2017 04 18 Attachment 3 tandem parking
APPENDIX 3: TANDEM PARKING
DATE:
April 11, 2017
TO:
Budget & Infrastructure Committee
FROM:
Jennifer Little, MCIP, Manager of Planning
SUBJECT:
TANDEM PARKING IN TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS
1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1
Context: Tandem parking is the placement of a parking space behind another parking space so that only the rear space has direct access to a road or drive-aisle. Over the past decade, an increasing number of townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam have included various ratios of tandem parking, with an overall upward trend as developers aim for more compact development in light of rising land and construction costs and as the City strives to achieve more intensified residential land uses in keeping with regional direction. While the development industry had advised the provision of tandem parking is necessary to provide attached, ground-oriented units at a size and cost acceptable to the local market, developments with high ratios of tandem parking can be perceived by residents and community members as not providing for sufficient parking. This issue can be aggravated if the spaces are not designed or used properly. In March, the Smart Growth Committee (SGC) determined it wished to consider changing tandem parking in townhouse developments as part of its 2017 work program, as outlined in the Director’s covering report. This appendix provides technical information on the issue and identifies options to address SGC’s concerns including a discussion of options to limit the number of tandem spaces, prohibit this configuration, or continue to allow it but with enhanced communication and enforcement measures in place to mitigate the impacts.
1.2
Policy: The Official Community Plan (OCP) contains policies which support provision of a variety of housing types to accommodate different housing needs for the growing population. It promotes expansion of townhouses in a number of older residential areas, as this use can serve as a transition between areas intended to retain their single residential character and areas which will have higher density apartment or mixed use developments. OCP policies also allow for rowhouse developments within areas designated for apartment uses as a form higher density infill where appropriate, such as properties otherwise too small to feasibly accommodate an apartment building.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 2 Policies related to parking are intended to ensure there is adequate parking and loading facilities provided for new developments. The OCP specifically encourages single-width garages and tandem parking arrangements in small lot residential developments (RS4 zone) as a mechanism to minimize the visual impact of driveways in front yards. 1.3
Regulations: The Zoning Bylaw includes three townhouse zones, RTh1, RTh2, and RTh3 that vary depending on the number of permitted units per acre (UPA). In Port Coquitlam, most developers propose rezoning to the RTh3 (Residential Townhouse 3) zone as it allows for the most intense development with a minimum land area requirement of 220m2 per unit (results in approximately 18.6 UPA). By requiring a specified amount of land per dwelling unit, the UPA density model limits the number of units constructed on a site, but not the size of these units or the total floor area constructed on the site. In addition, a number of townhouse sites have been permitted to achieve higher densities on a site-specific basis through the rezoning process (e.g., Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront neighbourhood), a density transfer (allowing for more intense development on a portion of a property in exchange for dedicating a portion of the original parcel for environmental purposes, such as at 2560 Pitt River Road) and density bonus provisions (cash payment for additional land value attributed to the additional units). There is also one rowhouse zone, RRh (Residential Rowhouse), which essentially allows for street-oriented townhouses and is a higher density form allowing for a maximum floor area ratio of 1.0 rather than compliance with a UPA measure. For the purposes of this report, the term “townhouse” will be inclusive of rowhouses as the regulations and development impacts are similar. The Parking and Management of Development Bylaw allows tandem parking, but does not set specific regulations for this configuration. It requires additional width for spaces within or adjacent to an enclosed structure such a wall in a garage. The bylaw requires provision of 1.5 offstreet parking spaces for smaller townhouses having up to 2 bedrooms; 2 parking spaces for each townhouse with 3 or more bedrooms; and 1 visitor space for every 5 units. Rowhouses are required to provide 2 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit but there is no additional visitor parking space requirement. The configuration of parking spaces is reviewed by staff to assess compliance of a development application with the objectives and guidelines of a site’s development permit area designation. While not directly addressed by existing regulations, staff have been encouraging applicants to design for a mix of arrangements to include side-by-side parking spaces and provide sufficient room on the driveway apron to add additional parking opportunities through this regulatory review process.
