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.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

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 6 , Simon Fraser University, 1969 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of GEOGRAPHY We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1971 In present ing th i s thes i s in pa r t i a l f u l f i lmen t of the requirements fo r an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ib ra ry sha l l make i t f r ee l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fu r ther agree that permission for extens ive copying of th i s thes i s for s cho la r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s representat ives . It i s understood that copying or pub l i ca t i on of th i s thes i s f o r f i nanc i a l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permiss ion. Department of Geography  The Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date August 12, 1971 i i 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 city by-law provisions. A review of existing city 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 city building by-laws; and that both the external and internal site features were indirectly regulated through city 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-i i i oline and o i l products and. the provision of service and. repair facilities inside automobile parking garages. Two subsidiary-hypotheses were therefore considered: (i i ) 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. ( i i i ) The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair facilities 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 decision-makers. The analysis of sections of National building and fire codes for Canada and. the United States and various city building by-laws revealed that there exists differences between the two countries* national codes as well as differences between building by-laws for various cities. American codes and by-laws permit inside gasoline dispensing units and service and repair facilities within parking garages, whereas Canadian codes and by-laws do not. A l l three hypotheses were tested in 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 in regard to the inside location of gas-oline pumps and repair facilities. These regulations create a content!©us issue between industry and City officials, because the iv industry recognizes that a demand exists for various automobile-oriented 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 officials 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 v LIST OF TABLES v i i i LIST OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS '•- x CHAPTER I PARKING IN THE CITY 1 Ao Introduction 1 Bo Parking in Perspective 2 C. City Regulation of Parking Garages 14 Do The Study Problem 19 E 0 Geographical Perspective 20 F 0 Hypotheses 22 G. Approach and Scope of Study 24 H. Organization of the Thesis 25 II CITY STRUCTURE AND SITE TYPOLOGY 26 A. City Structure 26 Bo Site Type 31 C. Site Quality 40 Do Site Network 43 E 0 A Spatial Typology of Parking Garages 46 1. Downtown 46 a 0 Retail store parking garage 47 b 0 Office-employee parking garage 48 c. Central core parking garage 49 d. Hotel parking garage 49 2. Main Street 50 3. Residential District 50 4. Shopping Centre 51 5» Specialized Functional Area 52 III CITY REGULATION OF AUTOMOBILE PARKING GARAGES 53 A. Zoning 53 Bo Urban Transportation Planning 61 C. Urban Renewal Planning 66 v i CHAPTER PAGE Do Administrative Practices 69 1. Private Enterprise 70 2. Private and Public Cooperation 74 3. Municipal 75 a. Parking authorities 78 E. Financial Practices 81 1. Direct Revenue Sources 82 a. Current budget expenditures 82 b„ Benefited district assessment 83 c. Parking revenue 84 2. Borrowed Capital 86 a. General-obligation bonds 86 b. Revenue bonds 87 c. Assessment bonds 89 F. Building Codes 89 G. Summary 92 IV AN EXAMPLE OF INTERNAL SITE REGULATION 94 A„ Introduction 94 1. Custom 94 2. Interpretation of Words and Phrases 95 3» Draftsmanship 95 B. The Example 96 C. The Case of Western Canadian Cities 97 D0 The Case of Western United States Cities 102 E 0 The Case of Vancouver 108 F. General Appraisal 117 V PARKING GARAGESs A CASE STUDY OF VANCOUVER 122 A« Introduction 122 B. The Setting 123 Co The Parking Situation 124 D. Zoning 127 E. City Transportation Planning 133 F. City Redevelopment Planning I36 Go City Administrative and Financial Practices 140 H. City Building By-law 148 I 0 Summary 149 VI CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 151 Ao Review of the Study 151 B. Appraisal of the Hypotheses 155 1. Hypothesis 1 155 2. Hypothesis 2 156 3. Hypothesis 3 158 C0 Recommendations 160 1. Local Municipal Level 161 2 0 Private Enterprise Level I63 CHAPTER PAGE De Recornmendations for Further Study 16^ BIBLIOGRAPHY 166 APPENDIX A Part I 180 Part II 181 APPENDIX B Part I 185 Part II 194 v i i i LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Typical Zoning Requirements, Indicated 61 i Parking Space Needs and Suggested Planning Standards 2 Required Parking Spaces 190 3 Height and Area Limitations of Buildings 198 of Group G, Division 3 Occupancy 4 Height and Area Limitations for Open- 198 Air Parking Garages ix LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 Motor Vehicles - Vancouver. 1947-1968 3 2 Parking Space Costs in Relation to 10 Land Values 3 Off-Street Parking Spaces in 12 Relation to Urbanized Area Population 4 The Structure of Intra-Urban Business 36 and Commerce 5 Automobile Parking Garages in -the In Pocket Inside Downtown District of Vancouver Back Cover X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS With gratitude I wish to acknowledge the people who aided in 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. JCW. McLewin (Parking Engineer, City of Vancouver) and the Building Inspectors and Fire Chiefs in Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Vancouver, and. Victoria. I would also like 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 largely focused on the creation of generalized urban land use models derived from aggregated social and economic data (i.e. Park et a l , 1925) or on the study of r e t a i l location, industrial location, and so on (i.e. Berry, 1963)* Moreover, these studies have considered the effects of c i t y government decisions upon the urban environment i n only a general and i n some cases, a theoretical sense. In this thesis, i t i s however asserted that a better understanding of urban structure can be achieved through understanding the individual sites that create this structure and the effects of c i t y plans and by-laws upon these sites. The objective of this thesis i s to investigate the spatial effects 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 into the physical (location, size, design etc.), the p o l i t i c a l (private versus public interests), and the legal problems faced by various urban governments i n regulating the external and internal spatial features of the parking garage, i t i s hoped to gain a better insight into their existence. City regulations concerning the external and internal spatial features of this structure are investigated for parking garages i n general and more 2 specifically, for an internal site feature and a particular oity, with the hope that recommendations can be obtained for future regulations which can enhance the quality 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 principal uses as residential, commercial, service, and industrial structures. Due to increased motor vehicle ownership, urban area usage, and c i t y street congestion, parking must now be considered as a rather significant and v i t a l urban land use i n i t s own right. I t i s a consideration, particularly so, where parking i s to be furnished on an off-street basis. Automobile registrations i n the United States have risen 220 percent i n the l a s t twenty years (National Petroleum Institute, 1970, p. 38). F. Houston Wynn (1963. p. 1) noted that at the time of the I960 census "nearly four-fifths of a l l American families had an automobile for their use". Between 1953 and 1964, Toronto experienced a 100 percent increase i n registered vehicles, compared to a population growth of only 50 percent for the same period (Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, 1965). The following graph shows the rate of increase i n vehicle registration i n Vancouver from 1947 to 1968. I t shows a 425 percent increase for the period (See Figure 1 ) . But not only has motor vehicle ownership increased, vehicle use i n the urban area has risen as well. Having acquired the automobile, the majority of owners use i t for most of their travel, appearing to regard any other travel modes as a poor second choice. 3 50--47 50 55 60 65 k8 .YEAR- • Fig. 1. Motor Vehicles = Vancouver! 1947=1968 Sources City of Vancouver. City of Vancouver Plans Part 1 - The Issues. Vancouvers Planning Department, 1968, p„ 40„ 4 When a choice does exist between travel modes, convenience and time saving are the reasons usually given for selection of the automobile. Simultaneously, there has been a decrease i n the use of public transit i n major North American c i t i e s . Decreases i n public transit usage since the Second World War i n the c i t i e s of Seattle, Detroit, 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 transit trips to the C.B.D. i n that c i t y totals 35 percent of the trips made to there, i n the rest of the metro area usage has decreased from a 20 percent share of total trips i n 1950 to a 14 percent share i n 1968. The decrease i n the use of public transit 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 trans-portation 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, transit leaves when i t wants and goes where i t wants, and runs on i t s schedule and the rider has to meet that predetermined by the bus or train. Hunnicutt goes on to state: The automobile i s considerably more rapid than transit i n most c a s e s . t h e bus averages bet-ween 9 and 11 miles per hour on i t s overall t r i p . The automobile averages between 15 and 20 miles per hour. The bus takes twice as long to get there, not including transfers. 5 In terms of cost, i t appears that public transit i s a much cheaper mode of transportation than the automobile. The motor-vehicle driver must take into account not only his basic\ travel costs, those of gasoline, o i l , tires, and parking, but in 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 indiv-idual 1 s transportation needs i n a great many cases, the automobile i s the most convenient and time saving answer for a majority of car-owning citizens who clearly are not seeking the cheapest ride. Reflecting this rise in motor vehicle ownership and the decline in public transit usage i s a steadily increasing demand, for parking space on city streets. At the same time, however, growing traffic 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 in the central business district of the city, but in larger metropolises i t has expanded on-to 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 in traffic-congested, areas are used, for parking. 6 The result i s that streets are congested for much of the time. It would logically follow, then, that an automatic increase in the traffic 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 traffic capacity. Besides increased traffic 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 one-tenth 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 stall into the traffic stream. Increased city street congestion created by on-street or curbside parking can thus be very costly in terms of time and dollars to the motor-vehicle operator. However, the resultants of increasing city 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 in outlying shopping centres or sub-business districts (Burrage and Mogren, 1957s P« 4)", i t s effects must be kept in a proper perspective,, For example, in dealing with urban shopping habits, the Highway Research Board (1956) found that 90 percent of the shoppers interviewed in Columbus, Ohio found parking difficult in the downtown area, 71 percent were concerned about the parking cost, and traffic 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)", It appears that parking difficulty and traffic congestion does not influence the shopping habits of downtown shoppers. Further, i t has been inferred that the difficulty in parking and the congestion of streets have been primarily responsible for the spatial decentralization of retailing and the surge in suburban retail 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 in retail sales growth and store location, not the problems of parking and congestion. In perspective, then, traffic congestion and parking difficulty are not responsible for changing shopping habits, increased suburban sales, and new store location. Yet in order to maintain the central business district as a viable economic and functional entity, consideration must be given to urban parking and traffic problems, Correction of a parking deficiency, for example, might enable a 8 downtown merchant "to lure or lure back those shoppers who will have a shorter overall trip 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 in addition, to hold those shoppers who already shop in the downtown. Farther, a solution to the parking difficulty may help provide the stimulus needed to attract new office or retail developments to the central business district, which because of the parking deficiency, locate elsewhere i n the city or even in another city (Smith, 1965. pp. 23-30). However, should the parking difficulty 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 trip. Therefore, the gradual elimination of curbside parking i s warranted by the effects of congested city 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 facilities. There are two basic types of off-street parking facil i t i e s : surface lots and multi-deck structures. Parking lots in the central business district or on main streets are usually in 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 lot facilities. In contrast, parking garages usually represent a permanent structure. They provide considerable capacity in a small area, often in highly congested sections where parking demands and land values are highest. The parking garage also represents a much greater investment than the parking lot. For commercial parking lots, most of the cost i s in the land and operation with minimal cost for development. Land for commercial lots i s more often leased than purchased. Leased land may range in 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 will 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 lot operation, and may run from $135 to $180 per space. 10,0 0 0 T q o o o . . 8000.. » 7 000. UJ b cr < •E 4000 10 15 20 15 30 35 L A N D C Q S T . . D O L L A R S P E R S O U - A B E F O O T Fig, 2, Parking Space Costs in Relation to Land Values Source. Wilbur So Smith & Associates, Parking in the City Center, New Haven, Conn,; Author, 1965s Po 36, 11 However, in larger cities, the cost of land, either by purchase or by lease, coupled with larger and more concentrated parking demands, will 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 in larger urban centres because they are the most economical parking use of this land. As depicted in Figure ; 3» urban centres of 100,000 population have approximately 18 percent of the total parking supply along curbs, 67 percent i n lots, and 15 percent in garages. In contrast, when urban population rises to one million, garages increase their share of the total spaces to 27 percent while ourbspace falls 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 lot i n urban centres i s i t s ability 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 facilities can be found in most North American cities. In Pittsburg, a new multi-purpose structure features retail space on the f i r s t floor, two floors of office space, a 12 storey apartment, a pedestrian bridge to a depart-ment store, and a self-service parking garage with space for 825 cars. 12 0,000 50 )^00 100,000 500,000 I MILUtON 5 MILUOiMO MlLUOH , 'RBANIZ E D .AREA. R.OP.U.LAT.ION-=J$*0. F i go 3o Off-Street Parking Spaces In Relation To Urbanized Area Population As urban areas increase in size, the number of garage spaces increases at a faster rate than parking lot spaces. Central business districts in urbanized areas of 200,000 or less usually have fewer than 1,000 spaces in parking garages. This number increases substantially as urban areas enlarge; there are about 5»500 garage spaces in urban areas of one million in population. The total off-street spaces averaged 2,800 in urbanized areas of 100,000, 16,000 in areas of one million, urbanized areas of two million population. and about 28,000 in Sources Wilbur S„ Smith & Associates, Parking in the City Center, New Haven, Conn, s Author, 19659 p« 7<> 13 Marina City i n Chicago which consists of ko stories of apartments located above 20 floors of parking, which in 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 build-ing with a garage in between to act as a sound barrier (Martin, 1969* P. 30). Integrated parking structures can also be found in shopping centres (See Chapter II). The underground parking garage with a park on top is another type of multi-purpose structure (Klose, 1965). Examples are found in 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 facilities. For example, a $10 million garage of the John Hancock Insurance Company will be built astride the Massachusetts Turnpike in Boston (Beach, 1970). Plans in Spokane, Washington are for the creation of lk blocks of parking under a section of the East-West Freeway. Scarcity of land in the central business district, and the resulting increase in land values i s thus forcing more and more cities to integrate parking facilities with other major building and land developments. Similarlly, retail or service facilities which cannot afford or do not wish to purchase or lease land for their establishment in the central business district, 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 like clothing or furniture and personal service establish-ments such as loan companies or ticket agencies. Automobile service facilities, including gasoline pumps , car washes, and repair bays, are another example of accessory uses in parking garages. Where city by-laws permit, these facilities 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 vital 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 faci l i t i e s . Although, off-street parking can be provided by either the surface lot 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 ability 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 city planning and control. Spatially, the effects of such practices can be viewed as having external and internal influences upon the activity and the fa c i l i t y concerned. Externally and internally, parking garages can 15 be regulated through city zoning by-laws, transportation and redevel-opment planning, administrative and financial methods, and building and fire 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 lot 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 districts, 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 facilities 