Bike parking facilities in residential buildings

[jta5]

Anyone live in a recently-built building with a high bike parking ratio? As far as the urban planning world goes, the required dedicated bike parking facility phenomenon is relatively quite new. So what can we learn so far? I'd love to hear people who live in such buildings share:

1. -Approximately how many housing units and how many indoor bike parking spaces are there in your building?
2. -How much demand is there for the indoor bike parking? Like how many of the spaces are being used?
3. -Where in your building is the bike parking (main level? near entrance? or do you have to take an elevator to access it on a different level? (asking because my hypothesis is that when the answer to this question is different, there will be a big difference in answers to the previous question, but maybe I'm wrong)
4. -How many doors do you have to open and walk through in order to take your bike from its parking spot to the street?
5. -How much of your own transportation happens by bike, and do you store your bike in indoor parking or in your home, and why?
6. -Do you have a sense for the degree to which others in your building park their bikes in common storage areas versus their homes?
7. -Are you or your neighbours concerned about bike theft in your common bike parking room? What features (or missing features) of the room increase or decrease your concern?
8. -How prevalent is non-bike transportation devices - motorcycles, mobility scooters, vespa scooters, etc - in your building's bike parking room?
9. -If you care to look it up, what is the BikeScore of the neighbourhood your building is located in? (enter your address here to find out: https://www.walkscore.com/)
10. -Would also love to hear any other reflections others would like to share about their experience with common bike parking areas in apartment buildings.
    
    Disclaimer: I'm not asking as a way of building evidence for a case that all this bike parking is or is not justified. I believe planners (by definition, people responsible for thinking about the future) are requiring bike parking to make sure we're ready for a future when bike parking is more in demand than presently. Same reason street-facing commercial units sit vacant in some new buildings for a long time. Or why EV charging stations seem to exist in surplus of demand right now. We're building what we can now so that it's there when we really need it. But asking instead to see about things like how do we best plan for the future we need. How much of a difference does it make if parking is underground vs on the main level? Why might people just park their bikes in their homes? etc.
    Looking forward to an enlightening series of reflections! Thanks in advance.

 

[ownthesky]

Bike storage drama at home, at work, and on transit is why I’m a big evangelist for folding bikes. They reduce a lot of the stress with these issues and if you choose a 20” model, it feels just like a real bike. Hell, you can even throw it in a shopping cart at the grocery store. I think if we had a an affordable 16” Brompton competitor in Canada, it could really be disruptive for the urban cycling scene. A bike that rolls folded easily into an elevator, stores in a closet or under a desk, and isn’t priced like a Veblen good would be game changing and doesn’t require the same level of infrastructure investment for bike storage.

 

[Milaisacat]

For what it's worth, from my perspective it seems like secure bike storage parking is generally handled in Toronto by trying to squeeze it in here and there in the P1, ground floor, and L1 podium levels. This isn't necessarily an indictment on Toronto-focused architects and transportation consultants. Rather, low bike parking rates mean that the creation of secure bike parking is rarely (if ever) approached as a core part of the design brief. Moreover, it appears the aim is seldom to create large, contiguous, highly accessible, and pleasant bike parking facilities that residents necessarily enjoy using.

As an example of what a project can achieve when high bike parking rates require prioritizing the creation of secure bike storage within the overall project design, consider an active rezoning application in Vancouver by Toronto-based Diamond-Schmitt Architects: 1402-1460 Burrard St, 900 Pacific St and 1401-1451 Hornby St (link to rezoning booklet below).