1.4
The Housing Action Plan: The Housing Action Plan endorsed by SGC in 2015 identifies groundoriented dwellings including townhouses and rowhouses as an increasingly important housing choice for those who desire private, street front entrances and direct access to yards, accept multiple-storey living, and wish an alternative to a detached home (usually for financial or lifestyle reasons). The Plan notes that City’s supply of this housing form has increased substantially over the past several decades, with most of this growth taking place on larger parcels which were previously undeveloped or significantly underutilized such as in the Riverwood, Dominion Riverfront, and Prairie/Flint areas. The Plan identified a concern that many of the remaining areas designated for townhouse development include relatively small lots that have high property values based on their existing single residential use. An economic analysis
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 3 completed as part of the current OCP review concluded there is insufficient economic value in these areas to support redevelopment to townhouses under our current regulations. In keeping with the direction of the Plan to achieve residential growth, options to address this significant gap are intended to be brought forward through the OCP update. 2.0 TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS AND PARKING 2.1
Site and Development Characteristics: Prior to the late 1990s, townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam were characterized by larger, wider 2-storey units often in excess of 185m2 (2000 sq.ft.) and contained in smaller building complexes with spacious yards and common amenity areas. The density of these developments was moderate and often not significantly higher than surrounding single residential development. This model has given way to compact developments with smaller, narrow 3-storey units ranging between 100 – 140 m2 (1100-1500 sq. ft.), often contained in buildings comprised of 6 to 8 units, with smaller yards and limited common space.
Figure 1: 1255 Riverside Drive, constructed in 2004 at a 13 UPA
Figure 2: 2423 Avon Place and 2428 Nile Gate, constructed in 2013 at 23-28 UPA
A number of factors influence how a townhouse site is designed and the ultimate number of units which can be achieved. These factors include:
Size, shape and grade of the property: Large, flat and rectangular shaped properties can provide more flexibility in configuring the site. Narrow or irregular shaped lots can be challenging to design efficiently; steeply sloping sites can have accessibility constraints.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 4
2.2
Location: properties adjacent to busy roads, watercourses, or non-residential uses may be required to provide greater setbacks to buffer uses from negative impacts or provide for environmental protection.
Transportation requirements: limited locations for safe vehicular access may be dictate options for configuring vehicular access through a site.
Floodplain: properties located in the floodplain may be restricted to garage and other non- habitable uses on the ground floor.
Efficiency: The developer aims for an efficient land use by reducing space occupied by drive-aisles, turnarounds and amenity areas and constructing longer, narrower buildings.
Market demand for size, shape and price point of units: larger units, units at the end of a building, units with street access or adjacent to an amenity such as a park have generally achieved higher sales prices. Under current market conditions, all units including innovative designs such as back-to-back configurations have been tested to meet demand for less costly units.
Parking requirements: A mix of side-by-side and tandem parking is typically offered preferred as it accommodates a range of unit shapes and sizes, and can allows for a more interesting building design than one dominated by garage doors.
Tandem parking arrangements: Tandem parking arrangements are a common mechanism to manage parking within the footprint of a narrow unit. Tandem parking can be arranged in two ways: both spaces within a garage, or one space within the garage and one on the drive apron. A representative sample of townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam since the early 2000s indicates most have included a portion of tandem stalls as shown in the following table. Address 1255 Riverside Drive 1055 Riverwood Gate 2495 Davies Ave 2418 Avon Place 2655 Bedford Street 2423 Avon Place & 2428 Nile Gate 2332 Ranger Lane 2183 Prairie Ave 2310 Ranger Lane 2138 Salisbury Ave 2139 Prairie Ave 2150 Salisbury Ave 1818 Harbour Ave 2560 Pitt River Rd 2143-9 Prairie Ave
# of Units 59 145 64 137 35 Lot 1:65 Lot 2:49 48 17 75 15 17 22 17 45 17
Density (UPA) 13.0 18.6 20.5 18.4 17.0 23.0 28.8 25.9 18.0 25.9 17.4 18.0 19.4 20 24.7 20
% tandem stalls none 55% 100% 81% 100% 100% 90% none 92% 40% 50% 27% 79% 73% 65%
Year constructed 1996 2005 2009 2010 2012 2013
Developer
2013 2014 2014 2015 2016 2017 In progress In progress Proposed
Mosaic Prairie Green Mosaic McLean Homes Nu-Gen McLean Homes Quantum Bosa McLean Homes
Richardson Bros Surelok Mosaic Mosaic Mosaic Mosaic
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 5 Units with tandem parking typically have a 4.6m (15’) wide frontage, or less (some units are as small as 13’ wide) whereas units with side-by-side parking typically start at a 7.3m (24’) width. The larger frontage required for a double-wide parking arrangement results in a larger unit due to the building length associated with efficient layouts. While designing units which would be short and wide is technically feasible, this design is avoided as it can significantly increase construction costs (roads & services, bearing walls, joists) and/or reduce efficiencies. 2.3
Impacts of tandem parking: Occupants’ use of parking spaces for non-parking purposes within multi-family developments can increase pressure on street parking and designated visitor spaces within a complex, and result in the perception that adequate parking had not been supplied for the development. Conversion of some or all of a garage to living space or storage use can eliminate one or both parking spaces; while this appears to be more prevalent for two tandem parking spaces within a garage, it is also common in other arrangements, including side-by-side garages. There can be individual preferences to park on the street in front of a street-facing unit if it is more convenient, or if there is a concern about maneuvering a larger vehicle into an allocated parking space. Occupants may also find it challenging to coordinate moving their vehicles in and out of tandem spaces and look for an easier solution. Staff have been made aware of concerns related to tandem parking from residents in two neighborhoods, Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront development and the Prairie/Salisbury area.