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 in 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 facilities 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 in relation to traffic flow, size or capacity of the garage, and res-ervoir 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 well-situated garages (Whiteside, 1961, p. 14) n. The provision of adequate parking for these projects i s essential i n attracting new traffic generating activities and as a result in maintaining or increasing the tax base of the area. On a much larger scale, parking garages can be effect-ively regulated through a city government's administrative and financial approach to parking in general. The approach taken by a city government towards parking, i f one i s taken, can dictate the external and internal features of the facilities provided for such an activity.But presuming that parking garages are one of those facilities 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 district 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 stall dimensions, travel ramps, floor designs, stairways, elevators, ventilation, building materials, and fire protection. But more importantly, building and fire by-laws regulate the provision of accessory functions, especially automobile-oriented service facilities and retail establishments, inside parking garages. The sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair facilities 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 retail outlets in a downtown setting must be located in 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 itsel f will 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 in 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 in 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 facilities as an accessory function i n parking garages i s one of the best ways to meet this demand. On the other hand, many cities, particularly those in Canada, through building and fire by-laws, prohibit or restrict the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the Installation of automobile service and repair facilities inside parking garages. Regulations concerning these facilities 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 city plan. However, by-laws are often treated as the end-products — the instituted plan — rather than the means to attain the product. "A city which unthinkingly enforces by-laws without reference to a plan may be building an unattractive city with limited form and inconvenient urban structure (GLaus and Hardwick, 1971* P« 255)". Glaus and Hardwick (1971, p. 256) 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 city building and fire by-laws. An example of problems created by the enforcement of certain building and fire 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 facilities inside parking garages are recognized by the petroleum and the parking industries as providing an economically viable retail 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 fire by-laws prohibiting or restricting the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of automobile service and repair facilities 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 facilities as uneconomical and unattractive uses of downtown land. However, the city, unlike the petroleum industry, offers no alternatives for relocating gasoline retail outlets elsewhere i n the central business district, As noted above, the most logical and feasible alternative i s to locate such facilities in conjunction with parking garages, but present city building and fire 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. It i s a conflict that i s a result of the dissimilar goals of city zoning by-laws and city building and fire 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 facil i t y for various retail 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 their 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 later publication, Murphy (1966) has considered parking i n terms of i t being a rather significant user of commercial land i n the city. In fact, 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 into the problem of adding the different types of parking i n order to give a significant and meaningful total of parking space. But the real importance of Murphy's question l i e s i n the fact 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 spatial manifestations, including surface lots and multi-deck structures..Although parking consultants and t r a f f i c engineers have considered some of the locational aspects of these f a c i l i t i e s (See, for example, Le Craw and Smith, 1948; Barrage and Mogren, 1957; 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 spatial effects of c i t y plans and by-laws upon the external and internal spatial features of parking garages. The importance of studying internal and external site features by geographers has been demonstrated by daus (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 city planning decisions and by-law provisions has been pointed out by Claus and Hardwick (1971) in their examination of automobile-oriented retailing, of which the parking garage i s an example. The geographical perspective of this thesis, therefore, lies in the study of the spatial effects of city planning decisions and city by-law provisions upon the external and internal site features of automobile parking garages. Hypotheses It 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 ln the total downtown plan... Thus, greater functional and visual inte-gration of parking into over-all site planning should be encouraged, with a consequent improvement in parking aesthetics.... 23 However, Edmund Bicker (1957) asserts that parking must not only be discussed with reference to its place in an urban setting, but i t must also be considered in terms of location and design of its facilities particularly in 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 is 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 in this chapter, where city building and fire by-laws permit, the sale of gasoline and oil 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 is 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 is that: The sale of gasoline and oil 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 city decision-makers. In the case of automobile service functions inside parking garages, there exists a conflict between city officials and the o i l companies and parking garage managers which has resulted from a further conflict, that created by the dissimilar goals of city zoning by-laws and city building and fire 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 facilities 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 city decision-makers. The validity of the study hypotheses i s discussed in the final chapter. Approach and Scope of Study The approach taken i n this study i s that of analytic-description. In other words, city regulation and practices and their spatial effects upon the external and internal features of parking garages will 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 in 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 city regulations of parking garages nor their implementation and enforcement i n city governments. The method of investigtion imposes a limitation upon the study, particularily l n the questions asked in the interviews and the questionnaires, the availability of literature for review, and the specific and particular problems of various cities. 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 city street congestion and their effects upon the city 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 facil 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 city 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 city structure and site typology, centering on site and city retail structure and suggesting a spatial typology of parking garages. The following chapter i s devoted to existing city 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 cities. An examination of the external and internal site regulations for parking garages in the city of Vancouver provides the basis for Chapter Five. The last 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 II CITY STRUCTURE AND SITE TYPOLOGY City Structare City plans and by-laws are primarily designed to determine the structure of the city. The urban structure, i n turn, i s made up of small functional units of space called sites. I t then seems only reasonable that i n order to better understand the effects of c i t y planning decisions and c i t y by-law provisions upon the structure of the ci t y , one must f i r s t understand their effects upon these small functional units that make up c i t y structure. Urban geography has not been greatly concerned with the analysis of either individual sites or the effects of c i t y legislation upon these sites. Instead, geographers have tended to aggregate their data rather than to examine the characteristics of these smaller functional units and the effects of c i t y government decisions upon these units. The former approach to urban structure has led to the setting up of models that spatially organize generalized forms of urban environment (See, for example, Park et a l , 1925; Hoyt, 1939; Harris and Ullraan, 19^5). As a result, l i t t l e work has been done on the analysis of individual sites themselves and on the effects of c i t y plans and by-laws upon these sites, despite the fact that the principles for such an analysis have at some time a l l been mentioned i n urban geographic literature and thus are somewhat familiar to geographers. 28 The concept of site has been a basic element i n urban geography for nearly f i f t y years. Through these years geographers have enlarged the definition of site while they have simultaneously reduced the scale of the term. Blanchard, i n 1922, who distinguished between general elements of situation and particular characteristics of s i t e , remarked that the site factors were "purely l o c a l t r a i t s of the landscape (Berry and Horton, 1970, p. 15)". Thirty years later, Max Sorre, who was mainly concerned with situation factors i n urban development, noted that the important elements of site were certain topographical features which afforded protection for a city. Similarly, Robert E. Dickinson (1959, p. 12) wrote that "...site embraces the precise features of the terrain on which the settlement began and over which i t has spread". In the same vein, Arthur Smailes (1966, p. 40) has written, a site "may be defined as the ground upon which a town stands, the area of the earth i t actually occupies". As might be inferred from the previous definitions, i n the early writings there appears to be a bias of treating sites only on a large scale i . e . a city-wide scale. In addition, " s i t e " i s usually defined as a purely physical element, while situation refers to the human element. The situation i s usually taken to mean the physical conditions (as for the site) over a much wider area around the settlement. But of equal importance are the human characteristics of the surrounding country, since these affect the character and fortunes of the urban settlement (Dickinson, 1959» p. 12). Broek (19^5* p. 30), however, offers a somewhat less restrictive 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 in defining site: "It 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 in that dealing with urban land economics and retail 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 lot and/or the building itself. 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 retail 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. Mitchell and Rapkin(1954, p.Ill) define linkage as n... a relationship between establishments characterized by continuing or frequently recurring interaction. It 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 in the structure of the city". The shape of and the structures upon the site itself contribute to the form of the city. Form i s generally defined in 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 lot 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 city are subject to city government decisions and controls. In fact, as suggested earlier in this chapter, the structure of the city may be determined by city planning decisions and city by-laws provisions. Structure, in turn, can determine form. For example, in San 31 Franciso, recently, a zoning by-law was used to limit 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 in 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 in 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 in 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 city by-law provisions upon individual sites and in turn, upon city 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 retail sites, where the practice has been to amass a l l business sites into one type 32 according to their spatial position within the urban structure. The earliest statement by a geographer on the typing of ret a i l , sites was made by Proudfoot (1937). Proudfoot differentiated fi 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) principal business thoroughfare; (4) neighborhood business street; and (5) isolated store cluster. E x p l i c i t i n his classification of r e t a i l types i s the class of commodities sold, concentration or dispersion of outlets, and character of customer tributary areas; and implicit i n his 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 locations, similar to those of Proudfoot: (1) central shopping d i s t r i c t ; (2) sub-centres; (3) string-streets; (4) neighbourhoods; (5) isolated stores. In a study published i n 19*4-9, Richard R a t c l i f f also confirms the broad structural outlines sketched by Proudfoot. R a t c l i f f states that the focal 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 at the convergrence of a l l t r a f f i c and transportation routes. Beyond the C B D , 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 retail uses, which appear at important intersections and creates a pyramiding of land values to peaks at the intersection. The nucleatLon may vary in nature from isolated stores and neighbourhood fa c i l i t y combinations to major retail 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 retail facility should be located on a site at which transfer costs will 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 in 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 in 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 in a medical-dental building or a newstand at an airport. One of the most unique typologies of retail structure has been suggested by John Hertes (1964). Mertes (1964, p.26) argues that "modem retail store locations should be studied on the basis of a classification that considers the traffic circulatory system". On such a basis he classifies retail sites as: (1) internal, a location within the CBD of the city; (2) axial, a strip development along the major traffic 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 in 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 traffic artery in the hinterland between communities. The factors of population and transportation are assumed to be organic to the spatial positioning of retailing. Finally, a fairly recent and well-developed classification of retail structure which makes implicit use of mode of transportation has been suggested by Duncan and Phillips (1967): (1) older central shopping district; (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 retail 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 retail 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 in order to purchase a good at a business centre. The range of a good offered from a retail outlet has an upper limit beyond which the outlet i s unable to attract customers for the good and a lower limit 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 retail 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 CENTERS Planned or Unplanned Conv. Neighb'd Community lona I Metropolitan C.B.D I _ RIBBONS Traditional shopping street I Urban arterial I New suburban ribbon I Highway oriented Planned (plaza) Unplanned i ! —— ! J i SPECIALIZED AREAS I Automobiles rows Printing districts Entertainment districts Exotic markets Furniture districts Medical centers Planned D nplanned Fig. 4. The Structure of Intra-Urban Business and Commerce Source: B.J.L. Berry & F.E. Horton. Geographic Perspectives on Urban Systems. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970, p. 457. 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 in 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 realistic 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 in the retail 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 will 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 retail sites has been noted by Kelley (1955» p.415), who points out that there are some recognized differences 38 between customers shopping downtown and in regional centres. It would appear, that based upon the above criticisms that a more befitting typology of intra-city retail sites would be one which concerned individual retail 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 retail sites by mode of transportation used to reach the site. On the other hand, a typology of retail sites must also include the kind and size of threshold of a site. Although the role of threshold in 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 traffic flow and transportation artery. The placement, layout, and facilities of a downtown station, for example, would differ from that of a freeway station. Although a l l service stations sell gasoline, they may be different i n the type of service or function performed and as a result in 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 retail sites are, in addition, subject to city regulations and control. City zoning by-laws, for example, may not permit a service station to be located in the downtown area of a city. Thus, one type of retail site i s eliminated from an urban setting. However, much more work s t i l l needs to be done on the effects of city legislation upon types of urban retail sites. It would appear that a more suitable method of typing urban retail 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 in the retail 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 retail 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 in approximately similar locations for the same source of trade, the stores that offer the best retailing facilities can expect to outperform their inferior competitors. Other writers (See for example, Canoyer, 1946; Brown and Davidson, 1953; Duncan and Phillips, 1967) have also made mention of the importance of having superior site facilities. 