TheWashCycle

Chicago recognizes bike parking as alternative to car parking

DC should really replicate this new Chicago policy:

The reforms, expected to be introduced at Wednesday's City Council meeting, would allow developers to benefit from transit-oriented development incentives if they build within 1,360 feet of a transit station, up from the 600 feet allowed now. Along pedestrian-designated streets, which are streets with high concentrations of retail stores, the zones would expand to 2,640 feet, up from 1,200 feet.

Residential developers in those expanded zones would not be required to provide any off-street parking spaces if they provide one bike parking spot for each unit in the building, plus offer either a bike rental station or car-share station on site. If a developer can't provide a station, it would need to provide a financial contribution to a bike-sharing station nearby.

PG County zoning rewrite recommendations include better bike parking, complete streets and better connectivity

If you haven't had your fill of zoning rewrites with DC's, you can now get involved in Prince George's County's rewrite. Via RPUS, they're holding listening sessions on it this week starting tonight in Riverdale.

This is mostly relevant to the issue of bike parking design and how much is required.  The Evaluation and Recommendation Report notes that

The only places in the current Zoning Ordinance that include bicycle parking standards are the UC zones established in Subtitle 27A. They include bicycle parking standards that are comparable to standards found in modern codes used in other urban and town-center contexts.

The standards are based on the number of vehicle parking spaces required on the site,84 and specify where the bicycle parking should be located, and limit wheel-based racks (where bicycles are affixed to a rack only by their wheel and not their frame) from counting toward the minimum number.

In addition, the current Subdivision Regulations include a requirement for adequate public pedestrian and bikeway facilities (Sec. 214-124.01, Subdivision Regulations) that includes provision of bicycle parking “at transit stops, commercial areas, employment centers, and other places where vehicle parking, visitors, and/or patrons are normally anticipated.”

And it recommends (I removed non-bike elements from the list) that

To modernize the parking and loading and bicycle parking standards to implement Plan 2035, we suggest the following changes be made to the current regulations.

First, establish different parking standards for the urban and other contexts in the County (versus the “one size fits all” set of standards in the current parking standards table). We suggest three different set of parking standards for the following areas:

• Centers (The Regional Transit Districts (including the Downtowns), the Local Transit Centers, Neighborhood Centers, Town Centers, and Campus Centers);
• Areas in the County “inside the beltway;” and
• All other areas in the County.

Second, review and modify the current parking standards in these three areas to bring them into conformance with current best practices.

• In the Regional Transit Districts (including the Downtowns) this will include:
• Making more proactive use of Transportation Demand Management strategies during the development review process to further reduce parking requirements;

Seventh, add the following type of bicycle parking requirements:

• In the Regional Transit Districts (including the Downtowns), establish requirements both for bicycle parking on-site (especially in parking structures or adjacent to building entrances, and to include covered and secured facilities for long-term bicycle parking intended for transit commuters or all-day employees of uses in the center) as well as in public right-of-way as part of a streetscape, with the latter to be located in places convenient to principal building entrances.
• In the Local Transit Centers, Neighborhood Centers, Town Centers, and Campus Centers establish requirements for bicycle parking on-site as well as in public right-of-way as part of a streetscape.

Eighth, encourage and incentivize the use of bicycle parking in other locations by establishing basic requirements for retail establishments of a certain size, office zones that permit a certain amount of intensity, and for any office, retail, multi-family residential, community facility or hotel use located on streets designated as bicycle corridors in an official bicycle facility master plan adopted by Prince George’s County; these requirements should also specify acceptable types of bicycle storage.

Refine, expand, and consolidate the range of flexibility provisions that can be used to address parking standards, through administrative approval by the Planning Director. This should include:

• Reductions in parking for Transportation Demand Management programs in zones where more development intensity will occur over time, with more specific guidance on estimated levels of reduction that an applicant may expect from implementing and agreeing to provide a particular TDM measure as part of a development; and 

In addition to bike parking, there's a whole section on Transportation, Pedestrian, Bikeway, Circulation Standards. For that section the report recommends

A new set of basic street design standards to apply in zones associated with Regional Transit Districts and Local Transit Centers. To complement the mixed-use, urban, and transit-supportive character of development in these areas, the standards emphasize local vehicular circulation, pedestrian activity, on-street parking, street and bicycle network and connectivity, and access management. The concept of complete streets will also be explored in these areas. The regulations will also provide developers significant flexibility to propose alternative mobility and connectivity plans that demonstrate equivalent compliance.