2.4
Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront neighbourhood was zoned to permit the development of a very dense community with 650 units in 4 apartment buildings and 7 townhouse complexes. The townhouse units were designed with a high percentage of double tandem stall garages to achieve this density. Strata representatives have advised a number of occupants are using garage space for purposes such as storage or games rooms. The compact design of the neighborhood, narrow width of Ranger Lane with its privately held on-street parking spaces (no additional street parking) and location adjacent to Fremont Connector (which does not offer on-street parking) have combined to result in minimal additional parking opportunities for visitors and limited alternatives for residents to park outside their allocated stalls. The City has been made aware of concerns that residents are using visitor stalls or parking on drive-aisles and within travel lanes, and that trade contractors working on the remaining townhouse and apartment parcels are impacting the availability of street and visitor parking.
The 2100 block of Prairie and Salisbury Avenues is currently transitioning from large lots developed with single residential units to consolidated lots developed with townhouses; four townhouse developments are under construction or completed and one application for townhouses is currently under consideration by Council. These developments have all provided a mix of tandem and double-wide garages. The City has been advised of concerns that the new developments have increased pressure on street parking and resulted in vehicles being parked or obstructing the lane. It is difficult to assess if parking will be problematic in the long term as some of these parking issues also appear to be related to current construction activities.
Regional Comparisons. The approach taken by other municipalities in allowing for tandem parking in ground-oriented development varies through the region and includes setting maximum ratios of tandem spaces, considering tandem parking on a project by project basis,
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 6 setting higher parking space requirements or additional use requirements where tandem parking is allowed. In the last several years, a number of municipalities have conducted comprehensive reviews of tandem parking with the intent they would clarify or amend their regulations and policies. After consulting with development industry stakeholders in 2011, the City of Richmond imposed a limit on the ratio of tandem spaces in townhouse developments to 50% of the required parking stalls. The City of Surrey consulted with residents and the development industry in 2015 before determining it would also set a limit of 50% to tandem parking spaces in groundoriented buildings. Last year the City of Coquitlam embarked on a review of all ground-oriented housing parking requirements, including tandem parking and it is currently considering bylaw amendments which would limit the number of tandem stalls in townhouse developments to 33%. 3.0 POTENTIAL DIRECTIONS IF TANDEM PARKING REGULATIONS ARE TO BE REVIEWED 3.1
Amend the Planning Division work program to undertake a specific review of tandem parking, including community consultation. This direction would provide for consideration of the maximum number or ratio of tandem spaces which may be considered appropriate for townhouse developments as well as an assessment of measures which could address other parking issues, such as the number of visitor spaces. This work would be expected to result in setting out clear expectations and provides certainty to developers. If selected, a range of limits could be explored in consultation with the community and development industry to identify a ratio considered to meet different objectives by continuing to support a mix of unit sizes and configurations while reducing negative impacts. Other measures to address townhouse parking issues which could be explored through this review could include: Replacing the calculation of number of required parking spaces based on number of bedrooms with a base requirement of 2 parking spaces per unit as a way of recognizing parking demand is not based on unit size. Only allowing tandem parking when one space is located on the drive apron as a mechanism for reducing impacts where one or both tandem spaces within a garage are converted to non-parking uses. Requiring registration of a covenant on title as a condition of rezoning to specify that Strata Bylaws must prohibit residents from using garages as interior living space or parking in visitor spaces. This could help give strata corporations authority to influence troublesome parking behavior and empower them to use enforcement tools available under the Stata Title Act. Changing the required number of visitor parking spaces.