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 in turn can affect the store's sales volume. Huff (1966) has criticized the use of mathematical models in approximating optimum retail locations on the basis that such models f a i l to consider the qualitative aspects of retail site. Mathematical models are not infallible..»Therefore decision makers should be aware that there are variables other than those specified in the model that affect the sales of a retail 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. It 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. Visibility 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 'fixity 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 in 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 it 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 in the market place. In recognition of such a conclusion, Glaus and Rothwell (1970, p. 86) define site quality as the ability of a retail site to perform i t s function for which i t i s designed, measured in terms of facilities and layout of the site it s e l f . As hypothesized for this study, the facilities and layout or the internal features of a site could however be subject to effective regulation by city planning decisions and city by-law 4 3 provisions. If this i s true, i t would then follow that site quality could be effectively controlled by city legislation. For example, i f the function of a downtown parking garage was to provide automobile parking and automobile servicing, but city fire by-laws only permitted part of the latter function, one could then say that because of the site's inability to perform i t s function due to city legislation, site quality was low. There appears, however, to be a lack of work done on the effects of city legislation on site quality. If we are to come to a fuller 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 retail sites by geographers began with Christaller's (1933) work on central place theory, and i s being currently pursued by those interested in marketing geography (See for example, Applebaum and Cohen,196la; 196lb; Berry, 1967). In terms of the nature of geographic research on the network retail type, work has been mainly concerned with the delineation of trade areas for various retail 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 retail location. In the case of gasoline service station site selection, she considers competition 44 to be second only in importance to traffic density. Kelley (1955) also mentions the importance of the quantitative and qualitative effects of competitive retail 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 city in which to locate a particular retail activity, apply equally as well to the selection of a particular site within a city. Although i t i s desirable to select a city in which the amount of existing competition may be judged less than adequate to meet fully the demands of the public, i t does not follow that the presence of a large number of similar stores i s necessarily discouraging. If local merchants in a given line of business have become lethargic, are operating with obsolete physical facil 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 city 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 retail competition, Alderson 45 and Shapiro (1964) have suggested that when considering a new r e t a i l s i t e , management has a choice between two alternatives: optimal site selection or optimal network expansion. Of concern here i s the l a t t e r alternative, which i s viewed as a move by a firm to place a network of sites throughout a whole market area. Such a practice i s typical of certain "types of chain stores, who wish to make a more effective use of such widespread merchandising f a c i l i t i e s as newspaper advertising and credit cards. Ideally, a l l prospective customers exposed to such f a c i l i t i e s would find a unit of the chain within an acceptable shopping range. As suggested by the literature, network can then be defined as an integrated pattern of a particular r e t a i l type over a market area (Glaus and Rothwell, 1970, p.86). Such a pattern may be, however, subject to governmental regulations. For example, the placement of a particular type of gasoline service station on the landscape i n order to complete a firm's network of sites with which i t w i l l cover a whole market area may be prohibited by a zoning by-law. In addition, the looation, amount, and quality of competitive sites may be also subject to c i t y regulations. Research on the subject of site networks and c i t y regulations by geographers i s however lacking; but i f we are to better understand urban structure, research into this topic must be carried 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 in 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 district, d) shopping centre, and e) specialized functional area. Downtown In most large cities, there can be found four types of parking garages in the downtown area. These types are: a) retail store, b) office-employee, c) central core, and d) hotel. In 4? addition, there may be combinations of each type. The retail 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 retail or service establishments. In some cities, where permitted, department stores have placed automobile service facilities, 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 lot or across the street. If 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 in 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 facilities 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 parking garage of the Rumble Oil Company in 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 facilities are, together with a general traffic concourse, accommodated with a low building, forming the base of the office tower" (Klose, 1965, p.50). Other office complexes have their parking facilities 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. Its only link i s with the functions of downtown in general. 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 city permits, this type of garage may provide limited facilities 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 in 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, in 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 in 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 multi-storey parking garages in order to try to keep pace with the development of motels on the city's fringes. They create their own parking facilities on adjacent sites or in 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 in the total hotel b i l l . Main Street This "type of parking garage i s generally found on a principle business street in 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 medical-dental 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 in meaning to a parking structure which i s linked with an 51 apartment building. Such a garage, usually underground for aesthetic, cost, and area reasons, provides parking for the residents of the apartment block. However, a two or three storey parking garage can be found i n association with various types of residential 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 for 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 fee, whereas a customer would pay an hourly fee. Shopping Centre Because of the large 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 limited acreage, some shopping centrei developers have found i t necessary to build a garage i n order to provide additional parking for their customers. Far-har* because of limited acreage and. high land cost at the outset of some shopping centre projects, developers have had to build 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 also as a result of a desire on the part of the developer to blend his 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, limited acreage, and aesthetic purposes (KLose, 1965, p.48). As parking i s a prime method of attracting 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 university (The University of Cincinnati), a hospital (The New England Deaconess Hospital), an airport (Los Angeles International Airport), or some other institution (Los Angeles Music Centre for Performing Arts; Cleveland Convention Hall) (Hackman and Martin, 1969, pp. 7-1 - 7-4). The primary function of this garage i s to provide parking for both the users and the personnel of the complex. On-site location widely varies, ranging from underground garages to five or six storey aboveground garages, some a distance away from the area complex. Fees are charged on an hourly basis, a daily, monthly, or yearly basis, depending on the type of parking. 53 CHAPTER III CITY REGULATION OF AUTOMOBILE PARKING GARAGES City government regulation of automobile parking garages appears to have four areas of emphasis. External site features, including location, are frequently subject to regulation through c i t y zoning by-laws and c i t y transportation and renewal planning. The internal site features of size, layout, and construction are matters of concern for c i t y zoning by-laws, transportation and renewal planning, and building by-laws. In general, both the external and internal features of parking structures are subject to indirect control through a city's approach to the administration and financing of a parking program. Lastly, the emphasis upon standards requiring safe provisions for construction and operation of parking garages appears to re f l e c t a need for protection of the public health, welfare, and safety. Zoning Zoning i s one of the most comonly used legal devices available for implementing the land-use plan of a city. Urban zoning may simply be defined as the division of a municipality or other governmental unit into d i s t r i c t s , the basic types of which are residental, commercial, and industrial, and the regulation within those d i s t r i c t s of: 54 1) . The height and bulk of buildings and other structures; 2) . The area of a lot 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 was noted by the Metropolitan Housing Council of Chicago (Blair, 1964, p.517) in 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 itse 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, like 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 in the provincial statutes establishing the municipality. The enabling act in 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, in 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 in 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 district to district, rather than being uniform throughout the city. Thus, a given area might be restricted to single-family residences with height regulations, minimum lot 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 fire 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 neighborhoodsn. 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 in order to contribute to the neighborhood quality of the area. It 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 district may only permit single-family houses with a density of five families or twenty per acre, for example, whereas in a multiple dwelling district the density i s allowed to reach hundreds of people per acre. These variations i n population density must be reflected in other precise plans for the city since they affect the provisions of a l l community facilities and services including schools, commercial establishments, police and fire protection, and u t i l i t i e s . Essentially, the underlying purpose of regulating uses in 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 facilities such as major u t i l i t y lines and heavily paved streets are restricted to those areas where the facilities exist or are planned to be installed (Goodman and Freund, 1968, p.426). In regard to automobile parking garages, city zoning by-laws can effect control over the external and internal site features of these structures in 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 in association or major alteration of existing construction. In the former case, through establishing zoning districts and regulating land uses within these districts, city 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 in a general commercial district, but may not be permitted in a local commercial district. 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. It i s obvious that a parking garage i s needed in a general commercial district where such uses permitted may include office buildings, television studios, and department stores, whereas i t i s not needed in 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 facil 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 district ^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 d i f f i c u l t . In a c i t y l i k e Milwaukee, no other use may be made of land i n this area (Fordham, 1956, p.9), but i n Vancouver, British Columbia, a more fle x i b l e by-law has been enacted, i n that certain types of residential buildings may be permitted i n this zone (City of Vancouver, 1969). A few c i t i e s have however established a special d i s t r i c t to designate privately-owned property specifically to be used for parking; but as Williams (1966, p.228) points out, the courts have "struck this down as arbitrary and over-restrictive". Williams goes on to state: "If the public desires to regulate property as specifically as that, the public authorities should acquire i t " (p.228). By a different use of the zoning mechanism, most c i t i e s require the provision of designated amounts of parking space i n connect with new or substantially altered structures or uses according to a ratio determined by the need for parking accommodations. In regard to a parking garage, such an application of the zoning by-law. can effectively regulate the internal feature of size or capacity of this structure. An analysis of this by-law for off-street 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 this point. Historically, Columbus, Ohio i s generally credited with being the f i r s t municipality to require that off-street parking areas be provided i n connection with certain types of residential structures (Mogren, 1952, p.25). Later, Fresno, California became the f i r s t municipality to adopt regulations subjecting hotels and hospitals to similar 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 in 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 lot, the cars visiting an establishment will be dumped on the public streets, and will 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 in a quantity which can cope with the parking problems created by commercial enterprises, i t will become necessary to develop such facilities as independent ventures. Such ventures, however, are less certain of maintaining a balance between commerical floor space and parking space, although some, like the Merchant Association in 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 retail 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 lot being improved. For example, in Los Angeles, California, the parking fa 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 city 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 in the downtown area of the city, i t seems reasonable to say that the parking fa c i l i t y built to accommodate 625 automobiles would be a parking garage. A case -in - point i s the Music Center for Performing Arts in Los Angeles (Hackman and Martin, 1969, p.7-3). However, for a 300 seat cinema located in a suburban shopping center, i t i s reasonable to say that the patron's automobiles could be accommodated in a parking lot. The erection of a parking garage i n the latter case i s not needed and further, would be uneconomic. TABLE 1 TYPICAL ZONING REQUIREMENTS, INDICATED PARKING SPACE NEEDS, AND SUGGESTED PLANNING STANDARDS Range In Number Of Parking Spaces Per Indicated Unit Land Use Single-Family Residence Apartment House Hospital Auditorium9 Theater, or Stadium Restaurant Retail Office Manufacturing-Warehousing College-University Church Unit dwelling dwelling bed seat seat 1,000 sq. f t . (gross floor area) 1,000 sq. f t . employee student seat Zoning Requirements 1-2 0.4-0.5 up 0,25-1.40 0.08-0.25 variable 1.5-3.0 variable variable variable 0.10-0.33 Parking Space Needs 0.5-2.2 0.3-2.0 0.60-1.40 0.08-0.50 N.A. 1.5-8.0 2.9-4.0 variable 0.4-0.6 N.A. Planning Standards 1-2+ 0.7-2.0 1.0-1.4 0.25-0.33 0.33-0.50 2.0-8.0 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 in the city center. New Haven, Conn.j Author, 1965s p. 65. 61 Farther, by establishing a maximum distance standard, a zoning ordinance can regulate the location of the parking garage. As pointed out previously, some c i t i e s ' by-laws require that the stipulated parking area must be located within a certain distance of the stated establishment. Therefore, i f a parking garage i s to provide this space, i t must adhere to the location requirement. Zoning by-laws regulating the uses of land i n particular areas of the c i t y and requiring the provision of parking space for each new or altered structure can thus effectively regulate the spatial features of location and capacity of a parking garage as well as establish the need for such a f a c i l i t y . Urban Transportation Planning Parking i s an integral 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 basically connected to or a part of the transportation system" (Hunnicutt, 1965, p.^7). This i s not just i f i a b l e . For although the driver looks upon freeways or thoroughfares as the primary transport mode by which to reach his destination, they alone, even i n ample supply, cannot solve the driver's problem. At the end of his journey, the driver must find a place at which to park his automobile. Parking must thus be considered as the terminal storage of vehicles and as a result, an integral and indispensible part of the transportation system. 