SkyscraperPage Forum - Huge oversupply in parking stalls in Metro Vancouver's apartment buildings: study

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=170)

- - Huge oversupply in parking stalls in Metro Vancouver's apartment buildings: study (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=238236)

Huge oversupply in parking stalls in Metro Vancouver's apartment buildings: study

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metr...partments-2019

Quote:

A new report by Metro Vancouver Regional District that analyzes the utilization of parking supply within apartment and condominium buildings in the region concludes that there is an oversupply of parking stalls in such developments.

The Regional Parking Study found that apartment parking supply exceeds use across the region for both rental and strata buildings, with parking supply exceeding use by 42% for strata apartment buildings and 35% for market rental apartment buildings.

The overcapacity rate is similar for mixed tenure and mixed rental apartment buildings, with supply over demand by 41%.

Furthermore, smaller strata or market rental units with less than 800 sq. ft. of living area tend to have at most one parked vehicle per unit. Market rental units that are even smaller with less than 600 sq. ft. generally have the largest oversupply of parking.

Progressive urban development strategies of building greater density around the frequent transit network, such as frequent bus routes or SkyTrain, are showing the intended results.

Strata apartment buildings near frequent transit see a parking utilization of between 0.86 to 0.97 vehicles per unit, which is lower than 1.09 vehicles per unit for buildings further away from transit.
The difference is even higher for market rental sites, with parking utilization near transit ranging at 0.35 to 0.72 vehicles per unit — significantly lower than 0.99 for sites that are not close.
Small strata or rental units are generally more responsive to close proximity to frequent transit.

Overall, based on the findings, when apartment parking use is lower, transit boardings for apartments near frequent transit services are higher.

But the report suggests that much more can be done, as in parking requirements near transit investments should be lowered to reduce land use and construction costs, which could contribute to housing affordability.

A significant portion of the cost of construction with multi-family residential buildings comes from parking, especially from the excavation and concrete required for underground parking levels and ramps.

“An excessive supply of parking represents an inefficient use of land and capital resources, especially in Urban Centres and areas along the Frequent Transit Network, and a missed opportunity to reflect evolving transportation choices and to reduce the cost of housing construction,” reads the report. “The Regional Parking Study, a collaborative effort between TransLink and Metro Vancouver, draws out patterns to expand the knowledge base of practitioners and policymakers in member jurisdictions and the development community.”

“Many of the patterns are consistent with expectations and reflect the success that the region has had in coordinating land use and transportation decisions. The findings also reveal opportunities to ‘right size’ the amount of parking in apartment buildings.”

In another recent report by the regional district that evaluated land use on the Lougheed Corridor in advent of the Lougheed Highway B-Line, regional planners assert that parking requirements for areas within 400 metres of B-Line stops should be reduced, especially for rental buildings, which “may support the creation of higher-density nodes close to transit by reducing developer construction costs.”

Within Vancouver, reduced parking space requirements are already practiced to an extent for newer developments, including for Marine Gateway and the upcoming Oakridge Centre redevelopment. Policies such as Rental 100 also provide developers with the option to build less parking space than normally required.

According to regional planners, on-site and on-street parking should be considered in tandem.

“A more holistic approach toward parking supply and parking demand management for new apartment projects is warranted,” reads the report. “Attention should be paid to the availability, type, and relative permanence of street parking (e.g. free, paid, permit-only, and / or time-limited) and surrounded land uses, in association with any reductions in on-site parking requirements.”

The study found that about one-third of bicycle-owning households do not use their building’s secured bicycle parking facility, with the rate of use consistent across different building ages.
“The most frequently cited concerns were risk of damage to or loss of the bicycles, crowded facilities, and adverse perceptions of safety and convenience,” reads the report.

A number of other recommendations were made by the study, including encouraging parking unbundling or opt-outs. Parking stalls would be sold separately from apartments or consumers would be allowed to opt out of a parking stall to increase housing affordability options for prospective homeowners without personal vehicles.

Municipal governments and developers should also encourage car share businesses to expand their operating boundaries to emerging urban centres in frequent transit development areas in the suburban cities.

Additionally, municipal governments should change their processes that allow for alterations in a development’s parking supply design after apartment pre-sales, when developers have homeowner data to support modifications to a building’s residential parking supply.

One other recommendation relates to conducting regular and frequent post-occupancy surveys of apartment projects to provide timely information on parking demand in recently built and fully-occupied apartment developments.
The study’s findings were based on surveys of 73 apartment sites, a street parking survey, and 1,500 voluntary household surveys.

