UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The spatial effects of city by-laws upon automobile parking garages Weaver, Barry John 1971

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1971_A8 W43.pdf [ 12.84MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101943.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101943-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101943-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101943-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101943-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101943-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101943-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101943-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101943.ris

Full Text

THE SPATIAL EFFECTS OF CITY BY-LAWS UPON AUTOMOBILE PARKING GARAGES by BARRY JOHN WEAVER B c A , Simon Fraser University, 1969 6  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  i n the Department of GEOGRAPHY We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1971  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y s h a l l I  f u r t h e r agree  in p a r t i a l  fulfilment of  the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  make i t  freely available  that permission  for  the requirements f o r  Columbia,  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and  f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f  this  that  study. thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s of  this  written  representatives. thesis  for financial  i s understood that copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n gain s h a l l  permission.  Department o f  Geography  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada  Date  It  August 12, 1971  Columbia  not  be allowed without my  ii  ABSTRACT  The aim of this thesis i s to examine the spatial effects of city regulations and practices upon one urban function - parking and the parking garage. This follows the conviction that the study of urban structure can be best achieved through a spatial analysis of the individual sites that create urban structure rather •than through the creation of generalized urban land use models. The' study i s organized around one central hypothesis? (i) The external and internal spatial arrangements of automobile parking garages are effectively regulated by city planning decisions and c i t y by-law provisions. A review of existing c i t y regulatory methods concerning automobile parking garages showed that external site features of parking garages are regulated through zoning by-law provisions, and transportation and redevelopment or renewal planning decisions; that internal site features, i n addition to the above, were subjected to c i t y building by-laws; and that both the external and internal site features were indirectly regulated through c i t y approaches to the administrative and financial aspects of a parking program. The analysis of regulations showed one area i n which regulations were particularly stringent. This i s the sale of gas-  iii  oline and o i l products and. the provision of service and. repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages. Two subsidiaryhypotheses were therefore  considered:  ( i i ) The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages are both a desirable and a safe use of space •within these structures. ( i i i ) The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages leads to a conflict between actors at the municipal and industrial levels that can only be resolved by the adoption of similar planning goals by city decisionmakers. The analysis of sections of National building and f i r e codes for Canada and. the United States and various c i t y building by-laws revealed that there exists differences between the two countries* national codes as well as differences between building by-laws for various c i t i e s . American codes and by-laws permit inside gasoline dispensing units and service and repair f a c i l i t i e s within parking garages, whereas Canadian codes and by-laws do not. A l l three hypotheses were tested i n a case study of Vancouver, B.C. An examination of relevant sections of the building and zoning by-laws revealed that the City has many restrictions on parking garages, specifically i n regard to the inside location of gasoline pumps and repair f a c i l i t i e s . These regulations create a content!©us issue between industry and City o f f i c i a l s , because the  iv industry recognizes that a demand exists for various automobileoriented products and services, yet the City s building and zoning ,  by-law prohibits many of them. This conflict can only be resolved through availability of common information and continuing dialogue. This study has endeavored to provide this i n a systematic form. A dialogue between municipal and industrial o f f i c i a l s may lead to diverse and conflicting regulations, however, the ultimate goal should be the creation of an urban environment which accomodates the variety of requirements of an increasing urbanized population.  TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT  i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES  v viii  LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS '•-  ix x  CHAPTER I  PARKING IN THE CITY Ao Bo C. Do E F G. H. 0  0  II  Introduction Parking i n Perspective City Regulation of Parking Garages The Study Problem Geographical Perspective Hypotheses Approach and Scope of Study Organization of the Thesis  1 2 14 19 20 22 24 25  CITY STRUCTURE AND SITE TYPOLOGY  26  A. Bo C. Do E  26 31 40 43 46 46 47 48 49 49 50 50 51 52  0  City Structure Site Type Site Quality Site Network A Spatial Typology of Parking Garages 1. Downtown a Retail store parking garage b Office-employee parking garage c. Central core parking garage d. Hotel parking garage 2. Main Street 3. Residential District 4. Shopping Centre 5» Specialized Functional Area 0  0  III  1  CITY REGULATION OF AUTOMOBILE PARKING GARAGES  53  A. Zoning Bo Urban Transportation Planning C. Urban Renewal Planning  53 61 66  vi  CHAPTER  IV  PAGE  Do Administrative Practices 1. Private Enterprise 2. Private and Public Cooperation 3. Municipal a. Parking authorities E. Financial Practices 1. Direct Revenue Sources a. Current budget expenditures b„ Benefited d i s t r i c t assessment c. Parking revenue 2. Borrowed Capital a. General-obligation bonds b. Revenue bonds c. Assessment bonds F. Building Codes G. Summary  69 70 74 75 78 81 82 82 83 84 86 86 87 89 89 92  AN EXAMPLE OF INTERNAL SITE REGULATION  94  A„ Introduction 1. Custom 2. Interpretation of Words and Phrases 3» Draftsmanship B. The Example C. The Case of Western Canadian Cities D The Case of Western United States Cities E The Case of Vancouver F. General Appraisal  94 94 95 95 96 97 102 108 117  PARKING GARAGESs A CASE STUDY OF VANCOUVER  122  A« B. Co D. E. F. Go H. I  122 123 124 127 133 I36 140 148 149  0  0  V  0  VI  Introduction The Setting The Parking Situation Zoning City Transportation Planning City Redevelopment Planning City Administrative and Financial Practices City Building By-law Summary  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  151  Ao Review of the Study B. Appraisal of the Hypotheses 1. Hypothesis 1 2. Hypothesis 2 3. Hypothesis 3 C Recommendations 1. Local Municipal Level 2 Private Enterprise Level  151 155 155 156 158 160 161 I63  0  0  PAGE  CHAPTER D  e  Recornmendations f o r Further Study  16^  BIBLIOGRAPHY  166  APPENDIX A Part I Part I I  180 181  APPENDIX B Part I Part I I  185 194  viii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1  PAGE Typical Zoning Requirements, Indicated i Parking Space Needs and Suggested Planning Standards  61  2  Required Parking Spaces  190  3  Height and Area Limitations of Buildings of Group G, Division 3 Occupancy  198  4  Height and Area Limitations for OpenAir Parking Garages  198  ix LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE  PAGE  1  Motor Vehicles - Vancouver. 1947-1968  3  2  Parking Space Costs i n Relation to Land Values  10  3  Off-Street Parking Spaces i n Relation to Urbanized Area Population  12  4  The Structure of Intra-Urban Business and Commerce  36  5  Automobile Parking Garages i n -the Downtown District of Vancouver  In Pocket Inside Back Cover  X  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS With gratitude I wish to acknowledge the people who aided i n the preparation of this thesis. I am particularly indebted, to Dr. R. James daus for his invaluable guidance and support during the preparation and. completion of the thesis. I also wish to thank Dr. Walter G. Hardwick for his helpful criticisms and. comments. Mention must also be made of the information provided by Mr. B.H. Boers (Building Inspector, City of Nanaimo), Mr. R.N. Bubbs (Petroleum Industry Committee, Vancouver, B.C.), Mr. C.S. Hyciek (President, Western Auto Park Ltd., Calgary), Mr. J W. C  McLewin (Parking Engineer, City of Vancouver) and the Building Inspectors and Fire Chiefs i n Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Vancouver, and. Victoria. I would also l i k e to acknowledge the excellent work of the typist, Mrs Linda Dadey. Finally, a very special thanks to my wife, Linda, for her patience and encouragement during the writing of this thesis.  CHAPTER I PARKING IN THE CITY  The study of the urban environment by geographers has l a r g e l y focused  on the creation of generalized urban land use models  derived from aggregated s o c i a l and economic data ( i . e . Park et a l , 1925)  or on the study of r e t a i l l o c a t i o n , i n d u s t r i a l l o c a t i o n , and  so on ( i . e . Berry, 1963)* Moreover, these studies have considered the e f f e c t s of c i t y government decisions upon the urban environment i n only a general and i n some cases, a t h e o r e t i c a l sense. In t h i s t h e s i s , i t i s however asserted that a better understanding of urban structure can be achieved  through understanding the i n d i v i d u a l s i t e s  that create t h i s structure and the e f f e c t s of c i t y plans and by-laws upon these s i t e s . The objective of t h i s thesis i s to investigate the s p a t i a l e f f e c t s of c i t y regulations and practices upon one urban function and i t s form within the urban structure —  namely, parking  and the parking garage. By delving i n t o the physical ( l o c a t i o n , s i z e , design e t c . ) , the p o l i t i c a l (private versus public i n t e r e s t s ) , and  the  l e g a l problems faced by various urban governments i n regulating the external and i n t e r n a l s p a t i a l features of the parking garage, i t i s hoped to gain a better i n s i g h t i n t o t h e i r existence. C i t y regulations concerning  the external and i n t e r n a l s p a t i a l features of t h i s  structure are investigated f o r parking garages i n general and more  2 s p e c i f i c a l l y , f o r an i n t e r n a l s i t e feature and a p a r t i c u l a r o i t y , with the hope that recommendations can be obtained f o r future regulations which can enhance the q u a l i t y of parking garages i n the urban environment.  Parking In Perspective Parking can no longer be considered as a f a c i l i t y or accessory use to such p r i n c i p a l uses as r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial, service, and i n d u s t r i a l structures. Due to increased motor v e h i c l e ownership, urban area usage, and c i t y s t r e e t congestion,  parking  must now be considered as a rather s i g n i f i c a n t and v i t a l urban land use i n i t s own r i g h t . I t i s a consideration, p a r t i c u l a r l y so, where parking i s to be furnished on an o f f - s t r e e t basis. Automobile r e g i s t r a t i o n s i n the United States have r i s e n 220 percent i n the l a s t twenty years (National Petroleum I n s t i t u t e , 1970,  p. 38). F. Houston Wynn (1963. p. 1) noted that at the time of  the I960 census "nearly f o u r - f i f t h s of a l l American f a m i l i e s had  an  automobile f o r t h e i r use". Between 1953  and 1964,  Toronto experienced  a 100  percent  increase i n registered v e h i c l e s , compared to a population growth of only 50 percent f o r the same period (Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, 1965). The following graph shows the rate of increase i n v e h i c l e r e g i s t r a t i o n i n Vancouver from 1947  to 1968.  I t shows a  425  percent increase f o r the period (See Figure 1 ) . But not only has motor v e h i c l e ownership increased, v e h i c l e use i n the urban area has r i s e n as w e l l . Having acquired  the  automobile, the majority of owners use i t f o r most of t h e i r t r a v e l , appearing to regard any other t r a v e l modes as a poor second choice.  3  50--  47  50  55  60  65  k8  .YEAR- •  Fig. 1. Motor Vehicles = Vancouver! 1947=1968 Sources C i t y of Vancouver. C i t y of Vancouver Plans Part 1 - The Issues. Vancouvers Planning Department, 1968, p„ 40„  4 When a choice does e x i s t between t r a v e l modes, convenience and time saving are the reasons usually given f o r selection of the automobile. Simultaneously, there has been a decrease i n the use of public t r a n s i t i n major North American c i t i e s . Decreases i n public t r a n s i t usage since the Second World War i n the c i t i e s of Seattle, D e t r o i t , and San Francisco have been noted by the Highway Research Board (1956). A Consultant's report on transportation i n Vancouver (P.B.Q. and D., 1968,  p. 7) has shown that although public t r a n s i t  t r i p s to the C.B.D. i n that c i t y t o t a l s 35 percent of the t r i p s made to there, i n the r e s t of the metro area usage has decreased from a 20 percent share of t o t a l t r i p s i n 1950 to a 14 percent share i n  1968.  The decrease i n the use of public t r a n s i t systems i n c i t i e s i s p a r t i a l l y attributed to the convenient method of transportation offered by the automobile. As James Hunnicutt (1964, p. 50), a noted t r a f f i c and parking consultant, puts i t : The car i s ready to go when i t s owner wants and where i t s owner wants and operates s t r i c t l y on the owner's schedule. On the other hand, t r a n s i t leaves when i t wants and goes where i t wants, and runs on i t s schedule and the r i d e r has to meet that predetermined by the bus or t r a i n . Hunnicutt goes on to state: The automobile i s considerably more rapid than t r a n s i t i n most c a s e s . t h e bus averages between 9 and 11 miles per hour on i t s o v e r a l l t r i p . The automobile averages between 15 and 20 miles per hour. The bus takes twice as long to get there, not i n c l u d i n g transfers.  5 In terms of cost, i t appears that public transit i s a much cheaper mode of transportation than the automobile. The motorvehicle driver must take into account not only his basic\ travel costs, those of gasoline, o i l , tires, and parking, but i n addition, the costs of insurance and repairs, costs which seem to increase each year. On the other hand, the bus commuter need only consider his travel fare. Cost-wise, public transit, then, i s a much more economical mode of travel than the automobile. However, the automobile i s a phenomenon of an affluent age. Although, i t i s not the most economical solution to the indivi d u a l s transportation needs i n a great many cases, the automobile 1  i s the most convenient and time saving answer for a majority of carowning citizens who clearly are not seeking the cheapest ride. Reflecting this rise i n motor vehicle ownership and the decline i n public transit usage i s a steadily increasing demand, for parking space on city streets. At the same time, however, growing t r a f f i c volumes mean greater demands on the streets for moving vehicles. The result i s a "mutually exclusive competition for city street space between moving and standing vehicles (Fordham, 1956, p. 1)", or the "parking problem". The parking problem orginated i n the central business d i s t r i c t of the city, but i n larger metropolises i t has expanded onto main streets and into high density residential areas. The fact simply i s that streets are not meant to be parking areas. Yet, paradoxically, i t can usually be found that up to one-half of the area of streets i n traffic-congested, areas are used, for parking.  6 The result i s that streets are congested for much of the time. I t would logically follow, then, that an automatic increase i n the t r a f f i c capacity of congested-area  streets would result  from eliminating curbside parking. The elimination of parking on both sides of a two-lane street, for example, would mean doubling the street's t r a f f i c capacity. Besides increased t r a f f i c capacity, there are other benefits to be gained from the! elimination of on-street parking. The absence of curbside parking would mean no stalled traffic because of drivers attempting to park. Further, there would be a reduction in, the minor but costly accidents that result from the process of parking and unparking. Studies show that accidents involving parking or parked cars account for approximately onetenth of a l l accidents, and half of those involved parked cars. The next highest percentage of parking accidents involves cars moving from the curb. Cars slowing to park, double-parked and backing into curb spaces account for most other accidents (Barrage and Mogren, 1957» P« 9). Barrage and Mogren go on to note that accident hazards are created by curb parking too near an intersection and by maneuvering from an angled s t a l l into the t r a f f i c stream. Increased c i t y street congestion created by on-street or curbside parking can thus be very costly i n terms of time and dollars to the motor-vehicle operator. However, the resultants of increasing c i t y street congestion created by on-street parking i s not only limited to motor vehicle operators. The business community can be affected as well.  7 Although i t i s recognized that "parking affects the competition between downtown business and that i n outlying shopping centres or sub-business districts (Burrage and Mogren, 1957s P« 4)", i t s effects must be kept i n a proper perspective,, For example, i n dealing with urban shopping habits, the Highway Research Board (1956) found that 90 percent of the shoppers interviewed i n Columbus, Ohio found parking d i f f i c u l t i n the downtown area, 71 percent were concerned about the parking cost, and t r a f f i c congestion hampered 81 percent, "Yet less than 10$ allowed these impediments to deter them from shopping downtown by automobile (Highway Research Board, 1956, p. 10)", I t appears that parking d i f f i c u l t y and t r a f f i c congestion does not influence the shopping habits of downtown shoppers. Further, i t has been inferred that the d i f f i c u l t y i n parking and the congestion of streets have been primarily responsible for the spatial decentralization of retailing and the surge i n suburban r e t a i l sales. Writers have hypothesized (See, for example, Ratcliff, 1959» p. 313) and researchers have proven (Highway Research Board, 1953; 1956), however, that an expanded population base and the increased mobility of the auto shopper have prompted the change i n r e t a i l sales growth and store location, not the problems of parking and congestion. In perspective, then, t r a f f i c congestion and parking d i f f i c u l t y are not responsible for changing shopping habits, increased suburban sales, and new store location. Yet i n order to maintain the central business d i s t r i c t as a viable economic and functional entity, consideration must be given to urban parking and t r a f f i c problems, Correction of a parking deficiency, for example, might enable a  8 downtown merchant "to lure or lure back those shoppers who w i l l have a shorter overall t r i p or those to whom a greater selection of goods overshadows any added time i t might take them to accomplish their shopping mission (Highway Research Board, 1956,  p. 15)  w  and i n  addition, to hold those shoppers who already shop i n the downtown. Farther, a solution to the parking d i f f i c u l t y may help provide the stimulus needed to attract new office or r e t a i l developments to the central business d i s t r i c t , which because of the parking deficiency, locate elsewhere i n the city or even i n another city (Smith,  1965.  pp. 23-30). However, should the parking d i f f i c u l t y be corrected but not the problem of congestion created by s t i l l permitting on-street parking, one would then be negating most of the positive results to be gained from such a correction. For example, i f a downtown shopper had to drive on a congested street on which on-street parking substantially contributed to the congestion, he may soon consider the alternatives to making such a t r i p . Therefore, the gradual elimination of curbside parking i s warranted by the effects of congested c i t y streets to both the automobile driver and the business community. Bat the problem i s that automobiles must be parked somewhere; and the answer i s to provide off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . There are two basic types of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s : surface lots and multi-deck structures. Parking lots i n the central business d i s t r i c t or on main streets are usually i n areas not occupied by buildings. Some lots were created by the demolition  9 of out-moded structures. Such lots are interim uses of these lands and as a consequence, have l i t t l e guarantee of permanency. The enlargement of adjacent buildings or the construction of new buildings often eliminate surface l o t f a c i l i t i e s . In contrast, parking garages usually represent a permanent structure. They provide considerable capacity i n a small area, often i n highly congested sections where parking demands and land values are highest. The parking garage also represents a much greater investment than the parking l o t . For commercial parking l o t s , most of the cost i s i n the land and operation with minimal cost for development. Land for commercial lots i s more often leased than purchased. Leased land may range i n cost from $25 per space: per year to more than $200, depending on i t s location, with $60 - $75 per space somewhat typical. Annual operation and maintenance costs are also related to location, with high-turnover locations costing more than $200 per space. Average locations w i l l cost $100 - $125 per space (Wynn, 1963* p. 6). On the other hand, easy entry and exit garages can cost under $2,000 per space plus the site costs which may range upwards from $1,500 to $3,000 per space, depending on location (Smith, 1965, p. 35). Construction costs range from $2,000 to $3*000 for most mechanical garages and up to $4,000 for underground garages (Wynn, 1963, p. 6) (See Figure 2) . Garage operating costs are higher on the average than costs for parking l o t operation, and may run from $135 to $180 per space.  10,0 0 0  T  qooo.. 8000.. »  7 000.  UJ  b  cr <  •E 4000  10  15  L AN D CQST ..DOLLARS  20 PER SOU-ABE  15  30  35  FOOT  Fig, 2, Parking Space Costs i n Relation to Land Values Source. Wilbur So Smith & Associates, Parking i n the City Center, New Haven, Conn,; Author, 1965s Po 36,  11 However, i n larger c i t i e s , the cost of land, either by purchase or by lease, coupled with larger and more concentrated parking demands, w i l l usually dictate construction of parking garages at the most centrally located sites. Because parking space must compete for expensive land with multi-storey buildings, parking garages generally account for an increasing share of parking spaces i n larger urban centres because they are the most economical parking use of this land. As depicted i n Figure ; 3»  urban centres of 100,000  population have approximately 18 percent of the total parking supply along curbs, 67 percent i n l o t s , and 15 percent i n garages. In contrast, when urban population rises to one million, garages increase their share of the total spaces to 27 percent while ourbspace f a l l s to 8 percent and lots remain static at 65 percent. Another feature of the parking garage which enhances i t s construction over the surface l o t i n urban centres i s i t s a b i l i t y to be integrated with a primary function or to integrate an accessory function. In congested downtown areas, land economics and  convenience  have, for example, spawned many multi-use buildings including parking garages. Such buildings provide two basic advantages: "They allow developers to provide parking on sites too expensive for parking alone, and they allow tenants and visitors to reach their destination without going outside (Beach, 1970)". Examples of integrated parking f a c i l i t i e s can be found i n most North American c i t i e s . In Pittsburg, a new multi-purpose structure features r e t a i l space on the f i r s t floor, two floors of office space, a 12 storey apartment, a pedestrian bridge to a department store, and a self-service parking garage with space for 825 cars.  12  0,000  50^)00 100,000 ,'RBANIZ E D .AREA.  Figo  3o  500,000 I MILUtON  5 MILUOiMO MlLUOH  R.OP.U.LAT.ION-=J$*0.  Off-Street Parking Spaces In Relation To Urbanized Area Population  As urban areas increase i n size, the number of garage spaces increases at a faster rate than parking l o t spaces. Central business districts i n urbanized areas of 200,000 or less usually have fewer than 1,000 spaces i n parking garages. This number increases substantially as urban areas enlarge; there are about 5»500 garage spaces i n urban areas of one million i n population. The total off-street spaces averaged 2,800 i n urbanized areas of 100,000, 16,000 i n areas of one million, and about 28,000 i n urbanized areas of two million population. Sources Wilbur S„ Smith & Associates, Parking i n the City Center, New Haven, Conn, s Author, 1965 p« 7<> 9  13 Marina City i n Chicago which consists of ko stories of apartments located above 20 floors of parking, which i n turn i s on top of two floors of shops and office space, i s another example. Other examples include a combination motel and garage and theatre and garage. Under construction i n New York City i s a combined apartment and school building with a garage i n between to act as a sound barrier (Martin, 1969* P. 30). Integrated parking structures can also be found i n shopping centres (See Chapter I I ) . The underground parking garage with a park on top i s another type of multi-purpose structure (Klose, 1965). Examples are found i n San Francisco (Fisher and Gould, 1953)» Los Angeles (Clements, 1953)* Pittsburg, Chicago, and Detroit. Parking below or above freeways i s s t i l l another example of a multiple use of f a c i l i t i e s . For example, a $10 million garage of the John Hancock Insurance Company w i l l be built astride the Massachusetts Turnpike i n Boston (Beach, 1970). Plans i n Spokane, Washington are for the creation of lk blocks of parking under a section of the East-West Freeway. Scarcity of land i n the central business d i s t r i c t , and the resulting increase i n land values i s thus forcing more and more cities to integrate parking f a c i l i t i e s with other major building and land developments. Similarlly, r e t a i l or service f a c i l i t i e s which cannot afford or do not wish to purchase or lease land for their establishment i n the central business d i s t r i c t , but desire to locate  14 there, are becoming accessory functions to the primary function of the parking garage. Often, the street-level frontage on one side of a parking garage i s used to house specialty shopping good stores with items l i k e clothing or furniture and personal service establishments such as loan companies or ticket agencies. Automobile service f a c i l i t i e s , including gasoline pumps , car washes, and repair bays, are another example of accessory uses i n parking garages. Where city by-laws permit, these f a c i l i t i e s can represent an important source of income for the garage operator as well as convenience for the customer (Barrage and Mogren, 1957, p.281). Parking has therefore become a v i t a l u t i l i t y i n the city. Because of increased motor vehicle ownership, decreased public transit usage, and intensified city street congestion, parking must be gradually eliminated from the curb, and be replaced by off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . Although, off-street parking can be provided by either the surface l o t or. the multi-deck structure, the latter i s more preferable because of i t s greater guarantee of permanence, larger amount of investment, better economic use of urban land, and a b i l i t y to become or include an acoessory function. Parking garages are thus becoming significant users of urban land. City Regulation of Parking Garages Similar to most urban functions and forms, parking and parking garages respectively, are subjected to c i t y planning and control. Spatially, the effects of such practices can be  viewed as  having external and internal influences upon the activity and the f a c i l i t y concerned. Externally and internally, parking garages can  15 be regulated through city zoning by-laws, transportation and redevelopment planning, administrative and financial methods, and building and f i r e by-laws. Zoning by-laws are considered to be the mechanism by which the city planner puts into effect many of his plans. These by-laws are an application of the police power of urban governments for the protection of the public health, welfare, and safety (Gallion and Eisner, 1963» p. 203)* The zoning ordinances divide municipalities into "zones'* or districts and prescribes for eaoh of these, "regulations governing land use, building heights and bulks, and l o t area that may be occupied by buildings within the zone" (Mogren, 1952,  p.12). Through the enforcement of zoning by-laws, control  over population density i s attained. In relation to parking garages, zoning by-laws extend control over both the external and internal spatial features of these structures. First, through establishing zoning districts and by regulating land uses within these d i s t r i c t s , zoning by-laws influence the location of a parking garage. Secondly, by requiring a minimum amount of parking space for every new or redeveloped building, the internal feature of size or capacity of a parking garage i s regulated by zoning ordinances. Regulation of parking garages by an urban government can also be effected by city planning for transportation f a c i l i t i e s and renewal or redevelopment projects. Since parking i s generally considered to be an important phase of transportation, i t would logically follow that any planning for the latter would affect the former. In terms of parking garages, they would be affected by their  16 placement i n relation to the overall transportation system for the city, including freeway routes and interchanges, arterial streets, and directional streets (Smith, 1961), Further, the location of parking garages can be conditioned by rapid transit stops or commuter railroad stations (Smith, 1965, p. 63). The latter condition i s created by the need for parking f a c i l i t i e s for the automobiles owned by transit users. The extension of influence of transportation planning over the parking garage can also be viewed for certain internal features of the structure such as the placement of entrances and exits i n relation to t r a f f i c flow, size or capacity of the garage, and reservoir space (Burrage and Mogren, 1957; Ricker, 1957). A parking garage can be affected externally by renewal or redevelopment projects undertaken by the city (Smith, 1959; Candeub, 1964). "Current urban renewal and redevelopment programs afford maximum opportunities to develop the most efficient and wellsituated garages (Whiteside, 1961, p. 14) . The provision of adequate n  parking for these projects i s essential i n attracting new t r a f f i c generating activities and as a result i n maintaining or increasing the tax base of the area. On a much larger scale, parking garages can be effectively regulated through a city government's administrative and financial approach to parking i n general. The approach taken by a c i t y government towards parking, i f one i s taken, can dictate the external and internal features of the f a c i l i t i e s provided for such an activity.But presuming that parking garages are one of those f a c i l i t i e s  17 provided, an.analysis of the administrative approach would center on the type of ownership and operation of the garages. Ownership and operation are of three types: (a) privately owned and operated; (b) publicly owned and privately operated; and (c) publicly owned and operated. The financial approach i s concerned with the methods of financing parking garages, of which there are seven modes: (a) general fund appropriations; (b) current budget expenditures; (c) benefited d i s t r i c t assessments; (d) parking revenues; (e) general obligation bonds; (f) revenue bonds (g) assessment bonds. In addition to being regulated through zoning ordinances and influenced by transportation planning, the internal features of parking garages are affected spatially by the building and f i r e by-laws enacted by a city. These by-laws effect control over such internal features as s t a l l dimensions, travel ramps, floor designs, stairways, elevators, ventilation, building materials, and f i r e protection. But more importantly, building and f i r e by-laws regulate the provision of accessory functions, especially automobile-oriented service f a c i l i t i e s and r e t a i l establishments, inside parking garages. The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s Inside parking structures are credited with being a source of profit to the parking garage operator and convenience to the customer (Barrage and Mogren, 1957, p. 281). In major urban centres, gasoline r e t a i l outlets i n a downtown setting must be located i n a building with a complimentary  18 threshold* i n order to remain viable. "In other words, the internal linkages with the retailing outlets must be strong so that the building i t s e l f w i l l generate a very high threshold (daus and Hardwick, 1971, p. 259)". Thus both o i l companies and parking managers have recognized that where the rate of return would be inadequate to a downtown gasoline service station on i t s own, locating i n conjunction with a parking garage may provide a sufficient threshold. Further, because of high land costs and limited space i n the downtown, o i l companies recognize 'that a solitary gasoline service station i s an uneconomic use of core land. However, at the same time, the o i l companies are aware of a demand for gasoline and o i l products and automobile services i n the downtown area, and thus desire to meet this demand; and the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s as an accessory function i n parking garages i s one of the best ways to meet this demand. On the other hand, many c i t i e s , particularly those i n Canada, through building and f i r e by-laws, prohibit or restrict the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the Installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages. Regulations concerning these f a c i l i t i e s are based on the principles of public health, welfare, and safety.  Threshold i s defined as the minimum number of people required to support one establishment of a functional type.  19 The Study Problem Zoning by-laws are one of the tools for implementing a c i t y plan. However, by-laws are often treated as the end-products the instituted plan —  —  rather than the means to attain the product.  "A c i t y which unthinkingly enforces by-laws without reference to a plan may be building an unattractive c i t y with limited form and inconvenient urban structure (GLaus and Hardwick, 1971* Glaus and Hardwick (1971, p. 256)  P« 255)".  go on to state:  Even when goals are similar, there may be conflicts i n operation between actors at the municipal level and the industrial level. Most often these conflicts develop because goals have not been explicitly set and the planning sector has no clear direction to follow. These criticisms of zoning by-laws can be extended to c i t y building and f i r e by-laws. An example of problems created  by  the enforcement of certain building and f i r e by-laws i s that concerning a spatial internal feature of parking garages. The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages are recognized by the petroleum and the parking industries as providing an economically viable r e t a i l outlet i n the downtown section of the city, a source of supply and attraction to and convenience for the customer, and a source of additional income. However, many Canadian cities have enacted building and f i r e by-laws prohibiting or restricting the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s  20  inside parking garages. Cities base this prohibition on -the fact that the city f i r e marshal! deems such an outlet as being particularly dangerous to the public health, welfare, and safety. Simultaneously, many city zoning ordinances are designed to eliminate gasoline service stations from urban cores, representing such f a c i l i t i e s as uneconomical and unattractive uses of downtown land. However, the city, unlike the petroleum industry, offers no alternatives for relocating gasoline r e t a i l outlets elsewhere i n the central business d i s t r i c t , As noted above, the most logical and feasible alternative i s to locate such f a c i l i t i e s i n conjunction with parking garages, but present c i t y building and f i r e by-laws prohibit any such linkage. The result i s thus that despite having similar goals, there exists a conflict between actors at the municipal level and the industrial level. I t i s a conflict that i s a result of the dissimilar goals of city zoning by-laws and city building and f i r e ft by-laws, and one which can only be resolved when consideration i s given to the factors of economic motivation and public health, welfare, and safety. Geographical Perspective Parking and i t s spatial manifestations have not been subjected to analysis by urban geographers. Typically, i n studies of intra-i^ity.retail structure, parking has been considered as a f a c i l i t y for various r e t a i l units which make up this structure (See for example, Proudfoot, 1937; Berry, 1963; Simmons, 1964; Leigh, 1966; Horton, 1968), Murphy, Vance, and Epstein (1955) and  21 Horwood and Boyce (1959) i n t h e i r respective studies of the central business d i s t r i c t have however discussed parking as being an  important  part i n the structure of the C.B.D.. In a l a t e r p u b l i c a t i o n , Murphy (1966) has considered parking i n terms of i t being a rather s i g n i f i c a n t user of commercial land i n the c i t y . In f a c t , Murphy goes on to ask: "What research can the geographer do with respect to parking? Murphy (1966, p. 251)  suggests that the geographer may be interested  i n studies of the adequacy of parking i n a c i t y or i n studies of the parking resources of downtown areas. However, Murphy asserts that when such a study i s attempted, one runs i n t o the problem of adding the d i f f e r e n t types of parking i n order to give a s i g n i f i c a n t and meaningful t o t a l of parking space. But the r e a l importance of Murphy's question l i e s i n the f a c t that i t acknowledges the notion that research on parking may be done within Geography. Research on parking by geographers can also Include on a more minute scale the study of i t s s p a t i a l manifestations, i n c l u d i n g surface l o t s and multi-deck structures..Although parking consultants and t r a f f i c engineers have considered some of the l o c a t i o n a l aspects of these f a c i l i t i e s (See, f o r example, Le Craw and Smith, Barrage and Mogren, 1957;  1948;  Whiteside, 1961), there are s t i l l numerous  areas of research open to geographers i n the study of parking f a c i l i t i e s . . , One area of study which has not been thoroughly researched i s the examination  of the s p a t i a l e f f e c t s of c i t y plans and by-laws  upon the external and i n t e r n a l s p a t i a l features of parking garages. The importance of studying i n t e r n a l and external s i t e features by geographers has been demonstrated by d a u s (1969) and Rothwell (1970)  22 and further discussed by Glaus and Rothwell (1970) for gasoline service stations. Moreover, the importance of research by the geographer on the spatial effects of c i t y planning decisions and by-law provisions has been pointed out by Claus and Hardwick (1971) i n their examination of automobile-oriented retailing, of which the parking garage i s an example. The geographical perspective of this thesis, therefore, l i e s i n the study of the spatial effects of c i t y planning decisions and city by-law provisions upon the external and internal site features of automobile parking garages. Hypotheses I t has been generally agreed upon by geographers and planners that parking i s a necessary and fundamental element i n the urban environment. Arthur Gallion and Simon Eisner (1963, p. 216) have taken the view that: The road system upon which these vehicles circulate i s a major element i n the general plan of the city. A component of this element i s the accomodation of these vehicles at their destination. In a report prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates (1965, p. 70)» i t was noted that: Parking can be an important element l n the total downtown plan... Thus, greater functional and visual integration of parking into over-all site planning should be encouraged, with a consequent improvement i n parking aesthetics....  