3.2
Proceed directly with elimination of tandem parking by requesting SGC bring forward an amendment to the Parking and Development Management Bylaw that would require independent access to all parking spaces in new townhouse developments. It is expected that this option would have a significant impact on the feasibility of any new townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam because developers would be unable to create efficient layouts achieving densities high enough to warrant the costs of lot consolidation and redevelopment. While a variance to allow for tandem parking arrangements could be sought on a site-specific basis through the rezoning process, if Council were to proceed in this direction, the development industry is unlikely to find it acceptable due to the significant risk that a variance would not be approved. Adoption of a policy to guide applications for site-specific variance could mitigate some of this concern.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 7 3.3
Not change the work program, but obtain a review of tandem parking as part of the OCP update. The Housing Action Plan identified a significant issue associated with the inability to achieve housing objectives due to the challenge of assembling a sufficient number of single family lots to accommodate, due to the high value of single family lots for in many areas designated for townhouses. A review of townhouse-designated sites which are unlikely to be redeveloped is included in the Planning Division’s work program and is scheduled to be undertaken this spring and summer and will include an evaluation of the RTh3 zone’s regulations including density and siting requirements. A discussion of issues associated with tandem parking could be included within this scope of work.
3.4
Not change the work program and maintain the status quo (current regulations) but enforce non-compliance. This option could address the concern that much of the parking problem can be attributed to residents using their required parking spaces for non-parking purposes. It would continue the current informal process whereby staff encourage developers to design their sites to maximize double-wide garages as feasible given the location and characteristics of the development site. Staff would also explore options such as requiring developers to inform purchasers that parking spaces cannot be converted, enhancing public education by working with strata organizations and management companies to help residents comply with existing regulations.
Prepared by Jennifer Little, Manager of Planning
DATE:
April 11, 2017
TO:
Budget & Infrastructure Committee
FROM:
Jennifer Little, MCIP, Manager of Planning
SUBJECT:
TANDEM PARKING IN TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS
1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1
Context: Tandem parking is the placement of a parking space behind another parking space so that only the rear space has direct access to a road or drive-aisle. Over the past decade, an increasing number of townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam have included various ratios of tandem parking, with an overall upward trend as developers aim for more compact development in light of rising land and construction costs and as the City strives to achieve more intensified residential land uses in keeping with regional direction. While the development industry had advised the provision of tandem parking is necessary to provide attached, ground-oriented units at a size and cost acceptable to the local market, developments with high ratios of tandem parking can be perceived by residents and community members as not providing for sufficient parking. This issue can be aggravated if the spaces are not designed or used properly. In March, the Smart Growth Committee (SGC) determined it wished to consider changing tandem parking in townhouse developments as part of its 2017 work program, as outlined in the Director’s covering report. This appendix provides technical information on the issue and identifies options to address SGC’s concerns including a discussion of options to limit the number of tandem spaces, prohibit this configuration, or continue to allow it but with enhanced communication and enforcement measures in place to mitigate the impacts.