62 Recognition of such a fact, though, was long in 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 facilities. City governments did not always fully understand the importance of providing adequate parking facilities, especially in the central business district; and traffic 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 facilities 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 in the coordination of off-street parking facilities with freeway developments. By coordination, i t i s meant that the location of off-street parking facilities, including parking garages, i s often determined by a freeway system and the resulting street pattern. In many cities, 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 travel to and from freeways* However, as Smith (1961, pp.230-231) points out, "problems of ramp spacing, geometric design, and cost, especially i n central areas, w i l l l i m i t direct connections to major parking structures where adequate reservoir capacity can be provided". Examples of successful coordination via direct ramp connections include a 1,000 -car garage at Detroit's Cobo Mall, and Hartford, Connecticut's Constitution Plaza Garage. An integral part of a comprehensive transportation development i n downtown St. Louis, Missouri, i s the provision of a massive parking garage linked directly to the two-le v e l Daniel Boone Expressway (Smith, 1961, p.234). Adjusted c i t y street connections usually involve the improvement of a connecting street between a parking garage and a freeway. The widing of Chicago's Michigan Avenue to provide direct 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 also offers opportunities to develop new transportation routes and as a consequence, new off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . In New Haven, Connecticut, for example, the downtown redevelopment project has provided for the locating and building of a freeway system and the locating and building of a 1500 - car parking garage i n relation to this 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 transit f a c i l i t i e s . The location of 6k these parking f a c i l i t i e s i s determined by the location of transit routes and stops. Although parking for transit-users i s usually 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 location of the parking garage i s affected by planning for transit f a c i l i t i e s . Internal features of parking garages also have a close physical relationship with streets, expressways, and other arterials. The entrances and exits of parking garages must be located so as to harmonize incoming and outgoing vehicles with the flow of street t r a f f i c . Most engineers agree that entrances and exits should be located so as not to lead into 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, for example, Ricker, 1957; Whiteside, 1961; Fordham, 1956; Burrage and Mogren, 1957). Instead, they recommend that entrances and exits to and from the parking garage be tied i n with a one-way street system or secondary streets. Burrage and Mogren (1957, p<150) suggest that an idea location for a garage i s on a block between a pair of one-way streets which w i l l permit cars from either direction to enter and leave without crossing t r a f f i c . Access to a rear alley or a back street may accomplish the same purpose. Further, parking consultants recommend that entrances and exits should be located as far as possible from street intersections. The slow movement of entering and leaving a garage should be removed from the normal congestion of street intersections 65 (Ricker, 1957, p>7). The size or capacity of a parking garage i s also a function of i t s location in relation to traffic flow planning. In determining the size of a garage, a parking consultant must always examine and anticipate changes in the traffic pattern resulting from changes in 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 traffic congestion. For example, consultants in 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 will be an even distribution of traffic on the streets and that traffic operations are maximized (Read et a l , 1968, p.133). A similar point was stressed by planners ln 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 traffic 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 literature* i t would thus seem reasonable to conclude that i n relation to parking garages, c i t y transportation and t r a f f i c planning can influence the external feature of garage location as well as the int e r a l site features of entrance and exit, size, and reservoir space* Urban Renewal Planning Current c i t y planning decisions concerning central business d i s t r i c t renewal d e a r l y reflects the growing need to conserve, rehabilitate, or redevelop this urban area* Such a need has been created by declines i n the C B D's relative position i n r e t a i l sales, land values, number of businesses, and additional capital investments. Concurrently, increased congestion and parking deficiencies have made trips downtown less pleasant and more expensive. The results 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, relative reductions i n tax income and a general lowering of i t s relative attractiveness as a place to work, shop, set up a new business, or expand an existing one" (Smith, 1959, p.156). Although the economic and social climate for renewing urban centres varies among c i t i e s , urban renewal usually affords many opportunities for a total downtown design encompassing buildings, open spaces, transit, 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 facilities 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 facility, the garage, which, as Robert Whiteside (1961, p.10) writes, must be "designed as an integral part of the over-all development". As areas in the central business district suitable for parking garages are limited, spatially and monetarally, downtown renewal projects offer excellent opportunities i n which to locate such facilities. Such opportunities are made available through the redesigning of space in specific areas of the downtown. If 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 facilities within i t s boundaries. Further, i f city officials recognize and take advantage of the opportunities presented by central business district renewal, their decision to locate a parking garage within a project may substantially contribute to relieving downtown traffic 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. In Rochester. New York, the Midtown Plaza incorporated an 1,800 - space underground garage into an office block-shopping mall redevelopment project. Plans for the Bunker H i l l Urban Renewal Project i n Los Angeles provide for tower apartments for 6,000 to 8,000 persons, office buildings, and commercial uses for a daytime population of 50,000 people, and related parking structures, on a 136-acre site (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 parking spaces. An interesting footnote to this l a t t e r project was that the provision of off-street parking was a prerequisite for private investment and a basic requirement for mortgages. Plans for redevelopment of the Central Area i n Edmonton, Alberta also ref l e c t the importance of parking i n this type of urban planning (The City of Edmonton, 1965). Within the Central Area, plans for the Civic Centre area c a l l for the building of three major shopper parking structures as well as the building of underground structures. In calling for the development of these garages, planners have recognized the importance of providing parking as an integral part of the commercial, hotel, office or other buildings being constructed f o r the core area. Similarly, planning for downtown redevelopment i n Calgary, Alberta stressed the importance of integrating parking f a c i l i t i e s with a ground level mall, c i v i c plaza and improved 69 roadway widths (City of Calgary, 1967). Within a four block area, a total of 2,370 parking s t a l l s would be required to cater for projected demands. These w i l l be provided on three levels and allocated for development on a parcel basis with f l e x i b i l i t y to provide for integration as the Scheme i s implemented. These f a c i l i t i e s are regarded as the responsibility of the developers of each specific parcel (City of Calgary, 1967. p.42). City planning for renewal or redevelopment of central business d i s t r i c t s was thus in f l u e n t i a l i n the location of parking garage developments i n these particular 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 certain amount of parking space for each type and size of new or altered structure within the project. A more indepth look at the effects of this ordinance on parking garages has been taken i n an earlier section of this 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. In developing a parking program or programs, a municipality often determines, indirectly, the types of 70 facilities 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 facilities 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 in terms of i t s advantages and disadvantages, limitations, legality, and forms. Private Enterprise. This type of operation describes the parking facilities developed, owned, and operated by private individuals or companies. As Fordham (1956, p.73) points out, such private development of parking facilities i s of three forms: ...(a) commercially developed lots or garages built and operated for profit; (b) special purpose parking facilities developed by non-profit corporations representing various commercial groups, such as retail trade associations; and (c) special purpose parking facilities 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 initiative i n the development and operation of off-street parking 71 facilities since i t places these facilities 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 dear span express exit ramp i n the world, and also boasted the f i r s t pedestrian skywalk, in their Calgary Parkade (Hackman and Martin, 1969* p.1-4). Further, under a private enterprise program, the land on which the fa c i l i t y i s sited remains taxable, except in rare cases of tax exemption. Another advantage of the private enterprise approach i s that any financial risk in developing off-street facilities i s taken by private interest; "the public i s not gambling on the financial feasibility of parking fa c i l i t i e s " (Fordham, 1956, p.75). Finally, under the private enterprise approach, there i s allowance for functional consolidation of parking facilities 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 in a l l cities, since many cities* building by-laws either limit accessory commercial facilities to the ground floor of a garage or prohibit them. There has arisen in the private parking industry a national trade association which i s dedicated to the private enterprise cause in the parking business. The National Parking Association (N.P.A.), with headquarters in Washington, D.C, i s consistently critical of governmental entry into the parking 72 business. William Barr, the executive-director of the N.P.A., testified 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 establish 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 institutions... have publicly stated that they have millions of dollars invested i n downtown American c i t i e s and are wi wi l l i n g to invest millions more for off-street parking to protect that investment; however, they cannot lend money for this purpose where there exists the threat or actual existence of subsidized municipal competition. Lending institutions have discovered that parking can be a profitable business where there exists a proper "climate" for free enterprise. But where subsidized municipal competition i s present, not only i s private enterprise unable to expand, i t i s driven off the market. Reflective of the Association's attitude i s the t i t l e of a recent publication: The Parking Industry: private enterprise for the public  good (Hackman and Martin, 1969). The major limitation of the private enterprise approach to parking has been the i n a b i l i t y to furnish a sufficient quantity of properly located parking space to suit a city's need. I t i s not uncommon to find instances where a private agency i s unable to assemble land for parking because of the price asked for i t . Such was the case i n Philadelphia, where a merchant's association gave up the thought of expanding their garage because of the high prices asked for 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 priate enterprise. For example, i n Houston, Texas, nearly a l l of the downtown parking has been constructed by private capital, usually i n conjunction with the development of major office buildings (McGtonigle, 1963), banks, and department stores (Smith, 1965). In Minneapolis, the downtown parking needs are also met by private enterprise. Here, i n 1948, leading downtown retailers, including 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 private enterprise i n this city. Merchant associations and department stores are other examples of the priate enterprise approach to parking. These types of organizations often provide parking as a source of convenience and attraction to shoppers. Well-known examples of merchant's associations participation 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 participation of department stores i n the parking business have been mentioned i n Chapter I I . 74 Private and Public cooperation. Off-street 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 this type of operation range from c i t i e s buying or leasing land for parking from private individuals to the exact opposite situation, i n which a c i t y -financed multi-storey parking structure i s given over to the highest-bidding commercial operation on a long-term lease. "Cooperation may also take the form of tax r e l i e f arrangements, urban redevelopment programs, under which land i n a redevelopment area i s to be developed by private enterprise for parking purposes; and technical services, advioe and surveys" (Fordham, 1956, p.79)» This type of program for developing off-street parking combines many of the advantages of private and municipal undertakings. For example, the land for 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 participation 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 location. Another advantage that results from this arrangement i s that i n having private capital 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 at a specified date, i t removes the financial risk of such an undertaking from the c i t y . Simultaneously, a permanent f a c i l i t y i n an ideal location 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 capital (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 interim, the c i t y i s paid a rental or a percentage of net profits. The major disadvantage of this approach comes not from the program i t s e l f , but from trying 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 private individuals and c i t y governments, and i n others, few c i t i e s have suitable land for parking i n their downtown area to entice private investment. However, i n such major c i t i e s as San Francisco, Baltimore, Pittsburg, and Chicago, private and public cooperation has provided them with a complete parking program. Municipal. The promotion and protection of public health, welfare, and safety are some of the basic purposes of c i t y government. If a parking problem persists i n a c i t y , i t may become the responsibility of the c i v i c government to take whatever steps are required to alleviate this 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 responsibility i n the matter. Recognizing their responsibility, c i t i e s i n increasing numbers are providing and operating off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . The administration of such a program has been done through (a) regular public o f f i c i a l s , (b) boards, or (c) parking authorities. 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 responsibility i s delegated. Culp (1967, P«^*0 76 maintains that the placing of responsibility for the development of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s i n an existing c i t y department has the potential advantages of: ...(a) making the community's parking system including curb spaces, more efficient; (b) f a c i l i t a t i n g proper integration 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 profits 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 differs 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 city's off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . The function of the board i s that of advising, especially 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 closely related to the parking problem through their occupation. The main disadvantages of such a, board i s that much of i t s authority rests with the mayor and that sometimes i t becomes a body more interested i n gaining public recognition than i n service (Burrage and Mogren, 1957, p.211). Parking authorities are discussed l a t e r . The l e g a l i t y of municipal development of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s i s provided through a variety of powers. In the United States, this right may be provided through home-rule powers (the municipal charter), state enabling legislation, or implied 77 powers* In Canada, l e g a l i t y for the provision of off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s by municipal governments i s established by the Provincial legislature 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 for a coordinated system of off-street parking f a c i l i t e s , well-located and functionally designed, and i n connection with such planning to conduct surveys; (b) to assemble land for parking f a c i l i t i e s at desired locations; (c) to finance i n any desired manner; (d) to construct f a c i l i t i e s or to contract for construction; and (e) to operate and maintain f a c i l i t i e s or to enter into arrangements with others for operation and maintenance (Culp, 1967* p.33). Principal opposition to municipal entry into an off-street parking program i s usually based on tiie contention that i t represents unfair governmental competition with private enterprise. Further, the opposition contends that municipal parking f a c i l i t i e s may also involve removal of land from the tax r o l l (Hackman and Martin, 1969)* "although as an offsetting consideration, parking improvements.often contribute to an increase i n the tax revenues from nearby properties" (Culp, 1967* p.44). Generally, private enterprise asserts that professional private parking interests 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 decision to chose either approach, and the advantages of each, must be based on the situation i n individual 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 initiative 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 facilities; (b) to prepare a master plan of off-street parking facilities to meet present and anticipated future needs; (c) to plan, design, and locate facilities; (d) to program construction; (e) to purchase, lease or condemn property; (f) to construct, improve and maintain facilities; (g) to f i x and alter rates, fees, 79 charges, or rentals for use of facilities; and (h) to lease for operation. There are some obvious advantages of authority administration in the provision of off-street parking fa 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 in a single agency; (b) relative freedom from political pressures; (o) the avoidance of certain governmental process and other delays; and (d) the payment of costs, as a rule, from users of the facil 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 ability of the agency to initiate parking relief 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 ability 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 in some existing city department. 