23 However, Edmund Bicker (1957) asserts that parking must not only be discussed with reference to i t s place i n an urban setting, but i t must also be considered i n terms of location and design of i t s facilities particularly i n respect to their layout, operation, and safety. In recognition of the fact that parking facilities must be considered with respect to both site and situation, urban governments have introduced legislation concerning the regulation of these facilities. It i s thus hypothesized for this study that: The external and internal spatial arrangements of automobile parking garages are effectively regulated by city planning decisions and city by-law provisions. Further, as introduced earlier i n this chapter, where city building and fire by-laws permit, the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair facilities Inside parking garages may provide a profit margin for the garage operator and a source of convenience to the garage customer. However, permission for allowing such activities inside parking structures i s heavily contingent upon the degree to which the city considers them to be dangerous to the public health, welfare, and safety. Thus a second hypothesis i s that: The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair facilities inside automobile parking garages are both a desirable and a safe use of space within these structures.  2k  Finally, i t was previously recognized that despite having similar goals, there can exist a conflict between actors at the municipal level and the industrial level. Further, this conflict can be a result of a conflict created by the setting of dissimilar goals by c i t y decision-makers. In the case of automobile service functions inside parking garages, there exists a conflict between c i t y o f f i c i a l s and the o i l companies and parking garage managers which has resulted from a further conflict, that created by the dissimilar goals of c i t y zoning by-laws and city building and f i r e by-laws. The latter conflict can only be resolved when consideration i s given to both the factors of economic motivation and public health, welfare, and safety. Thus the study's third hypothesis i s that: The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages leads to a conflict between actors at the municipal and i n dustrial levels that can only be resolved by the adoption of similar planning goals by c i t y decision-makers. The validity of the study hypotheses i s discussed i n the f i n a l chapter. Approach and Scope of Study The approach taken i n this study i s that of analyticdescription. In other words, c i t y regulation and practices and their spatial effects upon the external and internal features of parking garages w i l l be described and analyzed with the hope of gaining a better insight into their existence and obtaining recommendations for future regulations.  25 The Investigation i s intended to provide information for use i n Western Canada, therefore sources from western Canadian examples have been used as much as possible. However, since much information from outside sources i s available, the scope of this thesis includes examples from the United States, England and other European countries. The scope i s further defined by the methods used i n the study: a review of the literature, questionnaires, and personal interviews. No attempt has been made i n this study to classify and investigate the f u l l range of problems i n c i t y regulations of parking garages nor their implementation and enforcement i n c i t y governments. The method of investigtion imposes a limitation upon the study, particularily l n the questions asked i n the interviews and the questionnaires, the availability of literature for review, and the specific and particular problems of various c i t i e s . Organization of the Thesis The introductory chapter i s an attempt to establish through a documentation of the literature, the problems resulting from Increased automobile ownership and urban area usage, and intensified c i t y street congestion and their effects upon the c i t y and i t s functions. The introduction of the parking problem within the city leads to an increased awareness of the need for off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s , of which the parking garage as one type, i s emphasied. Further emphasis i s placed upon outlining some of the spatial effects of c i t y regulations and planning upon the external  26  and internal features of parking garages, and the problems resulting from such controls and decisions. Chapter Two discusses c i t y structure and site typology, centering on site and c i t y r e t a i l structure and suggesting a spatial typology of parking garages. The following chapter i s devoted to existing c i t y government external and internal site regulation methods and practices for parking garages. Chapter Four analyzes a specific example of internal site regulation and i t s effects for the case of western Canadian cities and some western American c i t i e s . An examination of the external and internal site regulations for parking garages i n the city of Vancouver provides the basis for Chapter Five. The l a s t chapter of the thesis offers a review of the study, recommendations for better site regulations for parking garages, an appraisal of the hypotheses, as well as recommendations for further research on the subject of parking by geographers.  CHAPTER I I CITY STRUCTURE AND SITE TYPOLOGY  C i t y Structare C i t y plans and by-laws are p r i m a r i l y designed to determine the structure of the c i t y . The urban structure, i n turn, i s made up of small functional units of space c a l l e d s i t e s . I t then seems only reasonable that i n order to better understand the e f f e c t s of c i t y planning decisions and c i t y by-law provisions upon the structure of the c i t y , one must f i r s t understand t h e i r e f f e c t s upon these small functional units that make up c i t y structure. Urban geography has not been greatly concerned with the analysis of e i t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s i t e s or the e f f e c t s of c i t y l e g i s l a t i o n upon these s i t e s . Instead, geographers have tended to aggregate t h e i r data rather than to examine the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of these smaller functional units and the e f f e c t s of c i t y government decisions upon these u n i t s . The former approach to urban structure has l e d to the setting up of models that s p a t i a l l y organize generalized forms of urban environment (See, f o r example, Park e t a l , 1925; 1939;  Hoyt,  Harris and Ullraan, 19^5). As a r e s u l t , l i t t l e work has been  done on the analysis of i n d i v i d u a l s i t e s themselves and on the e f f e c t s of c i t y plans and by-laws upon these s i t e s , despite the f a c t that the p r i n c i p l e s f o r such an analysis have a t some time a l l been mentioned i n urban geographic l i t e r a t u r e and thus are somewhat f a m i l i a r to geographers.  28  The concept of s i t e has been a basic element i n urban geography f o r nearly f i f t y years. Through these years geographers have enlarged the d e f i n i t i o n of s i t e while they have simultaneously reduced the scale of the term. Blanchard, i n 1922,  who distinguished  between general elements of s i t u a t i o n and p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s i t e , remarked that the s i t e f a c t o r s were "purely l o c a l t r a i t s of the landscape (Berry and Horton, 1970,  p. 15)". T h i r t y years l a t e r ,  Max Sorre, who was mainly concerned with s i t u a t i o n f a c t o r s i n urban development, noted that the important elements of s i t e were c e r t a i n topographical features which afforded protection f o r a c i t y . S i m i l a r l y , Robert E. Dickinson (1959, p. 12) wrote that " . . . s i t e embraces the precise features of the t e r r a i n on which the settlement began and over which i t has spread". In the same v e i n , Arthur Smailes (1966, p. 40) has written, a s i t e "may be defined as the ground upon which a town stands, the area of the earth i t a c t u a l l y occupies". As might be i n f e r r e d from the previous d e f i n i t i o n s , i n the e a r l y writings  there appears to be a bias of treating s i t e s only  on a large scale i . e . a city-wide scale. In addition, " s i t e " i s u s u a l l y defined as a purely physical element, while s i t u a t i o n r e f e r s to the human element. The s i t u a t i o n i s u s u a l l y taken to mean the p h y s i c a l conditions (as f o r the s i t e ) over a much wider area around the settlement. But of equal importance are the human c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the surrounding country, since these a f f e c t the character and fortunes of the urban settlement (Dickinson, 1959» p. 12). Broek (19^5* p. 30),  however, o f f e r s a somewhat l e s s r e s t r i c t i v e  29 definition of site than previous ones:  "Site,..means the location  of a given place with i t s local internal features or resources". Kevin Lynch (1962, p.6) i s even less restrictive than Broek i n defining site: " I t consists, not just of buildings and streets, but of a whole complex of structures, natural forms, climates, texture, and detail, above, below, and at the surface". In contempory urban geographic literature, especially i n that dealing with urban land economics and r e t a i l location (See for example, Berry, 1963; Simmons, 1964; Garner, 1966; Murphy, 1966; Berry and Horton, 1970), "site" commonly refers to land areas of a much smaller size than a city.  In this context, site usually refers  to the size of a building l o t and/or the building i t s e l f .  Garner  (1966, pp.100-101), for example, asserts that site inoludes such features as shape, size, topography, lighting, landscaping and so on, plus "capital committed i n the form of buildings". Similarily, the literature of r e t a i l site selection (See for example, Proudfoot, 1937; Canoyer, 1946; Kelley, 1955; Nelson, 1958) regards the building as an inherent element of the site.  Site has thus come to mean both  a specific area of land and also, the buildings or structures erected upon that land. In this new context, usage of the term site demands the realization that "a city...is divided into many parcels of land, each of which may be called a "site".  Most of these sites have structural  improvements designed for some particular use" (Lowry, 1970, p.499)» Site must now be considered as a basic part of the urban  30 whole.  The spatial arrangement of these parts i s called the structure  of the city.  Such parts or sites are by no means isolated from one  another and are more or less linked together by transportation and communication. n  Mitchell and Rapkin(1954, p.Ill) define linkage as  ... a relationship between establishments  characterized by  continuing or frequently recurring interaction.  I t i s associated  with the movement of persons and goods between the linked establishments and generates a tendency on the part of linked establishments  to seek proximate locations". Howard J . Nelson  (1969» p.200) goes a step further and suggests that "urban transportation not only laces the urban structure together, but i t also profoundly affects the arrangement and function of elements i n the structure of the city". The shape of and the structures upon the site i t s e l f contribute to the form of the city.  Form i s generally defined i n  terms of the size, layout, build, and style of the buildings and lots that create individual sites.  Interestingly, sites having  different forms may perform the same functions.  For example, a  parking l o t and a parking garage are of different forms, but basically have the same function. Further, the structure and i n turn, the form of the c i t y are subject to city government decisions and controls.  In fact,  as suggested earlier i n this chapter, the structure of the city may be determined by c i t y planning decisions and c i t y by-laws provisions. Structure, i n turn, can determine form.  For example, i n San  31 Franciso, recently, a zoning by-law was used to l i m i t the height of the United States Steel Corporation Building, to be built i n a particular downtown area near the waterfront. In summary, the concept of site has been re-interpreted by geographers i n order to mean both the natural and human landscape. Simultaneously, the scale of the term has been reduced somewhat, so that a> site i s presently considered to be only one parcel of land within a city.  Further, with recent reductions i n the scale of the  term "site", geographers are becoming increasingly concerned for the smaller units within the urban structure, and therefore, i t appears that traditional definitions of "site" must become more precise. However, as every site i s unique, some degree of commonality must be established among them i n order to conduct a meaningful study of sites.  The usual method i s to examine individual sites under the  three categories of site type, quality, and network. Further, an examination of type, quality, and network of site also provides a basis for an understanding of the effects of city planning decisions and c i t y by-law provisions upon individual sites and i n turn, upon c i t y structures. Site Type There exists a sizeable proportion of geographic literature concerning the classification of urban sites by type. Such classification i s especially notable for r e t a i l sites, where the practice has been to amass a l l business sites into one type  32 according to t h e i r s p a t i a l p o s i t i o n within the urban structure. The e a r l i e s t statement by a geographer on the typing of r e t a i l , s i t e s was made by Proudfoot (1937).  Proudfoot d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  f i v e types of r e t a i l structure, and (1) central business d i s t r i c t ; (2) outlying business center; (3) p r i n c i p a l business thoroughfare; (4) neighborhood business street; and (5) i s o l a t e d store c l u s t e r . E x p l i c i t i n h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r e t a i l types i s the class of commodities sold, concentration or dispersion of o u t l e t s , and character of customer t r i b u t a r y areas; and i m p l i c i t i n h i s categorization, i s the mode of transportation used to reach an establishment. Canoyer (19^6) made e x p l i c i t use of mode of transportation i n suggesting f i v e types of r e t a i l l o c a t i o n s , s i m i l a r to those of Proudfoot: (1) central shopping d i s t r i c t ; (2) sub-centres; (3) string-streets; (4) neighbourhoods;  (5) i s o l a t e d  stores. In a study published i n 19*4-9, Richard R a t c l i f f also confirms the broad s t r u c t u r a l outlines sketched by Proudfoot. R a t c l i f f states that the f o c a l point of every c i t y i s the central business d i s t r i c t , which has the most intense r e t a i l a c t i v i t y a t the convergrence of a l l t r a f f i c and transportation routes. CBD,  Beyond the  the pattern of r e t a i l structure consists of combinations and  variations of two basic conformations: (1) String street developments or business thoroughfares which consist of "the r e t a i l use of property abutting a t r a f f i c artery, stretching out along i t s length,  33 and rarely sprouting off down intersecting streets" (Ratcliff, 1949, p.388). The nature of uses along the string street development depends upon the extent to which the street i s a main automobile artery and the degree to which i t i s the core of a residential area. And (2) Business nucleations or a clustering of r e t a i l uses, which appear at important intersections and creates a pyramiding of land values to peaks at the intersection.  The nucleatLon may vary i n  nature from isolated stores and neighbourhood f a c i l i t y combinations to major r e t a i l sub-centres. A classification by Kelley (1955;1956), while employing threshold size, range, and transportation to provide a description of retail structure, i s primarily based on the idea of cost minimization or ndnimum of transfer costs.  Cost minimization  involves the notion that a r e t a i l f a c i l i t y should be located on a site at which transfer costs w i l l be minimized for the largest number of customers.  Customer transfer costs involve the expenditure  of money, time, and physical and nervous energy that must be made i n order to purchase a good. Kelley's extensive classification i s thus: (1) CBD; (2) main business thoroughfares; (3) secondary commercial sub-centres or controlled secondary commercial sub-centres; (4) neighbourhood business streets; (5) small store clusters and scattered individual stores; and (6) controlled regional shopping centres. Nelson (1958) has classified locations i n a slightly different way: (1) generative location, to which the customer i s  34 directly attracted from his place of residence, and (2) suscipient location, to which the customer i s impulsively or coinoidentally attracted while on a trip where primary purpose i s anything other than shopping.  At the basis of Nelson's classifications i s the idea  of some form of linkage between different sites, whether i t be a drugstore i n a medical-dental building or a newstand at an airport. One of the most unique typologies of r e t a i l structure has been suggested by John Hertes (1964). Mertes (1964, p.26) argues that "modem r e t a i l store locations should be studied on the basis of a classification that considers the t r a f f i c circulatory system". On such a basis he classifies r e t a i l sites as: (1) internal, a location within the CBD of the city; (2) axial, a strip development along the major t r a f f i c thoroughfare leading out of the CBD toward the residential areas; (3) pivotal, a site which occurs at the confluence of two or more principal thoroughfares; (4) Periperhal. those i n outer reaches of a community or those adjacent to the interchanges or access roads of community circumferential freeways; and (5) external. one along a high-volume t r a f f i c artery i n the hinterland between communities.  The factors of population and transportation are  assumed to be organic to the spatial positioning of retailing. Finally, a f a i r l y recent and well-developed classification of r e t a i l structure which makes implicit use of mode of transportation has been suggested by Duncan and Phillips (1967): (1) older central shopping d i s t r i c t ; (2) older secondary shopping districts; (3) newer shopping centres; (4) large free-standing stores (i.e. discount houses or department stores); (5) neighbourhood business streets; and  35 (6) small clusters and Isolated stores. In a l l probability, the best known work on the classification of the elements of r e t a i l structure has come from the Chicago school led by Brian Berry (see Berry, 1967; Simmons, 1964; 1966).. Using the basis of Christaller's central place theory, which focuses upon locational and hierarchal systems of urban places, Berry applies similar ideas to the intra-retail structure of urban areas.  However, because central place theory i s inadequate to  explain highway-oriented ribbons and specialized functional areas, Berry has had to deviate from the theory i n order to f i t these types into his structure (Figure &.). Of particular importance to Berry's r e t a i l hierarchy, are the ideas of the range of a good and the threshold. Range i s defined as the distance that a consumer i s willing to travel i n order to purchase a good at a business centre.  The range of a good offered  from a retail outlet has an upper l i m i t beyond which the outlet i s unable to attract customers for the good and a lower l i m i t which encloses the,threshold purchasing power needed for the good to be offered.  Threshold i s defined as the minimum sales volume area  necessary for the conditions of entry of different r e t a i l functions. One of the basic assumptions of the model i s that a l l business types are considered to l i e along a continuum of threshold size, and " a l l establishments of a given business type are considered to operate at the same threshold level" (Garner, 1966, p.115).  Thus, i t follows  that such establishments are serving an identical or homogenous  Planned  or  SPECIALIZED  RIBBONS  CENTERS  I  Unplanned  Automobiles  Traditional shopping street  rows  I  Conv. Urban  Neighb'd  New  Printing  arterial  I  Community  i  districts  !  suburban  ——  ribbon  lona I Metropolitan  AREAS  Entertainment  districts  I  C.B.D Highway  oriented  Planned (plaza) Unplanned  !  Exotic  J  i  Furniture  Medical  I _  Fig. 4. The Structure of Intra-Urban Business and Commerce Source: B.J.L. Berry & F.E. Horton. Geographic Perspectives on Urban Systems. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970, p. 457.  markets  districts  centers Planned D nplanned  37 urban market. However, Garner (1966, p.115) goes on to point out that the urban market does not comprise a simple set of consumer demands; but rather " i t consists of a complex pattern of different tastes, needs, and preferences which stem directly from the differences i n available amounts of disposable income". Using the example of bars, whose character ranges from the chic cocktail lounge to the impeccably dreary "joint", Garner (1966, p.116) asserts that tiie differences between various bars would be related to the level of consumer preference serviced. Rather than grouping a l l bars into one class of business type under the available system of classification i t would be more r e a l i s t i c to consider them as offering different goods and consequently comprising different business types. A similar argument can be extended to include the classification of a l l other business types i n the r e t a i l nucleation (p. 116). Once the assumptions of homogeneity of establishments within any business type i s relaxed to include the notion of product differentiation, i t i s apparent that a simple ranking of business types by threshold size i s no longer possible. Thus for a given business type, each establishment w i l l be associated with a different threshold level (p.118). Product differentiation can also be brought about by a variety of factors including patents, trade marks, "snob appeal", perouliarities of packaging, singularity of product, design, color, and style, and qualities of a site.  The importance of product  differentiation i n r e t a i l sites has been noted by Kelley (1955»  p.415), who points out that there are some recognized differences  38 between customers shopping downtown and i n regional centres. I t would appear, that based upon the above criticisms that a more befitting typology of intra-city r e t a i l sites would be one which concerned individual r e t a i l functions.  In other words, a  classification might be made for restaurant sites, dry-cleaner sites, motel sites, and so on.  As suggested by previous typologies and by  Garner's criticisms i t would appear that this typology should be based on the dominant form and structure of transportation that i s used to reach a site and the kind and size of threshold of a site. Explicity or implicity, transportation mode has been used i n the previously discussed site typologies of Proudfoot (1937), Canoyer (1946), Rateliff (1949), Kelley (1956), Nelson (1958), Mertes (1964), and to some extent, Berry (1963) and Simmons (1964). RanneUs (1956, p.48) asserts that the type and location of every establishment within the urban structure i s determined by the availability and mode of transportation.  On the one hand, i t i s then  sensible to type r e t a i l sites by mode of transportation used to reach the site.  On the other hand, a typology of r e t a i l sites must also  include the kind and size of threshold of a site.  Although the role  of threshold i n type of site i s uncertain, i t appears that there exists some definite relationship.  Rothwell (1970) has suggested  that perhaps i t i s mode of transportation that determines the threshold of a site, although this has not been empirically tested. One of the better classifications of site by types has been developed by the o i l industry.  Distinguishable on the basis of  39 transportation and threshold, are the industry's five types of service stations: downtown, main street, neighbourhood, shopping centre, and freeway (GLaus and Rothwell, 1970, p.23).  Service stations are  distinguished by transportation due to the fact that they are designed to accomodate a particular kind of t r a f f i c flow and transportation artery.  The placement, layout, and f a c i l i t i e s of a  downtown station, for example, would differ from that of a freeway station. Although a l l service stations s e l l gasoline, they may be different i n the type of service or function performed and as a result i n their sources of income.  The downtown station, for  example, may have the same threshold size as the freeway station, but usually receives a sizable portion of i t s income from parking and servicing and repairing automobiles.  The freeway station,  however, receives most of i t s income from the sale of gasoline and related products.  Generally, kind of threshold differs for a l l types  of gasoline service station sites. Types of urban r e t a i l sites are, i n addition, subject to c i t y regulations and control.  City zoning by-laws, for example,  may not permit a service station to be located i n the downtown area of a city. setting.  Thus, one type of r e t a i l site i s eliminated from an urban However, much more work s t i l l needs to be done on the  effects of c i t y legislation upon types of urban r e t a i l sites. I t would appear that a more suitable method of typing urban r e t a i l sites, using form and structure of transportation and  40 kind and size of threshold, has thus been developed. Although, more work s t i l l needs to be done on the refinements of differentiations of business types i n the r e t a i l structure, i t i s hoped that such can be accomplished through using the method of typing sites according to transportation and threshold. Site Quality One of the more important features of a site, i s i t s quality.  As Glaus and Rothwell (1970, p.26) point out, the  importance of site quality rests on the fact that i t can determine the degree to which a r e t a i l establishment performs i t s function. In other words, sites performing the same function and maintaining the same size and kind of threshold are not unlikely to do the same volume of business, because of qualitative differences between sites. Literature dealing with retailing, or more specifically store location, frequently discusses the effects of quality upon site performance. Applebaum (1968, p.49), for example, writes; Where different firms offer a similar choice of goods, prices, and service - as i s typically the case with supermarkets - and where two or more firms compete i n approximately similar locations for the same source of trade, the stores that offer the best retailing f a c i l i t i e s can expect to outperform their inferior competitors. Other writers (See for example, Canoyer, 1946; and Davidson, 1953;  Duncan and Phillips, 1967)  Brown  have also made  mention of the importance of having superior site f a c i l i t i e s .  Nelson  (1958, p.l4l), for example, writes that, "location i s not the only  41 factor determining the success of the operation or the business volume".  He notes that other factors such as attractiveness of the  decor, character of service, accessibility, reputation,  availability  of parking, and so on are also important to the performance of a site.  Martineau (1958, p.55)  asserts that such qualitative  attributes as store atmosphere, status, personnel and other customers can project an image of the establishment i n the consumer's mind, which i n turn can affect the store's sales volume. Huff (1966) has criticized the use of mathematical models i n approximating optimum r e t a i l locations on the basis that such models f a i l to consider the qualitative aspects of r e t a i l site. Mathematical models are not infallible..»Therefore decision makers should be aware that there are variables other than those specified i n the model that affect the sales of a r e t a i l firm. The reputation of a firm, the newness of the store, the merchandise i t carries, the service i t offers, etc. are but a few examples of additional variables... Furthermore, the model does not consider important questions pertaining to the site at a potential location. I t i s obvious that there are a number of important factors related to the site i t s e l f that can influence the volume of sales that can be expected from a given location. V i s i b i l i t y and accessibility, as well as the nature and condition of adjacent property, have a bearing on the sales that can be expected (pp.  302-303).  Garner (I966) has also noted the importance of the "physical quality" of a site.  He (1966, p.10)  asserts that before a  site i s developed physical quality "refers to the ' f i x i t y of investment', the capital committed i n the form of buildings".  42 Until such development, site productivity i s variable, and i s fixed predominantly by external factors, principally location. Once developed, however, site productivity i s relatively fixed and permanent, and subject to internal site variation. The latter i s i n the form of buildings committed on the site (p. 101). Garner (1966, p.ll6) also states that: Establishments are not exactly similar but are differentiated from each other i n many subtle ways. Qualitative differences whether real or fancied i n the eyes of the consumer, arise from a combination of (a) differences i n the product sold, and (b) differences i n the condition surrounding i t s sale. Qualitative differences arising out of the character of conditions surrouding the sale of the good include such features as the general tone of the store, seller's reputation, personal service, personal attractiveness of the surroundings, etc. as well as the location of the establishment. As suggested by the literature, i t seems reasonable to conclude that sites of highest quality attain the best performance i n the market place.  In recognition of such a conclusion, Glaus and  Rothwell (1970, p. 86) define site quality as the a b i l i t y of a r e t a i l site to perform i t s function for which i t i s designed, measured i n terms of f a c i l i t i e s and layout of the site i t s e l f . As hypothesized for this study, the f a c i l i t i e s and layout or the internal features of a site could however be subject to effective regulation by c i t y planning decisions and c i t y by-law  4 provisions.  3  I f this i s true, i t would then follow that site quality  could be effectively controlled by c i t y legislation.  For example,  i f the function of a downtown parking garage was to provide automobile parking and automobile servicing, but c i t y f i r e by-laws only permitted part of the latter function, one could then say that because of the site's i n a b i l i t y to perform i t s function due to c i t y legislation, site quality was low. There appears, however, to be a lack of work done on the effects of c i t y legislation on site quality.  I f we are to come  to a f u l l e r understanding of the structure of the urban environment, we must learn about the effects of governmental decisions and regulations upon the component parts - the individual sites. Site Network The study of networks of r e t a i l sites by geographers began with Christaller's (1933) work on central place theory, and i s being currently pursued by those interested i n marketing geography (See for example, Applebaum and Cohen,196la; 196lb; Berry, 1967). In terms of the nature of geographic research on the network r e t a i l type, work has been mainly concerned with the delineation of trade areas for various r e t a i l outlets or the appraisal of the spatial attributes of competitive sites. Canoyer (1946), for example, regards location, amount, and quality of competition as one of the most important factors to consider i n the selection of a r e t a i l location.  In the case of  gasoline service station site selection, she considers competition  44 to be second only i n importance to t r a f f i c density. Kelley (1955) also mentions the importance of the quantitative and qualitative effects of competitive r e t a i l sites upon the potential site.  Kornbleau and Baker (1968, p.129) state a  similar point of view i n saying that "the quantity, quality, and location of competition (present and prospective) affect the performance of existing stores and plans for improving their performance". Brown and Davidson's (1953) remarks on selecting a c i t y i n which to locate a particular r e t a i l activity, apply equally as well to the selection of a particular site within a city. Although i t i s desirable to select a c i t y i n which the amount of existing competition may be judged less than adequate to meet f u l l y the demands of the public, i t does not follow that the presence of a large number of similar stores i s necessarily discouraging. I f local merchants i n a given l i n e of business have become lethargic, are operating with obsolete physical f a c i l i t i e s , and generally are out of tune with the times, there s t i l l may be an excellent opportunity for a qualified manager to establish a modern store based upon up-to-date merchandising methods, (p.72) The writers also point out that chain store organizations vary rarely stay out of a c i t y because of excessive competition, especially, i f they feel that they can do a better merchandising job than existing competitors, provided that they are able to obtain a desirable specific site upon reasonable occupancy terms. In developing a paradigm of r e t a i l competition, Alderson  45 and Shapiro (1964) have suggested that when considering a new  retail  s i t e , management has a choice between two alternatives: optimal s i t e s e l e c t i o n or optimal network expansion.  Of concern here i s the  l a t t e r a l t e r n a t i v e , which i s viewed as a move by a f i r m to place a network of s i t e s throughout a whole market area.  Such a p r a c t i c e i s  t y p i c a l of c e r t a i n "types of chain stores, who wish to make a more e f f e c t i v e use of such widespread merchandising f a c i l i t i e s as newspaper advertising and c r e d i t cards.  I d e a l l y , a l l prospective  customers exposed to such f a c i l i t i e s would f i n d a u n i t of the chain within an acceptable shopping range. As suggested by the l i t e r a t u r e , network can then be defined as an integrated pattern of a p a r t i c u l a r r e t a i l type over a market area (Glaus and Rothwell, 1970,  p.86).  however, subject to governmental regulations.  Such a pattern may be, For example, the  placement of a p a r t i c u l a r type of gasoline service station on the landscape i n order to complete a firm's network of s i t e s with which i t w i l l cover a whole market area may be prohibited by a zoning by-law.  In addition, the l o o a t i o n , amount, and q u a l i t y of  competitive s i t e s may be also subject to c i t y regulations. Research on the subject of s i t e networks and c i t y regulations by geographers i s however lacking; but i f we are to better understand urban structure, research i n t o t h i s topic must be c a r r i e d out.  k6 A Spatial Typology of Parking Garages In the literature dealing with parking (See especially, Ricker, 1957; Barrage and Mogren, 1957; Whiteside, 1961), i t i s suggested that there are three basis typologies of parking garages* The f i r s t classifies parking structures according to architectural design and operation: a) ramp garages and b) mechanical parking devices.  A second types garages i n terms of ownership and operation:  a) privately owned and operated, b) publicly owned, privately operated, and c) publicly owned and operated.  Finally a third  classification categorizes parking garages according to who parks the automobiles: a) attendant parking and b) self-service parking. There are, however, no existing typologies which classify parking structures according to their location or surrounding environment. Yet, a classification of this type i s needed, especially i f one i s to examine parking garages i n a geographical perspective. Glaus and Rothwell (1970, p.87) have defined type of site as a "classification according to the primary function i n association with the surrounding environment".  On the basis of this definition,  the writer has developed a spatial typology of automobile parking garages: a) downtown, b) main street, c) residential d i s t r i c t , d) shopping centre, and e) specialized functional area. Downtown  In most large c i t i e s , there can be found four types of  parking garages i n the downtown area.  These types are: a) r e t a i l  store, b) office-employee, c) central core, and d) hotel. In  4? addition, there may be combinations of each type. The r e t a i l store parking garage i s primarily linked to a large department store, i . e . Macy*s, Bon Marche i n Seattle, The Bay, and Eaton's, that i s located i n the downtown area of a city.  The  primary function of this type of garage i s to provide parking for the store's customers. In addition, department store garages quite often provide space at the ground level for accessory functions such as for r e t a i l or service establishments. In some c i t i e s , where permitted, department stores have placed automobile service f a c i l i t i e s , such as for the sale of gasoline and o i l products and minor repairs, inside their parking garages.  This accessory function can be both an additional source  of income for the store and convenience for the customer. The retail store garage i s usually located adjacent to -the store, either on the same l o t or across the street. I f the garage i s located on the opposite side of the street, i t i s quite often linked to the store by a skywalk. The number of storeys of the garage varies, but on the average the garage i s usually five or six storeys i n height.  The  number of spaces within the garage varies also, with 1,000 being an average number (Smith, 1965, p.29). Parking fees are generally charged on an hourly basis. With the rate increasing each hour parked, the store manages to discourage long term parking i n order to generate a greater turnover i n customers and thus, a higher income for both the garage and the  48 *  store.  Also, the operating time of the garage Is based on the  opening and closing times of the department store.  Thus, when the  store closes, the garage closes. The office-employee parking garage i s generally linked with a large office complex.  The primary function of this garage  i s to offer f a c i l i t i e s for company-owned cars, for visitor's cars, and for employees* cars. Often where a number of businesses occupy an office building, parking space i s allotted to each business according to number of personnel.  In other cases, employees rent  parking spaces on an individual basis. The parking garage may be erected on a site adjacent to the main building, being connected to the latter by a pedestrian bridge or a subway, i.e. the administration building and the p a r k i n g garage of the Rumble O i l Company i n Houston, Texas (McGonigle, 1963). But the garage may also become an integral part of one and the same building.  "In the case of the Tiseman Building at Los Angeles,  California, the parking f a c i l i t i e s are, together with a general t r a f f i c concourse, accommodated with a low building, forming the base of the office tower" (Klose, 1965, p.50).  Other office  complexes have their parking f a c i l i t i e s underground, beneath the building. For this type of garage, both the number of storeys and spaces vary according to the size of the office building or complex. Rate structure i s determined by type of parker.  For  example, a short-term parker i s charged on an hourly rate, whereas a long-term parker may pay either a daily charge or a monthly charge.  49 Further, when the office complex closes, so does the parking garage. A central core parking garage has no formal link with either a department store or an office building. with the functions of downtown i n general.  Its only link i s  In other words, i t s  primary function i s to serve the parking needs of drivers who use the downtown either on a short-term basis, such as the salesman or the customer, or on a long-term basis, such as the worker. In addition, this type of parking garage provides parking for those who wish to partake of the downtown "nightlife", such as theatres, restaurants, nightclubs, etc. Where the c i t y permits, this type of garage may provide limited f a c i l i t i e s for pumping gasoline and servicing automobiles, particularly on a one-day basis. The central core parking garage i s located -throughout the downtown area of the city.  