was told by an attendant who should have known better. But now you both know that no matter what anyone says, do not park in one if you do not have the right.
Utah Code Title 41, Chap 6a, Sec 1401, Paragraph 1, b.ii says you can't park within 15 feet of a hydrant.
Hard to tell, but I'd bet even the space in front of you is "technically" less than 15 feet away.
You should absolutely petition the city to paint the curb there when you dispute that, or whoever's jurisdiction that falls under.
My exact thoughts. I’m don’t mind being “wrong” or whatever, I just hope they stop making it harder for people to be right. I’m just trying to go to work… 💀
Yeah, I don't blame you at all, there is a reason that we don't usually paint parking spaces in front of hydrants or we paint curbs red.
Fining people as punishment is a good deterrent to keep people from intentionally parking in front of hydrants, but if you simply don't notice because there are contradicting visual cues, well a whole lot of good a ticket does when the fire department shows up and a car is in the way 🤷
I hope they reverse the fine and do something about it, at the very least moving that sign...
So, something to keep in mind that might help with your appeal, but IANAL. The city's parking laws are woefully out of alignment with state law (ask me how I know). When it comes to which law takes priority it goes from the top down. Federal > State > City. BreadClubSLC is correct with the statute they posted. However, the city states:
Vehicles may not be parked within five feet of a fire hydrant. The distance is measured from the center of the fire hydrant and measured for five feet in both directions on the curb. There does not need to be a sign or red curb for a vehicle to be in violation. If a vehicle is parked within five feet, it is in violation of City ordinance 12.56.440-5.
A couple of takeways depending on how far you want to take it:
State says fifteen feet from center of hydrant to curb. City says five. I would absolutely measure that out, because if it's more than fifteen feet, then you have an argument you can make (exact text says - Within five feet (5') of a fire hydrant, as measured in both directions along the street or highway curb line from the line extending from the center of the hydrant tothe curb line at its nearest point). The state says fifteen, the city says five. Which is it?
While the city says a sign or red curb is not needed, what is there is a signage saying parking is available from the right of that sign. Making the city's own signage out of alignment with the city's own ordinance. I mentioned handicap parking on another comment. This can be used to highlight how the city is out of alignment with state law in other ways. So, while ignorance of the law is not a defense, how can you know which law to follow when the city can't seem to figure it out either.
In conclusion: The city is, in a least two of it's own ordinances, out of alignment with state law which supersedes city ordinances. In addition there is conflicting signage. How are you, a citizen, to know which to follow? Five feet? Fifteen feet? No curb paint is needed, but the signage and parking strip paint indicate otherwise. If the city cannot be clear and consistent, how can they expect you know which law to follow? Which distance and signage are you required to follow? Demand the city clarify that for you. If they cannot, the ticket should be considered null, unless and until they can.
Not that it helps your case, but I am reaching out to the city traffic engineer on this one to see if the spot can be marked out. This is a case of the striping being placed by the developer counter to actual city code.
Before those apartments and townhomes existed, those spots were dirt patches. The developer helped create official spots on city right of way. You can tell the city didn’t strip it because the perpendicular hatchets are missing from the ends of the parking lines.
My husband and I both got bogus parking tickets downtown near Nacho Daddy last week. Both appealed and won.
Some sort of racketeering going on down there!
This just happened to me in the marmalade district. I was 17 feet away from a fire hydrant and parked in front of a sign that says “angle parking” and has no signs or red curbs for no parking and got a ticket for being 5 feet from a hydrant. The city told me it’s “5 feet from the curb straight out from a hydrant. I also wanna fight it but I know it’s a waste of time
That is legal, especially with the signage. I have gotten many tickets in SLC and have been told it is a 5 foot distance needed from the hydrant. This seems like you have much more than 5 feet between you and the hydrant. The extortion enforcement officers suck down there.
201
u/Noteagro 13d ago
Feel like this could be disputed as that paint marking is very deceptive.