1.2
Policy: The Official Community Plan (OCP) contains policies which support provision of a variety of housing types to accommodate different housing needs for the growing population. It promotes expansion of townhouses in a number of older residential areas, as this use can serve as a transition between areas intended to retain their single residential character and areas which will have higher density apartment or mixed use developments. OCP policies also allow for rowhouse developments within areas designated for apartment uses as a form higher density infill where appropriate, such as properties otherwise too small to feasibly accommodate an apartment building.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 2 Policies related to parking are intended to ensure there is adequate parking and loading facilities provided for new developments. The OCP specifically encourages single-width garages and tandem parking arrangements in small lot residential developments (RS4 zone) as a mechanism to minimize the visual impact of driveways in front yards. 1.3
Regulations: The Zoning Bylaw includes three townhouse zones, RTh1, RTh2, and RTh3 that vary depending on the number of permitted units per acre (UPA). In Port Coquitlam, most developers propose rezoning to the RTh3 (Residential Townhouse 3) zone as it allows for the most intense development with a minimum land area requirement of 220m2 per unit (results in approximately 18.6 UPA). By requiring a specified amount of land per dwelling unit, the UPA density model limits the number of units constructed on a site, but not the size of these units or the total floor area constructed on the site. In addition, a number of townhouse sites have been permitted to achieve higher densities on a site-specific basis through the rezoning process (e.g., Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront neighbourhood), a density transfer (allowing for more intense development on a portion of a property in exchange for dedicating a portion of the original parcel for environmental purposes, such as at 2560 Pitt River Road) and density bonus provisions (cash payment for additional land value attributed to the additional units). There is also one rowhouse zone, RRh (Residential Rowhouse), which essentially allows for street-oriented townhouses and is a higher density form allowing for a maximum floor area ratio of 1.0 rather than compliance with a UPA measure. For the purposes of this report, the term “townhouse” will be inclusive of rowhouses as the regulations and development impacts are similar. The Parking and Management of Development Bylaw allows tandem parking, but does not set specific regulations for this configuration. It requires additional width for spaces within or adjacent to an enclosed structure such a wall in a garage. The bylaw requires provision of 1.5 offstreet parking spaces for smaller townhouses having up to 2 bedrooms; 2 parking spaces for each townhouse with 3 or more bedrooms; and 1 visitor space for every 5 units. Rowhouses are required to provide 2 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit but there is no additional visitor parking space requirement. The configuration of parking spaces is reviewed by staff to assess compliance of a development application with the objectives and guidelines of a site’s development permit area designation. While not directly addressed by existing regulations, staff have been encouraging applicants to design for a mix of arrangements to include side-by-side parking spaces and provide sufficient room on the driveway apron to add additional parking opportunities through this regulatory review process.
1.4
The Housing Action Plan: The Housing Action Plan endorsed by SGC in 2015 identifies groundoriented dwellings including townhouses and rowhouses as an increasingly important housing choice for those who desire private, street front entrances and direct access to yards, accept multiple-storey living, and wish an alternative to a detached home (usually for financial or lifestyle reasons). The Plan notes that City’s supply of this housing form has increased substantially over the past several decades, with most of this growth taking place on larger parcels which were previously undeveloped or significantly underutilized such as in the Riverwood, Dominion Riverfront, and Prairie/Flint areas. The Plan identified a concern that many of the remaining areas designated for townhouse development include relatively small lots that have high property values based on their existing single residential use. An economic analysis
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 3 completed as part of the current OCP review concluded there is insufficient economic value in these areas to support redevelopment to townhouses under our current regulations. In keeping with the direction of the Plan to achieve residential growth, options to address this significant gap are intended to be brought forward through the OCP update. 2.0 TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS AND PARKING 2.1
Site and Development Characteristics: Prior to the late 1990s, townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam were characterized by larger, wider 2-storey units often in excess of 185m2 (2000 sq.ft.) and contained in smaller building complexes with spacious yards and common amenity areas. The density of these developments was moderate and often not significantly higher than surrounding single residential development. This model has given way to compact developments with smaller, narrow 3-storey units ranging between 100 – 140 m2 (1100-1500 sq. ft.), often contained in buildings comprised of 6 to 8 units, with smaller yards and limited common space.
Figure 1: 1255 Riverside Drive, constructed in 2004 at a 13 UPA
Figure 2: 2423 Avon Place and 2428 Nile Gate, constructed in 2013 at 23-28 UPA
A number of factors influence how a townhouse site is designed and the ultimate number of units which can be achieved. These factors include:
Size, shape and grade of the property: Large, flat and rectangular shaped properties can provide more flexibility in configuring the site. Narrow or irregular shaped lots can be challenging to design efficiently; steeply sloping sites can have accessibility constraints.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 4
2.2
Location: properties adjacent to busy roads, watercourses, or non-residential uses may be required to provide greater setbacks to buffer uses from negative impacts or provide for environmental protection.
Transportation requirements: limited locations for safe vehicular access may be dictate options for configuring vehicular access through a site.
Floodplain: properties located in the floodplain may be restricted to garage and other non- habitable uses on the ground floor.
Efficiency: The developer aims for an efficient land use by reducing space occupied by drive-aisles, turnarounds and amenity areas and constructing longer, narrower buildings.