But, primarily, i t i s found within  ten minutes walking distance to the major department stores and office complexes i n the downtown. Size of this type of garage fluctuates between three and five storeys and between 400 and 700 spaces. Parking rates are charged according to the length of stay.  The options available are hourly, daily, and, i n some cases,  monthly.  Generally, after 6:00 p.m., most central core garages charge  a set rate, such as f i f t y cents or one dollar, for the evening. The hotel parking garage i s linked with a large hotel located i n the city's downtown. The primary function of this garage i s to provide parking for the hotel guests.  50 Downtown hotels have found i t necessary to build multistorey parking garages i n order to try to keep pace with the development of motels on the city's fringes.  They create their own  parking f a c i l i t i e s on adjacent sites or i n direct connection with the hotel building. As this i s a service to the guest, no parking fee i s directly charged to him.  Instead, the fee i s included i n the total  hotel b i l l . Main Street  This "type of parking garage i s generally found on a  principle business street i n a city, especially one on which on-street parking i s restricted by space or time. The main street parking garage i s primarily linked with an office building, with the most common example being a medicaldental building (Shuldiner, 1964).  The primary function of this  garage i s to provide a convenient parking area for those who maintain offices within the building and for the office visitors. The garage i s usually located on the same site as the building, and quite often, structurally supports the building.  Size  of the parking structure i s generally limited to two storeys and about 100 spaces. Parking rates are based on an hourly charge for an office visitor, and a monthly charge for an office lessee. Residential District  The residential parking garage i s confined  here i n meaning to a parking structure which i s linked with an  51 apartment b u i l d i n g .  Such a garage, u s u a l l y underground f o r  aesthetic, cost, and area reasons, provides parking f o r the residents of the apartment block. However, a two or three storey parking garage can be found i n association with various types of r e s i d e n t i a l complexes, such as an apartment-retail complex, an apartment-hotel complex, or an apartment-condiminiun  complex, the function of which i s to provide  parking f o r both the resident and the customer or guest. Parking fees are generally charged according to the type of parker.  For example, a resident of an apartment-retail  complex would pay a monthly f e e , whereas a customer would pay an hourly f e e . Shopping Centre  Because of the l a r g e acreage of a shopping centre  and the vast area given over to surface automobile parking, a parking garage i n a shopping centre i s a r a r i t y .  However, because  of increased, customer usage and l i m i t e d acreage, some shopping centrei developers have found i t necessary to b u i l d a garage i n order to provide a d d i t i o n a l parking f o r t h e i r customers.  Far-har* because  of l i m i t e d acreage and. high l a n d cost a t the outset of some shopping centre p r o j e c t s , developers have had to b u i l d parking garages i n order to accommodate the projected number of customers (Baker and Funaro, 1951;  Welch, 195^;  Pearlstone, 1971).  Underground parking  garages have been b u i l t a l s o as a r e s u l t of a desire on the p a r t of the developer to blend h i s centre with the surroundings  (Fisher,  52 1951).  The Lloyd Centre i n Portland, Oregon and the Miltown Plaza  i n Rochester, New Tork are examples of a shopping centre where garages have been constructed because of land costs, l i m i t e d acreage, and aesthetic purposes (KLose, 1965, p.48). As parking i s a prime method of a t t r a c t i n g customers to the shopping centre, no parking fee i s charged. Specialized Functional Area  This type of parking garage i s  generally linked with an area complex serving a specialized function, such as a u n i v e r s i t y (The University of C i n c i n n a t i ) , a hospital (The New England Deaconess Hospital), an a i r p o r t (Los Angeles International A i r p o r t ) , or some other i n s t i t u t i o n (Los Angeles Music Centre f o r Performing Arts; Cleveland Convention Hall) (Hackman and Martin, 1969, pp. 7-1 - 7-4).  The primary function of t h i s garage i s to provide  parking f o r both the users and the personnel of the complex. On-site l o c a t i o n widely varies, ranging from underground garages to f i v e or s i x storey aboveground garages, some a distance away from the area complex. Fees are charged on an hourly basis, a d a i l y , monthly, or yearly basis, depending on the type of parking.  53 CHAPTER I I I CITY REGULATION OF AUTOMOBILE PARKING GARAGES  C i t y government regulation of automobile parking garages appears to have four areas of emphasis.  External s i t e  features, i n c l u d i n g l o c a t i o n , are frequently subject to regulation through c i t y zoning by-laws and c i t y transportation and renewal planning.  The i n t e r n a l s i t e features of s i z e , layout, and construction  are matters of concern f o r c i t y zoning by-laws, transportation and renewal planning, and b u i l d i n g by-laws.  In g e n e r a l , both t h e  external and i n t e r n a l features of parking structures are subject to i n d i r e c t control through a c i t y ' s approach to the administration and financing of a parking program.  L a s t l y , the emphasis upon standards  r e q u i r i n g safe provisions f o r construction and operation of parking garages appears to r e f l e c t a need f o r protection of the p u b l i c health, welfare, and safety. Zoning Zoning i s one of the most comonly used l e g a l devices available f o r implementing the land-use plan of a c i t y .  Urban  zoning may simply be defined as the d i v i s i o n of a municipality or other governmental u n i t i n t o d i s t r i c t s , the basic types of which are r e s i d e n t a l , commercial, and i n d u s t r i a l , and the regulation within those d i s t r i c t s o f :  54 1) . The height and bulk of buildings and other structures; 2) . The area of a l o t which may be occupied and the size of required open spaces; 3) . The density of population; 4) . The use of buildings and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes (Goodman and Freund, 1968, p. 403). The close relationship between zoning and planning noted by the Metropolitan Housing Council of Chicago (Blair,  was  1964,  p.517) i n saying, "In discussing problems of zoning, i t i s essential not to lose sight of the fact that zoning i s not an end i n i t s e l f , but a means of arriving at a systematic and economical pattern of land use as a part of planning for the entire city". . The power to zone, l i k e other regulatory powers, i s customarily derived by municipalities from the provincial or state legislature.  In Canada, municipal governments are empowered to pass  by-laws on a l l matters, inoluding zoning, within i t s jurisdiction as set out i n the provincial statutes establishing the municipality. The enabling act i n British Columbia i s the Municipal Act, and gives each municipality the power to plan and control the use of lands by various zoning, subdivisions, and building by-laws (Todd, 1970, p.16-17).  Similarly, i n the United States, cities and municipalities  have only those powers that the state delegates to them, usually through a state planning enabling act (Williams, 1966).  The  principal regulatory powers employed to carry out planning proposals are 1) the taxing power, 2) the power of eminent domain, and 3) the police power.  55 The police power i s the basis for zoning, subdivision, and building regulations and other planning controls.  These  regulations must be justified by some considerations of public health, safety, morals, and general welfare.  They must also meet  the legislative requirements set forth i n the state enabling act. The characteristic feature of the zoning ordinance that distinguishes i t from most other regulations i s that i t differs from d i s t r i c t to d i s t r i c t , rather than being uniform throughout the city. Thus, a given area might be restricted to single-family residences with height regulations, minimum l o t size requirements, and setback provisions appropriate for that kind of structure.  In other  districts, commercial or industrial development might be permitted, and regulations for those districts would be enacted to control such development.  Building or f i r e code provisions, on the other hand,  normally apply to a l l buildings of a certain type regardless of where they may be located within a city. Gallion and Eisner (1963* p.265) note that "size, shape, and location of districts reflect the major uses indicated by the Master Plan and should be formed to invite the natural development of neighborhoods . n  The Master Plan may indicate an area to be appropriate  for single-family dwellings, for example, where as the zoning schedule may permit a commercial use within specified limits to be developed as a local shopping centre and a school and a park i n order to contribute to the neighborhood quality of the area. I t i s also pointed out by Gallion and Eisner (1963, p.266)  56 that most zoning ordinances provide for different densities of population i n different areas of residential and commercial districts.  One residential d i s t r i c t may only permit single-family  houses with a density of five families or twenty per acre, for example, whereas i n a multiple dwelling d i s t r i c t the density i s allowed to reach hundreds of people per acre.  These variations i n  population density must be reflected i n other precise plans for the city since they affect the provisions of a l l community f a c i l i t i e s and services including schools, commercial establishments, police and f i r e protection, and u t i l i t i e s . Essentially, the underlying purpose of regulating uses i n each area of a city i s two-fold: 1) . To prevent the mixing of incompatible uses which may have such deleterious effects on one another as to depreciate property values and desirable environmental features; 2) . to insure that uses requiring expensive public service f a c i l i t i e s such as major u t i l i t y lines and heavily paved streets are restricted to those areas where the f a c i l i t i e s exist or are planned to be installed (Goodman and Freund, 1968, p.426). In regard to automobile parking garages, c i t y zoning by-laws can effect control over the external and internal site features of these structures i n one of two ways: 1) External parking garages constitute a land use and can be permitted or prohibited i n different kinds of zoning districts; or 2). Internal parking needs of specific land uses should be treated as accessories  57 to such uses and provision and size or capacity of parking garages be made a requirement i n association or major alteration of existing construction. In the former case, through establishing zoning districts and regulating land uses within these districts, c i t y zoning by-laws can influence the location of a parking garage.  In  other words, zoning commonly restricts the location of parking garages to certain areas.  For instance, a parking garage may be  allowed i n a general commercial d i s t r i c t , but may not be permitted i n a local commercial d i s t r i c t .  Such a restriction i s generally  based on the need for this structure and on i t s compatability with surrounding structures i n the area.  I t i s obvious that a parking  garage i s needed i n a general commercial d i s t r i c t where such uses permitted may include office buildings, television studios, and department stores, whereas i t i s not needed i n an area which only allows certain types of retailing (bakeries; grocery stores) and personal service (barber shops; launderettes) establishments catering to the day-to-day needs of residents of the local neighborhood.1 In larger metropolises, certain areas have been zoned exclusively for parking purposes or f a c i l i t i e s , including the parking garage. Most often, those areas, usually designated Parking Districts, are found on the fringes of the central business d i s t r i c t  ^Example taken from City of Vancouver Zoning and Development By-law Number 3575.  58 of the c i t y i n which parking space demand i s heavy and supply i s difficult.  In a c i t y l i k e Milwaukee, no other use may be made of  land i n t h i s area (Fordham, 1956,  p.9), but i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h  Columbia, a more f l e x i b l e by-law has been enacted, i n that c e r t a i n types of r e s i d e n t i a l buildings may be permitted i n t h i s zone ( C i t y of Vancouver, 1969). A few c i t i e s have however established a s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t to designate privately-owned property s p e c i f i c a l l y to be used f o r parking; but as Williams (1966, p.228) points out, the courts have "struck t h i s down as a r b i t r a r y and o v e r - r e s t r i c t i v e " .  Williams goes  on to state: " I f the public desires to regulate property as s p e c i f i c a l l y as that, the public authorities should acquire i t " (p.228). By a d i f f e r e n t use of the zoning mechanism, most c i t i e s require the provision of designated connect with new  amounts of parking space i n  or s u b s t a n t i a l l y altered structures or uses  according to a r a t i o determined by the need f o r parking accommodations. In regard to a parking garage, such an a p p l i c a t i o n of the zoning by-law. can e f f e c t i v e l y regulate the i n t e r n a l feature of s i z e or capacity of t h i s structure.  An analysis of t h i s by-law f o r o f f -  s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s i n general, w i l l i l l u s t r a t e t h i s point. H i s t o r i c a l l y , Columbus, Ohio i s generally credited with being the f i r s t municipality to require that o f f - s t r e e t parking areas be provided i n connection with c e r t a i n types of r e s i d e n t i a l structures (Mogren, 1952,  p.25).  Later, Fresno, C a l i f o r n i a became  the f i r s t municipality to adopt regulations subjecting hotels and hospitals to s i m i l a r mandatory parking provisions (Mogren,  1952,  59 p.25). Mogren further notes that the greatest amount of municipal zoning activity after World War II had been zoning for parking. In a more recent light, Norman Williams (1966, p.226) asserts that: "Off-street parking requirements are the most important supplementary type of zoning control, and i n some situations may be of equal importance with the basic use and bulk regulations". Williams bases his assertion on the notion that: "If no parking i s provided on the l o t , the cars visiting an establishment w i l l be dumped on the public streets, and w i l l create more congestion there; and so i t i s reasonable to require new establishments to take care of the parking needs which they themselves have created (p.226)". Further, by not making off-street parking mandatory through a zoning ordinance for each new or altered commercial development and i n a quantity which can cope with the parking problems created by commercial enterprises, i t w i l l become necessary to develop such f a c i l i t i e s as independent ventures.  Such ventures, however, are  less certain of maintaining a balance between commerical floor space and parking space, although some, l i k e the Merchant Association i n Oakland, California (Automotive Safety Foundation, 1955) do maintain a balance.  Zoning for parking i s thus an important means  by which cities can guarantee an adequate amount of off-street parking for new or altered developments. An actual zoning ordinance requires that there be a certain number of parking spaces per a certain number of units, be i t beds (hospitals), seats (theatres; restaurants), rooms (hotels),  60 or dwellings (apartments), or for a specific amount of floor space, such as for a r e t a i l store or an office building.  Typical zoning  requirements and suggested planning standards can be found i n Table 1.» In addition, this type of zoning ordinance can regulate the location of parking space.  Some ordinances require the space to  be located upon property other than that being improved, whereas others state that the required space be contained within the limits of the l o t being improved.  For example, i n Los Angeles, California,  the parking f a c i l i t y must be located within 1,500 feet of the establishment for which i t i s required. In regard to a parking garage, this type of zoning by-law can affect the size or capacity of this f a c i l i t y and even the need for i t .  For instance, i f a c i t y zoning by-law requires that  for every four seats i n a theatre there be one parking space, and that i f a new 2,500 seat theatre i s located i n the downtown area of the city, i t seems reasonable to say that the parking f a c i l i t y built to accommodate 625 automobiles would be a parking garage. A case i n - point i s the Music Center for Performing Arts i n Los Angeles (Hackman and Martin, 1969, p.7-3).  However, for a 300 seat cinema  located i n a suburban shopping center, i t i s reasonable to say that the patron's automobiles could be accommodated i n a parking l o t . erection of a parking garage i n the latter case i s not needed and further, would be uneconomic.  The  TABLE 1 TYPICAL ZONING REQUIREMENTS, INDICATED PARKING SPACE NEEDS, AND SUGGESTED PLANNING STANDARDS  Unit  Land Use  Range In Number Of Parking Spaces Per Indicated Unit Zoning Parking Space Requirements Needs  dwelling dwelling bed seat seat 1,000 sq. f t . (gross floor area) 1,000 sq. f t . employee student seat  Single-Family Residence Apartment House Hospital Auditorium Theater, or Stadium Restaurant Retail 9  Office Manufacturing-Warehousing College-University Church  1-2 0.4-0.5 up 0,25-1.40 0.08-0.25 variable 1.5-3.0  0.5-2.2 0.3-2.0 0.60-1.40 0.08-0.50 N.A. 1.5-8.0  1-2+ 0.7-2.0 1.0-1.4 0.25-0.33 0.33-0.50 2.0-8.0  variable variable variable 0.10-0.33  2.9-4.0 variable 0.4-0.6 N.A.  2.0-5.0 0.33-0.50 0.5-0.7 0.20-0.33  N.A. - Not Available Sources  Wilbur S. Smith & Associates. Parking i n the city center. New Haven, Conn.j Author, 1965 p. 65. s  Planning Standards  61 Farther, by e s t a b l i s h i n g a maximum distance  standard,  a zoning ordinance can regulate the l o c a t i o n of the parking garage. As pointed out previously, some c i t i e s ' by-laws require that the s t i p u l a t e d parking area must be located within a c e r t a i n distance of the stated establishment.  Therefore, i f a parking garage i s to  provide t h i s space, i t must adhere to the l o c a t i o n requirement. Zoning by-laws regulating the uses of land i n p a r t i c u l a r areas of the c i t y and requiring the provision of parking space f o r each new or altered structure can thus e f f e c t i v e l y regulate the s p a t i a l features of l o c a t i o n and capacity of a parking garage as well as e s t a b l i s h the need f o r such a f a c i l i t y . Urban Transportation  Planning  Parking i s an i n t e g r a l part of the automotive transportation system, and i t must be treated as such.  There are,  however, those who "claim that parking i s a separate phase of automobile movement and i s not b a s i c a l l y connected to or a part of the transportation system" (Hunnicutt, 1965, p.^7). justifiable.  This i s not  For although the d r i v e r looks upon freeways or  thoroughfares as the primary transport mode by which to reach h i s destination, they alone, even i n ample supply, cannot solve the d r i v e r ' s problem.  A t the end of h i s journey, the d r i v e r must f i n d a  place a t which to park h i s automobile.  Parking must thus be  considered as the terminal storage of vehicles and as a r e s u l t , an i n t e g r a l and indispensible part of the transportation system.  62 Recognition of such a fact, though, was long i n coming. Fenton Jordon (1967, p.16) maintains that: Federal-aid highway programs, until recently, bypassed the problem by not permitting the funds to be used for building parking f a c i l i t i e s . City governments did not always f u l l y understand the importance of providing adequate parking f a c i l i t i e s , especially i n the central business d i s t r i c t ; and t r a f f i c engineers concerned themselves primarily with the movement of vehicles and l e f t parking to some other agency. Similarly, the American Automobile Association (1946, p.14) wrote: In central business districts especially, the terminals part of this system has been seriously neglected, with very detrimental results. In city centers, not even the semblance of proper balance has been maintained between f a c i l i t i e s for movement and terminals. However, there i s now widespread recognition and acceptance of parking as being an integral part of the transportation system. Evidence of this recognition can be witnessed i n the coordination of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s with freeway developments. By coordination, i t i s meant that the location of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s , including parking garages, i s often determined by a freeway system and the resulting street pattern. In many c i t i e s , parking garages are located on ramps or along streets which lead directly to freeways.  Ramps joining freeways  63 with parking garages, where they are able to be provided, advantageously minimize surface t r a v e l to and from freeways* However, as Smith (1961, pp.230-231) points out, "problems of ramp spacing, geometric design, and cost, e s p e c i a l l y i n central areas, w i l l l i m i t d i r e c t connections to major parking structures where adequate reservoir capacity can be provided".  Examples of  successful coordination v i a d i r e c t ramp connections include a 1,000 car  garage a t Detroit's Cobo M a l l , and Hartford, Connecticut's  Constitution Plaza Garage.  An i n t e g r a l part of a comprehensive  transportation development i n downtown St. Louis, Missouri, i s the provision of a massive parking garage linked d i r e c t l y to the l e v e l Daniel Boone Expressway (Smith, 1961,  two-  p.234).  Adjusted c i t y s t r e e t connections u s u a l l y involve the improvement of a connecting s t r e e t between a parking garage and a freeway.  The widing of Chicago's Michigan Avenue to provide d i r e c t  ramp connections to the 2,500 - car Grant Park Garage i s an i l l u s t r a t i v e example (Smith, 1961,  p.231).  . Downtown renewal planning a l s o offers opportunities to develop new transportation routes and as a consequence, new o f f street parking f a c i l i t i e s .  In New Haven, Connecticut, f o r example,  the downtown redevelopment project has provided f o r the l o c a t i n g and b u i l d i n g of a freeway system and the l o c a t i n g and b u i l d i n g of a 1500 - car parking garage i n r e l a t i o n to t h i s system. I t i s also important that parking f a c i l i t i e s be considered i n connection with t r a n s i t f a c i l i t i e s .  The l o c a t i o n of  -  6k  these parking f a c i l i t i e s i s determined routes and stops.  by the l o c a t i o n of t r a n s i t  Although parking for transit-users i s u s u a l l y  supplied by a parking l o t , i n parts of the c i t y where land area i s minimal and development costs are high, such parking i s provided by a parking garage.  But, nevertheless, the l o c a t i o n of the parking  garage i s affected by planning f o r t r a n s i t f a c i l i t i e s . Internal features of parking garages a l s o have a close physical r e l a t i o n s h i p with s t r e e t s , expressways, and other a r t e r i a l s . The entrances and e x i t s of parking garages must be located so as to harmonize incoming and outgoing vehicles with the flow of s t r e e t traffic.  Most engineers agree that entrances and e x i t s should be  located so as not to lead i n t o a main a r t e r i a l where the t r a f f i c load i s already heavy (See, f o r example, Ricker, 1957;  1961; Fordham, 1956; Burrage and Mogren, 1957).  Whiteside,  Instead, they  recommend that entrances and e x i t s to and from the parking garage be t i e d i n with a one-way street system or secondary streets. and Mogren  Burrage  (1957, p<150) suggest that an idea l o c a t i o n f o r a garage  i s on a block between a p a i r of one-way streets which w i l l permit cars from e i t h e r d i r e c t i o n to enter and leave without crossing traffic.  Access to a rear a l l e y or a back s t r e e t may  accomplish  the same purpose. Further, parking consultants recommend that entrances and e x i t s should be located as f a r as possible from s t r e e t intersections.  The slow movement of entering and l e a v i n g a garage  should be removed from the normal congestion of street i n t e r s e c t i o n s  65 (Ricker, 1957,  p>7). The size or capacity of a parking garage i s also a  function of i t s location i n relation to t r a f f i c flow planning.  In  determining the size of a garage, a parking consultant must always examine and anticipate changes i n the t r a f f i c pattern resulting from changes i n the street system, including one-way streets, and construction of expressways and bridges.  An oversize parking  structure for a given location can create rather than eliminate t r a f f i c congestion.  For example, consultants i n Toronto recommended  that a municipal parking policy should incorporate the following point: The ultimate capacity of the street system should govern the supply of parking. This provision assumes that there w i l l be an even distribution of t r a f f i c on the streets and that t r a f f i c operations are maximized (Read  et a l , 1968, p.133).  A similar point was stressed by planners l n Edmonton, Alberta (City of Edmonton, 1965,  p.52).  Reservoir space at the entrance and exit of a parking garage for acceptance and delivery of automobiles must be also related to t r a f f i c patterns.  "Lack of space creates * back-up• into  the street, causing congestion, and the need to turn away potential parkers" (Burrage and Mogren, 1957,  p.308).  There are no general  rules for reservoir space required, but the amount must be i n proportion to rate of movement and rate of flow, which varies  66 between garages (Ricker, 1957» p.50). Based on the above information and as suggested by the l i t e r a t u r e * i t would thus seem reasonable to conclude that i n r e l a t i o n to parking garages, c i t y transportation and t r a f f i c planning can influence the external feature of garage l o c a t i o n as w e l l as the i n t e r a l s i t e features of entrance and e x i t , s i z e , and r e s e r v o i r space* Urban Renewal Planning Current c i t y planning decisions concerning c e n t r a l business d i s t r i c t renewal d e a r l y r e f l e c t s the growing need to conserve, r e h a b i l i t a t e , or redevelop t h i s urban area*  Such a need  has been created by declines i n the C B D's r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n i n r e t a i l sales, land values, number of businesses, and a d d i t i o n a l c a p i t a l investments.  Concurrently, increased congestion and parking  d e f i c i e n c i e s have made t r i p s downtown l e s s pleasant and more expensive.  The r e s u l t s are threats to the socioeconomic  health of  the downtown d i s t r i c t which have come about " i n the form of blighted areas, r e l a t i v e reductions i n tax income and a general lowering of i t s r e l a t i v e attractiveness as a place to work, shop, set up a new business, or expand an e x i s t i n g one" (Smith, 1959,  p.156).  Although the economic and s o c i a l climate f o r renewing urban centres varies among c i t i e s , urban renewal u s u a l l y affords many opportunities f o r a t o t a l downtown design encompassing buildings, open spaces, t r a n s i t , freeways, streets, and parking.  67 Parking Is an essential part of these downtown renewal plans and may often prompt investment i n the project by private enterprise (Candeub, 1964). Among the types of parking f a c i l i t i e s that may be provided i n connection with urban renewal projects are street-level parking lots and underground and multi-storey parking garages. Of concern here i s the latter type of f a c i l i t y , the garage, which, as Robert Whiteside (1961, p.10) writes, must be "designed as an integral part of the over-all development". As areas i n the central business d i s t r i c t suitable for parking garages are limited, spatially and monetarally, downtown renewal projects offer excellent opportunities i n which to locate such f a c i l i t i e s .  Such opportunities are made available through the  redesigning of space i n specific areas of the downtown. I f the renewal project i s planned i n relation to present or proposed automobile-oriented  transportation routes, the project provides  further reason for locating terminal f a c i l i t i e s within i t s boundaries.  Further, i f c i t y o f f i c i a l s recognize and take advantage  of the opportunities presented by central business d i s t r i c t renewal, their decision to locate a parking garage within a project may substantially contribute to relieving downtown t r a f f i c congestion and parking deficiency (Smith, 1959).  Moreover, the location and  integration of parking with other land uses may permit sharing of land costs, and lead to increased business activity and tax revenue, a l l of which benefits the city as a whole.  68  Examples of parking garages located within urban renewal projects are numerous. incorporated an 1,800  In Rochester. New York, the Midtown Plaza  - space underground garage i n t o an o f f i c e  block-shopping mall redevelopment project.  Plans f o r the Bunker H i l l  Urban Renewal Project i n Los Angeles provide f o r tower apartments f o r 6,000 to 8,000 persons, o f f i c e buildings, and commercial uses f o r a daytime population of 50,000 people, and related parking structures, on a 136-acre s i t e (Smith, 1965, p.91)*  The Constitution Plaza  redevelopment project, which opened i n 1963» i n Hartford, Connecticut, has two underground garages providing 1,825 spaces.  parking  An i n t e r e s t i n g footnote to t h i s l a t t e r project was that the  provision of o f f - s t r e e t parking was a prerequisite f o r private investment and a basic requirement f o r mortgages. Plans f o r redevelopment of the Central Area i n Edmonton, Alberta also r e f l e c t the importance of parking i n t h i s type of urban planning (The C i t y of Edmonton, 1965).  Within the Central Area,  plans f o r the C i v i c Centre area c a l l f o r the building of three major shopper parking structures as w e l l as the b u i l d i n g of underground structures.  In c a l l i n g f o r the development of these garages,  planners have recognized the importance of providing parking as an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the commercial, h o t e l , o f f i c e or other buildings being constructed f o r the core area. S i m i l a r l y , planning f o r downtown redevelopment i n Calgary, Alberta stressed the importance of i n t e g r a t i n g parking f a c i l i t i e s with a ground l e v e l mall, c i v i c plaza and improved  69 roadway widths ( C i t y of Calgary, 1967).  Within a four block area, a  t o t a l of 2,370 parking s t a l l s would be required to cater f o r projected demands. These w i l l be provided on three l e v e l s and allocated f o r development on a parcel basis with f l e x i b i l i t y to provide f o r integration as the Scheme i s implemented. These f a c i l i t i e s are regarded as the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the developers of each s p e c i f i c parcel ( C i t y of Calgary, 1967. p.42).  C i t y planning f o r renewal or redevelopment of central business d i s t r i c t s was thus i n f l u e n t i a l i n the l o c a t i o n of parking garage developments i n these p a r t i c u l a r c i t i e s and i n c i t i e s i n general. In addition, the type and size of structures located i n renewal projects can determine the size or capacity of the garage. Such determinism i s exerted through a c i t y zoning ordinance requiring the provision of a c e r t a i n amount of parking space f o r each type and s i z e of new or altered structure within the project. A more indepth look a t the e f f e c t s of t h i s ordinance on parking garages has been taken i n an e a r l i e r section of t h i s chapter. Administrative Practices Each municipality must make i t s own decision as to parking need and what kind of parking program i s most suitable i n order to f i l l i t s parking needs.  I n developing a parking program or  programs, a municipality often determines, i n d i r e c t l y , the types of  70 f a c i l i t i e s to provide for such a function. In fact, broadly speaking, one might even say that a municipality's parking program can influence the external and internal features of the f a c i l i t i e s provided.  For purposes of this thesis, i t i s the parking garage  which i s affected by the program. The various programs available to the municipality have been grouped into three general categories according to type of ownership and operation: (a) privately owned and operated (private enterprise); (b) publicly owned and privately operated; and (c) publicly owned and operated (municipal), with a sub-category of parking authority. Each program i s examined i n terms of i t s advantages and disadvantages, limitations, legality, and forms. Private Enterprise.  This type of operation describes the parking  f a c i l i t i e s developed, owned, and operated by private individuals or companies. As Fordham (1956, p.73) points out, such private development of parking f a c i l i t i e s i s of three forms: ...(a) commercially developed lots or garages b u i l t and operated for profit; (b) special purpose parking f a c i l i t i e s developed by nonprofit corporations representing various commercial groups, such as r e t a i l trade associations; and (c) special purpose parking f a c i l i t i e s developed by commercial establishments as an essential accessory use. The benefits of a parking program developed by private enterprise are numerous. Often, free enterprise encourages strong i n i t i a t i v e i n the development and operation of off-street parking  71 f a c i l i t i e s since i t places these f a c i l i t i e s on a competitive basis subject to the price mechanism.  The private parking industry also  stimulates important structural developments for the parking garage. For example, The Hudson's Bay Company developed the f i r s t sloped floor d e a r span express exit ramp i n the world, and also boasted the f i r s t pedestrian skywalk, i n their Calgary Parkade (Hackman and Martin, 1969* p.1-4). Further, under a private enterprise program, the land on which the f a c i l i t y i s sited remains taxable, except i n rare cases of tax exemption. Another advantage of the private enterprise approach i s that any financial risk i n developing offstreet f a c i l i t i e s i s taken by private interest; "the public i s not gambling on the financial f e a s i b i l i t y of parking f a c i l i t i e s " (Fordham, 1956, p.75). Finally, under the private enterprise approach, there i s allowance f o r functional consolidation of parking f a c i l i t i e s and commercial uses. An example of integral development i s the Carfitz. Building i n Washington, D.C, which provides parking on the same floors as offices (Baker and Funaro, 1958).  Such an  arrangement would not however be found i n a l l c i t i e s , since many cities* building by-laws either l i m i t accessory commercial f a c i l i t i e s to the ground floor of a garage or prohibit them. There has arisen i n the private parking industry a national trade association which i s dedicated to the private enterprise cause i n the parking business.  The National Parking  Association (N.P.A.), with headquarters i n Washington, D.C, i s consistently c r i t i c a l of governmental entry into the parking  72 business.  William Barr, the executive-director of the N.P.A.,  t e s t i f i e d before a United States Senate Subcommittee on Business and Commerce of the Committee on the D i s t r i c t of CLumbia studying a proposal to e s t a b l i s h parking f a c i l i t i e s i n the D i s t r i c t (1966, pp.226-227) that: Major lending i n s t i t u t i o n s . . . have p u b l i c l y stated that they have m i l l i o n s of d o l l a r s invested i n downtown American c i t i e s and are wi w i l l i n g to i n v e s t m i l l i o n s more f o r o f f - s t r e e t parking to protect that investment; however, they cannot lend money f o r t h i s purpose where there exists the threat or actual existence of subsidized municipal competition. Lending i n s t i t u t i o n s have discovered that parking can be a p r o f i t a b l e business where there e x i s t s a proper "climate" f o r f r e e enterprise. But where subsidized municipal competition i s present, not only i s p r i v a t e enterprise unable to expand, i t i s driven o f f the market. R e f l e c t i v e of the Association's a t t i t u d e i s the t i t l e of a recent p u b l i c a t i o n : The Parking Industry: p r i v a t e enterprise f o r the p u b l i c good (Hackman and Martin, 1969). The major l i m i t a t i o n of the p r i v a t e enterprise approach to parking has been the i n a b i l i t y to f u r n i s h a s u f f i c i e n t quantity of properly located parking space to s u i t a c i t y ' s need.  I t i s not  uncommon to f i n d instances where a p r i v a t e agency i s unable to assemble land f o r parking because of the p r i c e asked f o r i t . was  Such  the case i n Philadelphia, where a merchant's association gave up  the thought of expanding t h e i r garage because of the high p r i c e s asked f o r the adjacent property (Fordham, 1956,  p.76).  In some major North American c i t i e s , most of the  73 parking has been provided by p r i a t e enterprise. For example, i n Houston, Texas, nearly a l l of the downtown parking has been constructed by p r i v a t e c a p i t a l , u s u a l l y i n conjunction with the development of major o f f i c e buildings (McGtonigle, department stores (Smith,  1963), banks, and  1965). In Minneapolis, the downtown  parking needs are also met by p r i v a t e enterprise. Here, i n 1948, leading downtown r e t a i l e r s , i n c l u d i n g Woolworth's, Kresge*s, and Penny's, savings and loan associations, newspapers, and several parking companies formed the Downtown Auto Park Corporation (Wakefield,  1964). Since i t s inception, the Corporation has  constructed and successfully operated two garages and l o t s .  A  further eleven multi-deck structures have been developed by p r i v a t e enterprise i n t h i s c i t y . Merchant associations and department stores are other examples of the p r i a t e enterprise approach to parking.  These types  of organizations often provide parking as a source of convenience and a t t r a c t i o n to shoppers.  Well-known examples of merchant's  associations p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n parking provision are the "Park and Shop** program i n Allentown, Pennsylvania and the Oakland Merchant's Association (Whiteside,  1959). Hackman and Martin (1969) noted i n  1966 there were 131 operating "Park and Shop" programs i n the United States. Examples of the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of department stores i n the parking business have been mentioned i n Chapter I I .  74 Private and Public cooperation.  O f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s ,  including the garage, can be developed and operated through public and private cooperations.  Forms of t h i s type of operation range  from c i t i e s buying or l e a s i n g land f o r parking from private i n d i v i d u a l s to the exact opposite s i t u a t i o n , i n which a c i t y financed multi-storey parking structure i s given over to the highestbidding commercial operation on a long-term lease. also take the form of tax r e l i e f arrangements, urban programs, under which land i n a redevelopment  "Cooperation may redevelopment  area i s to be developed  by private enterprise f o r parking purposes; and technical services, advioe and surveys" (Fordham, 1956, p.79)» This type of program f o r developing o f f - s t r e e t parking combines many of the advantages of private and municipal undertakings. For example, the land f o r the parking f a c i l i t y remains on c i t y tax r o l l s with no drain on public funds.  