This two-tower, 87,500-square metre GFA, 12.11 FSR, 1,136-unit mixed use residential proposal includes 2,003 secure bicycle parking spaces (plus 64 short-term). In the Vancouver context, the required long term bike parking is correlated with unit type (1-bed = 1.5 long-term spaces / unit, 2-bed = 2.5 / unit, 3-bed 3 / unit). This is substantially higher than Toronto's rates and leaves a large project like this with no choice but to devote a significant amount of GFA to secure bike parking. Bike parking comprises approximately half of the P1 and Ground Floor GFA (PDF pages 93 and 94), and due to the slope of the site, both of these levels are directly accessible from ground level.

https://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/1402-1460-burrard-st/application-booklet.pdf

 

[innsertnamehere]

Those are some crazy high bike parking rates. My experience in Toronto building is that even the 1-1.2/unit rates Toronto requires are generally oversized for actual demand. Many people simply don't bike for a wide variety of reasons.

My experience with secure rooms in condos is more about lack of maintenance of the facilities than the size of them. Many condo corporations and rental landlords simply don't do the required regular cleaning of the spaces, removal of abandoned bicycles, regularly repair and replace broken racks, etc.

Security is also a concern for many with theft still being common even in "secure" rooms.

 

[Hieberrr]

Those are some crazy high bike parking rates. My experience in Toronto building is that even the 1-1.2/unit rates Toronto requires are generally oversized for actual demand. Many people simply don't bike for a wide variety of reasons.

My experience with secure rooms in condos is more about lack of maintenance of the facilities than the size of them. Many condo corporations and rental landlords simply don't do the required regular cleaning of the spaces, removal of abandoned bicycles, regularly repair and replace broken racks, etc.

Security is also a concern for many with theft still being common even in "secure" rooms.

Yeah, we had a bike stolen from a condo bike room that was supposedly 'secure'. When we approached management, the security camera footage conveniently was no longer available.

 

[ADRM]

Those are some crazy high bike parking rates. My experience in Toronto building is that even the 1-1.2/unit rates Toronto requires are generally oversized for actual demand. Many people simply don't bike for a wide variety of reasons.

My experience with secure rooms in condos is more about lack of maintenance of the facilities than the size of them. Many condo corporations and rental landlords simply don't do the required regular cleaning of the spaces, removal of abandoned bicycles, regularly repair and replace broken racks, etc.

Security is also a concern for many with theft still being common even in "secure" rooms.

Exactly this. I say this as someone who bikes to work nearly every day, bikes my daughter to and from school in the warmer months nearly every day: the long-term bike parking requirements in Toronto are much too onerous, and hinder the feasibility of lots of development projects (especially on the smaller scale, and exceptionally so on buildings with no below-grade).

 

[Northern Light]

Exactly this. I say this as someone who bikes to work nearly every day, bikes my daughter to and from school in the warmer months nearly every day: the long-term bike parking requirements in Toronto are much too onerous, and hinder the feasibility of lots of development projects (especially on the smaller scale, and exceptionally so on buildings with no below-grade).

Any thoughts on the recent amended standards and cash-in-lieu program?

 

[ADRM]

Any thoughts on the recent amended standards and cash-in-lieu program?

A good start but doesn't go far enough. The CIL rate is reasonable, but the relaxing of just 50% of the LT requirement does not go far enough; it is almost impossible meet this on most sites where you're doing slab-on-grade or minimal underground, especially on the type of infill 6-8-storey mid-rise that the EHON framework envisions.

And then on other sites of those sorts where you do notionally have the space to make it work, it's taking up valuable space that could be much better dedicated to usable outdoor amenity space.

 

[afransen]

Exactly this. I say this as someone who bikes to work nearly every day, bikes my daughter to and from school in the warmer months nearly every day: the long-term bike parking requirements in Toronto are much too onerous, and hinder the feasibility of lots of development projects (especially on the smaller scale, and exceptionally so on buildings with no below-grade).

Perhaps for small projects they could arrange for pooled nearby bike storage (within a few hundred meters).

 

[H4F33Z]

My main issue is that there's not been a big push to retrofit older apartment buildings with secure bike parking facilities. I grew up in Thorncliffe Park and many people use bikes in the community but there was no good place to put it. Many people put them on the balcony (which I believe has been banned in recent years or at least discouraged) so many put them in their unit. However, bringing a bike in on an elevator is extremely difficult when the elevators are busy (which is often). Some leave them on a nearby fence near the ground level but this is also very risky and prone to removal.

