In the Answers issue of the City Paper one question is about whether or not a condo association can ban bicycles from the parking garage (because theirs did) and force bike owners to either pay for space in a storage facility or keep them in their apartment.
My condo building decided to ban bicycles from being stored in our parking garage. They cut all locks on bicycles stored in the parking garage after a certain date, and disposed of them. As a storage alternative, they offered a small room, for a fee, for bike storage, but once that filled up, other residents were out of luck and now have to store their bikes in their living spaces. Can they really do this?
The City Paper says the condo association can do that, but I think they got it wrong. Or at least the answer is maybe, need more information.
The building has to provide indoor bike parking at the rate of one space for every three units and one outside space for every 20 units with a minimum of two.
They're using a bicycle storage room, and the zoning codes say that "If a room or common locker not divided into individual spaces is used to meet these requirements, twelve square feet (12 sq. ft.) of floor area shall be considered the equivalent of one (1) bicycle parking space."
So the question is how big as that storage room and how many units are there in the building. Since the room is overflowing, I suspect that it isn't big enough to meet code.
One thing that advocates could consider though is whether or not buildings should have to provide parking to tennatns for free, or for only a key deposit. I can see an argument on both sides of that question.



Zoning regulations typically only apply to new construction (i.e., you need to comply when requesting a building permit, certificate of occupancy, etc.). At all other times, things can be out of conformance with zoning for pretty much indefinite periods of time.
Posted by: Paytonchung | January 27, 2013 at 11:40 AM
If you're out of compliance Zoning can force you to change.
Posted by: washcycle | January 27, 2013 at 01:11 PM
I keep mine in the apartment.
That way I don't have to worry about theft as much as other wise.
Posted by: david | January 27, 2013 at 02:43 PM
Sounds like some people need to attend more condo board meetings.
Posted by: Kolohe | January 27, 2013 at 08:55 PM
Keep it in your storage locker.
Posted by: Kara | January 28, 2013 at 10:11 AM
You typically would only be forced get back into complaiance if you were making substantial changes to your property - then newer zoning reqs could kick in. However, more important, the info provided only applies to the USN zone, which is two blocks in the area north of Union Station. We don't know where the question-asker lives, but it almost certainly is not in this zone, because the USN zone is being creted for the large developements planned for over the tracks along H St.
I second the comment that people need to attend more of their condo board meetings.
Posted by: AICP20009 | January 28, 2013 at 03:06 PM
AICP20009, Where do you get that it only applies to the USN zone?
And while it may be true that you only get forced back into compliance when making changes - this change was made retroactive by law.
See this:
http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/blog/2012/09/in-dc-apartment-buildings-bicycle.html
Regulations submitted this week to the D.C. Council, proposed by the District Department of Transportation, require that all existing apartment buildings with eight or more units feature a “reasonable number” of secure, covered parking for bicycles. “Reasonable” is defined as one space for every three units.
Posted by: washcycle | January 28, 2013 at 04:17 PM
washcycle: I was responding to the information provided in the link in the initial response, which specifically addresses the requirements of the USN zone; these cannot be assumed to apply to other zones.
That there are different overall regulations is new information.
The better link for general information would have been:
http://ddot.dc.gov/DC/DDOT/On+Your+Street/Traffic+Management/Parking/Bicycle+Parking+Regulations
Posted by: AICP20009 | January 29, 2013 at 11:02 AM
I see. You're right that would've been a better link. It's quite a surprise that the website with the zoning regulations is confusing.
Posted by: washcycle | January 29, 2013 at 12:31 PM
I thought that confusing zoning regulations was the point, to improve the ability for large developers manipulate the system.
Posted by: Mike | January 30, 2013 at 07:53 AM