So... time to relax parking minimums?

Also, there's definitely a point to relaxing parking minimums in rentals. Real Estate in Van (and sometimes even Metro Van) is generally overregulated to appease NIMBYs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredinno (Post 8512837)

Parking has been reduced recently and can be through a few new tricks and is being examined again by year end but generally parking for new rental is quite low. Strata is trickier. It's more of a build it as a secure measure and see what happens. AKA status quo. No on wants to be left trying to sell condos without a stall when that's a possible (re)selling feature. Tough to kick old habits and concepts of getting around / value.

The two strata buildings I have direct experience with both have tons of parking, but it's hard to find somebody willing to even rent a stall from, even when they don't appear too well used at times.

Something I suggested years ago from my own observations of living in numerous apartment buildings, of which the parkades were basically all never more than half full. We should get parking lot management companies to manage the parkades of more multi unit buildings as they can better market the spaces to the tenants but also people who need parking but have none in their building nearby or just need a spot for a few hours. The parking management companies would foot the bill for dividing and upgrading the parkade in a more usable fashion. Some buildings and management companies ask too much and the tenants park on the street leaving the parkade mostly empty and clogging up the street parking or they don't charge at all and they get full of junk and broken down cars.

The last building I lived in on 8th near Fraser had the parkade entirely empty in a 43 unit building, aside from 3 broken down uninsured cars leaking various fluids. I lived in the building at Cardero and Davie 10 years ago above the Mcdonalds and it was half full always, if not less. My mom's strata highrise from the 70's in downtown New West (near the skytrain station I should add) has 2 spots for 2 bedroom suites and 3 for 3 bedroom suites. The lower half is almost entirely unutilized and could bring in profit for upgrades like new windows etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by retro_orange (Post 8512894)

Parkade management companies for a 40 space lot took 80% of the profit each month, and over 100% when you factored in the extra charges.

May workout if there's 100+ stalls.

It would be cool if the city of Vancouver created a Co-op parking management company for the entire city who would charge, manage, and market parking for the entire city. I think the co-op model would be better only because they would charge based on market rates but any profits would go into operations and or back to building owners so like retro_orange says the profits can help to make repairs to buildings. I think the co-op could then also have more data and when a new project goes up they could advise on how much more or less parking is required in a neighbourhood rather than the current system which is just making housing more unaffordable for the public.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 8512890)

The two strata buildings I have direct experience with both have tons of parking, but it's hard to find somebody willing to even rent a stall from, even when they don't appear too well used at times.

That bears up what I've seen in stratas. Parkades lots seem pretty full, even in downtown neighbourhoods. I suspect rental aprtments are different.

There's always a huge difference in the number of cars depending on what time of day you are in the parkade.
Even downtown, lots of residents drive elsewhere for work, so stalls empty out during the day and fill up late at night.

WRT parking management companies - see the discussion about Oakridge condos not coming with parking and owners entering fixed term rental contracts for parking spaces.

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller (Post 8513049)

There's always a huge difference in the number of cars depending on what time of day you are in the parkade.
Even downonw, lots of residnets drive elsewhere for work, so stalls empty out during the day and fill up late at night.

The lack of coordination and tracking who has what and best use of space is the biggest issue. I like Galaxy's idea, though on a metro-Vancouver scale. Basically any multi family building of decent size near a skytrain station or dense area should be included in this initiative, I think that would be amazing and free up lots of street parking! A Translink non profit parking authority spinoff perhaps?

The city's escalated pricing for neighbourhood permits should force cars back inside these apartment parkades.

Stratas usually prohibit renting out parking spaces to non-residents due to security concerns.

I've known people who rented suites in apartment buildings but chose cheaper or "safer" on street parking instead of the building's underground parking.

People also complain that the Car2Go cars are taking up all the on street permit parking spaces now.

Urban Planning nerds...

Apartment parking spots going unused in Metro Vancouver

Residents with bikes also avoiding apartment bike lockers

Mike Howelln / Vancouver Courier APRIL 29, 2019

https://images.glaciermedia.ca/polop...04/parking.jpg
Apartment buildings in Vancouver, including this one at 1305 West 12th Avenue, continue to have empty parking spots. Photo Dan Toulgoet

Urban planning nerds are going wild this month with all these reports out of city hall and TransLink boasting about walking, biking and transit ridership going up.