Furthermore, c i t y p a r t i c i p a t i o n  often means that parking f a c i l i t i e s developed by private concerns can be placed i n a desirable l o c a t i o n . ;  Another advantage that  r e s u l t s from t h i s arrangement i s that i n having private c a p i t a l finance the building of a f a c i l i t y on public land, and then having the f a c i l i t y become the property of the c i t y a t a specified date, i t removes the f i n a n c i a l r i s k of such an undertaking from the c i t y . Simultaneously, a permanent f a c i l i t y i n an i d e a l l o c a t i o n i s assured. This type of arrangement was the case i n Los Angeles and San Francisco, where the Pershing Square and Union Square underground garages, respectively, were b u i l t on city-owned land by private  75 c a p i t a l (Smith, 1965)*  Under the arrangement, these f a c i l i t i e s  are due to become the property of the c i t y i n f i f t y years; but i n the i n t e r i m , the c i t y i s paid a r e n t a l or a percentage of net p r o f i t s . The major disadvantage  of t h i s approach comes not from  the program i t s e l f , but from t r y i n g to i n i t i a t e i t .  In some instances,  i t i s d i f f i c u l t to obtain workable agreements between p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s and c i t y governments, and i n others, few c i t i e s have suitable land f o r parking i n t h e i r downtown area to entice private investment.  However, i n such major c i t i e s as San Francisco,  Baltimore, Pittsburg, and Chicago, p r i v a t e and public cooperation has provided them with a complete parking program. Municipal.  The promotion and protection of p u b l i c health, welfare,  and safety are some of the basic purposes of c i t y government.  If a  parking problem p e r s i s t s i n a c i t y , i t may become the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the c i v i c government to take whatever steps are required to a l l e v i a t e t h i s problem.  Thus, i f private enterprise f a i l s to supply  the parking needed, l o c a l government should consider i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n the matter. Recognizing t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , c i t i e s i n increasing numbers are providing and operating o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s . The administration of such a program has been done through (a) regular p u b l i c o f f i c i a l s , (b) boards, or (c) parking a u t h o r i t i e s . Programs administered by regular public o f f i c i a l s include those carried out by a municipal o f f i c i a l or department to whom or to which the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s delegated.  Culp (1967, P«^*0  76 maintains that the p l a c i n g of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the development of o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s i n an e x i s t i n g c i t y department has the p o t e n t i a l advantages of: ...(a) making the community's parking system i n c l u d i n g curb spaces, more e f f i c i e n t ; (b) f a c i l i t a t i n g proper i n t e g r a t i o n of parking with other highway transportation elements; (c) permitting maximum u t i l i z a t i o n of the municipality's powers, equipment and technical personnel; (d) keeping parking fees lower because no taxes or p r o f i t s need be included; and (e) f a c i l i t a t i n g the regulation and enforcement of parking l o t and garage operation, fee pattern, and usage.  The board approach d i f f e r s from the regular c i t y o f f i c i a l i n that a parking board or commission i s created to encourage and organize the development of the c i t y ' s o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s . The function of the board i s that of advising, e s p e c i a l l y during the formative stages of the program.  The advantage of a parking board  i s that i t s members are often people who are c l o s e l y related to the parking problem through t h e i r occupation.  The main disadvantages  of  such a, board i s that much of i t s authority r e s t s with the mayor and that sometimes i t becomes a body more interested i n gaining p u b l i c recognition than i n service (Burrage and Mogren, 1957,  p.211).  Parking a u t h o r i t i e s are discussed l a t e r . The l e g a l i t y of municipal development of o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s i s provided through a v a r i e t y of powers.  In the  United States, t h i s r i g h t may be provided through home-rule powers (the municipal charter), state enabling l e g i s l a t i o n , or implied  77 powers*  In Canada, l e g a l i t y f o r the p r o v i s i o n of o f f - s t r e e t parking  f a c i l i t i e s by municipal governments i s established by the P r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t u r e through a municipal act.  Bat i n either country, the  designated powers should include the a b i l i t y ...(a) to plan f o r a coordinated system of o f f s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t e s , well-located and f u n c t i o n a l l y designed, and i n connection with such planning to conduct surveys; (b) to assemble land f o r parking f a c i l i t i e s a t desired l o c a t i o n s ; (c) to finance i n any desired manner; (d) to construct f a c i l i t i e s or to contract f o r construction; and (e) to operate and maintain f a c i l i t i e s or to enter i n t o arrangements with others f o r operation and  maintenance (Culp, 1967* p.33).  P r i n c i p a l opposition to municipal entry i n t o an o f f s t r e e t parking program i s u s u a l l y based on tiie contention that i t represents u n f a i r governmental competition with p r i v a t e enterprise. Further, the opposition contends that municipal parking f a c i l i t i e s may a l s o involve removal of land from the tax r o l l (Hackman and Martin, 1969)* "although as an o f f s e t t i n g consideration, parking improvements.often contribute to an increase i n the tax revenues from nearby properties" (Culp, 1967* p.44).  Generally, p r i v a t e  enterprise asserts that professional p r i v a t e parking i n t e r e s t s can do a more e f f i c i e n t job of developing and operating parking l o t s and garages, and that a municipal agency i s wrought with p o l i t i c a l interests.  However, the d e c i s i o n to chose either approach, and the  advantages of each, must be based on the s i t u a t i o n i n i n d i v i d u a l municipalities.  78 Parking Authorities: Because of delays sometimes experienced as a result of divided administrative responsibility and authority, many cities have turned the establishment of a parking authority to administer their parking program.  The authority i s a special  purpose, public benefit corporation. "Created by the city, i t combines public responsibility of government with business i n i t i a t i v e and the efficiency of private enterprise" (Barrage and Mogren, 1957» p.212). Fordham (1956, p. 87) has suggested that, generally, there are three identifying characteristics of parking author!tes: ...(a) i t i s separated from the regular departments of government sufficiently to provide autonomy of operation, with sufficient corporate powers; (b) i t i s controlled by a governing body functioning i n the manner of a board of directors; (c) i t has powers to acquire, construct and operate parking projects and to issue revenue bonds for the purpose - but i s not empowered to levy taxes as such. The purpose of parking authorities seem to outline a development of logical action for a good off-street parking agency. Culp (1967, p.45) defines some of these purposes as: ...(a) to conduct research and maintain current data essential to establishment of parking f a c i l i t i e s ; (b) to prepare a master plan of offstreet parking f a c i l i t i e s to meet present and anticipated future needs; (c) to plan, design, and locate f a c i l i t i e s ; (d) to program construction; (e) to purchase, lease or condemn property; (f) to construct, improve and maintain f a c i l i t i e s ; (g) to f i x and alter rates, fees,  79 charges, or rentals for use of f a c i l i t i e s ; and (h) to lease for operation. There are some obvious advantages of authority administration i n the provision of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . According to Culp (1967, p.^8)  some of them are:  ...(a) the centralization of extensive authority and responsibility for the parking program i n a single agency; (b) relative freedom from p o l i t i c a l pressures; (o) the avoidance of certain governmental process and other delays; and (d) the payment of costs, as a rule, from users of the f a c i l i t i e s , with usually no direct effects on the regular municipal budget or tax program. Mogren (1953, P.17)  cites other advantages of author!tes as: (a) the  a b i l i t y of the agency to i n i t i a t e parking r e l i e f measures on a scale commensurate with the magnitude and importance of the problem; (b) the use of powers broad enough "to permit the authority to deal effectively with the local problem but sufficiently restricted to prevent misuse"; (c) the a b i l i t y to plan and pursue the most advantageous course i n providing municipal parking; and (d) the provision of an incentive to develop high management and personnel efficiency. On the other hand, parking authorities are not without their disadvantages.  These disadvantages, as again suggested by  Mogren (1953, p.18), include: 1. The powers granted authorities and necessary to their effectiveness places their operation beyond immediate public control.  80 2. Separation of authority operation from the governmental structure leads to duplication of effort and activities now contained i n some existing city department. 3. Because they are dependent upon their own earning and can i n no way rely on the financial support of general city credit, parking authority debt service charges are often appreciably higher than those found i n city improvements financed by general obligation bonds. Whether the advantages of authority mangement for city off-street parking outweigh the disadvantages must be determined for individual cities.  There are, however, a number of cities which have  successfully implemented the authority form of municipal off-street parking mangement. In San Francisco, for example, a parking authority has been i n operation since 1949 (Fisher, 1950). The outstanding feature of the San Francisco Authority's program i s i t s cooperation with private enterprise. In fact, the Authority actually sought to stimulate private enterprise "to acquire sites, finance, and construct a l l the facilities included in the off-street program" (Culp,, 1967,. p.50).  Only whenever private participation could not be  obtained, did the Authority activate the mechanism by which i t could develop off-street facilities.  Under an agreement with private  enterprise, the Authority has since built several open-air parking garages plus six underground garages i n the central business district of San Francisco. Parking authorities are also i n evidence in Pittsburg (Froelich, 1953), Baltimore (Bwald, 1950), Boston (Culp, 1967), and  81 Toronto (Bandy, 1970). As the parking problem continues to grow in seriousness, many cities will continue to consider i t of public importance to the continued growth and health of the city and direct threat to the downtown section of the city.  The provision of off-street parking  facilities must be the concern of both city authorities and private operators, but each city must decide on i t s own program. Indirectly the program decided upon by a city can affect the external and internal spatial features of the planned or constructed parking facilities, including parking garages, i n that city. Financial Practices Similar to having to make a decision on a parking program, each municipality must decide on how to finance i t .  If a  municipality decides that private enterprise or private - public cooperation will provide off-street parking facilities, then financing for private enterprise facilities and for the must part, private-public cooperation facilities will be provided from private capital sources (Automotive Safety Foundation, 1952). However, should the municipality decide that off-street parking will be a municipal operation, then i t must make a decision oh what method or methods of financing to adopt. There are many methods available for the municipal financing of parking facilities.  Unless facilities are provided by  gift, they are paid for ultimately by the public as a whole or by a  82  special class thereof* either through direct use of revenue derived by various methods or by borrowing.  The chief means of obtaining  funds f a l l into two general classes: (a) direct revenue and (b) borrowed capital. Direct Revenue Sources.  Revenues that may be used for direct  financing include general fund appropriations, current budget expenditures, benefited assessments, and parking revenues. A municipality may u t i l i z e any one or a l l of these various sources, where legally permissible, for deriving funds to finance i t s parking facilities. General Fund Appropriations: One method which cities use to finance parking f a c i l i t i e s without the necessity of borrowing i s termed general fund appropriations.  Using this approach, the local  government spreads the costs over the entire city and no interest charges are involved.  I f a surplus does not exist i n the city  treasury and this method i s adopted, new sources of general revenues may have to be found or otherwise an increase i n assessed valuations may be required. Current Budget Expenditures: This method has been often used to acquire and develop off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s .  Its use was  particularly popular nearly two decades ago, during the early days of municipal activity i n the parking f i e l d .  Much of the early city  participatory efforts i n furnishing off-street parking were modest,  83 designed to meet the growing need for parking space i n the city after World War II; and financing for these projects usually could be met through the city's budget. Today, however, municipal parking program costs run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.  The magnitude of developments  required to even minimally supply the parking need i n most cities almost excludes the possibility of current budget financing. The only exceptions to this generality occur when lands suitable for parking developments are already under city ownership or can be reasonably acquired by the city.  In such cases, less money  i s required to develop parking f a c i l i t i e s , and the total investment may come from the city's general fund. Benefited District Assessment: This method of financing "attempts to spread pro rata over a l l properties i n a previously determined benefited d i s t r i c t the cost of the parking development" (Mogren, 1951» p.434).  The theory behind this method i s that owners of  business property i n close proximity to parking f a c i l i t i e s enjoy a greater proportion of the benefit occuring from the f a c i l i t y than property owners farther away or i n the rest of the city.  It i s  argued that parking f a c i l i t i e s attract customers, thereby increasing the business activity of nearby sites and ultimately enhancing their value.  Consequently, i t i s held that these property owners should  bear a large portion of the cost, i f not the total cost, of establishing parking f a c i l i t i e s near their sites.  m The major problem of this approach i s i n deriving an equitable method of determining relative benefits.  Culp (1967, p.15)  states "that benefits may be based on: (a) assessed valuation of property for tax purposes, (b) front footage of property fronting on streets i n the assessment district, (c) floor area of business establishments, (d) the volume of business, as determined by gross or net receipts or other measures, or (e) any other desired, method or any combination of methods. Culp further notes that another method i s by dividing the benefit district into zones of benefit and apportioning the costs to the designated zones according to their proximity to the parking f a c i l i t y . The cost assigned to each zone i s then distributed to each internal property by one of the previously mentioned methods. The major problem of this approach to financing parking f a c i l i t i e s has arisen as a result of trying to determine an equitable assessment.  However, the decisions from the courts uphold the right  of a city to assess property owners according to the expectant benefits received from the proximity of parking f a c i l i t i e s (Culp,  1967, p.18). Parking Revenue: Many cities are attempting to meet the growing need for off-street parking by financing such f a c i l i t i e s through parking revenues, the funds accumulated from the operation of other on-street and off-street parking accommodations.  Based on the belief  that parking i s a business that can "pay i t s own way",  the net  85 revenues or a fixed percentage of the gross revenues of a l l curb parking meters and existing off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s are earmarked f o r the further development of off-street parking facilities.  Further, the belief i s that the parking fees exacted  from those enjoying the most direct benefits from the convenience provided, may constitute significant sums for financing parking f a c i l i t i e s (Culp, 1967). Often, cities integrate curb and municipal off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s into a unified whole, controlled, operated, and financed as a single unit.  In such a system, the revenues from both  types of f a c i l i t i e s are placed i n a common fund for the use, as needed, by any part of the system.  Culp (1967, p.17) notes that the  benefits to be derived from such a system are: (a) revenue bonds may be sold more easily and at a lower interest rate when secured by the combined revenues of curb and off-street f a c i l i t i e s and may be liquidated more quickly; (b) off-street f a c i l i t i e s that may not be completely selfliquidating but are an essential part of the program; i f combined with financially successful f a c i l i t i e s may be continued i n operation to serve a particular need, supported i n part by more prosperous members of the system; and (c) the rate structures for curb and o f f street f a c i l i t i e s may be brought more easily into a reasonable relation with each other. There are, however, disadvantages to fiancing by parking revenues.  One such disadvantage occurs as a result of local  government policy, i n that a number of cities w i l l not develop o f f street sites until parking receipts available are sufficient for  86 complete financing of these f a c i l i t i e s (Mogren, 1951)*  The weakness  here i s the time required to accumulate funds before the actual program can s t a r t .  Such a delay may lead to public aggregation  towards the c i t y ' s r o l e i n providing and financing o f f - s t r e e t parking facilities.  A second disadvantage i s that t h i s method of financing  i s not p r a c t i c a l f o r small l o c a l u n i t s with l i m i t e d general revenues (The American C i t y . 1970). Generally, however, t h i s method i s popular i n c i t i e s where revenues are used to finance bond i s s u e s , i n most cases revenue bonds (Mogren, 1951; Borrowed C a p i t a l .  Culp, 1967;  The American C i t y . 1970).  The borrowing of funds f o r parking f a c i l i t i e s  generally involves the issuance of bonds payable from property taxes or from s p e c i a l revenues.  The three most common types of bonds used  to finance parking f a c i l i t i e s are general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, and assessment bonds. General-Obligation Bonds: This type of bond i s generally supported by the f u l l f a i t h and c r e d i t of the entire c i t y .  Such  bonds may be p r i m a r i l y or c o l l a t e r a l l y payable from "ad valorem"^ taxes, from s p e c i a l assessments, or from any desired c i t y revenues, i n c l u d i n g revenue from o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s , parking meters, or benefited assessment i n a parking d i s t r i c t . General-obligation bonds are usually issued within l e g a l debt and tax l i m i t s and u s u a l l y require approval of the electorate  •Ad Valorem i s defined as: "According to value".  87 unless s p e c i f i c a l l y exempted from these requirements by law 1967,  p.19).. These requirements alone may  (Culp,  serve as deterents to t h i s  method of financing; f o r example, i n many instances, l e g a l debt l i m i t s may  already have been reached, or the l e g a l debts l i m i t s have not  been s u f f i c i e n t l y high to finance more than a l i m i t e d parking program (Mogren, 1951;  Culp, 1967). The chief advantages of general-obligation bonds are  low i n t e r e s t rates because they are backed by the f a i t h , c r e d i t , and taxing, power, of the c i t y , and the ease i n marketing an i s s u e . The voters i n amny c i t i e s have approved l a r g e issues of general-obligation bonds f o r parking. method has been rejected as u n f a i r .  However, i n some cases t h i s The basis f o r t h i s r e j e c t i o n i s  that some voters f e e l that commercial i n t e r e s t s i n the downtown receive benefits out of proportion with the tax burden they assume; and that these voters believe that they do not receive a b e n e f i t commensurate with t h e i r tax burden (Mogren, 1956,  p.431).  Although these bonds were very a t t r a c t i v e i n the past, with today's t i g h t money market, high i n t e r e s t r a t e s , and the pending threat of making municipals  taxable, general-obligation bonds have  become l e s s appealing and saleable (The American C i t y . 1970,  p.92).  Revenue Bonds; These types of bonds have become the most popular f i n a n c i n g source.  By t h i s method, the revenues from the  parking f a c i l i t i e s financed by the proceeds from such bonds are pledged to r e t i r e the bonds.  Revenue bonds are u s u a l l y more  88  d i f f i c u l t to market than general-obligation bonds, and because of the element of risk, require a higher interest rate. To lower the interest rate, however, and to insure redemption and increase the marketability of revenue bonds, additional support from other sources i s usally needed.  Generally,  the additional security required to support a sale of revenue bonds has been received from mortgaging parking property, on-street and off-street parking revenue, automobile service f a c i l i t i e s including the sale of gasoline and o i l products and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages, and non-automobile-oriented commercial establishments inside garages. Unlike general-obligation bonds, revenue bonds can be issued, outside legal debt limits, and the approval of the electorate i s not required.  However, the bond issue may be limited by  authorization to the amount required for a particular project or to the aggregate amount for a number of projects for an entire parking program. In some cases where the parking program i s extensive, the authorization may be open-ended, thereby permitting the issuance of additional revenue bonds as long as specified requirements are met. Revenue bonds have also proved particularly desirable i n financing the programs of municipal parking authorities (Mogren, 1953).  These authorities are usally confined to the self-  liquidating revenue bond for financing their operations as they lack the support of the city's legal borrowing power. As Barrage and Mogren (1957, p.217) have pointed out,  89 the revenue bond has grown i n popularity because of i t s f l e x i b i l i t y and a d a p t a b i l i t y f o r p l a c i n g the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r financing on those d i r e c t l y aided by the parking improvement. Assessment Bonds: This type of bond i s supported by the funds derived from the assessment of the t o t a l or a part of the cost of providing the needed parking f a c i l i t i e s i n a p a r t i c u l a r business area.  The costs are allocated to the property i n the area i n  proportion to the d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t benefits from increased business a c t i v i t y i n the area and increased land values, which r e s u l t from the parking improvement (Fordham, 1956,  may  p.48).  Generally, assessment bonds are l i m i t e d obligation bonds. The c o l l e c t i o n of assessments may  however be anticipated by  obligation bonds and assessments may bolster revenue bonds.  generalInterest  rates on assessment bonds are higher than those on general-obligation bonds. This method of financing parking f a c i l i t i e s has however proved to be unpopular, on the one hand, because of the  general  opposition of property owners who would be subjected to assessment, and on the other, because of the higher i n t e r e s t rate required compared with the rate f o r general-obligation bonds (Fordham,  1956;  Culp, 1967). Building, Codes B r i e f l y defined, "a building code i s a l e g a l document which sets f o r t h requirements to protect the public health, safety:  90 and welfare as they relate to the construction and occupancy of buildings and structures" (Sanderson, 1969* p.13).  A typical  building code regulates, i n general, the construction, alternation, maintenance, repair, and demolition of buildings and structures. More specifically, though, i t covers such factors as lighting, ventilation, heating, sanitation, plumbing, electrical work, types of building materials, and f i r e prevention and protection. Building codes are usually classified as being specification codes or performance codes.  Sanderson (1969, p.15)  defines the specification codes as that code describing "in detail exactly what materials are to be used, the size and spacing of units, and the methods of assembly".  The .performance code, on the  other hand, perscribes the objective to be accomplished. Building codes devote considerable attention to f i r e safety requirements.  For example, many building codes provide for  the establishment of f i r e limits within which only buildings of certain types of construction may be erected.  "The object of  establishing f i r e limits i s to restrict the spread of f i r e to limited areas within a city" (Sanderson, 1969, p.16). Another f i r e safety requirement within the building code i s the limitation of the maximum heights and areas of buildings depending on the type of construction and occupancy.  The purpose of  such a regulation i s to equalize the f i r e risk to a community for a l l use groups and a l l types of construction. Occupancy or use classifications i n building codes are  91 established according to the inherent f i r e hazard of the use.  A  city i n establishing such classifications must take into consideration the factors of numbers of people, conditions of occupancy or confined space, amounts and kinds of materials, and equipment utilized. The protection or safety provided by the several common construction methods can be used to offset the hazards of the various use groups.  These are grouped into types of construction  according to their proven capacity to resist f i r e .  Types of  construction are further distinguished by the combustibility or noncombustibllity of permitted materials.  Types of construction are  classified "cofflbustibile i f the materials permitted are combustLbile, ,,  thereby contributing fuel to the f i r e .  On the other hand, those  types wherein noncombustibile materials are required so that the elements of the structure w i l l not contribute fuel to the f i r e are classified as noncombustibile . w  M  Building codes are however not without fault. For example, building codes or by-laws i n some cities are excessively restrictive and require material of a quality beyond what i s reasonably adequate, resulting i n high building costs. however, such codes lag behind the times.  More common,  Thus, building codes f a i l  to allow modern building techniques and installations because they are not kept up to date (HIair, 1964, p.514). In regard to automobile parking garages, city building codes or by-laws can effectively regulate the internal features of  92 these structures, i n c l u d i n g construction materials, exterior walls, heat and l i g h t , v e n t i l a t i o n , bumpers, sanitation, f l o o r loadings, screening, stairways, elevators, and exitways.  Building codes also  provide f o r the necessary maintenance and housekeeping of these garages.  Moreover, b u i l d i n g codes regulate the use or occupancy of  the garage.  Such regulation includes the provision of accessory  commerical functions, i n p a r t i c u l a r , f a c i l i t i e s f o r the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the s e r v i c i n g and r e p a i r i n g of automobiles, and non-automobile oriented a c t i v i t i e s .  Similar to  other c i t y by-laws concerning parking garages, b u i l d i n g codes are based upon the p r i n c i p l e of the protection and promotion of the p u b l i c health, welfare, and  safety.  Summary The analysis of c i t y government controls upon automobile parking garages leads to the conclusion that c i t i e s have a t t h e i r disposal a wide range of practices and controls with which to regulate the external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of these structures. One  such control i s the c i t y ' s zoning by-law, which  regulates the external s p a t i a l feature of l o c a t i o n of a parking garage and the i n t e r n a l s p a t i a l feature of s i z e or capacity through land use controls and parking space requirements respectively. Further regulation of parking garages by a c i t y government can be effected by c i t y planning f o r transportation  93 f a c i l i t i e s and redevelopment or renewal projects.  As parking i s  considered to be an i n t e g r a l part of the urban automotive transportation system, planning f o r the l a t t e r also includes planning f o r the external and i n t e r n a l features of l o c a t i o n , entrances and e x i t s , and s i z e of f a c i l i t i e s f o r the former activity.  Parking garages are also being designed as i n t e g r a l  parts of urban renewal or redevelopment projects. On a much borader scale, parking garages are being regulated through a c i t y ' s administrative and f i n a n c i a l approach to parking i n general.  The analysis of a c i t y ' s administrative  approach centered on the a v a i l a b l e choices of parking programs i n c l u d i n g : (a) p r i v a t e enterprise, (b) private-public cooperation, or (c) municipal.  An analysis of the f i n a n c i a l approach concerned  i t s e l f with the choices a v a i l a b l e f o r municipal financing of parking programs. . In regard to automobile parking garages, c i t y b u i l d i n g codes or by-laws also e f f e c t i v e l y regulate i n t e r n a l features of these structures i n c l u d i n g the placement of accessory f a c i l i t i e s within them.  commercial  But not unlike other regulatory methods,  c i t y b u i l d i n g codes are designed f o r the protection and promotion of the p u b l i c health, welfare and safety.  94 CHAPTER IV AN EXAMPLE OF INTERNAL SITE REGULATION  Introduction  The proceeding chapter was concerned with a general analysis of the s p a t i a l e f f e c t s of c i t y l e g i s l a t i o n and practices upon the external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of automobile parking garages.  This examination did not however provide an indepth study  of the problems that a r i s e due to c i t y regulation of parking structures.  In order to delineate the problems and e f f e c t s a r i s i n g  from c t i y regulation of garages, a p a r t i c u l a r example of i n t e r n a l s i t e regulation has been chosen f o r analysis. . The example chosen i s that of the regulation by c i t i e s of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the i n s t a l l a t i o n of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages. This example of i n t e r n a l s i t e regulation i s chosen p r i m a r i l y because i t exhibits facets of the problems a r i s i n g out of the d i f f e r i n g formulation  and varying interpretations of c i t y l e g i s l a t i o n .  Secondly, i t i s chosen because an analysis of the e f f e c t s of t h i s regulation provides an i n t e r e s t i n g i n s i g h t i n t o a c o n f l i c t between actors a t the i n d u s t r i a l and a t the municipal l e v e l .  Further, the  analysis also o f f e r s an i n s i g h t i n t o the e f f e c t s of a c o n f l i c t created as a r e s u l t of the s e t t i n g of d i s s i m i l a r goals by c i t y decision-makers. In analyzing the e f f e c t s of c i t y l e g i s l a t i o n , the  95 current analysis must recognise that these e f f e c t s are, however, dependent on the present s i t u a t i o n within each community.  But, i n  general terms, the e f f e c t s of such l e g i s l a t i o n can be examined i n terms of considering  community and private needs and promoting the  public health, welfare and  safety.  Generally, i n formulating l e g i s l a t i o n , the problems that are l e g a l and administrative  i n nature may  be grouped i n t o  three areas of c o n f l i c t : custom, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of words and phrases, and drafsmanship. Custom.  The customary recognized s i t u a t i o n has precedent, but  has  shown that the need f o r i t s regulation or p r o h i b i t i o n w i l l prove too d i f f i c u l t to l e g i s l a t e against.  For example, the roof-sign, which  i n the past has been a common occurrence, has been recently prohibited i n c e r t a i n areas of the c i t y of Vancouver. Interpretation  of words and phrases.  The selection of words and  phrases used i n a by-law must be chosen c a r e f u l l y , so i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s consistent.  that  The r u l e "one word f o r one meaning"  applies e s p e c i a l l y i n r e l a t i o n to parking garages.  In s p e l l i n g out  the d e f i n i t i o n of garages, i t i s of the utmost i n t e r e s t that  the  regulations are c l e a r l y aimed a t a s p e c i f i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of garage type.  This becomes quite evident when sections of the by-law permit  or p r o h i b i t s p e c i f i c types of f a c i l i t i e s i n certain types of garages.  Draftsmanship.  The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of words and phrases i s dependent  upon the wording of the ordinance.  Thus, the by-law, i f drafted  according to r u l e s , should be " t i g h t " and  generally able to be upheld  96 i n courts of law.  One of the problems i n regulating the installation  of certain f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages i s the drafting of the ordinance. The Example The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages has been recognized by writers on the subject of parking, (Barrage and Mogren, 1957;  RLcker, 1957;  Whiteside,  1961)  as being both a source of income to the garage operator and a source of convenience to the garage customer.  Culp  (1967),  while examining  the legality of the provision of these f a c i l i t i e s by municipalities, has also recognized the economic importance of them. But the provision of these f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages goes beyond economic need, and customer convenience and reaches into the area of public health, welfare, and safety, which, i n effect, determines or, i n some instances, i s determined by c i t y building and f i r e by-laws. The provisions of city building and f i r e by-laws, however, sometimes clash with the policies set by private concerns, and as well, with other c i t y ordinances, whose purpose i s also that of protecting the public health, welfare and safety.  The latter  type of conflict i s usually created by the setting of dissimilar goals by c i t y decision-makers.  The result of "these conflicts i s a  questioning of the rationality of the concerned by-laws. For "this example, relevant sections of the building  97 by-laws of selected c i t i e s i n both western Canada and i n c l u d i n g Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Calgary, and V i c t o r i a , and the western United States, i n c l u d i n g Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle, were chosen f o r a n a l y s i s .  They prove to be varied i n  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and technique with regard to the regulation of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the i n s t a l l a t i o n of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages.  Secondly, a  more s p e c i f i c analysis i s made of pertinent sections of the b u i l d i n g by-law f o r the c i t y of Vancouver, as they have e f f e c t i v e l y created a c o n f l i c t between actors a t the municipal l e v e l and the i n d u s t r i a l l e v e l and an i n t e r n a l c o n f l i c t again a t the municipal l e v e l .  The Case of Western Canadian C i t i e s . On a national scale, the National Building Code and  the  National F i r e Code are recognized and accepted as the model codes which form the basis of Canada's code system. formulated  These codes are  by the Associate Committee on National Building Codes and  the Associate Committee on National F i r e Codes, both under the auspices of the National Research Council i n Ottawa.  Of the utmost  concern f o r these codes, i s the protection of p u b l i c health, safety, and general welfare. With regard to automobile garages, open-air parking or other, The National Codes recommend standards which i n v a r i a b l y influence i n t e r n a l s i t e features of these structures.  These  standards are generally prescribed according to garage type.  Part I  98 of Appendix A l i s t s the d e f i n i t i o n s of the various garages as stated by the National Building Code (1970) and should be reviewed before continuing. As the National Building and F i r e Codes prescribe standards concerning the i n t e r n a l s i t e features of garages, they are also recommending the requirements to be adopted by m u n i c i p a l i t i e s with regard to the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the p r o v i s i o n of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e the parking garage.  P r i o r to 1970, the National Building Code (1965>  p. 70) and the National F i r e Code (1963, P.H3)  stated that:  The dispensing of gasoline s h a l l not take place i n s i d e Tnrndiwflw or the f a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing s h a l l not be i n s t a l l ed i n any building. As i s noted by the d e f i n i t i o n s i n Part I of Appendix A, the Codes c l a s s i f i e d a l l types of garages as buildings. However, i n the r e c e n t l y released e d i t i o n of the National Building Code (1970), the previously r i g i d standards regarding the i n s t a l l a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline i n s i d e buildings are somewhat relaxed; and the Code now contains the article: F a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline s h a l l not be i n s t a l l ed i n any b u i l d i n g except i n buildings of Group F occupancy when approved (N.B.C., 1970, A r t i c l e 3.3.7.8, p.116).  Within Group F occupancy are r e p a i r garages, storage garages, and  99 open-air parking garages. Building inspectors have viewed this change i n the Code as a realization of the fact, by those who write the Code, that " i t i s impossible to anticipate a l l possible cases, and rather than have a r i g i d blanket ruling covering a l l cases, they have l e f t the door a j a r " l . What they are saying i n fact i s : "We do not think you should dispense gasoline i n any building at a l l , but a situation might arise somewhere somehow where i t i s unavoidable, i n which case play i t by ear" . 2  One building inspector however views this change as an appeasement to Ontario buildings o f f i c i a l s who were desirous of having the inside location of pumps so as to overcome any legal d i f f i c u l t i e s which might arise over the dispensing of gasoline to new automobiles inside motor vehicle manufacturing plants, rather than as an outright change of viewpoint by the national committee^. The standards set down by the National Building Code (1970) i n regard to the installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages have been more propitious than those concerning gasoline dispensing f a c i l i t i e s .  The previous  and the present National Building Codes clearly state that f a c i l i t i e s  •^Letter from A. James, City of Victoria Building Inspector, February 17, 1971. 2  Ibid.  ^Interview with R. Mon tad or, City of Vancouver Building Inspector, April 13, 1971.  100  for the servicing and repairing of automobiles may be permitted inside garages.  However, the Code carefully points out that once  f a c i l i t i e s are provided for servicing and repairing automobiles inside a garage, the garage becomes a repair garage.  The Code (1970,  p.116) further notes that the repair garage must be separated from other occupancies by at least a two-hour f i r e separation. A parking area for automobiles i s considered, to be another occupancy.  Thus,  although automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s are not permitted within the parking area i t s e l f , they are allowed to occupy the same building as the latter type of occupancy, provided that the building contains certain structural elements. . In regard to open-air parking garages, the National Building Code (1965, p.23) recommends that: "Automobile repair work and the servicing of automobiles shall not be permitted i n open-air parking garages".  