Market demand for size, shape and price point of units: larger units, units at the end of a building, units with street access or adjacent to an amenity such as a park have generally achieved higher sales prices. Under current market conditions, all units including innovative designs such as back-to-back configurations have been tested to meet demand for less costly units.
Parking requirements: A mix of side-by-side and tandem parking is typically offered preferred as it accommodates a range of unit shapes and sizes, and can allows for a more interesting building design than one dominated by garage doors.
Tandem parking arrangements: Tandem parking arrangements are a common mechanism to manage parking within the footprint of a narrow unit. Tandem parking can be arranged in two ways: both spaces within a garage, or one space within the garage and one on the drive apron. A representative sample of townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam since the early 2000s indicates most have included a portion of tandem stalls as shown in the following table. Address 1255 Riverside Drive 1055 Riverwood Gate 2495 Davies Ave 2418 Avon Place 2655 Bedford Street 2423 Avon Place & 2428 Nile Gate 2332 Ranger Lane 2183 Prairie Ave 2310 Ranger Lane 2138 Salisbury Ave 2139 Prairie Ave 2150 Salisbury Ave 1818 Harbour Ave 2560 Pitt River Rd 2143-9 Prairie Ave
# of Units 59 145 64 137 35 Lot 1:65 Lot 2:49 48 17 75 15 17 22 17 45 17
Density (UPA) 13.0 18.6 20.5 18.4 17.0 23.0 28.8 25.9 18.0 25.9 17.4 18.0 19.4 20 24.7 20
% tandem stalls none 55% 100% 81% 100% 100% 90% none 92% 40% 50% 27% 79% 73% 65%
Year constructed 1996 2005 2009 2010 2012 2013
Developer
2013 2014 2014 2015 2016 2017 In progress In progress Proposed
Mosaic Prairie Green Mosaic McLean Homes Nu-Gen McLean Homes Quantum Bosa McLean Homes
Richardson Bros Surelok Mosaic Mosaic Mosaic Mosaic
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 5 Units with tandem parking typically have a 4.6m (15’) wide frontage, or less (some units are as small as 13’ wide) whereas units with side-by-side parking typically start at a 7.3m (24’) width. The larger frontage required for a double-wide parking arrangement results in a larger unit due to the building length associated with efficient layouts. While designing units which would be short and wide is technically feasible, this design is avoided as it can significantly increase construction costs (roads & services, bearing walls, joists) and/or reduce efficiencies. 2.3
Impacts of tandem parking: Occupants’ use of parking spaces for non-parking purposes within multi-family developments can increase pressure on street parking and designated visitor spaces within a complex, and result in the perception that adequate parking had not been supplied for the development. Conversion of some or all of a garage to living space or storage use can eliminate one or both parking spaces; while this appears to be more prevalent for two tandem parking spaces within a garage, it is also common in other arrangements, including side-by-side garages. There can be individual preferences to park on the street in front of a street-facing unit if it is more convenient, or if there is a concern about maneuvering a larger vehicle into an allocated parking space. Occupants may also find it challenging to coordinate moving their vehicles in and out of tandem spaces and look for an easier solution. Staff have been made aware of concerns related to tandem parking from residents in two neighborhoods, Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront development and the Prairie/Salisbury area.
2.4
Mosaic’s Fremont Riverfront neighbourhood was zoned to permit the development of a very dense community with 650 units in 4 apartment buildings and 7 townhouse complexes. The townhouse units were designed with a high percentage of double tandem stall garages to achieve this density. Strata representatives have advised a number of occupants are using garage space for purposes such as storage or games rooms. The compact design of the neighborhood, narrow width of Ranger Lane with its privately held on-street parking spaces (no additional street parking) and location adjacent to Fremont Connector (which does not offer on-street parking) have combined to result in minimal additional parking opportunities for visitors and limited alternatives for residents to park outside their allocated stalls. The City has been made aware of concerns that residents are using visitor stalls or parking on drive-aisles and within travel lanes, and that trade contractors working on the remaining townhouse and apartment parcels are impacting the availability of street and visitor parking.
The 2100 block of Prairie and Salisbury Avenues is currently transitioning from large lots developed with single residential units to consolidated lots developed with townhouses; four townhouse developments are under construction or completed and one application for townhouses is currently under consideration by Council. These developments have all provided a mix of tandem and double-wide garages. The City has been advised of concerns that the new developments have increased pressure on street parking and resulted in vehicles being parked or obstructing the lane. It is difficult to assess if parking will be problematic in the long term as some of these parking issues also appear to be related to current construction activities.
