11779 replies to this topic

[JimV]

It provides a lever to make it too expensive to own a car.

That’s basically it.  The rest is just gaslighting.

[sebberry]

Believe it or not, some families need two cars as well.  The city needs to get lost.

[sebberry]

This pushes people further from the core where they can have parking, which only drives up the value of places with more parking and increases the overall cost of living.  

[sebberry]

The highest ratio of parking in the CRD among new-build projects is at government-funded social and affordable housing projects. I'm trying to understand how imposing maximums will lead to affordable housing, if affordable housing appears to be providing more (not less) on-site parking.

 

Facts like this are known by so few people (myself included until now) that the city is counting on the 'duh, cars bad' crowd for support.  This is long past rational thinking.

[Nparker]

Rational thoughts are rare from #1 Centennial Square.

(perhaps this little rhyme is the CoV's secret motto)

[Rex Waverly]

So if i understand what everyone here is saying, there are no issues with the city having MINIMUM parking requirements, just maximums?  

 

It seems to me that if a city should be able to regulate off-street parking to make sure there is enough parking, they should also be able to regulate it so there's not too much parking. I mean, having too much is as much a problem as too little, no?  

 

Also, do we even know what the maximums are?  If the limit is reasonable, there really shouldn't be an issue. 

[sebberry]

How likely is a developer to build too much parking considering the cost of it?  

 

Will the city come up with something stupid like a maximum of one spot for every 1.25 dwelling units in condo buildings?

[Rex Waverly]

The highest ratio of parking in the CRD among new-build projects is at government-funded social and affordable housing projects. I'm trying to understand how imposing maximums will lead to affordable housing, if affordable housing appears to be providing more (not less) on-site parking.

 

Can you provide some examples of this? Most parking studies I've seen lately use lower parking demand rates for affordable housing then market retail....   I'd be interested to see the rationale for more parking at these sites when the rate of car ownership should logically be lower than typical developments.  

[Rex Waverly]

How likely is a developer to build too much parking considering the cost of it?  

 

Will the city come up with something stupid like a maximum of one spot for every 1.25 dwelling units in condo buildings?

 

Well, if you're talking about apartment-style condos downtown, 1.25 probably isn't that crazy a number.  

 

The ITE Parking Generation Manual has a demand of 1.31 space / unit for mid-rise multi-family residential units, and this is based on mostly American studies so is probably more car-centric then Victoria. So based on this (which is admittedly very high level estimate), 1.25 is probably pretty close to the expected demand.  And this data is for general suburban / urban sites; looking at dense urban sites it's about 0.9 spaces / unit.  

 

 

I mean, it's not any more unreasonable than say, Langford having a MINIMUM of 2.75 parking spaces per apartment, unless it's a three bedroom apartment in which case you need 3.75 spaces per unit.  

[Mike K.]

The rationale is creating obstacles for parking creates obstacles for employment, mobility and opportunity.

Here are a few examples, units:stalls:
- Crosstown on Douglas/Burnside (approved): 154:141
- Wilson’s Walk in Vic West (built): 108:136
- 496 Cecelia (approved): 88:99
- Caledonia (proposed): 155:109
- Kiwanis (proposed): 78:108

And that’s just a few examples, and only from the City of Victoria.

[Victoria Watcher]

Can you provide some examples of this? Most parking studies I've seen lately use lower parking demand rates for affordable housing then market retail.... I'd be interested to see the rationale for more parking at these sites when the rate of car ownership should logically be lower than typical developments.

Prosser in central saanich will have underground parking.

[spanky123]

The rationale is creating obstacles for parking creates obstacles for employment, mobility and opportunity.
 

 

Obviously the CoV is trying to get rid of cars. They are doing everything they can by making it as difficult as possible to travel and park anywhere in the downtown core. The belief seems to be that we can become another Amsterdam or Paris (forgetting that both cities actually have cars and downtown parking). They can't do it by actually making downtown safe and attractive so the next step is to try and force private enterprise to play by their rules.

Edited by spanky123, 05 May 2021 - 12:18 PM.

[Nparker]

...The belief seems to be that we can become another Amsterdam or Paris (forgetting that both cities actually have cars and downtown parking)....

And much higher population density.

[Rex Waverly]

The rationale is creating obstacles for parking creates obstacles for employment, mobility and opportunity.

Here are a few examples, units:stalls:
- Crosstown on Douglas/Burnside (approved): 154:141
- Wilson’s Walk in Vic West (built): 108:136
- 496 Cecelia (approved): 88:99
- Caledonia (proposed): 155:109
- Kiwanis (proposed): 78:108

And that’s just a few examples, and only from the City of Victoria.