However, should any part of this type of garage  be used for another occupancy including automobile service and repair areas, the garage i s then designated a storage garage.  This  change i n classification leads to the previous recommendation that f a c i l i t i e s for the servicing and repairing of automobiles be permitted inside the same building as a storage garage, but separated by two-hour f i r e resistive construction, plus other recommended construction standards. The degree of adoption by western Canadian cities of the recommended standards set down i n the National Building and Fire Codes with regard to both the installation of gasoline  101 dispensing and automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages has varied. since 1958,  The C i t y of Calgary, f o r example,  has permitted the dispensing of gasoline i n s i d e parking  structures.  Dispensing Pumps s h a l l not be i n s t a l l e d i n any garage or b u i l d i n g area, but may be i n s t a l l e d i n Parking Structures ( C i t y of Calgary F i r e Code By-law No. 5220).  A parking structure i s defined, as "a b u i l d i n g or structure designed f o r parking automobiles"*''.  P r i o r to  I960,  the C i t y of Saskatoon  also permitted, the placement of gasoline dispensing f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages, but has since adopted the National Code, thereby p r o h i b i t i n g t h e i r i n s t a l l a t i o n ^ .  Building  S i m i l a r l y , the C i t y  of Winnipeg permitted dispensing f a c i l i t i e s f o r gasoline i n s i d e garages u n t i l  1961,  when i t enacted By-law Number  18600:  In no case may dispensing devices f o r gasoline be i n s t a l l e d i n s i d e a b u i l d i n g ( C i t y of Winnipeg By-law No. 18600, Section 13). The C i t y of Regina and the C i t y of V i c t o r i a have, however, consistently prohibited, the i n s t a l l a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline i n s i d e parking garages i n accordance with recommended standards i n the National Building Code. In western Canadian c i t i e s , the b u i l d i n g by-laws  i+  Letter from C i t y Calgary Planning Department, March 1,  -^Letter from R. Burdyny, C i t y of Saskatoon Architectural Assistant, February 19, 1971.  1971.  102 concerning the i n s t a l l a t i o n of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages have deviated l i t t l e from the standards prescribed i n the National Building Code.  For example,  the c i t i e s of Calgary, Regina, and V i c t o r i a have permitted  the  i n s t a l l a t i o n of these f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages under the s p e c i f i c a t i o n s set down by the National Building Code, whereas the C i t y of Saskatoon has prohibited t h e i r i n s i d e l o c a t i o n . The C i t y of Winnipeg has however enacted the most permissive regulations of any western Canadian c i t y . Corporation of Greater Winnipeg By-law Number 711,  The Metropolitan  A r t i c l e 3«3«7«3»  enacted i n October 1965» states that "minor automobile r e p a i r work and s e r v i c i n g may be permitted" i n s i d e an open-air parking garage, "provided" (a) that there i s no dispensing of gasoline within the b u i l d i n g , and (b) that, that portion of the building be enclosed within a two-hour f i r e separation. As suggested by the above review of by-laws i t would thus appear that various c i t i e s i n western Canada have d i f f e r i n g l y adopted the standards recommended i n the National Building and F i r e Codes, concerning the sale of gasoline and o i l products and  the  provision of service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e automobile parking garages. The Case of Western United States C i t i e s . In the United States, recommended standards  concerning  103 the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e automobile parking garages as set down by national agencies greatly d i f f e r from those suggested by Canadian agencies. Similar to Canada, there are national agencies which develop and publish standards concerning building and f i r e codes, which a c t as the foundations f o r the United States code system. Two standards i s s u i n g agencies deserve special attention since the standards they issue constitute the bulk of those found i n that p a r t of c i t i e s * building codes concerning automobile parking garages. These agencies are the National F i r e Protection Association and the Building O f f i c i a l s * Conference of America. The National F i r e Protection Association (N.F.P.A.) with headquarters i n Boston, develops and publishes f i r e protection, f i r e prevention, and f i r e safety standards.  The purpose of the  Building O f f i c i a l s Conference of America (BOCA), on the other hand, i s "to promote the improvement of b u i l d i n g regulations and the administrative organization, techniques and methods of t h e i r enforcement by l o c a l governments" (Sanderson, 1963, also publishes a model building code.  p.83).  The BOCA  However, the program and work  of both agencies i s s i m i l a r , i n that both are dedicated to the protection and promotion of public health, welfare and safety. In regard to a l l types of automobile garages, including that of parking, these agencies are s i m i l a r to those i n Canada, i n that they recommend standards which, i n e f f e c t , regulate the i n t e r n a l  104 features of these structures.  Furthermore, the standards  recommended by the American agencies are also prescribed In terms of garage type.  A l i s t of the d e f i n i t i o n s of the various types of  garages, as stated by the NFPA and the BOCA are found i n Part I I of Appendix A. Codes developed by the American agencies concerning automobile garages contain provisions dealing with the i n s t a l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e these structures.  For example, i n the volume dealing with  occupancy standards and process hazards within the National F i r e Code, as set down by the NFPA (1969), are contained several references i n regard to the i n s i d e l o c a t i o n of gasoline dispensing units.  However, unlike the National Building and F i r e Codes of  Canada, the United States National F i r e Code i s much more permissive i n the matter concerning t h e i r i n s i d e l o c a t i o n . Inside l o c a t i o n i n c l u d i n g Open A i r Parking Garages: Approved dispensing units may be l o c a t i o n i n s i d e garages upon s p e c i f i c approval of the authority having j u r i s d i c t i o n (NFPA, 1969, A r t i c l e 2423, p.88-21). The BOCA Building Code (1969) contains s i m i l a r standards concerning the i n s t a l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages.  In the d e f i n i t i o n of the  parking garage (See Appendix A, Part I I ) , i t i s noted that "gasoline, o i l and s i m i l a r products may be dispensed f o r the servicing of (passenger) v e h i c l e s " i n s i d e t h i s structure. In regard to the placement of automobile service and  105  r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages, the two codes d i f f e r from the Canadian codes as w e l l as between themselves.  The National F i r e  Protection Association recommends that f a c i l i t i e s f o r s e r v i c i n g automobiles be permitted i n s i d e a l l types of garages, i n c l u d i n g the enclosed parking garage and the open-air parking garage (See Appendix A, Part I I ) .  The agency's code f u r t h e r acknowledges that r e p a i r  shops may be placed i n s i d e parking garages without an appropriate f i r e separation (See Appendix A, Part I I ) . I t appears that the only r e s t r i c t i o n s placed on the i n s t a l l a t i o n of r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n garages are that:  Repairing of motor vehicles s h a l l be r e s t r i c t e d to the areas s p e c i f i c a l l y provided f o r such purposes i n r e p a i r garages. Repairing of motor vehicles on f l o o r s located below grade l e v e l i s undesirable (NFPA, 1 9 6 9 , A r t i c l e 2 3 1 1 , p . 8 8 - 1 5 ) . The Building Code as proposed by the Building O f f i c i a l s Conference of America ( 1 9 6 9 ) , on the other hand, recommends that f a c i l i t i e s f o r the service and r e p a i r of automobiles be permitted only i n p u b l i c garages.  The BOCA code suggests that no provisions  f o r the r e p a i r i n g of automobiles should be made i n s i d e open-air parking structures (See Appendix A, Part I I ) . The degree of adoption of recommended standards developed by the NFPA and the BOCA by p a r t i c u l a r c i t i e s of the western United States has d i f f e r e d .  However, i t would appear that a l l l a r g e  P a c i f i c Coast American metropolises have enacted the recommendations found i n the National F i r e Code, as set down by the National F i r e Protection Association, concerning the i n s i d e l o c a t i o n of gasoline  106 dispensing u n i t s i n parking garages.  Typical by-laws thus read:  Sec.7.06 (b) Where an outside i n s t a l l a t i o n of dispensing devices i s impractical or impossible, the i n s t a l l a t i o n of a dispensing device, approved f o r i n s i d e use, may be permitted by the Chief of D i v i s i o n above ground l e v e l within a garage or other b u i l d i n g ( C i t y of San Francisco F i r e Code, A r t i c l e 7» p.6). Sec.14-1506 (e) Dispensing devices may be installed inside buildings or structures upon specific approval of the Fire Marshall as near the entrance or exit as practical, but not below the f i r s t floor or adjacent to a ramp or other opening to a level below the f i r s t floor (City of Portland Fire Code, Article 15). Sec.8.15.370 (a) 1. INSIDE LOCATION. Approved dispensing u n i t s may be located i n s i d e garages upon s p e c i f i c approval of the F i r e Chief ( C i t y of Seattle F i r e Code, p.1151). Further, i n the c i t y of Seattle, there can be found nemerous examples of parking garages i n which gasoline dispensing u n i t s have been i n s t a l l e d .  For example, gasoline dispensers have  been located i n s i d e the U n i v e r s i t y Properties Garage, which occupies three l e v e l s of the 20-storey Washington Building, located i n the City's downtown area.  Another example i s the Olympic Hotel Garage,  also i n downtown Seattle, i n which dispensers are located on the street l e v e l and on the f i r s t l e v e l above the s t r e e t . In the c i t y of Los Angeles i s also found examples of automobile parking garages i n s i d e which are found gasoline dispensing u n i t s .  For example, gasoline dispensing pumps are found  i n s i d e the Pershing Square Underground Parking Garage (ELose, 1965).  107  Similarly, f a c i l i t i e s for the dispensing of gasoline are located inside the Union Square Underground Parking Garage i n San Francisco, Acceptance and adoption of the practices recommended by the NFPA i n the National Fire Code, concerning the installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages appears to be unanimous i n western American cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle,  However, for Los  Angeles, the f i r e code further states that: Sec,57,100,31. Repairs involving motor overhauling, open flame, automobile fueling system, or the use of flammable liquids i n any form are prohibited i n any basement ,or subbasement garage (City of Los Angeles, Fire Code, p.357). The cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle have thus adopted building and f i r e regulations based on the standards recommended by the National Fire Protection Association and the Building Officials Conference of America,  In adopting these  recommended standards these western American cities have been much more permissive than their counterparts north of the 49th parallel i n matters concerning the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages.  Further, these recommendations have been adopted by these  cities and incorporated i n their building and f i r e by-laws, s t i l l i n recognition of the need for the protection of public health, welfare, and safety.  108 The Case of Vancouver, C i t y building by-laws concerning the regulation or the p r o h i b i t i o n of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e automobile parking garages r e f l e c t an adherance by the C i t y of Vancouver to the standards concerning these garages recommended i n the Canadian National Building and F i r e Codes,  These by-laws state a t y p i c a l l y (See Appendix B,  Part I I ) :  ( i ) Storage Barages Where a storage garage and one or more major occupancies are contained within the same b u i l d i n g such b u i l d i n g and the storage of automobiles s h a l l conform to the following requirements: (B) NO servicing or repairs to automobiles s h a l l be undertaken, nor s h a l l any gasoline other than that contained i n the tanks of the automobiles, be stored, used, or sold i n any such building nor s h a l l f a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline be i n s t a l l e d i n any such building ( C i t y of Vancouver Building By-law No. 4 1 9 3 , Sec. 3 . 1 2 , A r t i c l e 3 . 12.7.4.,  p.31).  S i m i l a r l y , f o r open-air parking garages, the by-law states: No servicing or r e p a i r s to automobiles s h a l l be undertaken, nor s h a l l any gasoline other than that contained i n the tanks of the automobiles, be stored, used, or sold i n any open-air parking garage nor s h a l l f a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline be i n s t a l l e d i n any open-air parking garage ( C i t y of Vancouver Building By-law No. 4193,  Sec. 3 . 1 2 , A r t i c l e 3 . 1 2 . 7 . 5 . , p . 3 2 ) .  In regard to r e p a i r garages, the C i t y i n adhering to the National Building Code, allows f o r t h e i r placement i n s i d e a parking  109 garage, provided that the r e p a i r area i s separated from the parking area by c e r t a i n s t r u c t u r a l requirements including a two-hour f i r e separation and a 1.5 hour s e l f - c l o s i n g f i r e door a t every opening between the two areas and that no gasoline i s dispensed i n s i d e the garage. As suggested by these by-laws, i t would thus seem reasonable that the C i t y of Vancouver has rigorously prohibited the i n s i d e l o c a t i o n of gasoline dispensing u n i t s and has somewhat r e s t r i c t e d the i n s t a l l a t i o n of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s within parking garages. To the petroleum industry, the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the p r o v i s i o n of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages i s an important source of monetary income and customer a t t r a c t i o n .  The industry bases t h e i r outlook on  the f a c t that the high cost of land continues to make i t more and more d i f f i c u l t to provide normal service s t a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s i n the downtown area of the c i t y of Vancouver.  Yet, simultaneously, the  industry r e a l i z e s that there exists a demand f o r gasoline and o i l products and automobile servicing and repairing i n the downtown and i s thus desirous to p r o f i t a b l y meet t h i s demand.  Further, the  industry recognizes that the most economically f e a s i b l e as w e l l as p r o f i t a b l e method of meeting t h i s need i s to integrate automobile r e t a i l i n g and servicing a c t i v i t i e s with parking operations, s p e c i f i c a l l y parking garages. However, as noted previously, the C i t y s b u i l d i n g by,  uo laws p r o h i b i t any such i n t e g r a t i o n , on account that i t i s considered by the f i r e marshal! and b u i l d i n g inspectors, to be too dangerous t o the public health, welfare and safety.  Bat, a t the same time,  Vancouver's zoning l e g i s l a t i o n p r o h i b i t s the future building of gasoline service stations i n the downtown section of the c i t y (See C i t y of Vancouver Zoning and Development by-law No.  3575).  Thus,  because of the r e s t r l c t i v e n e s s of both C i t y zoning and b u i l d i n g by-laws, the C i t y can o f f e r no a l t e r n a t i v e to the petroleum industry f o r a economically f e a s i b l e l o c a t i o n or r e l o c a t i o n of t h e i r r e t a i l outlets within the downtown area.  As a r e s u l t of these p o l i c i e s  set by the C i t y and the desires of the industry, a c o n f l i c t i s created between decision-makers a t the municipal l e v e l and those a t the i n d u s t r i a l l e v e l , which i s f u r t h e r heightened by a c o n f l i c t between the d i s s i m i l a r goals of C i t y zoning by-laws and c i t y b u i l d i n g by-laws. Beginning i n 1964,  the l o c a l decision-makers f o r the  petroleum industry have t r i e d to resolve the c o n f l i c t through attempts t o have the by-law r e s t r i c t i o n s concerning the i n s t a l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing u n i t s and automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e parking garages somewhat eased.  Highlighting these  attempts was a comprehensive b r i e f presented to C i t y Council, covering the l o c a t i o n of gasoline storage tanks, gasoline  dispensing  pumps " i n s i d e " or "under" buildings and service or r e p a i r work and other occupancies i n parking garages, of which only the two l a t t e r topics are of concern here.  Ill The Petroleum Industry Committee (PIC), a permanent body of representatives  of the l a r g e r o i l companies operating i n  B r i t i s h Columbia, presented the b r i e f , i n 1965, i n the b e l i e f that regulations concerning the i n s t a l l a t i o n of dispensing "unnecessarily  equipment were  r e s t r i c t i v e , thus constituting a hindrance to  development" (Petroleum Industry Committee, 1965, p . l ) . The b r i e f went on to state:  The Petroleum Industry has taken a very responsible and p o s i t i v e p o s i t i o n i n other major c i t i e s with regard to the development of parking structures, i n some cases incorporated with o f f i c e buildings or hotels and i n v o l v i n g the sale of gasoline. Their r o l e i n Vancouver has been n e g l i g i b l e because of the unnecessarily s t r i c t regulations which l e a d to the uneconomic development of the s i t e including the r e t a i l i n g of gasoline. The b r i e f continued: In the p u b l i c Interest i t i s desirable and necessary that such services be a v a i l a b l e i n the downtown area and. over the past several years, we have witnessed, a trend toward, t h e i r rapid elimination. This trend can only be stemmed by a relaxation of the F i r e Regulations t o permit more intensive integrated development with appropriate emphasis on safety standards (Petroleum Industry Committee, 1965, p . l ) . In regard to the i n s t a l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing pumps i n s i d e garages, the B r i e f noted that by t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the National Building Code, the C i t y Building Department prohibited their inside location.  I t f u r t h e r observed that t h i s ban "even  extended to the condition of pumps under an overhang of a b u i l d i n g " .  112 The Committee (1965» p.l) asserted that the "blanket rejection of such installations does not appear to be justified because with properly engineered design and layout i t i s possible to make such an installation without creating any public hazard".  Alternatively, the  Committee recommended that the City adopt the Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code of the National Fire Protection Association. The Code, as mentioned previously, permitted such installations to be located inside garages "upon specific approval of the authority having jurisdiction" (See Appendix A, Part I I ) . To counter arguments dealing with the hazards of the inside location of gasoline dispensing units, the Petroleum Industry Committee presented the results of particular tests conducted by the Fire Prevention Bureau of Los Angeles, to determine the extent of flammable vapors i n connection with dispensing and unloading of gasoline at service stations and i n closed rooms housing pumps. One of the conclusions drawn from these thests was: When dispensing gasoline into an automobile tank, a hazardous atmosphere i s l i k e l y to exist only within a few inches of the f i l l pipe opening, even i n s t i l l air. In the case of a minor gasoline s p i l l , a hazardous atmosphere i s l i k e l y to exist only i n the area directly above the liquid s p i l l , even i n s t i l l a i r (American Petroleum Institute, 1962, p.2). Regarding the gasoline dispenser i t s e l f , the conclusions reached were: a) A hazardous atmosphere does not exist i n an area adjacent to the dispenser during normal operation (A.P.I., 1962, p.3).  113 (b) A hazardous atmosphere i s not l i k e l y to exist because of a pump operating within a closed room even when a minor leak i s present (A.P.I., 1965, p.4). The Committee thus asserted that based on the conclusions reached from these tests, the installation of gasoline dispensing pumps inside parking garages does not endanger public health, welfare, and safety, and therefore, should be permitted inside these structures. A ejection of the Brief was devoted to that part of the City Building By-law which concerned the regulation of automobile service and repair work i n a parking garage. Committee  The Petroleum Industry  (1965» p.9) acknowledged the fact that the existing  building by-law did not appear to prohibit repair work i n a parking garage.  However, the Committee  (19&5, P»10) did point out that the  by-law further stated that " i f the parking garage includes another occupancy, repairs and gasoline sales are prohibited" inside these structures.  The Committee asserted that as there was nothing i n the  Fire Code as put forth by the National Fire Protection Association to prevent repairs and gasoline sales i n a parking garage even i f that garage was under floors used for other occupancy such as offices, hotels, apartment etc., then the City should adopt a by-law providing for this type of development, while continuing to permit other occupancies over parking garages. The Brief concluded: In summary, i t would appear that the above restrictive regulations, many of vrhich are  114 long standing, are based on fear arising from a lack of knowledge of the behavior of flammable liquids and. gases at the time they were instituted. They allow no room f o r the development of sound engineering, which can control and eliminate the supposed, hazards on which the regulations were based (Petroleum Industry Committee, 1965, p.10). Further actions by the Petroleum Industry Committee i n attempting to have the by-laws liberalized would appear to indicate that despite the facts and arguments presented by the Committee, the Brief f e l l on unsympathetic ears. In fact, based on present City Building By-laws, i t would appear that the City has restricted rather than liberalized the by-laws concerning the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside garages.  I t would however be unjustifiable and  unreasonable to say that the City has not given some ground with regard to permitting such installations.  Evidence of such a move  can be found i n the present City Zoning and Development By-law (1969, p.165) specifically i n those by-laws concerning a Parking District: (d) In the case of a Parking Area (Public) or Parking Garage (Public) which provides parking spaces for not less than 40 vehicles the sale of gasoline shall be permitted by the installation of not more than two pumps may be inside any Parking Garage (Public). (e) Where a Parking Garage (Public) provides parking spaces for not less than 40 vehicles the sale of lubricants, minor t i r e repairs, and the washing and polishing and greasing of vehicles shall be permitted inside the garage. Although this by-law was enacted i n 1957, the fact that i t has not  115 been rescinded i n recent years gives support to the notion that the City has somewhat yielded to pressure from the petroleum industry. The legal grounds of this zoning by-law i n relation to the building by-law has yet to be tested i n a court of law. There currently exists only one Parking District i n downtown Vancouver.  The District, one acre i n size, i s presently  occupied by a Public Parking Area. However, because of the dimensions of the zone and the nature of the streets bordering i t , i t would seem unlikely that a parking garage could be built on the l o t (See Figure 5). In 1969, a proposal by Western Auto Park Limited of Calgary to place gasoline pumps and a service garage inside their new Vancouver parking garage met with austere opposition from the City Building Department.  The Company found i t necessary to modify  their building so as to provide an "open sky" environment above the storage tanks and pumps i n order to r e t a i l gasoline i n agreement with the requirements set down i n the City*® Building By-law. However, i n order to locate a service garage within their structure, Western Auto Park would have found i t necessary to once again modify their building.  The Company, i n resigning from another costly  modification, argued that i t has not been prevented from installing minor service f a c i l i t i e s i n their other outlets.  "These minor  servicing areas have not been classed as dangerous due to the nature of the work that i s done, which includes lubrication and t i r e repairs  with no major mechanical repairs involved" . 0  The Company further  argued that there are numerous parkades i n Vancouver with service f a c i l i t i e s which are not up to the standard and quality of their garage, but which have been built i n the past, and presently operate service f a c i l i t i e s ? . Further, C S, 0  Hyciek, President of Western Auto  Park Limited, believes "that the only difference between these f a c i l i t i e s , theirs and ours, i s the individual interpretation of the building codes which are then applied as interpreted by the individual"^. The Company however realizes the fact that due to the City's interpretation of the National Building Code, i t i s impossible under the present Building By-law to locate a service garage inside their parking garage without incurring the high cost of structural modification. Based on the case of Western Auto Park, i t would thus appear that much of the work done and evidence presented by the Petroleum Industry Committee i n  I965  i s s t i l l unheeded by City  decision-makers. Furthermore, due to the City of Vancouver's adherence to and interpretation of the National Building Code, the petroleum industry remains i n a conflicting position with City decision-makers i n the matter of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside  °Letter from C,S, Hyciek, President of Western Auto Park Limited, January 21, 1971. 7  Ibid.  8  Ibid,  117 automobile parking garages.  The p o s i t i o n of the industry i s f u r t h e r  hindered by the d i s s i m i l a r i t y of goals as set out i n the City's Zoning By-law and i n the City's Building By-law. General Appraisal Several s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s stand out from the analysis of t h i s i n t e r n a l s i t e regulation.  A l l of the interested p a r t i e s are  generally concerned with protection of the public health, welfare, and safety.  The municipal l e v e l maintains that the i n s t a l l a t i o n of  gasoline dispensing u n i t s i n s i d e parking garages i s "too dangerous" to p u b l i c safety, and have thus enacted b u i l d i n g by-laws p r o h i b i t i n g such an occupancy?.  The i n d u s t r i a l l e v e l , on the other hand, i s  also concerned with p u b l i c safety, but argues that through modern and improved engineering techniques and b u i l d i n g materials  gasoline  dispensing i n s i d e parking garages presents l i t t l e hazard to the public. In regard to the placement of automobile service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e garages, the municipal l e v e l has l a i d down, i n the i n t e r e s t s of public safety, s p e c i f i c s t r u c t u r a l requirements f o r garages containing such f a c i l i t i e s .  The i n d u s t r i a l l e v e l  appears to adhere, although at times r e l u c t a n t l y , to such regulations. In attempting to l e g i s l a t e f o r the public health,  ^Interview with R. Montador, A p r i l 13,  1971.  118 welfare and safety, city governments have often created a conflict between their stated goals and the goals set by entrepreneurs.  For  example, i n Vancouver, the petroleum industry recognizes that the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages are not only an additional source of income but they are also a source of convenience and supply to the customer. Further, the industry acknowledges that with present city zoning by-laws and the high cost of land prohibiting the further building of service stations i n the downtown section of the city, that the most economically viable r e t a i l outlet for petroleum products and service work i n the downtown area i s i n a parking garage.  However, existing City building by-laws prohibit or  restrict such an installation and thus create a conflict between actors at the industrial level and those at the municipal level. Furthermore, this conflict between the city government and the petroleum industry has been heightened, by an additional conflict, that between the dissimilar goals of city zoning by-laws and city building by-laws i n matters concerning gasoline retailing i n the downtown section of Vancouver.  These conflicts can only be  resolved through consideration of public health, welfare, and safety. The regulation of internal site features raises the problems of definition and interpretation. In this example, these problems arise over the word, building, commonly used i n reference to parking garages. As one building inspector points out:  119 Most people would agree that a canopy over a gas pump, erected t o protect users from the weather, does not constitute a b u i l d i n g . Add a w a l l on one side f o r some reason and there i s some hesitancy, but again the majority w i l l avoid the i s s u e by using the word structure rather than b u i l d i n g . Add another w a l l and most people w i l l come down on the other side of the fence. So we have a sort of a l i d i n g - s c a l e d e f i n i t i o n leading to a v a r i e t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , and a l l the time, the use or occupancy has not changed; but the hazard probably h a s . 1 0  I t would thus appear that i n order to a l l e v i a t e or perhaps, even to eliminate, some of the problems associated with i n t e r n a l s i t e regulation, administrators or b u i l d i n g by-laws should transfer t h e i r meticulous attention from words l i k e b u i l d i n g or structure to consideration of use or occupancy or the actual hazard involved. The petroleum and the parking i n d u s t r i e s w i l l continue to lobby against stringent regulations covering the i n s t a l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing u n i t s and service and r e p a i r f a c i l i t i e s i n s i d e automobile parking garages.  In attempting to have these by-laws  changed, the i n d u s t r i e s w i l l again approach the c i t y b u i l d i n g departments and i n v a r i a b l y , c i t y councils and commissioners.  However,  most western Canadian c i t i e s i n reviewing t h e i r by-laws, examine them i n l i g h t of public health, welfare and safety and nation precedent. The p o l i c y of the C i t y possibly could be changed i f f i r e safety to both l i f e and property has been s u i t a b l y established by a n a t i o n a l l y recognized agencyH.  'Letter from A. James, February 17,  1971.  •Letter from C.N.W. Shewan, C i t y of Winnipeg F i r e Chief, March 3, 1971.  120 In regard to the inside location of gasoline dispensing units, the National Building Code (1970) for Canada permits such an occupancy.  However, despite this change i n a nationally recognized,  code, there are c i t i e s , particularly Vancouver, who s t i l l consider such an installation to be too dangerous to public safety, and thus continue to prohibit this internal site feature  . In fact, one  city building inspector believes that the national clause permitting the location of gasoline dispensers inside buildings of Group F occupancy w i l l be rescinded i n the 1975 edition of the National Building Code-^. He bases his view on the notion that the committee responsible for writing the Code w i l l find that such a practice i s s t i l l dangerous because safe engineering techniques are not yet available so as to eliminate the hazard involved i n the inside location of gasoline pumps. Simultaneously, however, there are city o f f i c i a l s who believe that gasoline pumps inside garages are not dangerous, and further, that public o f f i c i a l s must be willing to accept new ideas and to institute change accordingly.  As one building inspector put  it: ? There w i l l be opposition to gasoline pumps i n garages because people s t i l l believe that gasoline i s dangerous, and you must work uphill to change this b e l i e f ^ .  -^Interview with R. Montador, April 13, 1971. ^Ibid. ^Interview with B.M. Boers, City of Nanaimo Building Inspector, December 29, 1971.  121 On instituting change i n public policy, he gives the following views A by-law i s there for safety, and i f you go overboard i n safety, you ruin the intent. So i f you can prove that i t i s safe, why not allow it...And just to state that because somebody somewhere thought i t was dangerous and you adhere to i t without any further research i s wrong. ...But i t i s the politician who has to be convinced that a by-law i s i n the best interest of the city. If you have convinced the politician, he w i l l change the by-law. Sometimes i t i s the building inspector or or the building board who are s t i l l the older generation and. they are more cautious. If we do not change, we are stale, and that i s not right. And i f we change, we w i l l find out i f we have done the right thing"*^. City decision-makers must then be prepared and above a l l , be willing to institute change i n policies, i f such a change i s proven to be safe and desirable.  In order to prove such a condition,  research must be carried out not only at the municipal level but also at the industrial level.  But despite what the outcome may  be,  local governments must explicitly state their goals i n relation to the adopted policy, so that both the public and the private sectors can act accordingly i f not i n harmony so as to provide a better urban environment through protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety.  •'•^'interview with B.M. Boers, City of Nanaimo Building Inspector, December 29, 1971.  122  CHAPTER V PARKING GARAGES: A CASE STUDY OF VANCOUVER  Introduction  The C i t y of Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia i s not u n l i k e most major c i t i e s i n regulating external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of automobile parking garages and thus has been chosen f o r a case study.  Similar to most North American metropolises,  Vancouver's regulations concerning four areas of emphasis.  the C i t y of  these structures appear to have  The f i r s t i s that of regulating external  s i t e features through the City's Zoning and Development By-law and C i t y transportation and redevelopment planning.  Secondly, i n t e r n a l  s i t e features are subject to regulation by once again the City's Zoning and Development By-law and C i t y transportation and redevelopment planning as w e l l as the City's Building By-law. Further, both the external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of parking garages i n Vancouver are subject t o i n d i r e c t regulation by the City's approach t o the administration and financing of i t s parking program. F i n a l l y , regulation of the s i t e features of a parking garage r e f l e c t s the City's concern f o r the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety. The following study thus documents C i t y of Vancouver zoning ordinances, planning proposals and decisions, administrative and f i n a n c i a l p r a c t i c e s , and b u i l d i n g ordinances.  Concentration i n  123 t h i s case study i s mainly on parking garages i n the downtown section of Vancouver. The Setting  The t h i r d l a r g e s t c i t y i n Canada, Vancouver received i t s h i s t o r i c a l impetus f o r growth with the expansion of the transcontinental railway to a terminus a t Coal Harbour i n 1886.  Located  on a peninsula l y i n g north of the Fraser River and south of Burrard I n l e t , the C i t y has a population of  413,679 (1966) and serves a  hinterland of some 800 square miles with a population of over  1,150,000 people.  The C i t y i s the l o c a t i o n of head o f f i c e s or  branch o f f i c e s of many of the l a r g e corporations i n Canada, Federal and P r o v i n c i a l Government agencies, i n d u s t r i a l plants with operations i n primary and secondary a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d i n g timber, pulp and paper, minerals and food, and. i n c r e a s i n g t e r t i a r y and quarternary a c t i v i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g r e t a i l i n g , entertainment, professional and personal services, and tourism.  Vancouver i s a l s o the center of i n c r e a s i n g  Canadian transportation and trade a c t i v i t i e s on the P a c i f i c Rim, as witnessed i n the f u r t h e r development of the Burrard I n l e t port. The central business d i s t r i c t or downtown section of Vancouver i s located on the Burrard Peninsula and consists of an area of some 1350 acres or j u s t over two square miles^.  The  population of t h i s area i s estimated to be 48,400 persons i n 1970, with 70 per cent of t h i s number l i v i n g i n the high density  Much of the material on the CBD i s taken from Downtown Vancouver Development Concepts (1970).  124 r e s i d e n t i a l area c a l l e d the West End. A f u r t h e r 91,000 persons are employed i n the main economic functions of the downtown i n c l u d i n g r e t a i l i n g , o f f i c e work, service and warehousing, and i n s t i t u t i o n a l services.  The i n d u s t r i a l and warehouse area on the north side of  False Creek employs an a d d i t i o n a l 1,600 people, bringing the t o t a l number of persons working Vancouver's downtown d i s t r i c t to 92,600. Further, planners estimate that based on major projects already announced and due f o r construction i n the downtown section of the C i t y , employment i s expected t o r i s e to a minimum of 133,000 persons or a maximum of 173,000 persons i n 1985. The Parking S i t u a t i o n With approximately 92,600 people employed i n the Downtown section of Vancouver and conservative estimates of an a d d i t i o n a l 40,000 people by 1985 plus an e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t i a l population of 48,400 people, transportation i n the downtown area has become a major concern to C i t y planners.  One of the basic and more  important components i n the downtown automotive transportation system i s terminal  facilities. The parking s i t u a t i o n i n Downtown Vancouver has been  the subject of four studies by the C i t y . 1947,  The f i r s t , conducted i n  was an inventory and an a l l - d a y usage study and concluded  that the supply of parking a t that time was inadequate ( C i t y of Vancouver, 1948).  The report l e d to the formation of the Vancouver  Parking Commission and the approval of a one m i l l i o n d o l l a r Local  125 Improvement By-law to purchase properties for parking.  In 1954, City  Council authorized an inventory and a peak hour usage study which recommended that a core area be exempted, from parking standards i n the zoning by-law, customer and worker parking areas be developed around fringes of the high-density core and a further amount of two million dollars for purchasing properties for parking be included i n a five-year period of capital expenditures beginning January 1, (City of Vancouver, 1956).  1959,  Following this report, two further Local  Improvement By-laws were presented to the Downtown property owners, but both were defeated. Another inventory and peak hour usage study made i n I960, concluded that "the overall parking demand had increased, faster than the supply and. faster than was forecast i n 1954" (City of Vancouver, 1962).  However, much doubt was cast on the validity  of these conclusions and as a result, City Council authorized yet another Downtown parking study. The 1962 study however differed from the previous studies i n that one of i t s purposes was to determine the actual locations of demand by interviewing parkers.  