It frustrates me that there's been such a big push to get so much secure bike parking in newer buildings that many people won't use, yet there's been no consideration for people living in these apartment communities for which a lot of people have a bike, and use often but face struggles with, especially with where to keep them safely.

 

[innsertnamehere]

My main issue is that there's not been a big push to retrofit older apartment buildings with secure bike parking facilities. I grew up in Thorncliffe Park and many people use bikes in the community but there was no good place to put it. Many people put them on the balcony (which I believe has been banned in recent years or at least discouraged) so many put them in their unit. However, bringing a bike in on an elevator is extremely difficult when the elevators are busy (which is often). Some leave them on a nearby fence near the ground level but this is also very risky and prone to removal.

It frustrates me that there's been such a big push to get so much secure bike parking in newer buildings that many people won't use, yet there's been no consideration for people living in these apartment communities for which a lot of people have a bike, and use often but face struggles with, especially with where to keep them safely.

This is especially frustrating as older apartment buildings often have oodles of excess vehicle parking areas which they can easily convert to bike parking spaces. Could be as simple as throwing down some bike racks in the underground over some vacant spaces. ESPECIALLY now that they are no longer zoning constrained by parking minimums to preserve those empty parking spaces.

 

[bearcat]

I live in a building with a secured bike storage room on the ground floor. I personally just use it to store my bike, which I almost never ride, as there are two Bikeshare stations just outside my building. I cycle with Bikeshare almost exclusively, it's just more convenient for my needs.

Maybe there should be an option to contribute towards the capital budget of Bikeshare to pay for a station and some bikes in place of bike parking within a building.

 

[Northern Light]

This is especially frustrating as older apartment buildings often have oodles of excess vehicle parking areas which they can easily convert to bike parking spaces. Could be as simple as throwing down some bike racks in the underground over some vacant spaces. ESPECIALLY now that they are no longer zoning constrained by parking minimums to preserve those empty parking spaces.

I agree, though, a simple bike rack, w/o the benefit of an added layer of security (particularly in the case of a surface lot), and likewise, in that latter case, a lack of climate protection, makes that level of offer 'better than nothing' rather than 'ideal'.

I think the simple idea of providing the Metrolinx style secure bike parking facility to landlord's at-cost, and encouraging them to replace up to 4-6 parking spots with parking for 20+ bikes would work nicely. No climate control required, just lights, passcard locks, and cameras.

Credit: Metrolinx

 

[innsertnamehere]

I agree, though, a simple bike rack, w/o the benefit of an added layer of security (particularly in the case of a surface lot), and likewise, in that latter case, a lack of climate protection, makes that level of offer 'better than nothing' rather than 'ideal'.

I think the simple idea of providing the Metrolinx style secure bike parking facility to landlord's at-cost, and encouraging them to replace up to 4-6 parking spots with parking for 20+ bikes would work nicely. No climate control required, just lights, passcard locks, and cameras.

View attachment 641069
View attachment 641070
Credit: Metrolinx

The problem with older buildings is that budgets are.. constrained. Which I think is the real reason a lot of these buildings, particularly in low income areas, haven't done anything yet. They don't spend money unless they really need to, typically.

No need for it to be that complex - a wire cage enclosure around a few parking spaces with keycard access is sufficient in the underground for an much smaller price.

 

[Northern Light]

The problem with older buildings is that budgets are.. constrained. Which I think is the real reason a lot of these buildings, particularly in low income areas, haven't done anything yet. They don't spend money unless they really need to, typically.

Many of those older buildings are quite profitable. With vacancy de-control, they're getting $2,500+ rents while not providing central air or dishwashers or ensuite laundry, and they charge for parking and electricity on top

No need for it to be that complex - a wire cage enclosure around a few parking spaces with keycard access is sufficient in the underground for an much smaller price.

I'm not opposed to that, though I think lighting and cameras are essential for theft prevention and to ensure safety.