DC has changed the parking requirements in their zoning as mentioned here.
The District dumped its parking minimums last year, rewriting the zoning code for the first time in 50 years to set parking space according to demand in a particular neighborhood.
Previously, one bicycle parking space was required every 20 car spaces in new retail and office developments. But now, there will be fewer car spaces, so bike parking will be tied to the size of the structure. The proposed update will require the number of bicycle parking spaces in the table below for every 1000 square feet. Class A is indoor parking for residents and employees and can be bike rooms, lockers or bike cages. Class B is for visitors - bike racks - and must be within 50 feet of the entrance.
Use |
Class A |
Class B |
Residential |
1.0 |
0.05 |
Office |
0.2 |
0.025 |
Retail |
0.1 |
0.4 |
Service |
0.1 |
0.4 |
Accommodation |
0.05 |
0.025 |
Food Service |
0.1 |
0.1 |
Entertainment |
0.1 |
0.1 |
Arts Prod & Display |
0.05 |
0.05 |
Institutional |
0.05 |
0.1 |
Institutional - Education |
0.5 |
0.5 |
PDR |
0.1 |
0.05 |
Local Government |
0.1 |
0.1 |
Local Government - Education |
0.5 |
0.1 |
Other |
0.1 |
0.1 |
No bicycle parking is required for a non-residential use with less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area or a residential use with fewer than 9 units.
Buildings with more than 50,000 square feet will be required to provide showers. And 3 lockers are required for every 10 bike parking spaces.
The proposed update would also ban condominiums and co-ops from banning bikes inside units.
I was recently informed that I can no longer bring my bike into my office for safety reasons. Sigh...
Keep the homeland safe! Don't bring your bike!
"I was recently informed that I can no longer bring my bike into my office for safety reasons."
Posted by: Eric_W. | November 02, 2009 at 08:36 AM
I was recently informed I can no longer ride my bike into the office for safety reasons. makes sense when i think about it.
n00b! question: wtf is the difference between class A and class B office space?
Posted by: JTS | November 02, 2009 at 09:25 AM
Does it look like this is only for new development or is there going to be any requirement to have major retrofits/remodels implement these standards as well?
Posted by: Bilsko | November 02, 2009 at 09:58 AM
n00b! question: wtf is the difference between class A and class B office space?
I think that the Class A and Class B refers to types of parking and is not a categorization of the office, residential, or other space. As Washcycle wrote:
Class A is indoor parking for residents and employees and can be bike rooms, lockers or bike cages. Class B is for visitors - bike racks - and must be within 50 feet of the entrance.
Posted by: CyclingFool | November 02, 2009 at 10:17 AM
ah. Missed that. thought washcycle was referring to a type of office space and not parking arrangements. thanks!
Posted by: JTS | November 02, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Maybe the rules should allow building owners to provide fewer bike parking spaces if they allow bicyclists to bring their bikes into the building, i.e., into their offices or apartments. This would encourage building management not to adopt "safety" restrictions on bike access to buildings unless they are really necessary.
Posted by: Casey Anderson | November 02, 2009 at 12:18 PM
This is interesting, but what really captures my attention is the throwaway at the end about losing your own parking. What exactly is unsafe about bringing the bicycle inside ?!?!?
I consider myself VERY fortunate to have indoor secure parking at both ends of my commute. My boss is a cyclist, although not a commuter, and we have three pretty much full time commuters. There's another company in our building that has probably 6 or so more commuters. One of my co-workers was told recently by a random woman from the building management that we weren't allowed to bring bikes in. He locked outside and went back and brought it in later in the morning when she was gone. I haven't heard anything in the months since, and given that there is no lobby security I hope that they will never really be able to enforce this, but it makes me worry. I couldn't imagine leaving my baby out in the weather. It's infuriating that they can just make up a BS reason to keep people out of the building.
Posted by: Cycler | November 02, 2009 at 12:53 PM
I agree with Cycler. You of all people should not just accept the building mgmt's pronouncement that bringing your bike inside is "unsafe."
Some mgmt nazi at a former job of mine once told me the same sort of thing as I was bringing my bike inside the building ["It's not allowed."] Since I didn't have a lock with me I just said, oh, and took my bike on into the office as usual. Then I wrote an e-mail to the building manager requesting that they explain this policy and provide a secure location to store bikes if they insisted on enforcing a no-bikes-in-the-building policy. I never heard back from them.
Posted by: Nancy | November 02, 2009 at 03:14 PM
It's annoying. In my old building I used to keep my bike in the large space under the stairwell, along with everyone else. When I changed buildings there was no such space so I kept it in my office. No one complained. I moved offices within the building and no one complained. Meanwhile, in my old building I noticed signs went up saying that "Nothing" could be stored under the stairwell as it was a fire violation and so no one parked their bikes there anymore. One of my managers informed me that it was against the rules to bring my bike into my office but that he didn't care. Then, in the process of getting an office mate, another manager said I couldn't keep my bike in there anymore but that they would find me space under a stairwell. That was, yes, a fire code violation. I was told there is an outdoor rack. I'm moving offices again, back to my old building soon, so I'll probably just play stupid until then "oh, I thought I could keep it here. I'm so confused." But yes, the 'safety' claim is total BS. A fellow employee is creating a Bike Commuter Group, and I plan to be active in that and to talk about bike access to buildings as part of our agenda.
Posted by: Washcycle | November 02, 2009 at 05:14 PM
The "safety" thing is bull. I think that bike haters (we know their numbers are many) would complain because they pay so much for their parking and resent that we don't. Management would rather cater to them than bike commuters. I can park my bike in the parking garage but it's mixed in with storage, garbage, a scooter and broken furniture.
Posted by: Amy Smith | November 02, 2009 at 05:47 PM
While a step forward simply providing space for bikes inside a building doesn't solve all your problems.
The developer of my condo building listed bike parking as an "amenity". What we got was dead space underneath the parking ramp that they couldn't otherwise sell. It was also one level down from the ground entrance so one always had to ride the elevator down to store your bike.
The space was originally enclosed by a short chain link fence with no lock. Dozens of bikes were quickly stolen (no kidding - the floor was littered with broken pieces from the locks).
We put a lock on the fence gate - but then one had to first go to the desk to retrieve the key, get your bike, then back to the desk to return the key. After awhile of that individuals were issued their own keys - with the requisite management fee applied!
Still thefts were not deterred. In some cases the thieves lust lifted the bikes over the short chain link fence. I think we eventually extended the fence to the ceiling.
I now keep my bike in my apartment. I'd rather not but that is the only safe and convenient thing to do. It also keeps my bike a lot cleaner. The garage space was filthy.
So - mandating parking space is good. But the quality of the space provided will, in the end, determine if people feel comfortable enough to use it.
Posted by: JeffB | November 02, 2009 at 07:12 PM