In addition, the  study was undertaken "to clear up misunderstandings and conflicts of opinion regarding existing parking conditions i n the Downtown Area, to re-assess future parking requirements and to provide information with which to assess the effectiveness of the present administration and methods of financing further parking" (City of Vancouver, 1962, p . l ) .  One of the most important conclusions  126 derived from the study i s that there exists a " c r i t i c a l area" i n the downtown where demand i s greater than supply, but that outside the " c r i t i c a l area" demand i s being met.  The report d i d however  recognize that as employment and r e s i d e n t i a l population i n the downtown increased, more f a c i l i t i e s f o r parking would be needed and that as land was l i m i t e d and costs were high, -the best type of f a c i l i t y was the parking garage. The parking garage has thus s p a t i a l l y manifested i n the downtown area of Vancouver i n two ways. type (Figure 5 ) .  itself  The f i r s t i s by  In Downtown Vancouver can be found examples of the  r e t a i l store parking garage (The Bay; Eaton s; Woodward's), the ,  office-employee garage (Bentall Centre; Guiness Tower), the c e n t r a l core garage (Downtown Parking Corporation garages), and the h o t e l parking garage (Hotel Vancouver, Blue Horizon Hotel).  The West End  d i s t r i c t of downtown contains numerous examples of r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t parking garages, i n c l u d i n g those associated with an apartment-retail complex (Denman Place; Columbia Place, P a c i f i c Palisades).  Also found, i n the downtown section of the C i t y i s the  specialized f u n c t i o n a l area type of parking garage.  Examples of the  l a t t e r type are found i n the Queen E l i z a b e t h Theatre complex and the Vancouver Vocational School. Secondly, the parking garage s p a t i a l l y manifests i t s e l f through i t s external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features which are subject to regulation by C i t y planning decisions and C i t y by-law provisions; the case of which i s subject t o the following examination.  127 Zoning The present Zoning and Development By-law was enacted i n 1956, superseding the former zoning by-law which originated back i n 1928.  Similar to most North American c i t i e s , Vancouver's  zoning by-laws divides the c i t y i n t o zoning d i s t r i c t s of which presently there are four: One - Family Dwelling, two - Two Family, four - M u l t i p l e Dwelling, seven Commercial, two - I n d u s t r i a l D i s t r i c t s , and three others covering special categories, i n c l u d i n g parking.  Within each d i s t r i o t , the permitted uses are divided, i n t o  two categories, namely, those which are allowed, as of r i g h t , provided the development a p p l i c a t i o n meets a l l the specified regulations concerning height, yards, s i t e area, f l o o r space r a t i o , parking, loading and so on. These are known as outright uses.  The  other category l i s t s the uses which are permitted subject t o p r i o r approval of the Technical Planning Board.  "These are known as  conditional cases being i n the main, borderline cases, which could be allowed provided they do not adversely a f f e c t the neighbourhood" (Fountain, 1970, p.403). For example, a public parking garage i s an outright use i n a (C-4) Medium Density Commercial D i s t r i c t , but i t i s a conditional use i n a (CM-2) High Density Commercial Use D i s t r i c t , and i s not permitted i n the (C-l) Local Commercial D i s t r i c t .  Some of  the conditional uses, such as a gasoline service station i n a (C-l) Local Commercial D i s t r i c t , also require p r i o r consultation with the Town, Planning Commission, before the Technical Planning Board may  128 act. In developing zoning regulations, the C i t y must have due regard to the following considerations: (a) The promotion of health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the p u b l i c ; (b) The prevention of the overcrowding of land, and. the preservation of the amenities p e c u l i a r to any zone; (c) The securing of adequate l i g h t , a i r and access; (d) The value of the land and the nature of i t s present and prospective use and occupancy; (e) The character of each zone, the character of the buildings already erected, and the p e c u l i a r s u i t a b i l i t y of the zone f o r p a r t i c u l a r uses; (f) The conservation of property values; (g) The development of areas to promote greater e f f i c i e n c y and q u a l i t y (Todd, 1970, p.17). In regard, to automobile parking garages, Vancouver's Zoning and Development By-law exerts control over the external s i t e features by regulating the l o c a t i o n of these structures and as w e l l , over the i n t e r n a l s i t e features of s i z e or capacity of the garage as w e l l as e s t a b l i s h i n g the need f o r such a f a c i l i t y . The City's Zoning By-law regulates the external s i t e feature of l o c a t i o n of the parking garage by r e s t r i c t i n g the f a c i l i t y to c e r t a i n d i s t r i c t within the c i t y according to outright or conditional land uses (See Appendix B, Part I ) .  For example, a  parking garage i s permitted i n a (C-2) Suburban Commercial D i s t r i c t , but i t i s not allowed i n a (M-2) restrictions  Heavy I n d u s t r i a l D i s t r i c t .  By-law  on the l o c a t i o n of a parking garage are generally  necessitated by need f o r and compatibility of the structure with  129 the neighbourhood. In addition, Vancouver has established a d i s t r i c t exclusively f o r parking and i t s related f a c i l i t i e s , including the parking garage (See Appendix B, Part I ) .  The City's only (P-l)  Parking D i s t r i c t i s located near Burrard Street, on the edge of the City's downtown area, and i s presently occupied by a Public Parking Area (See Figure 5D. The l o c a t i o n of a parking garage i s also regulated by that part of the Zoning By-law specifying a maximum distance a t which a parking f a c i l i t y may be located away from a p a r t i c u l a r building f o r which such a f a c i l i t y i s required to serve.  In t h i s instance,  Vancouver's Zoning By-law requires that f o r a l l dwellings the parking f a c i l i t y be located on the same s i t e as the building i t s e l f , which i t i s required to serve; and f o r a l l other uses, i t must be located not over 150 f e e t from the structure except i n the case of a project f o r which c o l l e c t i v e parking i s authorized by C i t y Council, i n which case the distance may exceed 150 f e e t (See Appendix B, Part 1). Internal s i t e features of parking garages located i n Vancouver are also subject to regulation by the City's Zoning and Development By-law.  S p e c i f i c a l l y , the i n t e r n a l s i t e feature of  capacity of the garage i s regulated by that part of the By-law requiring a c e r t a i n number of o f f - s t r e e t vehicular spaces f o r any new or s u b s t a n t i a l l y altered development.  For example, the City's  Zoning By-law requires that f o r every new or altered o f f i c e b u i l d i n g  130 or r e t a i l establishment with a gross floor area exceeding 3,000 square feet, three parking spaces plus one parking space for every additional 500 square feet of gross floor area i n excess of 3,000 square feet be provided by the developers.  Similarly, for hotels  and motels i n the City, i t i s required that the developer provide one parking space for each dwelling unit and one parking space for every two sleeping units.  By requiring a minimum amount of space  for parking automobiles, the zoning mechanism not only exerts influence over the capacity of a parking garage, but i t can also determine the need for i t .  For instance, the owner of a 25 unit  motel i s unlikely to build a parking garage to accommodate his customers' automobiles; whereas the developer of a 700 room hotel located i n the downtown area of the City would find i t to his economic advantage to building a parking garage. A unique application of the zoning ordinance requiring the provision of designated amounts of parking space i n connection with new or substantially altered structures i s made i n the highdensity core.of Downtown Vancouver.  The parking report submitted i n  1956 (City of Vancouver, 1956) i n association with a planning report on Downtown Vancouver Development (City of Vancouver, 1956) recommended that a core area bounded by Burrard, Cordova, Main, Pender, Beatty, Robson, Richards, and Nelson Streets be excluded from the zoning regulations requiring a designated amount of offstreet parking spaces for certain buildings (Figure _5).  By such an  exclusion, the Technical Planning Board believed that parking  131 developments would then not interrupt "the continuity of building frontages".  "Instead, parking would occupy the fringe areas i n  situations convenient to the main building concentrations" (City of Vancouver, 1956, p.3)«  The Report added that the provisions of  parking f a c i l i t i e s located on the fringe of the core i s a more economical solution than each new building within the core being required to provide for i t s own needs. The Board's recommendations were adopted and enacted by City Council i n .1957. At present, parking requirements are suspended i n three zoning districts, including the (C-5) Amenity Commercial, (CM-1) General Commercial, and (CM-2) High Density Commercial Districts. In regard to automobile parking garages, these zoning regulations have further restricted the external feature of location and the internal features of height, site area, and floor space area i n two of the exempted districts.  For the (C-5) and (CM-2)  Commercial Districts, the Zoning By-law (City of Vancouver, 1969? p.135  and p.139) states that no parking garage must be located so as  to: (i) Occupy any portion of the f i r s t storey of a building or that part of the basement of a building which projects more than four feet above the building grade established by the City Engineer, to a distance of 50 feet from the building lines fronting or flanking a street, ( i i ) Occupy any portion of a site at street level to a distance of 50 feet from the property lines fronting or flanking a street and extending across the f u l l width and depth  132 of the site fronting or flanking a street. (b) Not more than thirty per cent of the total floor area of a principal building exclusive of the basement, shall be used for the purpose of a parking garage including relevant ramps and access areas. These regulations not only restrict the internal features of a parking garage but more importantly, they basically prohibit the location of such a f a c i l i t y i n these two zones. Currently, only the (CM-2) High Density Commercial District i s found i n Downtown Vancouver (Figure '5)«  The area zoned  for this District i s however large and i n a crucial economic area, that periodically the City has had to rezone certain lots so that a multi-storey parking garage can be b u i l t to serve the area.  Such was  the case i n 1966, when Dominion Construction applied and was granted a development permit for a multi-storey garage on Seymour Street near Georgia Street (Figure 5)» However, i n I967, when applying for another development permit to build a second parking garage, at the northwest corner of Pender and Seymour Streets, Dominion Construction found the application to be opposed by City Officials, including the Town Planning Commission.  In opposing the seven-level, 2*K)-car garage,  a report from City Officials stated': "The applications are correct i n stating that there i s a parking demand i n this area*'.  But the  report added: However, the rezoning of this site to permit a parking structure would run counter to every principle which has been accepted for the core. The most important principle i s that the central  133 part of the downtown area should be kept i n t a c t f o r the development of o f f i c e buildings and stores. The necessary parking to serve these buildings should be located around the edge of the core or permitted to a l i m i t e d extent as a n c i l l a r y to the i n d i v i d u a l buildings themselves ( E l s i e , 1967). Further, C i t y o f f i c i a l s were concerned  that i f t h i s application was  approved, they would be flooded with other requests to b u i l d garages within the r e s t r i c t e d area, thus causing f u r t h e r i n t e r r u p t i o n of the continuity of core development. However, through gathering considerable support f o r i t s a p p l i c a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g the backing of most of the merchants i n the area of the proposed garage, Dominion Construction was able to have C i t y Council rezone the area to (CM-1) General Commercial D i s t r i c t , thereby permitting the building of the multi-storey garage complete with s t r e e t - l e v e l r e t a i l shops. Zoning i n Vancouver has thus been an e f f e c t i v e t o o l f o r regulating the external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of parking garages located i n the downtown section of the C i t y . C i t y Transportation Planning Parking f a c i l i t i e s are viewed by most c i t i e s as being an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the automotive transportation system and Vancouver i s no exception. Recently, future transportation systems f o r Vancouver have been the subject of three major studies (Lea, 1968;  P.B.Q.&D.,  134 1968;  DeLeuw et a l , 1970).  One of these studies, the Vancouver  Transportation Study, i s concerned with a future automotive transportation system f o r the central part of Vancouver including the Downtown Peninsula.  The study involved recommendations  essentially  dealing with a Waterfront Freeway, a general transportation plan of a r t e r i a l highways, streets, and other transportation elements i n Urban Renewal Areas east of the central business d i s t r i c t , and EastWest and North-South Freeways. The report recommended that a Waterfront Freeway be located along Burrard I n l e t , and proceed from the Brockton Interchange a t Coal Harbour to the v i c i n i t y of Abbott Street where i t becomes the North-South Freeway.  Further, i n the v i c i n i t y of  Georgia Street, "the Georgia Interchange provides connections between the North-South Freeway, the East-West Freeway, the Taylor Expressway, and ramps to and from downtown streets (P.B.Q.&D., 1968, p.iii).  The east-west element within the Interchange consisting of  the new Georgia Viaduct, connects d i r e c t l y to the East-West Freeway running through East Vancouver. Important to t h i s t h e s i s , i s the f a c t that the consultant's report has considered parking f a c i l i t i e s as i n t e g r a l parts of the plan f o r transportation systems i n Downtown Vancouver.  The  consultants noted that any "major expansion i n the o f f - s t r e e t parking capacity of downtown Vancouver, by means of garages d i r e c t l y connected by s p e c i a l ramps to and from the freeway system, would permit r e l a t i v e l y large numbers of vehicles to reach downtown without  135 t r a v e l l i n g on the congested grade s t r e e t s " (P.B.Q.&D., 1968, p.106). S p e c i f i c a l l y , the report cited the proposed Project 200 Parking Garage, which i s designed to serve both Project 200 and the neighboring downtown area.  The report recommended that there be  d i r e c t access from the 3»500-car Garage from the Waterfront Freeway v i a a two-lane off-ramp beginning a t the Georgia Interchange and entering the proposed Garage a t i t s Abbott Street end. An eastbound one-way on-ramp from the Garage joins the Waterfront Freeway a t a gore opposite Homer Street. An analysis of vehicular t r a f f i c d i d not however recommend a western entrance to the Garage f o r North Shore t r a f f i c , as i t i s thought that the Garage could be adequately reached from the  Brockton Interchange by downtown streets. In l o c a t i n g the Project 200 Garage i n r e l a t i o n to the  proposed freeway system, planners have also taken i n t o account the i n t e r n a l s i t e features of the Garage. I t i s emphasized that the i n t e r n a l plan, design, and operation of such a garage must be c a r e f u l l y formulated to permit a safe e f f i c i e n t t r a n s i t i o n between freeway and garage d r i v i n g conditions. I t i s e s p e c i a l l y important that such a garage not engender peak-period back-ups of t r a f f i c which could hamper and endanger t r a f f i c on the freeway i t s e l f or on the ramps connecting the freeway with the garage (P.B.Q.&D., 1968, p.25). However, consideration of the external and i n t e r n a l s i t e features of parking garages i n r e l a t i o n to the downtown freeway system  i s only theoretical as the City has yet to decide on i t s future transportation system.  But i n presently locating parking garages  i n terms of the existing street pattern i n Downtown Vancouver, parking consultants must place these f a c i l i t i e s i n relation to the one-way street system which predominates i n the central business d i s t r i c t of the City.  I t would appear that most new parking garages  i n the downtown area are placed so as to catch the inbound vehicles to the CBD on the one-way street system and further, to release these vehicles on to the same arterial streets as well as away from the street intersection. At garages where potential parkers "back-up", a curb lane i s usually available for their automobiles so as not to cause further congestion on the streets of Downtown Vancouver. City Redevelopment Planning Downtown Vancouver i s the focus of a number of redevelopment projects.  Currently, there are three such major  projects under construction i n the downtown section of the City and a fourth under study by City o f f i c i a l s .  The f i r s t of the three  projects, Pacific Centre, bounded by Howe, Robson, Granville, and Dunsmuir Streets, includes three office buildings, a hotel, a department store, a r e t a i l mall of approximately 100 stores, and parking for 1,700  cars (Figure 5) • Total value of the project w i l l  l i k e l y exceed 100 million dollars.  The f i r s t phase of the project,  presently under construction, includes a new Eaton's department  137 store, of 450,000 square feet, the Toronto-Dominion Bank Tower of 30 storeys and 544,000 square feet and a r e t a i l mall of about twenty stores. A second redevelopment project, the massive Project 200, located on Vancouver's waterfront, covers an area of 23-acres from Howe to Abbott Streets (Figure 5)« In general terms the plan provides an urban development i n relation to the Port of Vancouver and the expansion and renewal of the downtown d i s t r i c t for the following accommodation: a) . Howe-to-Seymour: Offices, hotels, cultural and hotel uses. b) . Seymour-to-Cambie: Residential, and recreational. c) . Cambie-to-Abbott: Department store, and retail. The plan i s oriented towards the development of pedestrian circulation f a c i l i t i e s including a series of squares, plazas, malls, promenades, and courtyards, extending from one end of the scheme to the other.  Currently under construction within the  f i r s t phase of the project, Granville Square, i s an office tower rising 403 feet above a pedestrian plaza with 28 floors of office space comprising 350,000 square feet, one ground floor of r e t a i l shops, and two underground levels of parking accommodating 360 automobiles.  When completed the Square w i l l include two office  towers connected by a two level r e t a i l , banking, and restaurant plaza development.  138 The third redevelopment scheme under construction i n Downtown Vancouver i s the Royal Centre.  Situated on the city block  bounded by Burrard, Georgia, Melville, and Thurlow Streets (Figure 5 ^, the project includes an office tower housing the regional :  offices of the Royal Bank of Canada as wall as an additional 450,000 square feet of leasable office space.  Royal Centre w i l l also  include a two-storey r e t a i l mall, a banking pavilion, and twin cinemas. A unique feature of the project i s the inclusion of a 35 storey hotel, a development of Hyatt International. The Vancouver Hyatt House w i l l feature 700 rooms and suites, numerous restaurants and cocktail lounges, as well as a convention centre. A fourth urban redevelopment project, one which i s s t i l l under consideration by City planners, i s located on the north shore of False Creek. Marathon Realty, the real estate arm of Canadian Pacific Railway, has proposed a residential-commercialrecreational complex for i t s 120 acres that l i e between Granville and Cambie Bridges.  The overall plan encompasses a cost of over  200 million dollars and accommodation for 14,000 people within 9,000 l i v i n g units i n apartments and townhouses and 800 units for families with children. Further, the development w i l l contain an elementary school, a community centre, 25 acres of open space for recreational activities, a 500 boat marina, and 10,000 covered parking spaces. The complex w i l l also have i t s own r e t a i l shopping area. In regard to parking, these projects essentially mean that there w i l l be a greater demand for parking space within their  139 own boundaries as w e l l as i n downtown areas as a whole.  An economic  study of downtown Vancouver, completed i n 1969, estimated that by 1975, developed space requirements f o r parking would be 13,184,200 square f e e t , a 1.5 per cent increase over developed space i n 1969» and that by 1985» developed demand would be 15,300,300 square f e e t (Menzies, 1970, p.188).  With l i m i t e d land area and high development  costs as w e l l as r e s t r i c t i v e zoning practices increases i n parking space i n the central core of the downtown section of the c i t y i s almost p r o h i b i t i v e .  However, with the redesign of space within the  core by redevelopment projects, including P a c i f i c Centre, Project 200, and Royal Centre, opportunities are provided to develop f u r t h e r parking f a c i l i t i e s i n t h i s area. The developers of these projects have however recognized these opportunities, and have made parking an i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e i r developments.  For example, the Project 200 redevelopment scheme  c a l l s f o r the provision of 7,000 parking s t a l l s i n c l u s i v e of an e x i s t i n g 800 spaces i n Woodward's Department Store Parkade.  The  developers assert that the proposed 7,000 spaces represent about 70 percent of the o v e r a l l demand based on Downtown parking studies by the C i t y Engineer and 10 percent above the supply that the balance of the downtown has been providing to meet the o v e r a l l demand ( C i t y of Vancouver, 1966).  Further, i n planning f o r and l o c a t i n g of these  spaces, the developers have considered the relationship of t h e i r parking f a c i l i t i e s , underground garages, with the present and proposed, downtown automotive transportation system (P.B.Q.&D., 1968;  140 Menzies, 1970).  Other considerations by the developers have been  given to the i n t e r n a l features of t h e i r garages, including design and operation as w e l l as to the aesthetics of Project 200. The P a c i f i c Centre and Royal Centre redevelopment projects have also provided parking space within an underground garage f o r aesthetic purposes and i n accordance to zoning by-law r e s t r i c t i o n s necessary to meet 60 per cent of the o v e r a l l demand. Redevelopment projects have thus provided opportunities to l o c a t e parking garages within the downtown section of the C i t y and as a consequence, to help meet the demand f o r parking space i n Downtown Vancouver. C i t y Administrative and F i n a n c i a l Practices The p r o v i s i o n of parking f a c i l i t i e s i n Downtown Vancouver has been l a r g e l y the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of p r i v a t e enterprise. Companies such as Imperial Parking, Western Auto Park, and Aide Auto Parks are j u s t a few of the numerous companies with parking f a c i l i t i e s i n the downtown section of the C i t y .  Needless to say,  t h e i r f a c i l i t i e s are financed by p r i v a t e c a p i t a l . In terms of c i v i c government a c t i v i t y i n parking, Vancouver has witnessed two such developments.  The f i r s t i s the  Vancouver Parking Commission, established by By-law 3124 i n 1949, to manage and improve parking areas assigned to i t by C i t y Council, to charge and c o l l e c t fees f o r these areas, to conduct investigations and to make analyses of e x i s t i n g parking f a c i l i t i e s and needs, t o  141 acquire and to lease property on behalf of the c i t y and to conduct l e s s important a c t i v i t i e s (deWolf, 1965, pp.15-19). By-law 3124 provided that the Chairman of the Commission be elected from i t s members, but he always has been appointed by the M&for from C i t y Council. The second development i n C i t y government a c t i v i t i e s i n the parking f i e l d embodies a most i n t e r e s t i n g and unique administrative and f i n a n c i a l approach to providing parking f a c i l i t i e s i n Vancouver.  This approach i s embodied i n the Downtown Parking  Corporation (D.P.C.), a quasi-public operation formed by downtown business i n t e r e s t s twenty-three years ago. The administrative and f i n a n c i a l h i s t o r y of the D.P.C. i s worth reviewing as i t encompasses much of the h i s t o r i c a l development of parking f a c i l i t y provision i n Downtown Vancouver. A f t e r World War I I , many downtown property owners and businessmen found themselves confronted by the problem of r e t a i l decentralization.  In order to s t a b i l i z e t h e i r p o s i t i o n and to even  further t h e i r sales, these gentlemen formed the Downtown Business Association.  The main object of t h i s body was "to promote the  economic, commercial, and s o c i a l welfare of the C i t y of Vancouver as effected by the central business d i s t r i c t thereof; to make studies of and advance any project, plan, or improvement designed to the benefit of the C i t y as a whole; and the said d i s t r i c t i n p a r t i c u l a r " (As quoted by deWolf, 1951, p . l ) . One of the immediate projects appeared to be f i n d i n g a solution to the parking problem i n the downtown area.  In l a t e  142 1946, the Association successfully prevailed upon City Council to make funds available for a study of downtown parking needs.  The  study began i n 1947. Concurrently, a gradoise scheme to build an underground garage near Granville and Hastings Street failed, as did a much less pretentious plan for a surface l o t on the block now occupied by the main Post Office.  Further, with increasing availability and use of  automobiles, curb space and limited parking f a c i l i t i e s were inadequate to handle these motor vehicles i n the downtown area. The principle conclusion of the report (City of Vancouver, 1948) was that during the five years ending December 31, 1952, the City would require an additional 2,600 off-street parking berths and that these parking areas should be developed i n i t i a l l y as "self-parking" lots i n which fees would be collected by attendants. The report further recommended that the property for these parking areas be acquired by means of issuance of municipal debentures. In reality, a local improvement plebescite was placed before downtown property owners which would allow the City to borrow one million dollars on local improvement debentures to be used for the purchase of land for parking purposes.  As an enticement to vote  for the plebescite, the ratepayers were informed that, i f the plebescite passed, after the land had been purchased, i t would be leased to a non-profit private corporation for operation and "that a l l profits over and above operating expenses would be turned back to the City as an additional rent, as well as to defray i n part the  143 annual levy of $72,500 necessary to service the one million dollars of debentures authorized" (deWolf, 1951» p. 2).  Further, the City was  to appoint a Parking Commission which would be charged with selecting property, setting rates, and generally supervising the parking situation i n Vancouver. The plebescite passed i n the general municipal elections of 1948; and soon after the Downtown Parking Corporation was formed i n accord with the plebescite.  The Company had however presumed  that when lots were purchased they would be leased to i t automatically, but the then Chairman of the Parking Commission held that for various reasons tenders should be called. In the latter part of 1949 and i n the early months of .1950, tenders for leasing and operating a l l of the property purchased with by-law funds were submitted to the Parking Commission by the D.P.C. as well as by numerous companies and individuals (The Vancouver Sun. 1949).  The tender submitted by the Company was  successful; and the f i r s t lease, dated July 12, 1950, covered: Lot 1: 535 Hornby Street Lot 2s Corner Cambie and Pender Streets. Lot 3: 535 Richards Street. The period of the lease was set at 10 years, to August 1, I960, subject to cancellation of the term of any one or a l l of the parcels on one year's notice with the City paying the unamortized portion of the monies expended on improvements upon cancellation. The rent was to be 1$ of the cost of acquiring the land plus a l l taxes which would be assessed against the lands i f privately  144  owned, and i n addition a l l net profits arising from the operation. Such profits the City was to place i n a special account which would be used from time to time to defray the special levy (deWolf, 1965, p.24). The lease further stated that the lots should be devoted solely to afford transient parking accommodation on a short term basis and that should the demand for transient parking permit and with the permission of the Parking Commission, the D.P.C. could grant contract parking. The rates for the D.P.C. lots were set an ten cents for the f i r s t hour, fifteen cents for the second hour, and twenty-five cents per hour thereafter for transients, and prevailing rates for contract parkers.  These rates were increased in 1969 for the f i r s t  time since the Company's inception. As new lots were acquired, the lease was changed and the period of rental extended. The final lease was made on January 14, 1958, and i t s expiry date set for December 31> 1982, when the City agreed to the request of the Corporation that some evidence of indebtedness for levies paid be furnished in the form of Tax Refund Notes, which represent profit shares, but would not be paid until a l l other obligations are met including future expansion.  The lease further  provided for the continuation of the payment of the $72,800 annual levy to the City by the downtown property owners until  I969.  Property owners have been however relieved of paying this levy for the years  1962,  1963,  and  I967  to  1969,  as -the Corporation has paid  145 i t for them from surplus funds. The financing of the Downtown Parking Corporation has proven somewhat interesting. From 1948 to 1953, the Corporation, except for indirect funds made available through the 1948 by-law, relied on private capital. $30,000  Sources of capital have included a  loan from P.A. Woodward to clean up costs of improving Lot  One and Lot Two, a $75*000 loan from the Royal Bank of Canada, and a $15,000 loan from Rupert*s Land Trading Company (Hudson*s Bay Company) to lease and improve Lot Five at the corner of Georgia and Richards Streets. The Corporation used a repurchasing scheme to finance the construction of a garage, its first permanent structure, at the comer of Homer and Pender Streets. The deal was made with Dominion Construction Company. The need for additional parking in the Lot Five Area led to the Downtown Parking Corporation becoming a public company. In order to provide the additional parking for this area, the Company was urged to construct a multi-level garage on their site. To finance the proposed garage, the Corporation found i t necessary to obtain public financing, and in order to do so, the DPC became a public company. The capital structure of the public company gave ninety per cent of the shares a l l the beneficial interest, while the remaining ten per cent had no beneficial interest but maintained management right.  The ninety per cent "beneficial" shares were  offered to and accepted by the City, while the ten per cent management  146 shares were issued to the Downtown Business Association as trustee for the property owners subject to the parking levy (de Wolf, 1965, p.23). Concurrently, the financing of the proposed three level, 280-car garage (Western Business and Industry. 1954) was achieved through the sale of 15-year, six per cent sinking fund debentures due July 15, 1968.  The proceeds of this financing were also used to  liquidate the bank loan and other l i a b i l i t i e s .  Through a heavy  sinking fund and good management, the Company was able to retire these debentures i n f u l l i n July 1964. Since 1950,  the Downtown Parking Corporation has  serviced over seventeen million automobiles (Ross, 1970)  and  presently hold four parking lots and five Garages, including a s t a l l parking garage on the site of Lot Two.  1,016  The value of the  Corporation properties and f a c i l i t i e s now totals some six million dollars, to which the City has clear t i t l e . The operation of the Downtown Parking Corporation has however not been without criticism from private parking operators. Much of this criticism has centered on the fact that by charging low parking rates, the Corporation discourages further development of parking f a c i l i t i e s by private enterprise i n the downtown area of the City who must charge higher rates i f i t i s to successfully remain i n business (The Vancouver Sun. March 5, 1966;  Elsie, 1967). In order  to remedy the situation, private operators have suggested that the "D.P.C. should not be allowed to further expand or even ;to enlarge  147 i t s existing f a c i l i t i e s " , and to have the management of a l l i t s lots put out to public tender (Elsie, 1967). Alternatively, some City o f f i c i a l s have suggested that the Corporation should be taken over by a public parking authority (de Wolf, 1965;  Elsie, 1967;  Peloquin,  1967). The latter alternative has been the subject of much study during the mid-1960 s (See, for example, de Wolf, 1965). ,  The  conclusions of these studies were favorable to the development of a parking authority for Vancouver.  Briefly, one of these studies  concluded that the authority should, be free of city government influence and should operate on a budget derived from a parking occupancy tax and that a parking meter fund, which would be placed under the control of the authority, would be used for capital purposes either i n direct payments or as security for capital borrowing (de Wolf, 1965). However, despite this, conceivable proposal, the operation of a parking authority has not gone beyond the proposal stage.  Perhaps one of the reasons for this situation  i s that private enterprise has strongly lobbied against such an authority. The administrative and financial approach to parking i n Vancouver has thus included private enterprise operations as well as a quasi-public operation.  Through their approaches to parking, each  of these operations have indirectly influenced the spatial external and internal features of the f a c i l i t i e s , including parking garages, that they have provided, for the City.  148 City Building By-law In Chapter IV, that part of Vancouver's Building By-law regulating the installation of gasoline dispensing units and service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages was discussed. The City's Building By-law however regulates not only these internal site features, but i t also encompasses regulations which determine a l l internal site features of parking structures (See Appendix B, Part II). These regulations are prescribed for each type of garage. For most garages, including the storage garage and the repair garage, City building regulations deal with construction, height and areas, separation requirements, heat and light, sanitary f a c i l i t i e s , and ventilation.  Open-air parking garages have however been considered  separately i n the Building By-law. Regulations concerning this type of garage include those relating to other types of garages such as construction, height and areas, separation requirements including occupancy separation, heat and light, sanitation, and ventilation, as well as some requirements unique to this type of structure, for example, means of egress, shafts and opening, and f i r e extinguishing equipment (See Appendix B, Part I I ) . The power to enforce these regulations has been delegated by City Council to the City Building Inspector. Enforcement by this authority i s i n compliance to the main purpose of City activity, that of the promotion and protection of the public health, welfare, and safety.  149 1.3-3. By-law Enforcement. The Building Inspector shall inspect or cause to be inspected a l l buildings during the course of construction and otherwise, whenever i t shall be necessary or advisable for the safety or protection against f i r e of persons or property or the health of the occupants or of other persons or to ensure that the provisions of this By-law are obeyed or whenever i t i s otherwise advisable i n the opinion of the Building Inspector, and, for the purpose of making such inspections, the Building Inspector and anyone authorized by him amy enter any premises at any reasonable time (City of Vancouver Building By-law 4193, 1967, p.8). Should a particular structure not conform to building standards for the City, the owners are liable to penalties, such as monetary fines and/or prohibition of entry. The quality of that part of Vancouver's Building By-law regulating the internal features of parking garages appears to be upto-date, providing for available modern building techniques and materials.  However, i n some areas, specifically that concerning the  inside location of gasoline dispensing units, Vancouver's building regulations i n regard to garages are s t i l l detrimentally conservative particularly i n view of conclusive results of tests dealing with the potential explosion and f i r e hazard of inside gasoline dispensers as well as existing examples and recommended national and f i r e codes both for Canada and, the United States, Summary Parking i s essential l y a component of the automotive transportation system serving Downtown Vancouver; but i t i s a  150  component largely supplied by the private sector rather than by the public sector with the exception of the Downtown Parking  Corporation.  With increasing development of the downtown section of the City i n the form of redevelopment projects such as Pacific Centre, Project 200, and. Royal Centre, there w i l l be, concurrently, an increased demand, for parking f a c i l i t i e s i n the central business d i s t r i c t . Because of the high cost of land and a continuing excess demand, the supply of parking for Downtown Vancouver w i l l be furnished by the construction of more multi-storey parking garages, both above and below ground. The external and internal site features of these garages w i l l be regulated by the City's Zoning By-law and the City's Building By-law i n addition to being influenced by the City's consideration for a transportation system as well as for further redevelopment projects.  Site features of these structures w i l l be further  influenced by the City's approach to the administrative and financial aspects of parking f a c i l i t y provision.  Moreover, the City's actions  i n regard, to automobile parking garages reflect i t s concern for i t s primary responsibility, that of protecting and promoting the public health, welfare, and safety.  151 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  Review of the Study The introductory chapter of the study was largely devoted to fundamental problems associated with increased automobile ownership and urban area usage, and intensified c i t y street congestion, and their effects upon the city and i t s functions. One of these problems i s that of parking and i t s provision by certain types of f a c i l i t i e s , including the parking garage. An outline of some of the spatial effects of city by-law provisions and planning decisions upon external and internal site features of parking garages i s then attempted.  City regulation of parking garages i s  studied i n order to outline some of the problems encountered by urban governments i n attempting to regulate the external and internal site features of this type of off-street parking f a c i l i t y ; problems which can be stated as physical (location, size, design, etc.), p o l i t i c a l (private versus public interests), administrative, and legal or formulative. In the following chapter, the elements of c i t y structure are examined to bring c i t y regulation and types of parking garages into an urban geographic focus.  Urban site and situation, form and  structure, and site type, quality, and network were outlined to provide a better understanding of the effects of city planning  152 decisions and by-law provisions upon automobile-oriented  retailing  i n the urban environment. A spatial typology of parking garages i s presented, to place this type of parking f a c i l i t y within a geographic focus.  