REMI
Toronto parking review could allay tax exposure

Toronto parking review could allay tax exposure

Recommendations cycle through to options for some commercial landlords
Wednesday, January 22, 2025

Postponed debate about Toronto’s proposed commercial parking levy is set to resume with 2025 budget deliberations, while recommended changes to the City’s parking standards could present an opening for some landlords to reduce their potential tax exposure. A new staff report to Council’s housing and planning committee mostly focuses on the quantity and configuration of accessible and bicycle parking, but also makes a case for revising the zoning bylaw provision that prevents the removal of legacy parking spaces that are surplus to what would be dictated in new development.

“One of the objectives of introducing a commercial parking levy is to reduce the parking supply and thereby encourage people to consider other modes for their travel. This objective cannot be easily achieved while regulation 200.5.10.11(1)(C) is in place in its current form,” it states. “Staff recommend amending the regulation so that it only applies to residential developments.”

The report also suggests that, contingent on specified parameters, commercial/residential landlords and condominium corporations should have as-of-right flexibility to convert existing conventional parking spots into accessible spaces. That’s seen as a way to address projected growing need for accessible parking, conform with recent advice from a provincially appointed accessibility committee and meet the City’s objectives to reduce the per capita parking space ratio but expand the accessible quotient of parking inventory.

“This will reduce potential accessibility barriers by making it simpler, quicker and less expensive to retrofit buildings, including to comply with AODA (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act), by eliminating the need to seek a zoning by-law amendment or minor variance to secure an approval,” the report states. “It will also make it easier for people who choose to age in place to remain in their existing buildings and retrofit parking spaces, where possible, should they require an accessible parking space.”

The remainder of the report’s recommendations pertain to new development, as part of the second phase of an ongoing comprehensive review of parking standards. As proposed, these could bring some cost savings and/or free up potentially leasable space through:

  • a 50 per cent reduction in requirements for showers and changing rooms associated with commercial bicycle parking facilities;
  • extension of the option to contribute funds to Toronto’s Bike Share program in lieu of providing up to 50 per cent of required visitor bicycle parking spaces to residential developments throughout the entire city; and
  • replacement of the minimum threshold of three visitor bicycle parking spaces with a new formula that’s tied to floor area.

Other recommendations call for a larger share of accessible parking spaces in both new residential development and a range of non-residential uses, including medical offices and clinics, recreational and cultural facilities and industrial properties. As well, all new accessible spaces would have to be EV-ready — equipped with an energized outlet with the capacity to power a Level 2 electric vehicle charger.

Recommendations for bicycle parking generally focus more on convenient access and storage configurations than the quantity of spaces. However, they do call for more short-term spaces (for visitor use) at educational facilities, more long-term spaces (for occupant or tenant use) at office buildings and medical office/clinics and the introduction of bicycle parking thresholds for seniors residences, long-term care homes and student residences. This is aimed at meeting “equity needs” and aligning with North American standards.

Findings from the associated public consultation process inform the recommendations for bicycle storage facilities, including: limiting the allowance for stacked or vertical racks; invoking minimum requirements for aisle width; requiring oversized spaces that can accommodate cargo bikes or bike trailers; and ensuring a direct and unobstructed route between outdoor entrances and indoor parking areas. These are set out in new design and management guidelines, which it’s proposed City planners would reference in evaluating development applications.

“According to the survey respondents, the security of bicycle parking (e.g. fear of bicycles being stolen) is the dominant factor affecting a person’s decision to use (or not use) a bicycle. Other important factors include the availability of bicycle parking, easy-to-use bicycle racks, access to bicycle parking areas, safety and cost,” the staff report notes.

The expansion of the payment-in-lieu of bicycle parking (PILOBP) program is seen as a way to avert those reservations and encourage more people to cycle. Although it hasn’t actually attracted any funds since its 2021 launch — within the area south of Lawrence Ave. bounded by Victoria Park Ave. and the Humber River on the east and west — the City’s number-crunchers calculate it could theoretically generate up to $6 million per year based on current rates of residential development. Initially, the citywide lieu rate for developers would be $538 per applicable parking space, indexed to inflation, which would be put toward purchase of communal bicycles and stations for public access.

“Expanding the Bike Share system through the PILOBP program is considered an alternative way to promote bicycling as it solves critical concerns about bicycle parking with its unique advantages (e.g. theft and vandalism protection, convenient access at street level, etc.),” the report maintains. “If the program is successful, new uses could be added to the program over time, or the permitted use of the funds could be extended to other forms of bicycle infrastructure.”

Pegging the minimum requirement for visitor bicycle parking to floor area rather than a mandatory three spaces is considered more flexible for small developments. “A minimum of three short-term bicycle parking spaces may not be suitable for all uses,” the report acknowledges. Meanwhile, the space-saving allowance for commercial shower and change room facilities is contingent on it being gender-neutral.

For now, City staff are making no recommendations related to electric bikes or vehicular visitor parking. Council’s housing and planning committee will launch the consideration of the report at its Jan. 23 meeting before the full Council weighs in at a later date.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In our efforts to deter spam comments, please type in the missing part of this simple calculation: *Time limit exceeded. Please complete the captcha once again.