If those impressive numbers weren’t intoxicating enough for the active transportation crowd, we also learned Vancouver city staff has come up with “six big moves” to drop carbon emissions by 1.2 million tonnes by the year 2030.

...

Prepared by TransLink and Metro Vancouver, the study looked at 73 sites in the region built between 1976 and 2017, including 14 in Vancouver, 11 in Surrey and seven each in Burnaby and Richmond.

Fifty of the apartments were strata, 12 were market rental, seven mixed tenure, three mixed rental and one non-market rental. The majority—47—were built between 2014 and 2017.

Data was collected generally after 11 p.m. on weeknights. Researchers also quizzed 1,500 residents for contextual information such as vehicle ownership and willingness to forego a parking stall.

What the study found is that parking supply exceeded utilization by 42 per cent at strata buildings. It was 35 per cent at market rental sites and 41 per cent for mixed tenure and mixed rental.

The stats come at a time of a heightened discussion around land use, density and how people are going to get around without the region turning into a Mad Max movie.

Between 2014 and 2018, 59 per cent of the housing unit starts in the region were apartments, followed by 20 per cent single-detached homes, 13 per cent townhouse/duplex/triplex and seven per cent secondary suites.

...

https://www.vancourier.com/opinion/a...ver-1.23805781

I was thinking about this, the parking lot next to us sits 95% empty. Could they somehow change rules or whatever to allow tiny homeowners to rent a spot and live in their tiny homes in these sometimes vast empty spaces?

http://www.viewpointcloud.com/wp-con...egulation2.png
viewpointcloud.com

https://livability.com/sites/default...Tiny-House.jpg
livability.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG (Post 8556413)

Seems like a pretty niche market. :P

For condos, a parking space is still an asset when it comes time to sell the unit.

I think that the quest for efficiency and 100% utilization is being nitpicky.

An equivalent question for the region's housing experts would be - how many unoccupied bedrooms are there in the City?
Surely it's inefficient to have empty bedrooms in houses and apartments(?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller (Post 8557788)

Global News had an news item on this.

My view on this, is that it's smoke and mirrors.

There is no over-supply. There is no shortage. All Condos and Apartments need at least 1 parking space. Retired seniors do not have, or need two vehicles, but families might. So it's not up to the city to decide how much parking is necessary, and I certainly would throw any developer out who proposes a building design with less than 1 parking spot per unit.

The ideal situation is that each unit in a tower would have "2 parking spaces" and if a parking space is not needed, they can convert that space into a parkade "storage unit", and the storage unit trailer must be movable.

As it is, you can not fit anything like an RV in a parking garage. The one time I parked a moving van (not a cube van) in the underground parking garage at the condo I rented, the van barely cleared the gate, and it struck something that was hanging from the underground garage's ceiling.

If anything, each parking space should have a 30A outlet to use the car's own charging equipment, and the building should have 6 DC fast-charger spaces that anyone in the building (guests, and delivery vehicles included) can use. That enables the option of ride-sharing vehicles to be shared or rented.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kisai (Post 8559449)

So force people to have things they don't want?
It would be nice if it worked like the Japanese Parking minimum- everyone who registers a car also has a to register a home parking space too.

More buildings with built-in car sharing services will help alleviate the need for parking to be built, and for all residents to have cars. This has been a fairly successful program in Vancouver, and I believe some other municipalities are catching on. But it has some issues.

Our building for example, the developer was given an exemption for X number of stalls if they built 4 stalls for car sharing companies. I'm not sure what the X was there, but it's not that important. We do have fairly extensive parking.

Anyway, the area is pretty well saturated with car sharing (modo, zipcar, evo, car2go), so only 2 spots were taken by zipcar. The others didn't want to put the capital into 2 more cars. It's free to them, but still not worthwhile.

Now we have these 2 spots that nobody seems to know what to do with. Apparently the city still has some level of control, so we can't just expand visitor parking, or put an EV charger in, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 (Post 8513336)

The city's escalated pricing for neighbourhood permits should force cars back inside these apartment parkades.

Except apartment owners have been jacking up prices for parking, as there is no government cap on the yearly increase on those rates, as opposed to the rate on the apartment.

This shouldn't be a surprise, people who buy condos probably have more access to fudns and can afford to keep a car. The average renter may not have that leverage, so if you live n the city the car goes.

Another BS agenda driven "study." All an agenda to further the war on car use.
The study has so many holes in it you can drive a truck through them. :yuck: (but then sadly, no place left to park your truck)