As well as other ideas that would make cycling better, like encouraging roundabout intersections and a grid network; limiting culs-de-sac and requiring pedestrian access to other local streets or pedestrian systems access when they're allowed; traffic calming; creating incentives for the provision of bicycle facilities.

If you want to see better biking in PG County, better zoning regulations are a key step towards that end. Meetings are being held the next three nights. 

January Countywide Listening Sessions

North County
Tuesday, January 27, 2015 [Update: rescheduled for Feb 10th]
Parks & Recreation  Administration Building

6600 Kenilworth Avenue, Riverdale, MD 20737

6:00 - 8.00p.m.

 

South County
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Southern Technology & Recreation Complex

7007 Bock Road, Fort Washington, MD 20744

6:00 - 8.00p.m

Central County
Thursday, January 29, 2015

Wayne K. Curry Sports & Learning Complex

8001 Sheriff Road, Landover, MD 20785

6:00 - 8.00p.m.

Residential buildings now required to provide bike parking

On November 28th, DDOT adopted changes to bicycle parking rules at residential buildings which promptly* went into effect that day. 

These regulations were first called for by Tommy Wells' Bicycle Commuter and Parking Expansion Act of 2007, made possible by the 2010 follow-on law and approved by the Council in October of this year. The residential bike parking requirements represent the most important part of that law as no requirements previously existed. This is separate from, but consistent with, the bicycle parking relevant changes to zoning that are being proposed. 

Thanks to the update, all new or rehabilitated residential buildings of 8 units or more are now required to provide 1 bicycle parking space for every 3 units; but existing building will only be required to provide the lessor of 1 space for every 3 units or enough parking to meet demand - and then only at the request of a tenant. In all cases there are hardship exceptions, but even in those cases bike parking has to be provided for employees.

It goes on to define the nature of parking required. Parking should, for example, be indoors; but if not possible, then be in a secure, covered area adjacent to the building. The rules define how much space there needs to be, the clearance, lighting, accessibility, signage, etc...

Failure to comply can result in fines. So if you live in a building with below-standard parking, you now have a legal recourse to force them to add more and/or better parking.

There are a few differences between the final rules and the rules proposed in March.

• The final rules extend the 1 to 3 ratio requirement to all rehabilitated building.
• They now specify that bicycle parking has to be added only for "bicycles in operable condition"
• There is an added section allowing DDOT to mediate a dispute between the building management and residents and to make a decision about parking if the parties can't agree.
• It no longer defines a bicycle room as having walls or floor to ceiling fencing and doors that are always locked.
• In the proposed rulemaking vertical spaces could only make up 50% of all spaces, but now there just has to be at least one horizontal space.
• Gone also is a redundant section allowing a building owner to seek a hardship waiver from these requirements. They can still seek an exemption.
• There are other, more trivial changes as well.

This nearly completes the changes called for by the 2007 law, which had several parts. The first part called on DDOT to set standards, with guidance from the law, for what would be acceptable bike parking, which they have done in this rulemaking and in 2005. The second called for more parking at the Wilson Building, which was installed in 2008 and included interior parking. The third part was for a study of bike parking at Government Buildings, and that was completed in March 2010. (spoiler: there wasn't enough parking). And now, a month before Wells leaves office, the most important part is now law. 

There is still one last loose end. As originally proposed and passed out of committee, the 2007 bill mandated a doubling of bicycling parking for office, retail and service uses from 5% as much bike parking as there was car parking to 10%. But before being passed into law, this was watered down (primarily due to opposition of then CM Phil Mendelsohn) to make the mandate for 5% of car spaces unless "the utilization of the minimum number of bicycle parking spaces is reaching 90% or higher during peak usage period." In which case, "the owner of a building with office, retail, or service use shall provide bicycle parking spaces at least equal to 10% of the number of automobile parking spaces provided for the building." This has effectively neutered that part of the law, since it has never become part of the DC Code and never will. Instead DDOT will wait for the Title 11 zoning update to happen, which will make this part of the law obsolete by tying bike parking at these locations to square footage instead of automobile parking spaces.