The typology revealed that there are five primary types of  automobile parking garages: (a) downtown, (b) main street, (c) residental d i s t r i c t , (d) shopping center, and (e) specialized functional area. The analysis of existing city regulatory methods of automobile parking garages i n the third chapter revealed three significant observations.  The f i r s t was that cities regulate the  external site features of parking garages through their zoning bylaw provisions and transportation and redevelopment or renewal planning decisions; the second was that internal site features including size, layout, and construction were subjected, to regulation by again cities' zoning by-law provisions and transportation and redevelopment or renewal planning decisions as well as c i t i e s ' building by-law provisions; and the third was that both the external and internal site features were indirectly regulated through cities* approaches to the administrative and financial aspects of their parking program.  The regulations affecting the external and  internal site features of automobile parking garages and the enforcement of these regulations clearly reflected cities* concern for the protection and the promotion of the public health, welfare and safety. The analysis of the regulations concerning the sale of  153 gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages focuses on the central problem of the study i n that despite the formulation of similar goals by actors at the municipal level and the industrial level, there often results a conflict between these levels which has been created by the adoption of dissimilar internal policies or goals by city decisionmakers.  Sections of National building and f i r e codes for Canada and.  the United States and building by-laws for cities i n western Canada and i n the western United States with regard to the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages are analysed.  The analysis  revealed that there exists differences between the two countries* national codes as well as differences between the building by-laws for cities i n Canada and, those for cities i n the United States, i n that American codes and by-laws are generally much more permissive than their Canadian counterparts i n matters concerning gasoline dispensing and service and repair work inside parking garages. A more specific examination was made of relevant sections of the Building By-law of the City of Vancouver, revealing that the City maintains quite restrictive regulations i n regard to "the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages.  The analysis further disclosed  that these regulations created a contentious issue between the petroleum industry and City o f f i c i a l s , especially i n view of the fact that the City's zoning by-law prohibits the location of  154 gasoline service stations i n area where parking garages are prominent. However, the goals of both the private enterprise level and the City government level appear to have been set according to the individuals* concerns, needs, and problems, thus i n some instances, leading to conflicts between and within each level. The City of Vancouver was again used as a case study to show clearly the spatial effects of city regulatory methods, including the zoning by-laws, transportation and redevelopment planning, administrative and financial practices, and, building bylaws, upon automobile parking garages located i n the downtown area of the City.  The investigation revealed that although the city was  similar to other cities i n i t s regulation of the external and internal site features of parking garages, i t was a unique application of that part of the dty*s Zoning By-law requiring a specific number of parking spaces for certain types of occupancies to the core area of Downtown Vancouver; the second was that of the City's participation i n the parking f i e l d through the Downtown Parking Corporation; and the third was that i n most areas of i t s control, Vancouver's Building By-law was safely progressive, but i n matters concerning  the  installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages i t was detrimentally conservative.  Observations reveal that Vancouver*s regulations  affecting automobile parking garages were reflective of the City*s concern for the protection and the promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety.  155 Appraisal of the Hypotheses Hypothesis Is To explain the fact that the external and internal site features of automobile parking garages are not determined randomly but rather, intentionally, i t was hypothesized for this study that: The external and internal spatial arrangements of automobile parking garages are effectively regulated by city by-law provisions and city planning decisions. To be verified, the following observations i n the study were noted: The general analysis of municipal regulations concerning automobile parking garages clearly demonstrates the effects of these controls upon the external and internal site features of these facilities.  Moreover, as seen by the case study of Vancouver,  British Columbia, i t i s the intent of city legislation as reflected i n the City's zoning, building, and parking by-law provisions and c i t y transportation and redevelopment planning decisions, that the external and internal spatial arrangements of automobile parking garages be regulated i n agreement with the city's primary responsibility, that of the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety. Based on these observations, i t i s thus f e l t that the f i r s t hypothesis i s reasonable and should be supported. However, effective control of external and internal site features of parking garages cannot be guaranteed by city regulation.  There must be  156 strong, rational, and consistent enforcement as well.  Subject to the  limitations of the investigation i t s e l f , this hypothesis i s considered valid, and rational regulation of site and situation features of parking garages should be encouraged, i n urban areas. Hypothesis 11: The regulation or restriction of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages i s greatly dependent on the degree to which the city considers them to be dangerous to the public health, welfare, and safety.  Thus i t was hypothesized that:  The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages are both a desirable and. a safe use of space within these structures. To be verified, the following observations i n the study were noted: The analysis of selected Canadian and American national building and f i r e codes and western American cities and western Canadian cities* building by-laws demonstrate that -there exists differences i n their respective regulations concerning the sale of gasoline and. o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside types of automobile parking garages.  However, as  evident i n the national building and f i r e codes for the United States and. more recently, i n those for Canada, and i n building bylaws for selected western American cities and for one western  15? Canadian city, i t i s the intent of these codes and by-laws to permit the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside generally a l l types of parking garages. Their actions are based on the belief, which i s supported by existing evidence, that such f a c i l i t i e s are a safe use of space within these structures. Building ordinances oriented to the above purposes, for certain western Canadian cities are very restrictive.  This was  observed i n the cities of Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Vancouver, and Victoria.  These ordinances are too restrictive i n view of recent  changes i n Canada's National Building Code (1970), to which these cities generally subscribe, availability of safe modern structural designs and materials for parking garages, conclusive results of tests i n regard to the explosion hazard created, by the dispensing of gasoline inside buildings, and evidence of the safeness of these f a c i l i t i e s inside existing parking garages. In cities such as Vancouver where high land and development costs and c i t y zoning by-laws prohibit the further location of gasoline service stations i n certain areas of the c i t y where parking garages are prominent, i n particular the downtown d i s t r i c t , the use of space within these garages to r e t a i l gasoline and o i l products and. service and repair automobiles i s desirable. I t i s a desirable use of space i n that i t provides the petroleum industry with an economically viable r e t a i l outlet and the means for meeting the demand for automobile-oriented retailing f a c i l i t i e s  158 i n the downtown area of a city, as well as a source of customer attraction.  The installation of such features inside garages also  provides a source of additional income to the parking garage operator and a source of supply for or convenience to the customer. Subject to the limitations of the analysis i t s e l f , the second hypothesis i s considered valid, and rational regulation these internal site features of automobile parking garages should be encouraged i n concerned urban areas. Hypothesis 111: The suggested explanation of the central problem of the study, as put forth by the third hypothesis, i s that: The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages leads to a conflict between actors at the industrial and municipal levels that can only be resolved by the adoption of similar planning goals by city deci s i on-makers. To be verified, the following observations were noted: An analysis of the situation i n Vancouver demonstrated that there exists a conflict between actors at the industrial level and the municipal level over by-laws regulating the sale of gasoline and o i l products and. provision of service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages.  The petroleum industry recognizes  the fact that i n this major urban center, a solitary gasoline service station i s an uneconomic use of downtown land because of high land costs and limited space i n this area of the city.  However,  159 the industry realizes that there exists a demand i n the downtown d i s t r i c t of Vancouver for the products and the services offered by i t s r e t a i l outlets, and thus desires to meet this demand; and the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages i s considered by the industry as the best way of doing so. Ordinances concerning the above purposes have led to private and public differences.  The City's Zoning and Development  By-law prohibits the further location of gasoline service stations i n the downtown section of Vancouver, representing such outlets as an uneconomic and as well, an unattractive use of downtown land. The City's Building By-law, on the other hand, prohibits the inside location of gasoline pumps and restricts the inside location of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s i n parking garages. The City bases this prohibition and restriction on the fact that the City Fire Marshall with support of the City Building Inspector, deems such locations as being ultra vires to their main responsibility, that of the protection of the public health, welfare, and safety. The result of these By-law provisions i s that the goals of city policy have effectively regulated against the further location of automobile-oriented retailing f a c i l i t i e s concerning the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the service and repair of automobiles i n Downtown Vancouver i n conflict with the goals set forth by the petroleum industry.  The resultant conflict between  the industrial level and the municipal level has arisen because city  160 o f f i c i a l s can offer to the petroleum industry no viable alternative location for their r e t a i l outlets i n the downtown area of the city as a result of the goals adopted i n the City Building By-law concerning the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages. The resolution of this conflict between the industrial level and the municipal level can only be resolved when a change i s instituted i n either the Building By-law or the Zoning By-law, but preferably the latter, so as to offer to the petroleum industry, an alternative r e t a i l outlet i n the downtown section of Vancouver.  I t i s thus f e l t  that the third, hypothesis i s reasonable; and that subject to the limitations of the study i t s e l f , the hypothesis considered valid. Recommendati ons In l i g h t of the findings of the study i t i s presumed that a course of action for formulating rational city legislation concerning parking and i t s spatial manifestations i s possible, to be used for the provision of effective and perhaps, an harmonious urban environment.  The achievement of regulation should be based  on the collabration of the powers of both the local municipal level and the private enterprise level to achieve meaningful results. Although the goals of both levels often lead to diverse and conflicting regulations, the ultimate goal should be controlling the direction of the developing urban environment by means of rational city regulation.  To develop and protect an harmonious  161 urban area, dialogue must be generated between public and private sectors.  The development of an area of intercourse between these  sectors can often provide the municipal planner and invariably, the municipal decision-maker with the expertise possessed by private enterprise and needed i n order for them to attain their goals through enacting rational by-laws. In terms of the study, an area of dialogue should, be provided for c i t y o f f i c i a l s and private enterprise i n regard to formulating city legislation concerning parking and the external and internal site features of the f a c i l i t i e s provided for this activity.  The roles of the public and private levels are expressed  below to place the previously observed conflicts with regard to parking and parking f a c i l i t y legislation i n their proper context. Local Municipal Level: Throughout the study, the underlying element has been the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety.  The problem of municipal legislation concerning parking  and i t s f a c i l i t i e s , or for that matter, any municipal function and form, must be considered i n l i g h t of the health, welfare, and safety of the people.  In considering these elements, the municipality  must adopt a clearly stated and above-all, rational or r e a l i s t i c policy or goal so that these elements can be incorporated i n the development of a better environment.  The development of a better  environment must be for a l l of the populace, including private  162 enterprise. In order to attain i t s goals the municipal level must enact by-laws which are consistent with these goals and which are easily and consistently interpreted and easily and intelligently controlled by designated municipal o f f i c i a l s .  Diverse interpretation  or misinterpretation of municipal by-laws can only lead: to the creation of conflicts between the public and private levels, which i n turn leads to an inharmonious and unattractive urban environment. With regard to the study, municipal planners and decision-makers must adopt clearly enunciated policies or goals i n regard to the development and regulation of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s , including the parking garage. Municipal by-laws concerning the external and internal site features of these f a c i l i t i e s must thus be rational and be consistently and easily interpreted by municipal agencies.  Should there exist a by-law, as i n the case  of Vancouver's Building By-law regulating the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of repair and service f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages, which i s irrational or inconsistent with the needs of a l l or any one of the segments of the populace or with the provision of a more harmonious urban environment which incorporates the element of the protection and promotion of public health, welfare, and safety, then the municipal government should review this by-law and institute the necessary changes i n the by-law.  163 Private Enterprise Level: Generally, private enterprise i s willing to participate i n a program of intercourse with municipal government. Businessmen have realized that the success of this course of action often depends on the amount of time, effort, and money that they invest into i t . Private enterprise has further realized that often a dialogue between private and, public levels can only be generated through i t s initiative.  Initiation can be through a Board of Trade, a professional  group or some community organization. Once the program i s under way, private enterprise can contribute by participating through providing i t s knowledge and criticism of present or proposed municipal government policies. Through such participation, the specific policies or goals of the municipality can be i n part formulated by those who would be affected by them. In evaluating the municipal government's policy or goal, private enterprise must however think beyond i t s own specific needs and evaluate i n terms of the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety.  For private enterprise to  think i n these broad terms, would, be to take a step closer to providing a better environment for a l l elements of the populace. In regard to the study, private enterprise has much to offer to the municipality with regard to aiding the municipal government i n formulating i t s policies and goals concerning parking  164 and i t s provisionary f a c i l i t i e s .  Through i t s expertise i n the  parking f i e l d , private enterprise can actively participate i n the formulation of rational and. consistent municipal by-laws regulating the external and internal site features of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s , including the parking garage.  Dialogue between the  local municipal level and the private enterprise level i s thus the key to opening the door to the development and regulation of proper and successful parking f a c i l i t i e s for the municipality; f a c i l i t i e s which ultimately contribute to a better environment for a l l segments of the populace. Recommendations for Further Study The investigation revealed that further study and research i s needed i n the fields of c i t y regulation and i t s effects upon the urban r e t a i l environment, and parking. City planning decisions and city by-law provisions have been proved to determine the external and internal site features of automobile parking garages. More studies should be continued  along  these lines, only with a broadening of the research focus so as to examine the effects, i f any, of c i t y legislation upon other retailing activities i n the urban environment as well as upon the elements of site type, quality, and. network. Secondly, city regulation of parking garages have proven to be highly diverse and i n some instances, inconsistent and conflicting, thus lending support to the notion that cities are  165 sometimes unclear of what policies or goals should be set and how these policies or goals should be attained. Further study should be made along the lines of investigating the conflicting policies or goals of city governments and the effects of such policies or goals upon the urban r e t a i l environment. Lastly, although much of the subject has been covered here and elsewhere, there always exists numerous areas of research i n the subject of parking. For the geographer especially, the areas available for investigation include location-oriented parking f e a s i b i l i t y studies, similarly-oriented parking demand studies, and studies of the spatial effects of parking f a c i l i t i e s for cities i n general and for particular c i t i e s .  166 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Alderson, W. & Shapiro, S.J. Towards a theory of r e t a i l competition. In Cox, Ro et a l (Eds.), Theory i n marketing. Homewood 111.: Richard D. Irwin, 1964. American Automobile Association. Parking manual. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1946. Applebaum, W. Factors which determine store rental. In Applebaum, W. et a l (Eds.), Guide to store location research. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1968a. Applebaum, W. Store characteristics and operating performance. In Applebaum et a l (Eds.), Guide. 1968b. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Guideposts to store location strategy. In Applebaum, W. et a l (Eds.), Guide. 1968a. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Major considerations i n evaluating a store site. In Applebaum, W. et a l (Eds.), Guide. 1968b. Automotive Safety Foundation. Parking: how i t i s financed. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1952. Automotive Safety Foundation. What parking means to business. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1955. Baker, G. & Funaro, B. Shopping centers. New York: Reinhold, 1951. Baker, G. & Funaro, B. Parking. New York: Reinhold, 1958. Berry, B.J.L. Commercial structure and commercial blight. Chicago: The University of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 85, 1963. Berry, B.J.L. Geography of market centers and r e t a i l distribution. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.s Prentice-Hall, 1967. Berry, B.J.L. & Horton, F.E. (Eds). Geographic perspectives on urban systems. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.s Prentice-Hall, 1970. Blair, G.S. American local government. New York: Harper & Row, 1964. Broek, J.O.M. Geography: i t s scope and s p i r i t . Columbus: Charles E. Merrill, V)ZT.  167 Brown, P.L. & Davidson, W.R. Retailing; principles and practices. New York: The Ronald Press, 1953. Buchanan, C. Traffic i n towns. London: Her Majesty*^ Stationery Office, 19631 Building Officials Conference of America. The BOCA basic building code. Chicago: Author, 1969. Burrage, R.H. & Mogren, E.G. Parking. Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1957. Canoyer, H.G. Selecting a store location. Washington, D.C: United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce (Economic Series No. 56), 1946. Christaller, W. Die zentralen orte i n Suddeutschland. Jena; Fisher, 1933. Translated by C. Baskin, The central places of southern Germany. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.s Prentice-Hall, 1966. Glaus, R.J. Spatial dynamics of gasoline service stations. Vancouver: Tantalus Research, 1969. Glaus, R.J. & Hardwick, W.G. (Eds). The dialogue between municipal and industrial decision-makers: site selection, development and operation of automobile oriented retailing. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, Department of Geography, 1970. daus, R.J. & Hardwick, W.G. The mobile consumer. Toronto: CollierMacMillan, 1971. Claus, R.J. & Rothwell, D.C. Gasoline retailing. Vancouver: Tantalus Research, 1970. Cleveland, D. E. (Ed). Manual of t r a f f i c engineering studies.(3rd, ed.) Washington, D.C: Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1964. Dickensen, R.E. The scope and status of urban geography: an assessment. In Mayer, H.M. & Kohn, C.F. (Eds.), Readings i n urban geography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959. Duncan, D.J. & Phillips, C.F. Retailing: principles and methods. Homewood, H I : Richard D. Irwin, 1963. Fordham, J.B. Parking: Legal, financial, administrative. Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1956. Fountain, G.F. Zoning administration i n Vancouver. In Putnam, R.G. et a l (Eds.), A geography of urban places. Toronto: Methuen, 1970.  168 Gall ion, A.B. & Eisner, S. The urban pattern. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, 1963. Garner, B.J. The internal structure of retail nucleations. Evanston: Northwestern University Studies i n Geography No. 12, I966. Garrison, W.L. et a l . Studies of highway development and geographic change. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1959* Goodall, L.E. The American metropolis. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill,  1968.  Goodman, W.I, & Freund, E.C. (Eds). Principles and practices of urban planning. Washington, D.C.: International City Managers* Association, 1968. Gottesman, W. Parking f e a s i b i l i t y . In Alexander, L.A. & Bliss, J.J. (Eds,), Downtown action on T-P-T: Traffic-parking-transit. New York: National Retail Merchants Association, 1965. Gruen, V. The heart of our c i t i e s . New York: Simon and Schuster,  1964,  Hackman, L. & Martin, N.D. The parking industry: private enterprise for the public good. Washington, D.C.: National Parking Association,  196?.  Horwood, E.M. & Boyce, R.R. Studies of the central business d i s t r i c t and urban freeway development. Seattle: University of Washington,  1959.  Hunnicutt, J.M. Parking conceptions and misconceptions. In Alexander, L.A, & Bliss, J.J. (Eds.), Downtown action. 1965. Kelley, E.J. Shopping Centres. Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1956. Klose, D, Metropolitan parking structures. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1965. Kornblau, C. & Baker, G.L. A guide to evaluating competition. In Applebaum, W. et a l (Eds,), Guide. 1968. Le Craw, C.S,,& Smith W.S. Parking l o t operation. Saugatuck, Conn,: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1948. Leigh, R. Specialty-retailing : a geographical analysis. Vancouver: Tantalus Research, 1965. Lowry, I.S. Seven models of urban development: a structural comparison. In Berry, B.J.L. & Horton, F.E. (Eds.), Geographic perspectives.  1970.  169  Lynch, K. Site planning. Cambridge, Mass.; The M.I.T. Press, 1962. McCandless, C.A. Urban government and p o l i t i c s . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.  McKeever, J.R. Business parks. Washington, D.C; Institute, 1970.  The Urban Land  Mitchell, R.B. & Rapkin, C. Urban t r a f f i c ; a function of land use. New York; Columbia University Press, 1954. Mogren, E.G. Parking authorities. Saugatuck, Conn.; The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1953. Mogren, E.G. & Smith, W.S. Zoning and t r a f f i c . Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1952. Murphy, R.E. The American City. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. National Fire Protection Association. Occupancy standards and process hazards. Vol. 9 . National f i r e code. Boston: Author, 1 9 6 9 . Nelson, R.L. The selection of r e t a i l locations. New York: F.W. Dodge, 1958.  Nelson, R.L. & Aschman, F.T. Real estate and city planning. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1957. Park, R.E. et a l . The city. Chicago; The University of Chicago Press, 1925.  Ratcliff, R. U. Urban land economics. New York; McGraw-Hill, 1949. Ratcliff, R.U. The dynamics of efficiency i n the locational distribution of urban activities. In Mayer, H.M. & Kohn, C.F. (eds.), Readings. 1959. Ricker, E.R. The t r a f f i c design of parking garages.(2nd ed.) Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation f o r Highway Traffic Control, 1957. Sanderson, R.L. Codes and code administration: an introduction to the building regulations i n the United States. Chicago: The Building Officials Conference of America, 1969. Simmons, J.W. The changing pattern of r e t a i l location. Chicago: The University of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 92,  1964.  Simmons, J.W„ Toronto's changing r e t a i l complex. Chicago: The University of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 1 0 4 , 1966. Smailes, A.E. The geography of towns. London: Hutchinson University Library, 1 9 6 6 .  170 Smith, W.S. & Associates. Future highways and urban growth. New Havenj Author, 1961. Smith, W.S. & Associates. Parking i n the city center. New Havens Author, 1965. Todd, E.C.E, Legal aspects of site selection, development and operation of automobile oriented business. In Glaus, R.J. & Hardwick, W.G. (Eds.), Dialogue. 1970. Vablefeld, R. & Jacques, F. Garages and service stations. Londons Leonard H i l l Books, i960. Vance, J.E. Emerging patterns of commercial structures i n American cities. In Norborg, K. (Ed). Proceedings of the IGU symposium i n urban geography. Lunds Lund Studies i n Geography, Series B, Human Geography No. 24, 1962. Weimer, A.M. & Hoyt, H. Principles of urban real estate. New York: Ronald Press, 1948. Whiteside, R.E. Parking garage operation. Saugatuck, Conn.? The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1961. Williams, N. The structure of urban zoning. New York: Buttenheim, 1966. Periodicals Adams, W.T. Factors influencing transit and automobile use i n urban areas. Highway Research Board Bulletin 230. 1959, 101-111. Alexander, L.A. The downtown parking system. Traffic Quarterly. 1969,  22, 197-206.  Urban parking garages. The American City. 1970, 85_, 89-113. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Store trading areas i n a changing market. Journal of Retailing. 1961, 2Z» 14-25. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Trading area networks and problems of store saturation. Journal of Retailing, 196ib, 3_7_, 32-43. Review of some parking buildings. The Architect's Journal « 1966a (July 6), 144, 45-60. Multi-storey car park and service station. The Architect's Journal, 1966b (July 6), 144, 61-66. Commercial parking garages. The Architectural Record, 1958, 124, 181-188.  171 Barkley, G. Municipal garages i n Boston; a cost-benefit analysis. Traffic Quarterly. 1965, 19_, 213-228. Benn, George K. The formulation of a r e a l i s t i c parking policy. Traffic Quarterly. 1968, 22, 419-432. Beach, Douglas W. Why developers are up i n the a i r about parking. Buildings. 1970. Boyce, Ronald R. Public policy and the central business d i s t r i c t . Journal of Geography, 1969* £ 8 , 227-232. Brant, A.E. and Kinstllnger, J . Use of origin-destination survey data for parking analyses. Highway Research Record. 1968, 237. 13-20. Brawne, Michael. Parking terminals. The Architectural Record, i960, 127. 125-13^. Bruder, W.H. This parking garage. The American City, 1965, 80, 98-100. Bruening, Martin E. and Wantoch, Henry, J . Milwaukee's parking program. Traffic Quarterly, 1964, 18, 30-48. Bundy, Robert, G. The parking authority of Toronto. Traffic Engineering and Control. 1970, 12, 263-265. Burrage, R.H. Walking distances i n parking. Proceedings of the 33 Annual Meeting of Highway Research Board. 1954. 33, 404-408.  rd  Burton, H.R. Municipal parking policies. Proceedings of the 42 Convention- Canadian Good Roads Association, 1961, 448-456.  nd  Butcher, E.G. Fire and car parking buildings. Traffic Engineering & Control. 1970, 12, 377-378. Candeub, I. Planning for parking i n urban renewal projects. Traffic Quarterly. 1964, 18, 17-29. Chadwick, G.F. Car parking i n city centres. Journal of the Town Planning Institute. 1961, 4 £ , 84-90. Cherniak, N. A statement of the parking problem. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Anual Meeting of the Highway Research Board. 19467 2£, 250-256. A large new parking garage i n Vancouver. C i v i l Engineering and Public Works Review. 1959, £ 4 , 1022-1024. Clark, F.P. Adequate parking i n business areas. Traffic Quarterly.  1951, 1, 155-169.  Clements, S„0. The largest underground garage. Traffic Quarterly.  1953, Z» 124-133.  172 Culp, CA. Municipal provision of parking f a c i l i t i e s . Highway Research Record, 1967, 168, 12-52. de Wolf, T. Parking i n Vancouver. Urban Land, 1951, 10, 1-5. Doubleday, E.H. Off-street parking. The Chartered Surveyor, 1961,  21, 357-364.  Easley, G.W. Off-street parking assessment d i s t r i c t . Traffic Quarterly,  1965, 19_, 204-212.  Parking: no place to go but up. Engineering News-Record, 1959, 163,  21-22.  Evans, H.K. Parking study applications. Traffic Quarterly, 1963, 1Z» 274-292. Ewald, W.G. Development of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s i n Baltimore. Traffic Quarterly. 1950, 4, 16-23. Faustman, D.J. Estimation of parking f a c i l i t y usage. Traffic Quarterly, 1963, 12, 68-78. Fisher, H.T. Traffic planning opportunities i n shopping-center design. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_, 383-392. Fisher, V.T. Policy, program and progress of San Francisco parking authority. Traffic Quarterly. 1950, 4, 419-429. Fisher, V.T. & Gould, J.J. Another underground garage. Traffic Quarterly, 1953,_Z, 324-335. Fordham, J.B. Local government's power to provide and finance parking f a c i l i t i e s . Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 369-382. Froelich, W.R.B. Pittsburg's parking authority. Traffic Quarterly. 1953, Z, 540-552. Hand, I. & Hixon, CD. Planning, traffic and transportation i n metropolitan areas. Traffic Quarterly. 1963, 1Z, 254-273. Harris, CD. & Ullman, E.L. The nature of cities. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1945, 242.  7-17.  Heath, W.D. Parking in,U.S. cities and towns. Traffic Engineering.  1968, 3J8, 16-19.  Hendon, J.F. & Leake, H.D. When private enterprise furnishes public parking f a c i l i t i e s . Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_, 463-472. Heymen, J.H. Parking trends and recommendations. Traffic Quarterly. 1968, 22, 245-257.  173 Horton, F.E. Location factors as determinants of consumer attraction to r e t a i l firms. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1968, _58, 787-801. Howgrave-.Cjraham, H.S. Towards a car parking policy. Journal of the Town planning Institute, i960, 46, 299-300. Huber, M.J. Street travel as related to local parking. Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board. 1962,  41, 333-352.  Huff, D.L. A programmed solution for approximating an optimum r e t a i l location. Land Economics. 1966, 42, 293-303. Jackson, D.K. Parking needs i n the development of shopping centers. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_, 32-37. Jordan, F.G. The t r a f f i c engineer looks at parking. Traffic Engineering. 1967, 3j_, 16-18. Terminal planning for future highways. Journal of the Highway Division. American Society of C i v i l Engineers. 1966. 92. 61-74. Parking i n urban centres. Journal of the Town Planning Institute. 1968, _54, 285-286. Keenan, E.T. Financing municipal off-street parking. The American City. 1959, 7jt» 111-112. Kelley, E.J. Retail structure of urban economy. Traffic Quarterly. r 1955,  2, 411-430.  King, W.H. Tomorrow's parking innovations i n Los Angeles today. Traffic Engineering. 1969, 3_2, 42-45. Lambe, T.A. The choice of parking location by workers i n the central business d i s t r i c t . Traffic Quarterly. I 9 6 9 , 2_3_, 397-411. Langdon-Thomas, G.J. Fire protection problems i n multi-storey mechanical car parks. C i v i l Engineering and Public Works Review. 1961,  51,  753-755.  Lewis, T.D. Parking problems. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, £, 205-218. Manzoni, Sir H.J. Public parking garages. The Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects. 1958, 65_, 147-159. Martin, NvD. Parking now and a look ahead. NAPA Magazine. I 9 6 9 (May), 28-32.  Martin, N.D. 1970.  The future of downtown parking. Skyscraper Management.  174 Martineau, P. The personality of the reatail store. Harvard Business Review. 1958,,Ji, 47-55. Mayer, H.M. Urban geography and urban transportation planning. Traffic Quarterly. 1963, IZ, 610-631. McGonigle, G.L. Cffice-building parking. Traffic Quarterly. 1963, 1Z»  249-253. McManus, R.W. Meter feeders gobble cheap curbside parking. National Parking Association Newsletter. 1971, 1 2 (3), 2. Mertes, J.E. A r e t a i l structural theory for site analysis. Journal of Retailing. 1964, 40, 19-30. Mogren, E.G. A review of plans for financing municipal off-street parking. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_. 429-439. Car parking. The Municipal Journal. 1965, 21> ^399-4417. Murphy, R.E., Vance, J.E. & Epstein, B.J. Internal structure of the CBD. Economic Geography. 1955, 3A» 21-46. National Petroleum News. Factbook. 1970, May. Nelson, H.J. The form and structure of cities: urban growth patterns. Journal of Geography. 1969, 68, 198-207. Nielson, N.H. Des Moines* business leaders tackle the city*s parking problems. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_, 282-289. 0*Donovan, W. Auto parking at a profit. Traffic Quarterly. 1968, 22.  117-128.  Pearlstone, J.H. Deck parking at a regional shopping center. Traffic Quarterly. 1971, 2£, 17-24. Pratt, C.O. The department store and parking. Traffic Quarterly.  1952, 6, 116-127.  Proudfoot, M.J. City r e t a i l structure. Economic Geography* 1937, 1 ? .  425-428.  Proudfoot, M.J. The selection of a business site. Journal of Land and Public U t i l i t y Economics. 1938, 14, 370-381. Proudlove, J.A. Town planning i n the age of the car. Engineering.  1964, 128, 311-313.  Reeder, E.J. Off-street parking and loading i n Miami. Traffic Quarterly, 1951, 5_, 49-57. Rich, R.C Planning the downtown parking deck. Urban Land, 1965, 24, 6.  175  Rogers, A.H. Parking comes of age. Traffic Quarterly, 1959» 13. 149-155. Seeberg, T.R. Parking garages ease congestion. B.C. Motorist. 1970 (November-Decemi'.ber), 23. Shuldiner, P.W. et a l . Traffic and parking requirements of offcenter medical office buildings. Highway Research Record. 1964, 49, 1-12. Smith, W.S. The relation of traffic and parking to r e t a i l business. Traffic Quarterly, 1951, £, 225-234. Smith, W.S. Traffic and rebuilding cities. Traffic Quarterly, 1959, 12. 156-168. Sussna, S. Parking and zoning: a case study. Traffic Quarterly. 1967, 21, 435-442. Sutermeister, 0. Zoning related to general programs for parking relief. Traffic Quarterly. 1959, 1 2 , 247-259. Underwood, E.N. Multi-storey car parks. The Structural Engineer. 1959, 3_Z» 3^9-356. Voorhees, A.M. A parking study designed for downtown planning. Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board. 1962. 41. 353-362. Welch, K.C. An appraisal of shopping centers. Traffic Quarterly. 1954, 8, 384-396. Taking the pain out of parking. Western Business and Industry, 1954, 28 (5), 27 & 73-74. Whiteside, R.E. Parking f a c i l i t i e s developed i n merchant-city programs. Traffic Quarterly, 1959, 12» 294-304. Wynn, F.H. Downtown off-street parking: economics and techniques. Urban Land. I963, 22, 1-7. Government Publications Associate Committee on National Fire Codes. National f i r e code. Ottawa: National Research Council, 1963. Associate Committee on National Building Codes. National building code. Ottawa: National Research Council, 1965; 1970. Butcher, E.G. et a l . Fire and car-park buildings. London: Ministry of Technology and Fire Offices' Committee joint Fire Research Organization, Fire Note No. 10, 1957.  176 City of Calgary. Development manual. Calgary: Planning Department, 1967. City of Edmonton. General Plan. Part IV. Special planning and design studies. Edmonton; City Planning Department, 1965. Hoyt, Homer The structure and growth of residential neighborhoods in American cities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Federal Housing Administration, 1939. Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board. Metropolitan Toronto. Toronto: Thorn Press, 1965. Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board. Apartment parking requirements in metropolitan Toronto. Toronto: Author, 1968. United States Senate, Subcommittee on Business and Commerce on the District of Columbia. Establishment of parking f a c i l i t i e s i n the District of Columbia. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966. City of Vancouver. Report on the downtown parking problem. Vancouver: City Engineer's Office, 1948. City of Vancouver. Downtown Vancouver: 1955-1976. Vancouver: The Technical Planning Board, 1956. City of Vancouver. Report on the downtown parking problem. Vancouver; The Technical Planning Board, 1956. City of Vancouver. Vancouver Downtown Parking. Vancouver: City Engineering Department, 1962. City of Vancouver. Building by-law Number 4193. Vancouver: Author, 1967. City of Vancouver. City of Vancouver Plan: Part 1 - The issues. Vancouver: Planning Department, 1968. City of Vancouver. Rezoning application by Pro.iect 200 Properties Ltd., to City Council. Vancouver: Technical Planning Board. 1968. City of Vancouver. Zoning and development by-law number 3195. Vancouver: Author, "1969^ City of Vancouver. Downtown Vancouver development concepts. Vancouver: Planning Department, 1970.  177 Reports American Municipal Association. Parking spaces what American cities are doing to provide i t . Washington, D.C.s Author. 1956. Chamber of. Commerce of the United States. Curb parking. Washington, D.C.s Author, 1953. Crawford, J.M. Factors affecting capacities of parking garages. University of California, Berkleys The Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, 1958. De Leuw Cather & Company. Proposed Sutter-Stockton parking garage: San Francisco. San Francisco: Author, 1957. De Leuw Cather & Company of Canada. Report on the Greater Vancouver area rapid transit study. Vancouver: Author, 1970. Evans, H.K. Parking and i t s importance to the downtown business d i s t r i c t . Washington, D.C.: Chamber of Commmerc© of the United States, 1954. Heath, W.D. et a l . Parking i n the United States: a survey of local government action. Washington, D.C.: National League of Cities,  m?.  