Regional Comparisons. The approach taken by other municipalities in allowing for tandem parking in ground-oriented development varies through the region and includes setting maximum ratios of tandem spaces, considering tandem parking on a project by project basis,
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 6 setting higher parking space requirements or additional use requirements where tandem parking is allowed. In the last several years, a number of municipalities have conducted comprehensive reviews of tandem parking with the intent they would clarify or amend their regulations and policies. After consulting with development industry stakeholders in 2011, the City of Richmond imposed a limit on the ratio of tandem spaces in townhouse developments to 50% of the required parking stalls. The City of Surrey consulted with residents and the development industry in 2015 before determining it would also set a limit of 50% to tandem parking spaces in groundoriented buildings. Last year the City of Coquitlam embarked on a review of all ground-oriented housing parking requirements, including tandem parking and it is currently considering bylaw amendments which would limit the number of tandem stalls in townhouse developments to 33%. 3.0 POTENTIAL DIRECTIONS IF TANDEM PARKING REGULATIONS ARE TO BE REVIEWED 3.1
Amend the Planning Division work program to undertake a specific review of tandem parking, including community consultation. This direction would provide for consideration of the maximum number or ratio of tandem spaces which may be considered appropriate for townhouse developments as well as an assessment of measures which could address other parking issues, such as the number of visitor spaces. This work would be expected to result in setting out clear expectations and provides certainty to developers. If selected, a range of limits could be explored in consultation with the community and development industry to identify a ratio considered to meet different objectives by continuing to support a mix of unit sizes and configurations while reducing negative impacts. Other measures to address townhouse parking issues which could be explored through this review could include: Replacing the calculation of number of required parking spaces based on number of bedrooms with a base requirement of 2 parking spaces per unit as a way of recognizing parking demand is not based on unit size. Only allowing tandem parking when one space is located on the drive apron as a mechanism for reducing impacts where one or both tandem spaces within a garage are converted to non-parking uses. Requiring registration of a covenant on title as a condition of rezoning to specify that Strata Bylaws must prohibit residents from using garages as interior living space or parking in visitor spaces. This could help give strata corporations authority to influence troublesome parking behavior and empower them to use enforcement tools available under the Stata Title Act. Changing the required number of visitor parking spaces.
3.2
Proceed directly with elimination of tandem parking by requesting SGC bring forward an amendment to the Parking and Development Management Bylaw that would require independent access to all parking spaces in new townhouse developments. It is expected that this option would have a significant impact on the feasibility of any new townhouse developments in Port Coquitlam because developers would be unable to create efficient layouts achieving densities high enough to warrant the costs of lot consolidation and redevelopment. While a variance to allow for tandem parking arrangements could be sought on a site-specific basis through the rezoning process, if Council were to proceed in this direction, the development industry is unlikely to find it acceptable due to the significant risk that a variance would not be approved. Adoption of a policy to guide applications for site-specific variance could mitigate some of this concern.
Tandem Parking in Townhouse Developments April 11, 2017 Page 7 3.3
Not change the work program, but obtain a review of tandem parking as part of the OCP update. The Housing Action Plan identified a significant issue associated with the inability to achieve housing objectives due to the challenge of assembling a sufficient number of single family lots to accommodate, due to the high value of single family lots for in many areas designated for townhouses. A review of townhouse-designated sites which are unlikely to be redeveloped is included in the Planning Division’s work program and is scheduled to be undertaken this spring and summer and will include an evaluation of the RTh3 zone’s regulations including density and siting requirements. A discussion of issues associated with tandem parking could be included within this scope of work.
3.4
Not change the work program and maintain the status quo (current regulations) but enforce non-compliance. This option could address the concern that much of the parking problem can be attributed to residents using their required parking spaces for non-parking purposes. It would continue the current informal process whereby staff encourage developers to design their sites to maximize double-wide garages as feasible given the location and characteristics of the development site. Staff would also explore options such as requiring developers to inform purchasers that parking spaces cannot be converted, enhancing public education by working with strata organizations and management companies to help residents comply with existing regulations.
Prepared by Jennifer Little, Manager of Planning
