 |
|
Posted by : Anon
on Friday, September 28, 2007 - 07:21 AM EST |
City hides behind regulations to prevent sexy couples from swapping partners
Brian Gould,
A swingers’ club proposed for Edmonton's St Albert Trail and 118 Avenue was shot down this week when the Subdivision and Development Board claimed that although the fire code limits occupation to 149, the club needs 324 parking stalls. Apparently swingers need at least two cars each—presumably for the crazy multi-car backseat sex.
I’m not sure how those wacky swingers would manage to get all those extra cars there. Maybe they’ll duct-tape a dozen cars together into a raft or have some form of reverse clown-car routine worked out. Unfortunately, thanks to this Board, the answers to this question will be lost forever.
Now maybe I’m crazy, but isn’t the whole point of swinging that it’s for couples? So a significant portion should be showing up in groups of two to four. And even if the neighbourhood doesn’t want to admit it, some are going to walk from their nearby homes. Taken together, this makes the requirement for a massive parking lot seem ludicrous.
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that swingers clubs can’t be outlawed on moral grounds, so the Board used the city’s insane parking regulations as a substitute. Like most cities in North America, Edmonton requires businesses to provide a certain number of free parking spots. The usual ratio requires an area of parking equal to the area of the building. The incentive to build more than a single story, then, simply isn’t there, and the accompanying sprawl makes extra parking a self-fulfilling prophecy. But these unnecessary spots aren’t actually free, and this cost inevitably shows up on the price stickers in the store, while also creating huge driving incentives.
In reality, they know that they’re requiring a completely ridiculous amount that’s well in excess of the usual. If they actually added all that parking to the site, they’d have to build a five-storey parkade which would dwarf the single-storey mall. The average ratio would only require 52 spots, and amazingly enough that’s almost exactly what’s already there. If it worked as a bowling alley, then why can’t it work as a club?
They can’t even claim that a swingers’ club doesn’t really jive with the neighbourhood, because Source Adult Video is just across the street. But then again, thousands of porn movies for every taste are harmless, whereas the very thought of old married people getting it on will have little kids scrambling to have unprotected sex. Won’t somebody please think of the children?
Nearby, the Children’s Dental Centre proudly advertises its phone number as 428-KIDS: fully translated it becomes the family friendly message “HAV-KIDS.” By the same logic, the whole neighbourhood is only a single digit away from “GAY-KIDS.” And nobody wants that. Except the swingers.
Maybe it’s not the best place for a swingers club—it’s probably not the best place for a porn shop either—but moving it will only shift the problem somewhere else, and nothing can stop determined kids from getting their hands on porn. Still, it all comes back to horrible zoning laws, and it’s not just controversial uses either.
You can put bedrooms next to stores and restaurants if it’s a hotel, and if you’ve ever been to Las Vegas, Whistler, or any other tourist resort for that matter, you’ll agree that this formula works incredibly well. But try to do the same thing in an Edmonton suburb, and they’ll demand that you walk on water first.
In this case, there’s no acceptable zoning option for keeping these clubs and stores away from the little kiddies, and because the city’s zoning laws are so inept, they’re forced to use the equally inept parking regulations instead. Not only is that unfair and stupid, it’s also causing massive urban sprawl. Can’t we just admit that there’s a problem and fix it?
If they wanna shut you down, they'll allways find a way.
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that swingers clubs can’t be outlawed on moral grounds, so the Board used the city’s insane parking regulations as a substitute.
Note: If they wanna shut you down, they'll allways find a way.
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that swingers clubs can’t be outlawed on moral grounds, so the Board used the city’s insane parking regulations as a substitute.
|
|
|
|