3. Because they are dependent upon their own earning and can in no way rely on the financial support of general city credit, parking authority debt service charges are often appreciably higher than those found in 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 in operation since 1949 (Fisher, 1950). The outstanding feature of the San Francisco Authority's program is its cooperation with private enterprise. In fact, the Authority actually sought to stimulate private enterprise "to acquire sites, finance, and construct al 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 in the central business district of San Francisco. Parking authorities are also in 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 its 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, in 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 utilize any one or a l l of these various sources, where legally permissible, for deriving funds to finance i t s parking facil i t i e s . General Fund Appropriations: One method which cities use to finance parking facilities 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. If a surplus does not exist in the city treasury and this method i s adopted, new sources of general revenues may have to be found or otherwise an increase in assessed valuations may be required. Current Budget Expenditures: This method has been often used to acquire and develop off-street parking facilities. Its use was particularly popular nearly two decades ago, during the early days of municipal activity in the parking field. Much of the early city participatory efforts in furnishing off-street parking were modest, 83 designed to meet the growing need for parking space in 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 in 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 is required to develop parking fa 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 in a previously determined benefited district the cost of the parking development" (Mogren, 1951» p.434). The theory behind this method i s that owners of business property in close proximity to parking facilities enjoy a greater proportion of the benefit occuring from the fa c i l i t y than property owners farther away or in the rest of the city. It i s argued that parking facilities 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 facilities near their sites. m The major problem of this approach i s in 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 in 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 facility. 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 facilities 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 facilities (Culp, 1967, p.18). Parking Revenue: Many cities are attempting to meet the growing need for off-street parking by financing such facilities 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 facilities are earmarked for the further development of off-street parking facil i t i e s . 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 facilities (Culp, 1967). Often, cities integrate curb and municipal off-street parking facilities into a unified whole, controlled, operated, and financed as a single unit. In such a system, the revenues from both types of facilities are placed in 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 facilities and may be liquidated more quickly; (b) off-street facilities that may not be completely self-liquidating but are an essential part of the program; i f combined with financially successful facilities may be continued in operation to serve a particular need, supported in part by more prosperous members of the system; and (c) the rate structures for curb and off-street facilities 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, in that a number of cities will not develop off-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 start. Such a delay may lead to public aggregation towards the city's role i n providing and financing off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s . A second disadvantage i s that this method of financing i s not practical for small l o c a l units with limited general revenues (The American City. 1970). Generally, however, this method i s popular i n c i t i e s where revenues are used to finance bond issues, i n most cases revenue bonds (Mogren, 1951; Culp, 1967; The American City. 1970). Borrowed Capital. The borrowing of funds for parking f a c i l i t i e s generally involves the issuance of bonds payable from property taxes or from special 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 credit of the entire city. Such bonds may be primarily or collaterally payable from "ad valorem"^ taxes, from special assessments, or from any desired c i t y revenues, including revenue from off-street 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 legal debt and tax limits and usually require approval of the electorate •Ad Valorem i s defined as: "According to value". 87 unless specifically exempted from these requirements by law (Culp, 1967, p.19).. These requirements alone may serve as deterents to this method of financing; for example, i n many instances, legal debt limits may already have been reached, or the legal debts limits have not been sufficiently high to finance more than a limited parking program (Mogren, 1951; Culp, 1967). The chief advantages of general-obligation bonds are low interest rates because they are backed by the f a i t h , credit, and taxing, power, of the c i t y , and the ease i n marketing an issue. The voters i n amny c i t i e s have approved large issues of general-obligation bonds for parking. However, i n some cases this method has been rejected as unfair. The basis for this rejection i s that some voters f e e l that commercial interests 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 benefit commensurate with their tax burden (Mogren, 1956, p.431). Although these bonds were very attractive i n the past, with today's tight money market, high interest rates, and the pending threat of making municipals taxable, general-obligation bonds have become less appealing and saleable (The American City. 1970, p.92). Revenue Bonds; These types of bonds have become the most popular financing source. By this 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 retire the bonds. Revenue bonds are usually more 88 difficult 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 facilities including the sale of gasoline and o i l products and repair facilities 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 in 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 adaptability for placing the responsibility for financing on those directly aided by the parking improvement. Assessment Bonds: This type of bond i s supported by the funds derived from the assessment of the total or a part of the cost of providing the needed parking f a c i l i t i e s i n a particular business area. The costs are allocated to the property i n the area i n proportion to the direct and indirect benefits from increased business a c t i v i t y i n the area and increased land values, which may result from the parking improvement (Fordham, 1956, p.48). Generally, assessment bonds are limited obligation bonds. The collection of assessments may however be anticipated by general-obligation bonds and assessments may bolster revenue bonds. Interest 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 interest rate required compared with the rate for general-obligation bonds (Fordham, 1956; Culp, 1967). Building, Codes Briefly defined, "a building code i s a legal document which sets forth 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, in 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 fire 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 fire safety requirements. For example, many building codes provide for the establishment of fire limits within which only buildings of certain types of construction may be erected. "The object of establishing fire limits i s to restrict the spread of fire to limited areas within a city" (Sanderson, 1969, p.16). Another fire 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 fire risk to a community for a l l use groups and a l l types of construction. Occupancy or use classifications in building codes are 91 established according to the inherent fire hazard of the use. A city in 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 fire. On the other hand, those types wherein noncombustibile materials are required so that the elements of the structure will not contribute fuel to the fire are classified as wnoncombustibileM. Building codes are however not without fault. For example, building codes or by-laws in some cities are excessively restrictive and require material of a quality beyond what i s reasonably adequate, resulting in high building costs. More common, however, such codes lag behind the times. 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, including construction materials, exterior walls, heat and l i g h t , ventilation, bumpers, sanitation, floor loadings, screening, stairways, elevators, and exitways. Building codes also provide for the necessary maintenance and housekeeping of these garages. Moreover, building codes regulate the use or occupancy of the garage. Such regulation includes the provision of accessory commerical functions, i n particular, f a c i l i t i e s for the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the servicing and repairing 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, building codes are based upon the principle of the protection and promotion of the public 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 at their disposal a wide range of practices and controls with which to regulate the external and internal site features of these structures. One such control i s the city's zoning by-law, which regulates the external spatial feature of location of a parking garage and the internal spatial feature of size 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 for 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 integral part of the urban automotive transportation system, planning for the l a t t e r also includes planning for the external and internal features of location, entrances and exits, and size of f a c i l i t i e s for the former activity. Parking garages are also being designed as integral parts of urban renewal or redevelopment projects. On a much borader scale, parking garages are being regulated through a city's administrative and financial approach to parking i n general. The analysis of a city's administrative approach centered on the available choices of parking programs including: (a) private enterprise, (b) private-public cooperation, or (c) municipal. An analysis of the financial approach concerned i t s e l f with the choices available for municipal financing of parking programs. . In regard to automobile parking garages, c i t y building codes or by-laws also effectively regulate internal features of these structures including the placement of accessory commercial f a c i l i t i e s within them. But not unlike other regulatory methods, c i t y building codes are designed for the protection and promotion of the public 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 spatial effects of c i t y legislation and practices upon the external and internal site features of automobile parking garages. This examination did not however provide an indepth study of the problems that arise due to c i t y regulation of parking structures. In order to delineate the problems and effects arising from c t i y regulation of garages, a particular example of internal site regulation has been chosen for 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 installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages. This example of internal site regulation i s chosen primarily because i t exhibits facets of the problems arising out of the differing formulation and varying interpretations of c i t y legislation. Secondly, i t i s chosen because an analysis of the effects of this regulation provides an interesting insight into a conflict between actors at the industrial and at the municipal l e v e l . Further, the analysis also offers an insight into the effects of a conflict created as a result of the setting of dissimilar goals by c i t y decision-makers. In analyzing the effects of c i t y legislation, the 95 current analysis must recognise that these effects are, however, dependent on the present situation within each community. But, i n general terms, the effects of such legislation can be examined i n terms of considering community and private needs and promoting the public health, welfare and safety. Generally, i n formulating legislation, the problems that are legal and administrative i n nature may be grouped into three areas of conflict: custom, interpretation of words and phrases, and drafsmanship. Custom. The customary recognized situation has precedent, but has shown that the need for i t s regulation or prohibition w i l l prove too d i f f i c u l t to legislate against. For example, the roof-sign, which i n the past has been a common occurrence, has been recently prohibited i n certain 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 carefully, so that interpretation i s consistent. The rule "one word for one meaning" applies especially i n relation to parking garages. In spelling out the definition of garages, i t i s of the utmost interest that the regulations are clearly aimed at a specific classification of garage type. This becomes quite evident when sections of the by-law permit or prohibit specific types of f a c i l i t i e s i n certain types of garages. Draftsmanship. The interpretation of words and phrases i s dependent upon the wording of the ordinance. Thus, the by-law, i f drafted according to rules, should be "tight" and generally able to be upheld 96 in courts of law. One of the problems in regulating the installation of certain facilities 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 facilities 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 facilities by municipalities, has also recognized the economic importance of them. But the provision of these facilities inside parking garages goes beyond economic need, and customer convenience and reaches into the area of public health, welfare, and safety, which, in effect, determines or, in some instances, i s determined by city building and fire by-laws. The provisions of city building and fire by-laws, however, sometimes clash with the policies set by private concerns, and as well, with other city 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 city 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 including Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Calgary, and Victoria, and the western United States, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle, were chosen for analysis. They prove to be varied i n interpretation and technique with regard to the regulation of 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. Secondly, a more specific analysis i s made of pertinent sections of the building by-law for the c i t y of Vancouver, as they have effectively created a conflict between actors at the municipal l e v e l and the industrial l e v e l and an internal conflict again at the municipal l e v e l . The Case of Western Canadian Cities. On a national scale, the National Building Code and the National Fire Code are recognized and accepted as the model codes which form the basis of Canada's code system. These codes are formulated by the Associate Committee on National Building Codes and the Associate Committee on National Fire Codes, both under the auspices of the National Research Council i n Ottawa. Of the utmost concern for these codes, i s the protection of public health, safety, and general welfare. With regard to automobile garages, open-air parking or other, The National Codes recommend standards which invariably influence internal site 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 definitions of the various garages as stated by the National Building Code (1970) and should be reviewed before continuing. As the National Building and Fire Codes prescribe standards concerning the internal site features of garages, they are also recommending the requirements to be adopted by municipalities with regard to 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 the parking garage. Prior to 1970, the National Building Code (1965> p. 70) and the National Fire Code (1963, P.H3) stated that: The dispensing of gasoline shall not take place inside Tnrndiwflw or the f a c i l i t i e s for dispensing shall not be in s t a l l ed i n any building. As i s noted by the definitions i n Part I of Appendix A, the Codes classified a l l types of garages as buildings. However, i n the recently released edition of the National Building Code (1970), the previously r i g i d standards regarding the install a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline inside buildings are somewhat relaxed; and the Code now contains the a r t i c l e : F a c i l i t i e s f o r dispensing gasoline shall not be i n s t a l l ed i n any building except i n buildings of Group F occupancy when approved (N.B.C., 1970, Artic l e 3.3.7.8, p.116). Within Group F occupancy are repair 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 rigid blanket ruling covering a l l cases, they have l e f t the door ajar"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, in which case play i t by ear" 2. One building inspector however views this change as an appeasement to Ontario buildings officials who were desirous of having the inside location of pumps so as to overcome any legal difficulties 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 facilities inside parking garages have been more propitious than those concerning gasoline dispensing faci l i t i e s . The previous and the present National Building Codes clearly state that facilities •^Letter from A. James, City of Victoria Building Inspector, February 17, 1971. 2Ibid. ^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 facilities 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 fire separation. A parking area for automobiles i s considered, to be another occupancy. Thus, although automobile service and repair facilities are not permitted within the parking area it 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 facilities for the servicing and repairing of automobiles be permitted inside the same building as a storage garage, but separated by two-hour fi r e resistive construction, plus other recommended construction standards. The degree of adoption by western Canadian cities of the recommended standards set down in the National Building and Fire Codes with regard to both the installation of gasoline 101 dispensing and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages has varied. The City of Calgary, for example, since 1958, has permitted the dispensing of gasoline inside parking structures. Dispensing Pumps shall not be installed i n any garage or building area, but may be installed i n Parking Structures (City of Calgary Fire Code By-law No. 5220). A parking structure i s defined, as "a building or structure designed for parking automobiles"*''. Prior to I960, the City of Saskatoon also permitted, the placement of gasoline dispensing f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages, but has since adopted the National Building Code, thereby prohibiting their i n s t a l l a t i o n ^ . Similarly, the City of Winnipeg permitted dispensing f a c i l i t i e s f o r gasoline inside garages u n t i l 1961, when i t enacted By-law Number 18600: In no case may dispensing devices for gasoline be installed inside a building (City of Winnipeg By-law No. 18600, Section 13). The City of Regina and the City of Victoria have, however, consistently prohibited, the install a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s for dispensing gasoline inside parking garages i n accordance with recommended standards i n the National Building Code. In western Canadian c i t i e s , the building by-laws i +Letter from City Calgary Planning Department, March 1, 1971. -^Letter from R. Burdyny, City of Saskatoon Architectural Assistant, February 19, 1971. 