The Ogre In The Room:

How Ottawa Rewrote its Minimum Parking Regulations

Tim J. Moerman, MCIP, RPPOPPI Symposium 2016

October 6, 2016

4

7

8

Human Space:

1.5m x1.5m

Parking Space:

2.6m x 5.2m (stall)+

2.6m x 6.7m x ½ (aisle)+

10% (driveways etc.)

1.5m

1.5m

5.2m

3.35m

2.6m

9

Human Space:

2.25 m2

Parking Space:

24.5 m2

10

10xthe space

occupied bya human...

11

Mandatory parking distorts urban design

Corner store, 1940 (before parking minimums)

Corner store, 2015 (built after parking minimums)

(These stores are one block away from each other.)

18

First comprehensive parking review since 1964Dramatically reduced inner-urban parking minimums:• Eliminated parking minima for all uses near major rapid-

transit (LRT) stations

• No parking minimum for low-rise residential/office and 95% of ground-floor commercial on urban mainstreets

• No parking minimum for the first 12 residential units and up to 200m2 non-res in the inner urban area (=roughly the built-up area of Ottawa circa 1960.)

• Where parking required, rate is one-half the suburban rate.

• Near suburban rapid-transit stations, also cut parking minimums in half.*

*This summary is greatly simplified. Do not use the content of this slide to plan your project!

19

ConsultationDiscussion Paper #1 (May 2015)• Neutral, 12-page document to

introduce stakeholders to minimum parking

• History of minimum parking rates – how they came to be, and why

• Pros and cons (and no judgments!)

• Present a range of options, ranging from "keep status quo" to "abolish all parking minima city-wide"

• Invite people to send comments by e-mail.

20

ConsultationDialogue! (May – Sept 2015)

• Respond to emails• Talk on the phone• Meet with community groups or stakeholders one-on-one• Long, un-bureaucratic exchanges.• Make people feel that they are just talking to a real person

knows a lot about this stuff, who cares about the same things they do, and is willing to take the time to discuss at length.

21

Key message: It's not actually about parking!• It's about all of the good things

we all want.... but that you don't (can't!) get if there's a minimum parking requirement.

• e.g. Walkable streets, supporting small business, good public transit, affordable housing, appropriate intensification, keeping taxes under control....

• It's not obvious to non-experts how parking minimums hinder these goals.

• But once we made the connection, most opposition evaporated.

22

ConsultationDraft zoning... and a movie! (October 2015)• Draft zoning proposals posted

in Discussion Paper #2• Updated website with FAQ,

responses to frequent concerns, etc.

• Also, produced a 90-second animated-ish video on why we're changing the minimum parking rules.

• Video was picked up by Atlantic Citylab blog & hit 20,000 views in a week.

23

ConsultationMore Dialogue! (Oct-Dec. 2015)• More discussions (email and phone) about specific zoning proposals.• Meetings with community associations are with their boards or

planning committees—not the wide-open public meetings• Keep the meeting size manageable, discussion with relatively well-

informed stakeholders• Many small meetings instead of one or two big ones = less risk of a

fearful minority hijacking the conversation.

24

Top Three Concerns:1. Does this mean you're going to prevent people from having parking (or take away existing parking?)

2. What about the elderly & handicapped? Limited mobility means they need to drive.

3. What about spillover parking? If no on-site parking, that means the streets will be choked with parked cars, people will poach neighbours' parking spaces etc.

25

Top Three Concerns:"Are you going to prevent people from having

parking (or take away existing parking?)"• No! Parking maximums will be looked at in a later project.

(We know it will be more contentious.)

• But for now, this is only about how much parking you're required to provide—not how much you're allowed to provide.

• The stakeholders most concerned about minimum parking are a different group from those concerned about maximums.

• Splitting minimum and maximum parking reviews into two projects makes everything much more manageable.

26

Top Three Concerns:"What about the elderly & handicapped?"

27

Top Three Concerns:"What about the elderly & handicapped?"

28

Top Three Concerns:"What about the elderly & handicapped?"

• Note the assumption here: "elderly/handicapped = unable to walk but still able to drive."

• In fact, many kinds of handicaps (blindness, some neurological conditions, etc.) make people unable to drive but still able to function otherwise.

• Old age brings lots of surprises. Maybe you can still drive... but maybe vision loss, diabetes, cognitive decline etc. We need to provide for those people too!

• Those who really must drive still have an entire post-WW2 cityscape designed for car access.

29

Top Three Concerns:

• Short answer: spillover is way more complicated than just "not enough parking!"

• Parking minimums simply pretend it is simple; supply-side solutions are at best pyrrhic victories.

• Longer answer: We wrote a detailed discussion of what causes spillover parking and included it on the website and staff report.

"What about spillover parking? If no on-site parking, that means the streets will be choked with parked cars, people will poach neighbours' parking spaces etc.."

30

Everybody Loves A Happy Ending!• Staff report with parking reductions went to Planning

Committee in June 2016.

• Two delegations appeared to comment....both in favour.

• The resulting by-law was not appealed and is in force as of July 13, 2016.