*Promptly may not be the right word. The 2007 law said that the rules should have been completed 90 days after the law went into effect. But funding issues, flaws with the law that had to be fixed in 2010 and the sense that the zoning rewrite would make the new rules obsolete conspired to delay the rules by a few thousand days. In the end there was a sense that we were in the middle of a condo building boom, so it was better to push these rules through now while they could still do a lot of good rather than wait for the eternally delayed zoning update. Unlike with the existing commercial parking requirement, there was no existing requirement for residential bike parking until last week, though many buildings were installing it anyway. The new rules will also help with existing buildings.

Yes, we are still talking about zoning

If you have not weighed in on the zoning rewrite and it's many impacts on bike parking and required showers in building, you still have more opporunities as the city is hosting its eleventybillionth open house meeting on it. Two more open houses are still on the agenda this month.

Friday, March 21, 2014 
8:30 AM – 5:00 PM 
DC Office of Planning 
1100 4th ST SW, Suite E650 
Washington, DC 20024 

Friday, March 28, 2014 
8:30 AM – 5:00 PM 
DC Office of Planning 
1100 4th ST SW, Suite E650 
Washington, DC 20024 

The draft proposed text of the revisions can be found online at http://www.dcoz.dc.gov/ZRR/ZRR.shtmhttp://www.dcoz.dc.gov/ZRR/ZRR.shtm. Copies will also be available at the OP Open Houses. Additional information is available at the following websites: OP http://dczoningupdate.org/ http://dczoningupdate.org/orhttp://zoningdc.org/ http://zoningdc.org/ and Office of Zoning http://www.dcoz.dc.gov/ZRR/ZRR.shtmhttp://www.dcoz.dc.gov/ZRR/ZRR.shtm. 

Answers Issue: bicycle parking

The City Paper's answers issue has a question about bike parking at a condo. The board decided to ban bike parking from the garage and put in a bike room. But there isn't enough space for all the building's bikes and so the question is can the building do this. City Paper's Ally Schweitzer says yes.

I say maybe not.

In short, the 2007 bike parking law required residential building owners to "provide secure bicycle parking spaces for all existing residential buildings with 8 or more units." The 2010 amendment to that law obligated the Mayor to define how many spaces that should be. In 2012, DDOT did that and made a rule that they need to have 1 space for every 3 units. [This is the same as the zoning update that I don't think has passed yet, plus another short term parking space for every 20 units]. So the question is, what is the ratio of spaces in the bike room to units in the building?

I thought the zoning regs also made it illegal to charge for bike parking and had a rule about when the parking was inadequate the building had to provide more. But, maybe that got cut before the end. 

Anyway, it may be that the bike room is not in compliance either. The room has to have racks, a secruity light and a window on the door (so that people can see in before entering and getting jumped) and provide a certain amount of space per bike. I'm betting they didn't do that. 

DC Zoning Hearings - Now overflowing

GGW reports on the upcoming zoning hearings.

Tuesday, November 12 on car and bike parking, the most talked-about part of the update. This hearing is actually full, but there is an overflow night on Tuesday, November 19 where you can speak.

Even if you don't speak, I predict a high level of entertaining crazy. But from a policy standpoint, this is the once a generation change that will do a great deal to improve bike parking and commuting in DC. The most common excuse I hear for not bike commuting is lack of a shower, among other things this will require more showers and changing rooms for bike commuters. 

DC bike parking zoning regulations change to be discussed next month

The zoning regulations will be discussed on Tuesday, November 12, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. – Subtitle C (General Procedures, including parking, bike parking, loading) .