102 concerning the installation of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside 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 Victoria have permitted the installation of these f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages under the specifications set down by the National Building Code, whereas the City of Saskatoon has prohibited their inside location. The City of Winnipeg has however enacted the most permissive regulations of any western Canadian ci t y . The Metropolitan Corporation of Greater Winnipeg By-law Number 711, Article 3«3«7«3» enacted i n October 1965» states that "minor automobile repair work and servicing may be permitted" inside an open-air parking garage, "provided" (a) that there i s no dispensing of gasoline within the building, 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 differingly adopted the standards recommended i n the National Building and Fire Codes, 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. The Case of Western United States Cities. 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 inside 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 act as the foundations for the United States code system. Two standards issuing agencies deserve special attention since the standards they issue constitute the bulk of those found i n that part of c i t i e s * building codes concerning automobile parking garages. These agencies are the National Fire Protection Association and the Building Officials* Conference of America. The National Fire 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 building regulations and the administrative organization, techniques and methods of their enforcement by l o c a l governments" (Sanderson, 1963, p.83). The BOCA also publishes a model building code. However, the program and work of both agencies i s similar, 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 similar to those i n Canada, i n that they recommend standards which, i n effect, regulate the internal 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 definitions of the various types of garages, as stated by the NFPA and the BOCA are found i n Part II of Appendix A. Codes developed by the American agencies concerning automobile garages contain provisions dealing with the installation of gasoline dispensing and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside these structures. For example, i n the volume dealing with occupancy standards and process hazards within the National Fire Code, as set down by the NFPA (1969), are contained several references i n regard to the inside location of gasoline dispensing units. However, unlike the National Building and Fire Codes of Canada, the United States National Fire Code i s much more permissive i n the matter concerning their inside location. Inside location including Open Air Parking Garages: Approved dispensing units may be location inside garages upon specific approval of the authority having jurisdiction (NFPA, 1969, Article 2423, p.88-21). The BOCA Building Code (1969) contains similar standards concerning the instal l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages. In the definition of the parking garage (See Appendix A, Part I I ) , i t i s noted that "gasoline, o i l and similar products may be dispensed for the servicing of (passenger) vehicles" inside this structure. In regard to the placement of automobile service and 1 0 5 repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages, the two codes d i f f e r from the Canadian codes as well as between themselves. The National Fire Protection Association recommends that f a c i l i t i e s for servicing automobiles be permitted inside a l l types of garages, including the enclosed parking garage and the open-air parking garage (See Appendix A, Part I I ) . The agency's code further acknowledges that repair shops may be placed inside parking garages without an appropriate f i r e separation (See Appendix A, Part I I ) . I t appears that the only restrictions placed on the installation of repair f a c i l i t i e s i n garages are that: 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 le 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 for the service and repair of automobiles be permitted only i n public garages. The BOCA code suggests that no provisions for the repairing of automobiles should be made inside 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 particular c i t i e s of the western United States has differed. However, i t would appear that a l l large Pacific Coast American metropolises have enacted the recommendations found i n the National Fire Code, as set down by the National Fire Protection Association, concerning the inside location of gasoline 106 dispensing units i n parking garages. Typical by-laws thus read: Sec.7.06 (b) Where an outside insta l l a t i o n of dispensing devices i s impractical or impossible, the install a t i o n of a dispensing device, approved for inside use, may be permitted by the Chief of Division above ground lev e l within a garage or other building (City of San Francisco Fire Code, Artic 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 units may be located inside garages upon specific approval of the Fire Chief (City of Seattle Fire 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 units have been installed. For example, gasoline dispensers have been located inside the University Properties Garage, which occupies three levels 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 street. In the c i t y of Los Angeles i s also found examples of automobile parking garages inside which are found gasoline dispensing units. For example, gasoline dispensing pumps are found inside the Pershing Square Underground Parking Garage (ELose, 1965). 107 Similarly, facilities for the dispensing of gasoline are located inside the Union Square Underground Parking Garage in San Francisco, Acceptance and adoption of the practices recommended by the NFPA in the National Fire Code, concerning the installation of automobile service and repair facilities 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 fire code further states that: Sec,57,100,31. Repairs involving motor overhauling, open flame, automobile fueling system, or the use of flammable liquids in any form are prohibited in any basement ,or sub-basement garage (City of Los Angeles, Fire Code, p.357). The cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle have thus adopted building and fire 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 in matters concerning the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair facilities inside automobile parking garages. Further, these recommendations have been adopted by these cities and incorporated in their building and fire by-laws, s t i l l in recognition of the need for the protection of public health, welfare, and safety. 108 The Case of Vancouver, City building by-laws concerning the regulation or the prohibition 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 re f l e c t an adherance by the City of Vancouver to the standards concerning these garages recommended i n the Canadian National Building and Fire Codes, These by-laws state atypically (See Appendix B, Part I I ) : (i) Storage Barages 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: (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 (City of Vancouver Building By-law No. 4 1 9 3 , Sec. 3 . 1 2 , A r t i c l e 3 . 1 2 . 7 . 4 . , p . 3 1 ) . Similarly, f o r open-air parking garages, the by-law states: 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 (City of Vancouver Building By-law No. 4 1 9 3 , Sec. 3 . 1 2 , Article 3 . 1 2 . 7 . 5 . , p.32) . In regard to repair garages, the City i n adhering to the National Building Code, allows for their placement inside a parking 109 garage, provided that the repair area i s separated from the parking area by certain structural requirements including a two-hour f i r e separation and a 1.5 hour self-closing f i r e door at every opening between the two areas and that no gasoline i s dispensed inside the garage. As suggested by these by-laws, i t would thus seem reasonable that the City of Vancouver has rigorously prohibited the inside location of gasoline dispensing units and has somewhat restricted the installation of automobile service and repair 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 provision of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages i s an important source of monetary income and customer attraction. The industry bases their outlook on the fact 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 station 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 realizes that there exists a demand for gasoline and o i l products and automobile servicing and repairing i n the downtown and i s thus desirous to profitably meet this demand. Further, the industry recognizes that the most economically feasible as well as profitable method of meeting this need i s to integrate automobile re t a i l i n g and servicing a c t i v i t i e s with parking operations, specifically parking garages. However, as noted previously, the City ,s building by-u o laws prohibit any such integration, on account that i t i s considered by the f i r e marshal! and building inspectors, to be too dangerous to the public health, welfare and safety. Bat, at the same time, Vancouver's zoning legislation prohibits the future building of gasoline service stations i n the downtown section of the c i t y (See City of Vancouver Zoning and Development by-law No. 3 5 7 5 ) . Thus, because of the restrlctiveness of both City zoning and building by-laws, the City can offer no alternative to the petroleum industry fo r a economically feasible location or relocation of their r e t a i l outlets within the downtown area. As a result of these policies set by the City and the desires of the industry, a conflict i s created between decision-makers at the municipal l e v e l and those at the industrial l e v e l , which i s further heightened by a conflict between the dissimilar goals of City zoning by-laws and c i t y building by-laws. Beginning i n 1964, the l o c a l decision-makers for the petroleum industry have tried to resolve the conflict through attempts to have the by-law restrictions concerning the i n s t a l l a tion of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside parking garages somewhat eased. Highlighting these attempts was a comprehensive brief presented to City Council, covering the location of gasoline storage tanks, gasoline dispensing pumps "inside" or "under" buildings and service or repair work and other occupancies i n parking garages, of which only the two l a t t e r topics are of concern here. I l l The Petroleum Industry Committee (PIC), a permanent body of representatives of the larger o i l companies operating i n British Columbia, presented the brief, i n 1965, i n the belief that regulations concerning the install a t i o n of dispensing equipment were "unnecessarily res t r i c t i v e , thus constituting a hindrance to development" (Petroleum Industry Committee, 1965, p . l ) . The brief went on to state: The Petroleum Industry has taken a very responsible and positive position i n other major c i t i e s with regard to the development of parking structures, i n some cases incorporated with office buildings or hotels and involving the sale of gasoline. Their role i n Vancouver has been negligible because of the unnecessarily s t r i c t regulations which lead to the uneconomic development of the site including the retailing of gasoline. The brief continued: In the public Interest i t i s desirable and necessary that such services be available i n the downtown area and. over the past several years, we have witnessed, a trend toward, their rapid elimination. This trend can only be stemmed by a relaxation of the Fire Regulations to permit more intensive integrated development with appropriate emphasis on safety standards (Petroleum Industry Committee, 1965, p . l ) . In regard to the install a t i o n of gasoline dispensing pumps inside garages, the Brief noted that by their interpretation of the National Building Code, the City Building Department prohibited their inside location. I t further observed that this ban "even extended to the condition of pumps under an overhang of a building". 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 II). 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 in connection with dispensing and unloading of gasoline at service stations and in 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 likely to exist only within a few inches of the f i l l pipe opening, even in s t i l l air. In the case of a minor gasoline s p i l l , a hazardous atmosphere i s likely to exist only i n the area directly above the liquid s p i l l , even in s t i l l air (American Petroleum Institute, 1962, p.2). Regarding the gasoline dispenser itse l f , the conclusions reached were: a) A hazardous atmosphere does not exist in an area adjacent to the dispenser during normal operation (A.P.I., 1962, p.3). 113 (b) A hazardous atmosphere i s not likely 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 in a parking garage. The Petroleum Industry Committee (1965» p.9) acknowledged the fact that the existing building by-law did not appear to prohibit repair work in 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 for 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 in 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 facilities inside garages. It 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 in the present City Zoning and Development By-law (1969, p.165) specifically in 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 tire repairs, and the washing and polishing and greasing of vehicles shall be permitted inside the garage. Although this by-law was enacted in 1957, the fact that i t has not 115 been rescinded in 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 in a court of law. There currently exists only one Parking District in downtown Vancouver. The District, one acre in 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 lot (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 in order to retail gasoline in agreement with the requirements set down in the City*® Building By-law. However, in 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, in resigning from another costly modification, argued that i t has not been prevented from installing minor service facilities in 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 tire repairs with no major mechanical repairs involved" 0. The Company further argued that there are numerous parkades in Vancouver with service facilities which are not up to the standard and quality of their garage, but which have been built in the past, and presently operate service facilities?. Further, C0S, Hyciek, President of Western Auto Park Limited, believes "that the only difference between these facilities, 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 in 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 in a conflicting position with City decision-makers in the matter of the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair facilities inside °Letter from C,S, Hyciek, President of Western Auto Park Limited, January 21, 1971. 7Ibid. 8Ibid, 117 automobile parking garages. The position of the industry i s further hindered by the dissimilarity 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 significant factors stand out from the analysis of this internal site regulation. A l l of the interested parties are generally concerned with protection of the public health, welfare, and safety. The municipal le v e l maintains that the insta l l a t i o n of gasoline dispensing units inside parking garages i s "too dangerous" to public safety, and have thus enacted building by-laws prohibiting such an occupancy?. The industrial l e v e l , on the other hand, i s also concerned with public safety, but argues that through modern and improved engineering techniques and building materials gasoline dispensing inside parking garages presents l i t t l e hazard to the public. In regard to the placement of automobile service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside garages, the municipal le v e l has l a i d down, i n the interests of public safety, specific structural requirements for garages containing such f a c i l i t i e s . The industrial l e v e l appears to adhere, although at times reluctantly, to such regulations. In attempting to legislate for the public health, ^Interview with R. Montador, Ap 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, in Vancouver, the petroleum industry recognizes that the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair facilities 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 in the downtown section of the city, that the most economically viable retail outlet for petroleum products and service work in 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 in matters concerning gasoline retailing in 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 in reference to parking garages. As one building inspector points out: 119 Most people would agree that a canopy over a gas pump, erected to protect users from the weather, does not constitute a building. Add a wall on one side for some reason and there i s some hesitancy, but again the majority w i l l avoid the issue by using the word structure rather than building. Add another wall and most people w i l l come down on the other side of the fence. So we have a sort of aliding-scale definition leading to a variety of interpretations, and a l l the time, the use or occupancy has not changed; but the hazard probably has 1 0. I t would thus appear that i n order to alleviate or perhaps, even to eliminate, some of the problems associated with internal site regulation, administrators or building by-laws should transfer their meticulous attention from words l i k e building or structure to consideration of use or occupancy or the actual hazard involved. The petroleum and the parking industries w i l l continue to lobby against stringent regulations covering the install a t i o n of gasoline dispensing units and service and repair f a c i l i t i e s inside automobile parking garages. In attempting to have these by-laws changed, the industries w i l l again approach the ci t y building departments and invariably, c i t y councils and commissioners. However, most western Canadian c i t i e s i n reviewing their by-laws, examine them i n l i g h t of public health, welfare and safety and nation precedent. The policy of the City possibly could be changed i f f i r e safety to both l i f e and property has been suitably established by a nationally recognized agencyH. 'Letter from A. James, February 17, 1971. •Letter from C.N.W. Shewan, City of Winnipeg Fire 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 in a nationally recognized, code, there are cities, 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 will be rescinded in the 1975 edition of the National Building Code-^. He bases his view on the notion that the committee responsible for writing the Code will 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 in the inside location of gasoline pumps. Simultaneously, however, there are city officials who believe that gasoline pumps inside garages are not dangerous, and further, that public officials must be willing to accept new ideas and to institute change accordingly. As one building inspector put i t : ? There will be opposition to gasoline pumps in 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. ^ I b i d . ^Interview with B.M. Boers, City of Nanaimo Building Inspector, December 29, 1971. 