Highway Research Board. Parking as a factor i n business. Washington, D.C.: Author, Special Report 11, 1953. Highway Research Board. Parking and i t s relationships to business. Washington, D.C.: Author, Special Report 11-D, 1956. Hoffman, G.A. On minimizing the land used by automobiles and buses i n the urban central core: underground highways and parking f a c i l i t i e s . Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation. 1964. Lea, N.D. & Associates. Transportation systems for the City of Vancouver: an appraisal. Vancouver: Author. 1968. Levin, D.R. Elements for off-street automobile parking f a c i l i t i e s i n zoning and other local ordinances. Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Department, Bulletin No. 24, 1950. Menzies, H. & Associates. Downtown Vancouver: 1969. an economic study. Vancouver: Author, 1970. P.B.Q. & D., Inc. Vancouver transportation study: 1968. Vancouver: Author, 1968. Read, Voorhees, & Associates. Central area transportation study; metropolitan! Toronto. Toronto; Alan M. Voorhees & Associates, 1968.  178 Unpublished Materials. American Petroleum Institute. Results of combustible gas indicator tests conducted at service stations and enclosed rooms at bulk loading racks i n the City of Los Angeles. March, 1962. Claus, R.J. The effect of municipal by-laws on gasoline retailing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Planning Officials, New Orleans, March, 1971. de Wolf, T. Study for a parking authority for Vancouver, Canada. Cloverdale; Author, 1965. Petroleum Industry Committee. Vancouver building by-law and Vancouver f i r e by-law. Brief presented to the City of Vancouver Council, 1965. Rothwell, D.C. Marketing strategy and i t s effects on r e t a i l site; a case study of the Vancouver gasoline market. Unpublished Master of Arts' Thesis, University of British Columbia, 1970. Wilson, R. Downtown Parking Corporation President's report to the Downtown Business Association. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Downtown Business Association, March, 1971. Newspaper Articles Elsie, B. One parking voice urged. The Vancouver Province, July 12, 1965. Elsie, B. Alderman urges parking prices be controlled. The Vancouver Province, March 3» 1967. Elsie, B. Planners take hard line against downtown garage. The Vancouver Province, June 28, I967. Fitzpatrick, G„ Are municipalities unrealistic to parking? Financial Post, November 19$ 1966. Moore, R.J. Parking lots saved trade. The Vancouver Province. December 5» 1953. Peloquin, G. New parking authority proposed. The Vancouver Sun, March 29, 1967. Parking l o t probe urged. The Vancouver Province, March 1, 1966. Three-tier parking l o t bid offered. The Vancouver Sun, November 22, 1949.  179 Mayor Thompson supports downtown parking group. The Vancouver Sun, December 5» 1949. D.P.C. group to be given tax refunds...-,-The Vancouver Sun, January 15, 1958. Politics and parking...public or private. The Vancouver Sun- August 22, 1964. We s t a l l , S. The economics of parking autos. Toronto Globe and Mail, April 1, I960.  180  APPENDIX A PART I  EXCERPTS FROM THE NATIONAL BUILDING CODE OF CANADA Definitions of Garages  (1970)  Automobile garages are defined ass Garage, Repair means a building or part thereof where f a c i l i t i e s are provided for the repair or servicing of motor vehicles. Garage, Storage means a building or part thereof intended for the storage or parking of motor vehicles and which contains no provision for the repair or servicing of such vehicles. Garage, Open Air Parking means a storage garage situated i n a building which contains no other occupancy and which has not less than 5 0 per cent of the area of two or more sides open at each storey. Recommendations for Internal Site Features Recommendations concerning the inside location of gasoline dispensing units and automobile repair and service f a c i l i t i e s ares  3.3.7? 7(H)  A repair garage shall be separated from other occupancies by at least a 2-hr f i r e separation unless otherwise approved. Openings shall not be permitted i n the f i r e separation between a repair garage and a Group A (Assembly), B Constitutional), C (Residential, and E (Mercantile) occupancy.  3«3«7.7(12) 3.3.7.8.  A storage garage shall be separated fro occupancies by at least a lj-hr f i r e separation, unless otherwise approved.  F a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline shall not be installed i n any building except i n buildings of Group F occupancy (Industrial, including storage garages) when approved.  181 APPENDIX A PART I I EXCERPTS FROM THE NATIONAL FIRE CODE OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (1969) Definitions of Garages Automobile garages are defined as: Repair Garages are garages devoted to repairs to motor vehicles or to conduct automobile body and fender work. Garages may be with or without space f o r showrooms and with or without f l o o r space i n the building e s p e c i a l l y reserved f o r parking purposes. Operations may involve the use of open flame devices, welding and cutting equipment, the use of flammable l i q u i d s , and the dispensing of motor f u e l s . Enclosed Parking Garages are garages having exterior enclosure walls, used f o r the parking of motor v e h i c l e s . Parking f a c i l i t i e s may involve the use of conventional type elevators, attendant operated; mechanical control push-button type elevators; or ramps. Motor vehicles may be parked by garage attendants, the d r i v e r , or by mechanical automatic parking f a c i l i t i e s by which the garage attendant or operator may or may not be required to leave the grade or ground f l o o r . Dispensing of motor f u e l s and motor vehicle servicing are commonly provided at these garages. Open A i r Parking Garages are structures having not l e s s than 5 0 per cent of two sides of the structure open a t each storey and. used f o r the parking of motor v e h i c l e s . These structure may be of the ramp type i n which the motor vehicles are parked by garage attendants or the d r i v e r ; they may have the mechanical parking f a c i l i t i e s as described i n the above paragraph. Dispensing of motor f u e l s and motor v e h i c l e servicing are sometimes provided. Storage Garages are garages used s o l e l y f o r dead storage of motor v e h i c l e s . Basement and Underground Garages are garages located below grade, used s o l e l y f o r parking purposes. Motor vehicles may be parked by a garage attendant or by the d r i v e r . A basement garage has occupancies above; an underground garage has no occupancy other than a garage above i t .  182 Recommendations for Internal Site Features Recommendations concerning the inside location of gasoline dispensing units and automobile repair and service f a c i l i t i e s ares 1120. Garages should be limited i n height and area, depending upon the type of construction and private f i r e protection provided, to minimize the possibility of f i r e of such extent as to jeopardize public safety or to unduly disrupt normal community activities. Excessive heights and large undivided floor areas are undesirable. Garage buildings with numerous accessible exterior openings offer favorable features for f i r e fighting. Moderate areas are essential to the effective use of hose streams, where reliance i s placed on manual f i r e protection. 1130. Enclosed, parking garages, open a i r parking garages, and basement and underground garages shall, not be located within or attached to a building used, for any other occupancy unless separated by walls and floor and ceiling assemblies having f i r e resistance ratings appropriate to the type construction, with a l l openings between such garages and other than garage occupancies protected by approved self-closing f i r e doors. 1140. A repair garage or repair shop shall not be located within or attached to a building used for any occupancy other than garage purposes unless sparated by walls and floor and ceiling assemblies having f i r e resistance ratings appropriate to the type construction. Communications from a repair garage to other than garage occupancies should be of the vestibule or balcony type properly constructed and arranged. 2311. Repairing of motor vehicles shall be restricted to the areas specifically provided for such purposes i n repair garages. Repairing of motor vehicles on floors located below grade level i s undesirable. 2423. Inside Location including Open Air Parking Garagess Approved dispensing units may be located inside garages upon specific approval of the authority having jurisdiction. The dispensing area shall be separated from motor vehicle repair areas i n a manner approved by the authority having jurisdiction. The dispensing unit and. i t s piping shall be protected against physical damage by vehicles either by mounting on a concrete island or by equivalent means and shall be located i n a position where i t cannot be struck by a vehicle descending a ramp or other slope out of control. The dispensing area shall be provided, with an approved, mechanical or gravity ventilation system. When  183 dispensing units are located below grade only approved mechanical ventilation shall be used and the entire dispensing area shall be protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system. The ventilating systems shall be electrically interlocked with the gasoline dispensing units so that the dispensing units cannot be operated unless the ventilating fan motors are energized. 2424. Emergency Power Cutoff; A clearly identified and easily accessible switch(es) or a circuit breaker(s) shall be provided at a location remote from dispensing devices, including remote pumping systems, to shut off the power to a l l dispensing devices i n the event of an emergency. 2425. Dispensing devices located above grade and not subject to mechanical ventilation should be located within twenty feet of an outside door and the floor have a definite downward slope toward the door with a minimum of one inch for each 10 feet. When dispensing devices are located near a ramp to below grade, ventilation shall be sufficient at a l l times to prevent accumulation of flammable vapors.  EXCERPTS FROM THE BASIC BUILDING CODE OF THE BUILDING OFFICIALS CONFERENCE OF AMERICA(1969) Definitions of Garages Automobile garages are defined ass Garage. Publics a building or structure for the storage, parking, care or repair of five (5) or more motor vehicles not included i n the term garage, private. Public garages shall be classified according to their specific use i n one (1) of the following groupss -Group Is buildings used for parking, storage, repair or painting of passenger or commercial vehicles, trucks or buses, including fleets of motor vehicles, operated by u t i l i t i e s , large businesses, mercantile or similar concerns; and i n which gasoline, o i l , and similar products may be dispensed for the servicing of such vehicles. -Group 2s buildings used exclusively for the parking or storing of passenger vehicles that w i l l accomodate not more than nine (9) passengers, and i n which gasoline, o i l , and similar products may be dispensed for the servicing of such vehicles.  184 Parking Structure, Open; a structure for the parking of passenger cars wherein two (2) or more sides of such a structure are not less than f i f t y (50) per cent open on each floor or level for f i f t y (50) per cent of the distance from the floor to the ceiling and wherein no provision for the repairing of such vehicles i s made. Such open parking structures are not classified as public garages. Recommendations for Internal Site Features Recommendations concerning the inside location of gasoline dispensing units and automobile repair and service f a c i l i t i e s are; 415.13 Mixed. Occupancy; No public garage shall be located within or attached to a building occupied for any other use, unless separated, from such other use by walls or floors complying with recommendations for fireresistance. Such f i r e division shall be continuous and unpierced by openings; except that door openings equipped with selfclosing f i r e doors shall be permitted. 905.24 Gasoline Dispensing: Areas for dispensing of gasoline i n parking structures shall be located on the grade floor.  185 APPENDIX B PART I EXCERPTS FROM THE CITY OF VANCOUVER ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT BY-LAW NO. 3575 Definitions of Garages Automobile parking garages are defined as: Parking Garage shall mean a building the principal use of which i s the parking or storage of vehicles. Parking Garage (Public) shall mean a building the principal use of which i s the parking or storage of vehicles and which i s available to the public or as an accomodation to clients or customers or employees. Regulations for Off-Street Vehicular Parking Facilities Zoning regulations concerning off-street vehicular parking f a c i l i t i e s , especially automobile parking garages, are; (1) Required Vehicular Parking Spaces: In a l l districts, except the (C-5), CCM-1) and (CM-2) Commercial Districts, at the time that any development on any sitee-takes place, subject to the provisions of clause (f) below, off-street vehicular parking spaces determined with respect both to the existing land and buildings and also to the proposed development, shall be provided and maintained i n accordance with the following requirements: (a) Number of Spaces: The number of off-street vehicular parking spaces required for any development shall be as set out i n Schedule »B" (See Table .;2" to this By-law, (b) Size; A l l off-street parking spaces shall be of sufficienct size, satisfactory to the Director of Planning to accomodate the type of vehicles to be parked. In the case of a l l automobiles, parking space shall have a clear length of not less than 18 feet, a clear width of not less than eight feet, and a clear height  186 of not less than seven feet. When a parking space adjoins a structure over one foot i n height beyond a distance of four feet from either end of the parking space, the width of the parking space shall be increased by one foot on the side or sides which abut such structures to enable the opening of vehicular doors. (c) Access, Adequate provision shall be made for individual ingress and egress by vehicles to a l l parking spaces at a l l times by means of unobstructed manoeuvering aisles. In the case of automobiles the manoeuvering aisles shall betnot less than 22 feet i n width for right angle parking; for angle parking the manoeuvering aisles may be reduced i n width to a standard satisfactory to the Director of Planning. (d) Location; Cff-street parking f a c i l i t i e s shall be located as hereinafter specified; where a distance i s specified, such distance shall be measured by accessible street or lane from the nearest point of the parking area to the nearest point of the building that such f a c i l i t y i s required to serve; (i) For a l l dwellings; on the same site with the building they are required to serve, ( i i ) For a l l other uses: not over 150 feet from the building they are required to serve, except i n the case of a project, for collective parking authorized by Council under the provisions of . Part 3 of the Local Improvement Procedure By-law as amended, i n which case the distance may exceed 150 feet. (e) Units of Measurement: Where gross floor area i s used as a unit of measurement i n computing the parking requirements for apartment buildings, or buildings converted to contain more than two dwelling or housekeeping units or where such are located above C or M premises, the floor area shall be taken as prescribed for the computation of floor space ratio i n (RM-3) Districts. In a l l other cases i t shall include the floor area of accessory buildings and basements except where they are used for parking or heating f a c i l i t i e s . (f) Change i n Use-Additions Where there i s a change addition to an existing parking hereby required development occurs at a  and Enlargements: i n use, or alteration or building, the standard of need not be provided until a time when, or as a result  187 of whichs ( i ) The required parking provided on any given s i t e i s more than 10 percent d e f i c i e n t , or ( i i ) The f l o o r area i s increased i n excess of 10 percent over the f l o o r area e x i s t i n g a t June 18, 1956. (g) Mixed Occupancies and Uses Not Specified? In the case of a use not s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioned i n Schedule B the requirements f o r o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s shall be the same as f o r a s i m i l a r use. In the case of mixed uses, the t o t a l requirements f o r o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s s h a l l be the sum of the requirements f o r the various uses computed separately. O f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s f o r one use s h a l l not be considered as providing required parking f a c i l i t i e s f o r any other use. M  M  (h) C o l l e c t i v e Provision? Except i n the case of dwellings located i n R D i s t r i c t s nothing i n t h i s clause s h a l l be construed to prevent c o l l e c t i v e p r o v i s i o n of o f f - s t r e e t parking f a c i l i t i e s f o r two or more buildings or uses, subject to the approval of the Director of Planning, provided that the t o t a l of such o f f - s t r e e t parking spaces supplied c o l l e c t i v e l y s h a l l be not l e s s than the sum of the requirements f o r the various uses computed separately.  Location of Parking Garages Zoning regulations r e s t r i c t the l o c a t i o n of p u b l i c automobile parking garages to the following zones: (a) (C-l) Commercial D i s t r i c t (Local): Subject to approval by the Technical Planning Board. (b) (C-2) Commercial D i s t r i c t (Suburban): Outright use. (c) (C-3) Commercial D i s t r i c t (Medium Density): Outright use. (d) (C-4) Commercial D i s t r i c t (Medium Density): Outright use. (e) (C-5) Commercial D i s t r i c t (Amenity Commercial): Subject to approval by the Technical Planning Board (see p. 131). (CM-1) Commercial D i s t r i c t (General): Outright use. (CM-2) Commercial D i s t r i c t (High Density): Subject to approval by the Technical Planning Board, (see p. 131). (h) (M-l) I n d u s t r i a l D i s t r i c t (Light): Outright use. ( i ) (M-2) I n d u s t r i a l D i s t r i c t (Heavy): Outright use. j[j) (P-l) Parking D i s t r i c t : Outright use (see p. 188).  188 (P°l) Parking District Schedule 1. Uses permitted, conditions and regulations: Subject to a l l the provisions of this by-law on any site within any d i s t r i c t defined, designated or described i n this by-law as a (P-l) District the only uses permitted, and the only uses for which development permits may be issued are those contained i n Sections 1 and 2 hereof. A. Uses: (1) Parking Area (Public) subject to the provisions of Sections 11 (12) and 12 (2) (a) of the By-law. (2) Parking Garage (Public) subject to the provisions of Section 11 (12) of this By-law. (3) A building or use which i s customarily accessory to the above principal buildings or uses provided that: (a) No accessory building shall be located i n a front yard or i n a required side yard. (b) A l l accessory buildings shall occupy an area not greater than 300 square feet. (c) No accessory building shall exceed one storey or 12 feet i n height. (d) In the case of a Parking Area (Public) or Parking Garage (public) which provides parking spaces for not less than 40 vehicles the sale of gasoline shall be permitted by the i n s t a l l a tion of not more than two pumps; additional pumps may be installed inside any Parking Garage (Public). (e) Where a Parking Garage (Public) provides parking space for not less than 40 vehicles the sale of lubricants, minor t i r e repairs and the washing, polishing and greasing of vehicles shall be permitted inside the garage. B. Front Yard.: A front yard shall be provided not less than ten feet i n depth and subject to the provisions of Section 11 (12) of this By-law. Co Side Yard: 1. No side yard shall be required except that where the site of a Parking Area (Public) or Parking Garage (Public) adjoins the site of a building designed or erected, exclusively for use as an apartment building (but not including buildings converted to such use), or which adjoins or faces any site i n an (RM-4) District, a side yard shall be provided of not less than 5 feet i n width i n the case of a Parking Area (Public) and 10 feet i n width i n the case of a Parking Garage (Public).  189  PROVIDED, however, that i n the case of a corner site where a side yard adjoins a flenking street the side yard shall be not less than 1 0 feet i n either case. Where a side yard, i s required, i t shall be subject to the provisions of Section 1 1 ( 1 2 ) of this By-law. 2 . Where a side yard i n any such d i s t r i c t be provided where not required by the provisions of this by-law the said side yard shall be not less than 3 feet i n width. Do Rear Yards No rear yard shall be required. E  0  Heights The height of a building shall not exceed 5 0 feet.  190 TABLE .2, REQUIRED PARKING SPACES Use  a  Required Parking Spaces  Buildings containing three or more dwelling or housekeeping u n i t s located i n (RM-i) or (RM-2) Multiple Dwelling D i s t r i c t s .  One parking space f o r every 725 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area of a l l f l o o r s of the b u i l d i n g .  Buildings containing three or more dwelling or housekeeping u n i t s located i n (RM-3) Multiple Dwelling Districts.  One parking space f o r every 725 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area of a l l f l o o r s of the building.  Buildings containing three or more dwelling or housekeeping u n i t s located i n (RM-4) Multiple Dwelling Districts  One parking space f o r every 850 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area of a l l f l o o r s of the building.  Buildings containing three or more dwelling or housekeeping u n i t s located i n C or M D i s t r i c t s .  One parking space f o r every 725 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area of a l l f l o o r s or portions thereof used f o r r e s i d e n t i a l purposes, provided, however, i n C D i s t r i c t s located within D i s t r i c t Lot 185 the amount s h a l l be one space f o r every 850 square f e e t .  Boarding or rooming houses, f r a t e r n i t y or s o r o r i t y houses, personal care home, or other s i m i l a r uses.  One parking space f o r every 350 square f e e t of f l o o r area used f o r sleeping u n i t s , exclusive of bathrooms.  Hotels and motels.  One parking space f o r each dwelling u n i t and one parking space f o r every two sleeping units.  Tourist Courts.  One parking space f o r each dwelling u n i t or sleeping u n i t .  Hospitals, or other s i m i l a r uses.  One parking space f o r every 1,000 square f e e t of gross f l o o r area i n the b u i l d i n g .  191 TABLE .2- (oont.) Use  Required Parking Spaces  Institutions of a religious, philanthropic, charitable or philozoic character, or other similar uses.  One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building.  School-Public or Private.  Two parking spaces per three teaching areas i n elementary schools and one and one-quarter parking spaces per teaching area i n secondary schools provided always that i n any case where the number of parking spaces required under this By-law as a result of extension to an existing school would diminish the school playground area the amount of parking required under the By-law shall be reduced so as not to affect the playground area adversely.  Schools-Business -up to and including a gross floor area of 3»000 square feet.  One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building.  -exceeding a gross floor area of 3,000 square feet.  Three parking spaces, plus one parking space for every additional 500 square feet of gross floor area i n excess of 3,000 square feet.  Churches and similar places of public assembly.  For such area as i s used f o r public assembly: One parking space for every 100 square feet of such floor space, provided that the Technical Planning Board shall have regard to the incidence of use, and i n cases where there are two or more separate areas of assembly within the site, the Board, i f of the opinion-that such areas ordinarily would not be used concurrently, may assess the amount of parking spaces required by reference to only one of such areas, i n which case, the assessment shall be made by reference to the area which, by i t s e l f , requires the greatest number of parking spaces.  192 TABLE .2 (cont.) Use  Required Parking Spaces  Arenas, Ice, Roller or Curling Rinks, Riding Rings, Stadiums, Auditoriums, Theatres, Halls, Gymnasiums, Undertaking Establishments, Lodges (Fraternal) Clubs or other similar places of assembly.  For such area i s used for public assembly; One parking space for every 100 square feet of such floor space.  Community Centres or other / similar places of assembly.  For such area as i s used for public assembly; One parking space f o r every 200 square feet of such floor space.  Bowling Alleys.  Two parking spaces for each alley.  Office Buildings, Retail Establishments, or other similar use; -up to and including a gross floor area of 39000 square feet.  One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building.  -exceeding a gross floor area of 3,000 square feet.  Restaurants and other similar uses; -up to and including a gross floor area of 1,200 square feet.  Three parking spaces plus one parking space for every additional 500 square feet of gross floor area i n excess of 3,000 square feet.  One parking space.  -exceeding a gross floor area of 1,200 square feet.  One parking space, plus one parking space for every additional kOO square feet of gross floor area i n excess of 1,200 square feet.  Premises licensed as Public Houses (Beer Parlours) and Lounges licensed for the sale and consumption on the premises of alcoholic beverages.  One parking space for every 60 square feet of floor area open to the publi c within the area of the premises licensed for use as Public House or Lounge, except washrooms.  193 TABLE .2 (cont.) Use  Required Parking Spaces  Manufacturing and Industrial Buildings and. uses, Wholesale Distribution, Servicing and Repair Establishments, or other similar uses.  One parking space for each five employees on a maximum working shift, or not less than one parking space for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building, whichever i s the greater.  Warehouses, Storage Buildings or Yards, or other similar uses.  One parking space for each 2,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building, or not less than one parking space for each five employees on a maximum working shift, whichever i s the greater.  Golf Driving Range.  One parking space for every installed golf driving tee.  Marina.  One parking space for every twoboat mooring berths exclusive of parking spaces required i n connection with launching ramps.  Boat Launching Ramps,  The number of required parking spaces shall be as determined by the Technical Planning Board on the basis of the design and anticipated, use.  a) Pursuant to Section 12(1) (Off-Street Vehicular Parking F a c i l i t i e s , see p. 185) of the Zoning By-law, the number of Off-Street Vehicular Parking Spaces required for any development on any site located i n any zoning d i s t r i c t shall be as set out above; when the number of required parking spaces results i n a fractional space, any fraction of one-half or less may be disregarded, and any fraction of greater than one-half shall require one additional parking space.  194 APPENDIX B PART II EXCERPTS FROM THE CITY OF VANCOUVER BUILDING BY-LAW NO„ 4193 Definitions of Garages Automobile parking garages are defined as; Garage, Private means a building or part thereof used or intended to be used for the storage of four or less motor vehicles and i n which there are no f a c i l i t i e s for repairing or servicing such vehicles. Garage, Repair means a building or part thereof used or intended to be used where f a c i l i t i e s are provided for repairing and servicing of motor vehicles. Garage, Storage means a building or part thereof other than a private garage, used or intended to be used for the storage of automobiles and which contains no provision for the repair or servicing of such motor vehicles. Regulations for Automobile Parking Garages Building and f i r e regulations concerning the internal site features of automobile parking garages are: 3.12.7. Garages 3.12.7.1. General A l l buildings constructed, or altered to be used or intended to be used as garages for the storage or shelter of automobiles, or for the purpose of servicing, repairing, or painting automobiles, shall conform to the requirements of Sub-section 3.12.7. and where not specifically regulated i n Sub-section 3*12.7.9 shall conform to the other requirements of this By-law. Automobiles may be stored or displayed i n any building i f such automobiles contain no gasoline or other volatile liquid. 3.12.7.2. Construction (a) Fire Limits Except as provided for open-air parking garages, a l l buildings regulated by Sub-section 3.12.7. when erected within the districts s  195 or areas defined i n this By-law as Fire Limits Nos. 1,2 and 3» shall conform to the requirements i n respect to the construction of buildings situated within such Fire Limits. (b) Fire-resistive Construction Save as provided for open-air parking garages i n article 3*12.7.5.9 every garage greater than one storey i n height shall be of f i r e resistive construction. In buildings of fire-resistive construction used exclusively as storage garages the separation of storeys may be waived with respect to vehicular ramps only, provided such ramps are not required exits. (c) Incombustible Floors The floor system of any garage shall be of incombustible material.  3.12.7.3. Height and Areas (a) Fire-resistive Construction Except as provided for open-air parking garages i n article 3.12.7.5.» a l l garages constructed of fire-resistive construction shall not exceed the height area limitations set forth i n Table .3, except that; (i) the limiting area of a building of Type A f i r - r e s i s t i v e construction (3-hour rating) may be increased at the discretion of the Building Inspector when used as a storage garage only, and ( i i ) the height of a building of Type B f i r e resistive construction (2*h6ur rating) shall be limited to six storeys when used or intended to be used as a repair garage. (b) Non-fire-resistive Construction Except as provided for open-air parking garages i n article 3*12.7.5.* the area of any one storey garage of other than fire-resistive construction shall hot exceed 50 per cent of the area limitations permitted for the respective type of construction i n Table ;'• 3' for Group G, Division 3 occupancy.  3.12.7*4.  Separation Requirements  (a) Exterior Walls For the purposes of determining the f i r e separation of buildings i n accordance with Subsection 3*4.6. of this By-law, a f i r e load of not less than 20 pounds per square feet shall be used for a repair garage and a f i r e load of not less than 10 pounds per square foot shall be used for a gasoline service station, opena i r parking garage, or storage garage not being a private garage. (b) Occupancy Separation (i$ Storage Garages Where a storage garage and one or more major occupancies are contained within the same building such building and the storage of automobiles shall conform to the following requirements:  196 (A) The portion of any such building used for the storage of automobiles shall be of fire-resistive construction and shall be f u l l y separated from the remainder of the building by not less than a Grade 2 construction separation i n which a l l openings are protected by self-closing fire-resistive closures having a f i r e resistance rating of not less than 2 hours except that where the major occupancy or occupancies contained with the storage garage i s a theatre, motion picture theatre, Group A school occupancy, Group C school occupancy, or a Group B occupancy the said separation shall have no openings therein. Except as provided for theatres, motion picture theatres, and school occupancies i n the next preceding sentence, where the major occupancy contained with the storage garage i s a Group A, C, D, or E major occupancy the said fire-resistive closures shall be normally i n the closed position. (B) No servicing or repairs to automobiles shall be undertaken, nor shall any gasoline, other than that contained i n the tanks of the automobiles be stored, used, or sold i n any such building nor shall f a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline be installed i n any such building. (C) The portion of such building used for the storage of automobiles shall be provided with adequate ventilation to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector. ( i i ) Repair Garages Where a repair garage and one or more major occupancies as permitted by article 3.12.1*2. are contained within the same building such building and the repair of automobiles shall conform to the following requirements: (A) The portion of any such building used for the repair of automobiles shall be of fire-resistive construction and shall be f u l l y separated from the remainder of the building by not less than a Grade 2 construction separation i n which a l l openings are protected by automatic or self-closing fire-resistive closures having a f i r e resistancerating of not less than 2 hours. (B) F a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline shall not be installed i n any such building. (C) The portion of such building used as a repair garage shall be provided with adequate ventilation to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector. 3.12.7.5. Open-air Parking Garages (a) General For the purpose of Article 3*12.7.5. open-air parking garage means a building which has not less than 50 per cent of the area of two or more sides open at each storey and i n which the openings are  197 dispersed throughout the length of each storey and which i s used exclusively for the parking of automobiles. Any open-air parking garage not used exclusively for the parking of automobiles shall be classified as a storage garage. Open-air parking garages of Unprotected Noncombustible Construction may be erected i n the districts or areas defined i n this By-law as Fire Limits. No servicing or repairs to automobiles shall be undertaken, nor shall any gasoline, other than that contained i n the tanks of the automobiles, be stored, used, or sold i n any open-air parking garage nor shall f a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline be installed i n any open-air parking garage. (b) Construction The following requirements shall apply to the construction of a l l open-air parking garages; (i) a l l such garages shall be of either fire-resistive construction or of unprotected noncombustible construction. In unprotected noncombustible construction column protection may be omitted from columns which are 15 feet or more from an interior l o t line or which face upon a street 20 feet br more i n width. ( i i ) the clear headroom on a l l floors shall be not less than 7 -0" to any point except that clearance to beam soffits may be 6'-6 ( i i i ) a l l openings, including those resulting from the omission of exterior walls, shall be provided with approved^curbs and guard r a i l s . (iv) no combustible trim, partitions, or finishes shall be permitted i n such garages. (v) no tarpaulins, glass, or other materials shall be used to close required exterior openings at any time. ,  M  0  (c) Height and Areas See Table .4'.'.'. (d) Area Increases The limiting areas set forth i n the next preceding clause may be increased i n accordance with Note a or Note b of Table III provided the walls facing the said streets have not less than 50$ of the area of each storey open. Such openings shall be distributed throughout the length of each storey. (e) Separation Requirements (i) Exterior Walls In open-air parking garages the separation requirements of this By-law may be waived for an exterior wall which has not less than 50 per cent of i t s area open i n each storey and which faces upon a street not less than 20 feet i n width. Such openings shall be distributed throughout the length of each storey. In addition to complying with the separation requirements contained elsewhere i n this By-law, every exterior wall of an open-  TABLE 3 HEIGHT AND AREA LIMITATIONS OF BUILDINGS OF GROUP G, DIVISION 3 OCCUPANCY Protected Combustible 3/4 hr. rating  Unprotected Noncombustible  (2) 6,000  (3)10,000  (4)10,000  (1)15,000  (1)32,000  (1)48,000  Major Occupancy Unprotected Combustible of Building Group G Industrial & Storage Div. 3  Heavy Timber  Protected Noncombustible 1-hr. rating  (M  15,000 (1) 48,000  Protected Noncombustible 2-hr. rating  (6)24,000  (UN)32,000  (1)96,000  (1) 96,000  UN means "unlimited" Figures or letters i n brackets refer to storey heights and are shown before the maximum permissible areas i n square feet. Source: City of Vancouver. Building By-law No. 4193. Vancouver: Author, 1967, p. 10 (Part 3). TABLE 4 HEIGHT AND AREA LIMITATIONS FOR OPEN-AIR. PARKING GARAGES Type of Construction  Area (square feet)  Height  Fire-resistive, Type A Unlimited Unlimited Fire-resistive, Type B 45,000 per t i e r 6storeys, 7 tiers Fire-resi stive, Type C 30,000 per t i e r 5storeys, 6 tiers Unprotected Noncombustible 18,000 per t i e r 4storeys, 5 tiers Source: City of Vancouver. Building By-law No. 41' Vancouver: Author, 1967, p. 33 (part 3).  Protect. Noncomb. 3-hr.rat. (UN) 48,000 (1) 96,000  199 a i r parking garage shall be void of openings unless such wall i s provided with not less than a Grade 1 space separation,, ( i i ) Occupancy Separation (A) Except as permitted i n clause (C) hereof open-air parking garages shall not be permitted above, below, or within any other occupancy. Open-air parking garages attached to a building used for any other occupancy shall be f u l l y separated from such other occupancy by a wall which provides not less than a Grade 2 construction separation i n which a l l openings are protected by self-closing fire-resistive closures having a f i r e resistance rating of not less than 2 hours except that where such other occupancy i s a theatre, motion picture theatre, Group A school occupancy, Group C school occupancy, or a Group B occupancy the said separation shall have no openings therein. Except as provided for theatres, motion picture theatres, and school occupancies i n the next preceding sentence, where the occupancy attached, to the open-air parking garage i s a Group a, C, D, or E major occupancy the said, fire-resistive closures shall be normally i n the closed position. (B) For the purpose of sub-clause (A) of this clause automobile repair work, the servicing of, automobiles, and the sale or storage of automobile accessories shall be deemed another type of occupancy. (C) Offices used exclusively i n connection with the operation of an open-air parking garage are permitted. Such offices shall be f u l l y separated from the open-air parking garage by not less than a Grade 1 construction separation i n which a l l openings are protected by self-closing f i r e resistive closures. (f) Means of Egress (i) A l l open-air parking garages i n which the public have access to the parking area shall be provided with means of egress as required by Sub-section 3.^.8. and Section 3.14. of this By-law, for which purpose a roof used, for parking shall be deemed, to be a floor. ( i i ) A l l open-air parking garages i n which the public do not have access to the parking area shall be provided with two means of egress on each floor, which means of egress shall be remote the one from the other. (g) Shafts and Openings (i) Subject to the requirements of sub-clauses (b) ( i i i ) and (g) ( i i ) of this a r t i c l e , floor openings for shafts and vehicular ramps may be unenclosed. ( i i ) Elevators installed i n open-air parking garages for the  200 transportation of the public shall be enclosed as required bySubsection 3.4.12. of this By-law. ( i i i ) Elevators installed, i n open-air parking garages for the transportation only of automobiles and of employees need not be enclosed but the l i f t shaft shall be protected at each storey from floor to ceiling with wire mesh, or other similar material, to the approval of the Building Inspector. (h) Fire Extinguishing Equipment Dry standpipes, complying with the requirements of Subsection 6.6.4. of this By-law, shall be installed i n a l l open-air parking garages exceeding 50 feet i n height. Open-air parking garages not equipped, with standpipes shall be provided with hand fire-extinguishing equipment to the approval of the Fire Chief.  \  STANLEY  PARK  AUTOMOBILE PARKING G A R A G E S IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT OF VANCOUVER  TYPES OF GARAGES DEPARTMENT STORE CENTRAL CORE OFFICE-EMPLOYEE SPECIALIZED FUNCTIONAL HOTEL RESIDENTIAL PUBLICLY-OPERATED PRIVATELY-OPERATED PRIVATELY-OPERATED WITH INTERNAL GASOLINE PUMPS PRIVATELY-OPERATED WITH INTERNAL SERVICE BAYS PRIVATELY-OPERATED WITH INTERNAL GASOLINE PUMPS AND SERVICE BAYS PLANNING  PARKING DISTRICT  D E P T • CITY OF V A N C O U V E R  DRAWING N° BJW  DRAWN  BY  D.B.M. 4 0 0  DATE SCALE  l" = 400'  DATE :  1963  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101943/manifest

Comment

Related Items