The District first adopted bicycle parking requirements in the Zoning Regulations in 1984 (Title 11 DCMR, § 2119). The zoning requirements are fairly minimal, in that they:

• Only apply to office, retail, and service uses, and do not apply to residential buildings;
• Are directly linked to a percentage of required automobile parking spaces (and thus have little to no effect where little or no automobile parking is required);
• Even where automobile parking is required, set a low standard (5% of required car spaces);
• Make no distinctions between bike parking for short-term vs. long-term visitors (by implication, the standards are oriented toward long-term users such as employees);
• Have minimal standards for security, accessibility, and usability; and
• Have unclear provisions regarding relief or exemptions from the requirements

In response to these gaps/deficiencies, OP (assisted by its consultant, Nelson\Nygaard) proposed more robust standards as part of the Zoning Regulations Review (ZRR). Initial recommendations were published in OP reports developed through the ZRR Parking Working Group in 2008, and were subsequently refined and published as draft regulations to be adopted as part of the new zoning code. The Zoning Commission took “final action” on the proposed bike parking regulations (published as Title 11, Subtitle B, Chapter 16) on April 25, 2011, in ZC Order 08-06-C. However, since the new zoning code is still a work in progress and many issues remain to be resolved, the order has not taken effect. In order to be fully effective, the adopted bike parking chapter will need some minor revisions as the new zoning code is completed. OP proposed one adjustment (to the requirement for residential uses) in an updated chapter that was included in a complete draft of the new code, delivered to the Zoning Commission in July 2013.

Here's more.

In addition, OP has proposed a new provision to require mitigation for vehicle parking that is provided significantly in excess of the minimum parking requirement. If a project provides more than 150% of the required number of parking spaces, the developer must mitigate the impacts of that over-parking through Transportation Demand Management measures. Qualifying measures could include bike parking spaces in excess of the minimum number required, and the provision of new Capital Bikeshare stations on- or off-site.

Zoning update will require less auto parking, more bike parking

In a column in the Post, Harriet Tregoning and Terry Bellamy explained what the new proposed changes to the automobile parking minimums actually mean and how DC thinks it will help the city meet its goals. They briefly mention how bike sharing will make driving less necessary, but they didn't go into how the new zoning regulations will change bike parking. So, I will attempt to that. 

1. More bike parking - the current regulations (CR) require far less bike parking than the new regulations (NR) will.

• CR require 1 long-term bike parking space for every 3 residential units, NR requires 1 space for every unit. 
• The CR requires 1 long-term space for every 10,000 square feet of gross floor area for every other use, but the NR requires long-term bike parking that is based on the type of use. That requirement can be as much as 4 times as large - for offices - or non existent for parks or parking lots. Long term bike parking requirements will go up for the following uses: chanceries, education, firearms usage, government and institutional. It will go down for the following uses: basic utilities; motor-vehicle related; production, distribution and repair; agriculture; antennas;parking; parks; and transportation infrastructure. Don't worry though, sexually-based business establishments will remain at 1 space for every 10,000 square feet of gross floor area.
• Short-term parking will also go up and is no longer called "Outdoor spaces" acknowledging that it can, in fact, be inside or covered. In most cases more short-term parking will be required. For education, short-term parking will increase by a factor of 5. In a few cases, like parking lots or transportation infrastructure, it will not be required at all. And in other cases it will remain the same.

2. Better parking - Under the NR, bike parking will have to allow a user to lock both the wheel and frame with one lock without removing a wheel. That means that bike racks like this won't cut it. The racks will have to be secured to the ground (not true now), give adequate space for access and allow for securing in two locations.

Short term parking has to be located either on the same lot as the use they are intended to serve or on public space within 20 feet of the lot and within 50 feet of the entrance (no more DCUSA-style set-ups). Parking has to be on an all weather surface and visible from the building.  This type of parking will fail at least three requirements. 

Long-term parking will have to be inside the building no more than one floor away from the ground level. They have to be available to residents, employees and other building occupants. There are new requirements for how bike rooms should be designed (with visibility from the door included) and that require long-term bike parking to be separated from auto parking by wheel stops.

3. Better maintained parking - under the NR, property owners are required to maintain their buildings parking and keep parking clear of snow, ice and debris. 

4. Changing rooms - Unlike the CR, the NR has requirements for changing facilities. Non-residential buildings with over 25,000 square feet in gross floor area will provide 2 showers for every 25,000 square feet and 6 lockers for every 10 bike parking spaces.

The NR lays out when buildings have to meet code (at construction or modification) with exceptions for historic properties. And it lays our guidance and a process for getting a waiver from these requirements. 

But wait, there's more....