121 On instituting change in public policy, he gives the following views A by-law i s there for safety, and i f you go overboard in 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 in the best interest of the city. If you have convinced the politician, he will 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 will 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 in 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 in relation to the adopted policy, so that both the public and the private sectors can act accordingly i f not in 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 City of Vancouver, British Columbia i s not unlike most major c i t i e s i n regulating external and internal site features of automobile parking garages and thus has been chosen for a case study. Similar to most North American metropolises, the City of Vancouver's regulations concerning these structures appear to have four areas of emphasis. The f i r s t i s that of regulating external site features through the City's Zoning and Development By-law and City transportation and redevelopment planning. Secondly, internal site features are subject to regulation by once again the City's Zoning and Development By-law and City transportation and redevelopment planning as well as the City's Building By-law. Further, both the external and internal site features of parking garages i n Vancouver are subject to indirect regulation by the City's approach to the administration and financing of i t s parking program. Finally, regulation of the site features of a parking garage reflects the City's concern for the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety. The following study thus documents City of Vancouver zoning ordinances, planning proposals and decisions, administrative and financial practices, and building ordinances. Concentration i n 123 this case study i s mainly on parking garages i n the downtown section of Vancouver. The Setting The third largest c i t y i n Canada, Vancouver received i t s h i s t o r i c a l impetus fo r growth with the expansion of the trans-continental railway to a terminus at Coal Harbour i n 1886. Located on a peninsula lying north of the Fraser River and south of Burrard Inlet, the City 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 City i s the location of head offices or branch offices of many of the large corporations i n Canada, Federal and Provincial Government agencies, industrial plants with operations i n primary and secondary a c t i v i t i e s including timber, pulp and paper, minerals and food, and. increasing tertiary and quarternary a c t i v i t i e s , including r e t a i l i n g , entertainment, professional and personal services, and tourism. Vancouver i s also the center of increasing Canadian transportation and trade a c t i v i t i e s on the Pacific Rim, as witnessed i n the further development of the Burrard Inlet 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 just over two square miles^. The population of this area i s estimated to be 48,400 persons i n 1970, with 70 per cent of this 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 residential area called the West End. A further 91,000 persons are employed i n the main economic functions of the downtown including r e t a i l i n g , office work, service and warehousing, and institutional services. The industrial and warehouse area on the north side of False Creek employs an additional 1,600 people, bringing the total 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 for construction i n the downtown section of the City, employment i s expected to rise to a minimum of 133,000 persons or a maximum of 173,000 persons i n 1985. The Parking Situation With approximately 92,600 people employed i n the Downtown section of Vancouver and conservative estimates of an additional 40,000 people by 1985 plus an existing residential population of 48,400 people, transportation i n the downtown area has become a major concern to City planners. One of the basic and more important components i n the downtown automotive transportation system i s terminal f a c i l i t i e s . The parking situation i n Downtown Vancouver has been the subject of four studies by the City. The f i r s t , conducted i n 1947, was an inventory and an all-day usage study and concluded that the supply of parking at that time was inadequate (City of Vancouver, 1948). The report l e d to the formation of the Vancouver Parking Commission and the approval of a one million dollar 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 in a five-year period of capital expenditures beginning January 1, 1959, (City of Vancouver, 1956). 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 in 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 in 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 in 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 did however recognize that as employment and residential population i n the downtown increased, more f a c i l i t i e s for parking would be needed and that as land was limited 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 spatially manifested i t s e l f i n the downtown area of Vancouver i n two ways. The f i r s t i s by type (Figure 5 ) . 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 central core garage (Downtown Parking Corporation garages), and the hotel parking garage (Hotel Vancouver, Blue Horizon Hotel). The West End d i s t r i c t of downtown contains numerous examples of residential d i s t r i c t parking garages, including those associated with an apartment-retail complex (Denman Place; Columbia Place, Pacific Palisades). Also found, i n the downtown section of the City i s the specialized functional area type of parking garage. Examples of the l a t t e r type are found i n the Queen Elizabeth Theatre complex and the Vancouver Vocational School. Secondly, the parking garage spatially manifests i t s e l f through i t s external and internal site features which are subject to regulation by City planning decisions and City by-law provisions; the case of which i s subject to 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 ci t y into zoning d i s t r i c t s of which presently there are four: One - Family Dwelling, two - Two Family, four - Multiple Dwelling, seven Commercial, two - Industrial Districts, and three others covering special categories, including parking. Within each d i s t r i o t , the permitted uses are divided, into two categories, namely, those which are allowed, as of right, provided the development application meets a l l the specified regulations concerning height, yards, site area, floor space ratio, 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 to prior 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 affect 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 Di 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 prior consultation with the Town, Planning Commission, before the Technical Planning Board may 128 act. In developing zoning regulations, the City must have due regard to the following considerations: (a) The promotion of health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the public; (b) The prevention of the overcrowding of land, and. the preservation of the amenities peculiar 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 peculiar s u i t a b i l i t y of the zone for particular uses; (f) The conservation of property values; (g) The development of areas to promote greater efficiency and quality (Todd, 1970, p.17). In regard, to automobile parking garages, Vancouver's Zoning and Development By-law exerts control over the external site features by regulating the location of these structures and as well, over the internal site features of size or capacity of the garage as well as establishing the need for such a f a c i l i t y . The City's Zoning By-law regulates the external site feature of location of the parking garage by restricting the f a c i l i t y to certain 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 Di s t r i c t , but i t i s not allowed i n a (M-2) Heavy Industrial D i s t r i c t . By-law restrictions on the location of a parking garage are generally necessitated by need for and compatibility of the structure with 129 the neighbourhood. In addition, Vancouver has established a d i s t r i c t exclusively for 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 location of a parking garage i s also regulated by that part of the Zoning By-law specifying a maximum distance at which a parking f a c i l i t y may be located away from a particular building for which such a f a c i l i t y i s required to serve. In this instance, Vancouver's Zoning By-law requires that for a l l dwellings the parking f a c i l i t y be located on the same site as the building i t s e l f , which i t i s required to serve; and for a l l other uses, i t must be located not over 150 feet from the structure except i n the case of a project for which collective parking i s authorized by City Council, i n which case the distance may exceed 150 feet (See Appendix B, Part 1). Internal site features of parking garages located i n Vancouver are also subject to regulation by the City's Zoning and Development By-law. Specifically, the internal site feature of capacity of the garage i s regulated by that part of the By-law requiring a certain number of off-street vehicular spaces for any new or substantially altered development. For example, the City's Zoning By-law requires that for every new or altered office building 130 or retail 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 in excess of 3,000 square feet be provided by the developers. Similarly, for hotels and motels in 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 in 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 in connection with new or substantially altered structures i s made in the high-density core.of Downtown Vancouver. The parking report submitted in 1956 (City of Vancouver, 1956) in 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 off-street 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 in situations convenient to the main building concentrations" (City of Vancouver, 1956, p.3)« The Report added that the provisions of parking facilities 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 in .1957. At present, parking requirements are suspended in 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 in 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, (ii) 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 fa c i l i t y in these two zones. Currently, only the (CM-2) High Density Commercial District i s found in Downtown Vancouver (Figure '5)« The area zoned for this District i s however large and in a crucial economic area, that periodically the City has had to rezone certain lots so that a multi-storey parking garage can be built to serve the area. Such was the case in 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, in 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 in stating that there i s a parking demand in 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 intact for the development of office buildings and stores. The necessary parking to serve these buildings should be located around the edge of the core or permitted to a limited extent as ancillary to the individual buildings themselves (Elsie, 1967). Further, City o f f i c i a l s were concerned that i f this application was approved, they would be flooded with other requests to build garages within the restricted area, thus causing further interruption of the continuity of core development. However, through gathering considerable support f o r i t s application, including the backing of most of the merchants i n the area of the proposed garage, Dominion Construction was able to have City Council rezone the area to (CM-1) General Commercial Di s t r i c t , thereby permitting the building of the multi-storey garage complete with street-level r e t a i l shops. Zoning i n Vancouver has thus been an effective tool for regulating the external and internal site features of parking garages located i n the downtown section of the City. City 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 integral part of the automotive transportation system and Vancouver i s no exception. Recently, future transportation systems for 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 for 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 East-West and North-South Freeways. The report recommended that a Waterfront Freeway be located along Burrard Inlet, and proceed from the Brockton Interchange at 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 . i i i ) . The east-west element within the Interchange consisting of the new Georgia Viaduct, connects directly to the East-West Freeway running through East Vancouver. Important to this thesis, i s the fact that the consultant's report has considered parking f a c i l i t i e s as integral parts of the plan for transportation systems i n Downtown Vancouver. The consultants noted that any "major expansion i n the off-street parking capacity of downtown Vancouver, by means of garages directly connected by special ramps to and from the freeway system, would permit relatively large numbers of vehicles to reach downtown without 135 travelling on the congested grade streets" (P.B.Q.&D., 1968, p.106). Specifically, 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 direct access from the 3»500-car Garage from the Waterfront Freeway via a two-lane off-ramp beginning at the Georgia Interchange and entering the proposed Garage at i t s Abbott Street end. An eastbound one-way on-ramp from the Garage joins the Waterfront Freeway at a gore opposite Homer Street. An analysis of vehicular t r a f f i c did not however recommend a western entrance to the Garage for 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 locating the Project 200 Garage i n relation to the proposed freeway system, planners have also taken into account the internal site features of the Garage. I t i s emphasized that the internal plan, design, and operation of such a garage must be carefully formulated to permit a safe ef f i c i e n t transition between freeway and garage driving conditions. I t i s especially 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). features However, consideration of the external and internal site of parking garages i n relation to the downtown freeway system i s only theoretical as the City has yet to decide on i t s future transportation system. But in presently locating parking garages in terms of the existing street pattern in Downtown Vancouver, parking consultants must place these facilities in relation to the one-way street system which predominates in the central business district of the City. It would appear that most new parking garages in 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 in the downtown section of the City and a fourth under study by City officials. 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 retail mall of approximately 100 stores, and parking for 1,700 cars (Figure 5) • Total value of the project will likely 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 retail 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 in relation to the Port of Vancouver and the expansion and renewal of the downtown district 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 facilities 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 retail shops, and two underground levels of parking accommodating 360 automobiles. When completed the Square will include two office towers connected by a two level retail, banking, and restaurant plaza development. 138 The third redevelopment scheme under construction in 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 will also include a two-storey retail 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 will 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-commercial-recreational 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 living units in apartments and townhouses and 800 units for families with children. Further, the development will 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 will also have i t s own retail shopping area. In regard to parking, these projects essentially mean that there will be a greater demand for parking space within their 139 own boundaries as well 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 feet, a 1.5 per cent increase over developed space i n 1969» and that by 1985» developed demand would be 15,300,300 square feet (Menzies, 1970, p.188). With limited land area and high development costs as well as restrictive 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 prohibitive. However, with the redesign of space within the core by redevelopment projects, including Pacific Centre, Project 200, and Royal Centre, opportunities are provided to develop further parking f a c i l i t i e s i n this area. The developers of these projects have however recognized these opportunities, and have made parking an integral part of their developments. For example, the Project 200 redevelopment scheme cal l s f o r the provision of 7,000 parking s t a l l s inclusive of an existing 800 spaces i n Woodward's Department Store Parkade. The developers assert that the proposed 7,000 spaces represent about 70 percent of the overall demand based on Downtown parking studies by the City Engineer and 10 percent above the supply that the balance of the downtown has been providing to meet the overall demand (City of Vancouver, 1966). Further, i n planning f o r and locating of these spaces, the developers have considered the relationship of their 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 internal features of their garages, including design and operation as well as to the aesthetics of Project 200. The Pacific Centre and Royal Centre redevelopment projects have also provided parking space within an underground garage for aesthetic purposes and i n accordance to zoning by-law restrictions necessary to meet 60 per cent of the overall demand. Redevelopment projects have thus provided opportunities to locate parking garages within the downtown section of the City and as a consequence, to help meet the demand for parking space i n Downtown Vancouver. City Administrative and Financial Practices The provision of parking f a c i l i t i e s i n Downtown Vancouver has been largely the responsibility of private enterprise. Companies such as Imperial Parking, Western Auto Park, and Aide Auto Parks are just 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 City. Needless to say, their f a c i l i t i e s are financed by private capital. In terms of ci v i c government ac 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 City Council, to charge and collect fees for these areas, to conduct investigations and to make analyses of existing parking f a c i l i t i e s and needs, to 141 acquire and to lease property on behalf of the c i t y and to conduct less important ac 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 City Council. The second development