 

Well, i think half the Cross-town parking is for the commercial component, is it not? 

 

Also, the Wilson's Walk building looks like the parking is so high because of the bylaws at the time; looking at this news article from 2014: https://www.timescol...cized-1.1193384 it looks like the parking requirement was 151 spots and the developer was trying for a variance down to 91 stalls (clearly didn't get the full variance). 

 

 And ignoring all that, that's still a 1:1 parking ratio which doesn't seem all that high, particularly since these aren't in the downtown core.  

[Rex Waverly]

Obviously the CoV is trying to get rid of cars. They are doing everything they can by making it as difficult as possible to travel and park anywhere in the downtown core. The belief seems to be that we can become another Amsterdam or Paris (forgetting that both cities actually have cars and downtown parking). 

 

Why is Paris and Amsterdam always the examples?  You do know there are actually many small cities in France / Holland / etc. similar in size / density to Victoria that follow the same pedestrian / cycle / transit friendly design as the bigger cities?  The same planners / engineers in France / Holland / etc that design the big cities also design the small / medium cities.  

[gstc84]

I live in a downtown condo built in the late 90s (Mike knows the building as I used to see the Citified car parked here all the time). I don't know the ratio of parking spots to units, but there's been a definite shift in demand over the years. Five years ago there were always 3-4 posters up on the bulletin board from residents seeking a parking space at any time, and I was able to double the price I was charging for mine. Now it's the opposite - there's always 3-4 posters up from residents trying to rent out their unused space and I had to drop my price by $50 to keep someone.

[Nparker]

I live in a downtown condo built in the late 90s...but there's been a definite shift in demand over the years. Five years ago there were always 3-4 posters up on the bulletin board from residents seeking a parking space at any time, and I was able to double the price I was charging for mine. Now it's the opposite - there's always 3-4 posters up from residents trying to rent out their unused space and I had to drop my price by $50 to keep someone.

My 90s-built d/t adjacent condo always seems to have requests from residents for additional parking. Currently, at least one other owner that I know of and I are each renting out the spaces we are not using.

[Mike K.]

I live in a downtown condo built in the late 90s (Mike knows the building as I used to see the Citified car parked here all the time). I don't know the ratio of parking spots to units, but there's been a definite shift in demand over the years. Five years ago there were always 3-4 posters up on the bulletin board from residents seeking a parking space at any time, and I was able to double the price I was charging for mine. Now it's the opposite - there's always 3-4 posters up from residents trying to rent out their unused space and I had to drop my price by $50 to keep someone.

 

Ah, yes! I think what changed is the free overnight parking in parkades. I was familiar with a couple of people who gave up their paid-for spots at this building and moved them into an adjacent parkade (they'd leave in the AM to drive to work, then would return with only an hour or so left in the paid-for portion of the day [don't forget 1st hour free] and park free overnight) saving $$$ as the rates had crept up to $150+ per month.

[Mike K.]

Well, i think half the Cross-town parking is for the commercial component, is it not? 

 

Also, the Wilson's Walk building looks like the parking is so high because of the bylaws at the time; looking at this news article from 2014: https://www.timescol...cized-1.1193384 it looks like the parking requirement was 151 spots and the developer was trying for a variance down to 91 stalls (clearly didn't get the full variance). 

 

 And ignoring all that, that's still a 1:1 parking ratio which doesn't seem all that high, particularly since these aren't in the downtown core.  

 

Crosstown will have a seperate commercial phase. The first phase includes those stalls.

 

The point I want to make is parking is in plentiful supply at social housing projects, which doesn't make sense if parking is a contributor to un-affordability of housing.

 

And like I said these are just a few examples. Plenty of active BC Housing-backed projects are making their way through planning with more parking than comparable market projects would include.

[marks_28]

I live in a downtown condo built in the late 90s (Mike knows the building as I used to see the Citified car parked here all the time). I don't know the ratio of parking spots to units, but there's been a definite shift in demand over the years. Five years ago there were always 3-4 posters up on the bulletin board from residents seeking a parking space at any time, and I was able to double the price I was charging for mine. Now it's the opposite - there's always 3-4 posters up from residents trying to rent out their unused space and I had to drop my price by $50 to keep someone.

 

My 90s build condo in Fernwood definitely has extra spots for rent. Our household recently went from two cars to one, and the extra spot we rented at $30/mo has been vacant for 6+ months now.