In addition, the NR states that

• For a waterfront property with a setback, twenty five feet (25 ft.) of the required waterfront setback area, for the full width of the lot along the water, shall be reserved for a public pedestrian and bicycle trail along the waterfront. The property owner should align the trail reservation area with the reservation on adjacent properties
• Properties must allow for a continuous publicly-accessible pedestrian and bicycle trail along and adjacent to the waterfront as part of the Anacostia Waterfront Trail system 
• The movement of pedestrians, bikes and transit shall be prioritized, and provide reasonable accommodation for automobiles. The location of parking and loading access shall not unduly impact the movement of pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Bike sharing stations are an acceptable PUD category

It's much improved over the current regulations. And it would be a shame to see it delayed or killed over parking minimums. 

Zoning rule update could go to zoning commission this fall

In a story about coming changes to the way DC handles parking - one that notes that "the District charges $35 for a year-long residential parking permit while an annual Capital Bikeshare membership costs $75" - there is this added bit of good news.

In an overhaul of city codes expected to go before the Zoning Commission this fall...

Those new zoning codes  (Chapter 16) will require more and better bike parking as well as changing facilities in all new or upgraded buildings (depending on size). And they'll no longer tie the number of spaces to the number of car parking spaces, but rather to the size and purpose of the building.

And, of course, one could argue that anything that makes owning a car more expensive, only makes riding a bike more competitive.

I love this quote from John B. Townsend II of AAA who calls the new rules "discriminatory"

“It smacks at something that makes the District as an exclusive playground for the rich,” said Townsend, noting that those residents would have to pay for private parking if they have a vehicle. “What kind of city do we want to live in? Is this a city only for a certain class, or is it going to be an inviting community where all families can live?”

So, car owners are now a protected class? If he's worried about the poor, he should support higher gas taxes to pay for more buses and larger subsidies. 

94% of District facilities have substandard bike parking

According to a March 2010 study of bicycle parking at DC government properties, only 6% of DC government buildings would meet current bike parking requirements.

The study, which was mandated under the Bicycle Commuter and Parking Expansion Act of 2007 (the text of the act can be found in the report), found that the overwhelming majority of the District's 450 owned and leased properties would not meet current zoning regulations regarding bike parking - it they were required to meet them. While current zoning regulations require bike parking equal to 5% of automobile parking at commercial garages, no such requirement applies to office buildings owned and leased by the DC government. Not only would many of them not meet the 5% threshold, 81% of facilities have no bike parking at all. And many of the facilities that do have bike parking, have racks that don't meet current standards.

DC is currently updating its zoning, and under the proposed regulations bike parking will be a function of the type of facility and its size in square feet. Under that standard, DC would need to add a total of 11,326 bike parking spaces. Of those 2802 would be class A spaces, intended for long-term use and 8526 would be class B, intended for short-term use. To meet this standard, the study estimates that the District would need to spend $1,326,000.

Even where parking does meet the minimum standard there are locations where the minimum standard isn't meeting need. For example, I went to the Wilson Building earlier this spring and I had to lock my bike to a street sign that already had a bike locked to it - and I was lucky to find that space. The Wilson building might have a lot of bike parking - including indoor parking - but it still isn't enough.

The District should commit to providing enough bike parking to meet the new zoning regulations and current need. The DC government should be an example to other employers, not a laggard. It is much easier to sell policies that the District has instituted itself. The report makes this same point, and lists other policies that DC should institute to be a model for bike commuting. These policies include transportation subsidies for cyclists, secure indoor storage, shower and changing rooms, workplace bike clubs, parking cash out, bike commuting classes, and free or cheap bikesharing memberships. At the very minimum, DC should offer its employees the Federal bike commuting benefit.

The report also suggests that a follow-up study be performed on commercial buildings in the District. Such a study should probably wait until the zoning rewrite process is complete. In the meantime, the Bicycle Commuter and Parking Expansion Amendment Act of 2010 gave the 2007 act teeth. It requires that there be at least 1 bike parking spot for every 20 car parking spots (until the new zoning regulations come through) and it allows for enforcement of that standard. The fiscal impact statement that was issued with the 2010 law made it clear that there are adequate funds to enforce the law. If you should come across a commercial building in DC that doesn't provide the required amount of parking, you should contact the District's information line at 311 and report it. At this point the system relies almost exclusively on citizen reporting, so if you don't report it, it probably won't change. 

Bike Parking at Reeves by Eric Gilliland