i n City government a c t i v i t i e s i n the parking f i e l d embodies a most interesting and unique administrative and financial 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 interests twenty-three years ago. The administrative and financial history of the D.P.C. i s worth reviewing as i t encompasses much of the historical development of parking f a c i l i t y provision i n Downtown Vancouver. After World War II, many downtown property owners and businessmen found themselves confronted by the problem of r e t a i l decentralization. In order to stabilize their position and to even further their sales, these gentlemen formed the Downtown Business Association. The main object of this body was "to promote the economic, commercial, and social welfare of the City 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 City as a whole; and the said d i s t r i c t i n particular" (As quoted by deWolf, 1951, p . l ) . One of the immediate projects appeared to be finding a solution to the parking problem i n the downtown area. In late 142 1946, the Association successfully prevailed upon City Council to make funds available for a study of downtown parking needs. The study began in 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 lot on the block now occupied by the main Post Office. Further, with increasing availability and use of automobiles, curb space and limited parking facilities were inadequate to handle these motor vehicles in 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 in 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 in part the 143 annual levy of $72,500 necessary to service the one million dollars of debentures authorized" (deWolf, 1951» p. 2). Further, the City was to appoint a Parking Commission which would be charged with selecting property, setting rates, and generally supervising the parking situation in Vancouver. The plebescite passed in the general municipal elections of 1948; and soon after the Downtown Parking Corporation was formed in accord with the plebescite. The Company had however presumed that when lots were purchased they would be leased to i t automatically, but the then Chairman of the Parking Commission held that for various reasons tenders should be called. In the latter part of 1949 and in the early months of .1950, tenders for leasing and operating a l l of the property purchased with by-law funds were submitted to the Parking Commission by the D.P.C. as well as by numerous companies and individuals (The  Vancouver Sun. 1949). The tender submitted by the Company was successful; and the f i r s t lease, dated July 12, 1950, covered: Lot 1: 535 Hornby Street Lot 2s Corner Cambie and Pender Streets. Lot 3: 535 Richards Street. The period of the lease was set at 10 years, to August 1, I960, subject to cancellation of the term of any one or a l l of the parcels on one year's notice with the City paying the unamortized portion of the monies expended on improvements upon cancellation. The rent was to be 1$ 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 in addition all net profits arising from the operation. Such profits the City was to place in 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 first 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 first 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 its 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 all 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. Sources of capital have included a $30,000 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 al 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 in f u l l in 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 1,016 stall parking garage on the site of Lot Two. The value of the Corporation properties and facilities 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 facilities by private enterprise in 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 facilities", and to have the management of a l l i t s lots put out to public tender (Elsie, 1967). Alternatively, some City officials 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 in 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 in 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 facil 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 facilities 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 facil i t i e s , and ventilation. Open-air parking garages have however been considered separately in 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 fire extinguishing equipment (See Appendix B, Part II). 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 fire 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 in 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 up-to-date, providing for available modern building techniques and materials. However, in some areas, specifically that concerning the inside location of gasoline dispensing units, Vancouver's building regulations in regard to garages are s t i l l detrimentally conservative particularly in view of conclusive results of tests dealing with the potential explosion and fire hazard of inside gasoline dispensers as well as existing examples and recommended national and fire 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 will be, concurrently, an increased demand, for parking facilities in the central business district. Because of the high cost of land and a continuing excess demand, the supply of parking for Downtown Vancouver will 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 will be regulated by the City's Zoning By-law and the City's Building By-law in 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 will 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 in 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 city 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 facili 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 in 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 facility; problems which can be stated as physical (location, size, design, etc.), political (private versus public interests), administrative, and legal or formulative. In the following chapter, the elements of city structure are examined to bring city 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 in 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 district, (d) shopping center, and (e) specialized functional area. The analysis of existing city regulatory methods of automobile parking garages in 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 by-law 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 cities' 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 facilities inside automobile parking garages focuses on the central problem of the study in 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 decision-makers. Sections of National building and fire codes for Canada and. the United States and building by-laws for cities in western Canada and in the western United States with regard to the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair facilities 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 in Canada and, those for cities in the United States, in 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 in regard to "the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the provision of service and repair facilities inside parking garages. The analysis further disclosed that these regulations created a contentious issue between the petroleum industry and City officials, especially in view of the fact that the City's zoning by-law prohibits the location of 154 gasoline service stations in 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 in 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 by-laws, upon automobile parking garages located in the downtown area of the City. The investigation revealed that although the city was similar to other cities in 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 in the parking field through the Downtown Parking Corporation; and the third was that in most areas of i t s control, Vancouver's Building By-law was safely progressive, but in matters concerning the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair facilities 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 in 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 facil i t i e s . 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 city transportation and redevelopment planning decisions, that the external and internal spatial arrangements of automobile parking garages be regulated in 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, in 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 facilities 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 facilities inside automobile parking garages are both a desirable and. a safe use of space within these structures. To be verified, the following observations in 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 in their respective regulations concerning the sale of gasoline and. o i l products and the provision of service and repair facilities inside types of automobile parking garages. However, as evident in the national building and fire codes for the United States and. more recently, i n those for Canada, and in building by-laws 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 facilities 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 facilities 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 in the cities of Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Vancouver, and Victoria. These ordinances are too restrictive in view of recent changes in 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 in regard to the explosion hazard created, by the dispensing of gasoline inside buildings, and evidence of the safeness of these facilities inside existing parking garages. In cities such as Vancouver where high land and development costs and city zoning by-laws prohibit the further location of gasoline service stations in certain areas of the city where parking garages are prominent, in particular the downtown district, the use of space within these garages to retail gasoline and o i l products and. service and repair automobiles i s desirable. It i s a desirable use of space in that i t provides the petroleum industry with an economically viable retail outlet and the means for meeting the demand for automobile-oriented retailing facilities 158 in 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 itse l f , the second hypothesis i s considered valid, and rational regulation these internal site features of automobile parking garages should be encouraged in 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 facilities 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 si on-makers. To be verified, the following observations were noted: An analysis of the situation in 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 facilities inside automobile parking garages. The petroleum industry recognizes the fact that in 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 in this area of the city. However, 159 the industry realizes that there exists a demand in the downtown district of Vancouver for the products and the services offered by its retail outlets, and thus desires to meet this demand; and the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair facilities 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 in 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 facilities in 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 facilities concerning the sale of gasoline and o i l products and the service and repair of automobiles in Downtown Vancouver in 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 officials can offer to the petroleum industry no viable alternative location for their retail outlets in the downtown area of the city as a result of the goals adopted in the City Building By-law concerning the installation of gasoline dispensing units and automobile service and repair facilities 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 in either the Building By-law or the Zoning By-law, but preferably the latter, so as to offer to the petroleum industry, an alternative retail outlet in the downtown section of Vancouver. It i s thus f e l t that the third, hypothesis i s reasonable; and that subject to the limitations of the study itse l f , the hypothesis considered valid. Recommendati ons In light 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 in 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 city officials and private enterprise i n regard to formulating city legislation concerning parking and the external and internal site features of the facilities 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 in 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 fa c i l i t i e s , or for that matter, any municipal function and form, must be considered in light 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 realistic 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 officials. Diverse interpretation or misinterpretation of municipal by-laws can only lead: to the creation of conflicts between the public and private levels, which in 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 in regard to the development and regulation of off-street parking fac i l i t i e s , including the parking garage. Municipal by-laws concerning the external and internal site features of these facilities must thus be rational and be consistently and easily interpreted by municipal agencies. Should there exist a by-law, as in 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 facilities 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 in the by-law. 163 Private Enterprise Level: Generally, private enterprise i s willing to participate in 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 in 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 in terms of the protection and promotion of the public health, welfare, and safety. For private enterprise to think in 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 facilities. Through i t s expertise in the parking field, private enterprise can actively participate in the formulation of rational and. consistent municipal by-laws regulating the external and internal site features of off-street parking fac 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 facilities for the municipality; facilities 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 in the fields of city regulation and i t s effects upon the urban retail 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 city legislation upon other retailing activities in 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 in 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 retail environment. Lastly, although much of the subject has been covered here and elsewhere, there always exists numerous areas of research in the subject of parking. For the geographer especially, the areas available for investigation include location-oriented parking feasibility studies, similarly-oriented parking demand studies, and studies of the spatial effects of parking facilities for cities in general and for particular cities. 166 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Alderson, W. & Shapiro, S.J. Towards a theory of retail competition. In Cox, Ro et al (Eds.), Theory in 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 al (Eds.), Guide to store location research. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1968a. Applebaum, W. Store characteristics and operating performance. In Applebaum et al (Eds.), Guide. 1968b. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Guideposts to store location strategy. In Applebaum, W. et al (Eds.), Guide. 1968a. Applebaum, W. & Cohen, S.B. Major considerations in evaluating a store site. In Applebaum, W. et al (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 retail distribution. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.s Prentice-Hall, 1967. Berry, B.J.L. & Horton, F.E. (Eds). Geographic perspectives on  urban systems. Englewood Cliffs, 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 spirit. 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 in 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 in Suddeutschland. Jena; Fisher, 1933. Translated by C. Baskin, The central places of southern  Germany. Englewood Cliffs, 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: Collier-MacMillan, 1971. Claus, R.J. & Rothwell, D.C. Gasoline retailing. Vancouver: Tantalus Research, 1970. Cleveland, D. E. (Ed). Manual of traffic 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 in 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 in Vancouver. In Putnam, R.G. et al (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 in Geography No. 12, I966. Garrison, W.L. et al. 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 feasibility. 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 cities. 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 district  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 al (Eds,), Guide. 1968. Le Craw, C.S,,& Smith W.S. Parking lot 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 politics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970. McKeever, J.R. Business parks. Washington, D.C; The Urban Land Institute, 1970. Mitchell, R.B. & Rapkin, C. Urban traffic; 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 traffic. 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 retail locations. New York: F.W. Dodge, 1958. Nelson, R.L. & Aschman, F.T. Real estate and city planning. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1957. Park, R.E. et al. 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 in the locational distribu-tion of urban activities. In Mayer, H.M. & Kohn, C.F. (eds.), Readings. 1959. Ricker, E.R. The traffic design of parking garages.(2nd ed.) Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1957. Sanderson, R.L. Codes and code administration: an introduction to the  building regulations in the United States. Chicago: The Building Officials Conference of America, 1969. Simmons, J.W. The changing pattern of retail location. Chicago: The University of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 9 2 , 1964. Simmons, J.W„ Toronto's changing retail 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 in 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 in American cities. In Norborg, K. (Ed). Proceedings of the IGU symposium in urban geography. Lunds Lund Studies in 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 in 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 in 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 in Boston; a cost-benefit analysis. Traffic Quarterly. 1965, 19_, 213-228. Benn, George K. The formulation of a realistic parking policy. Traffic Quarterly. 1968, 22, 419-432. Beach, Douglas W. Why developers are up in the air about parking. Buildings. 1970. Boyce, Ronald R. Public policy and the central business district. 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 in parking. Proceedings of the 33rd  Annual Meeting of Highway Research Board. 1954. 33, 404-408. Burton, H.R. Municipal parking policies. Proceedings of the 42 n d  Convention- Canadian Good Roads Association, 1961, 448-456. Butcher, E.G. Fire and car parking buildings. Traffic Engineering &  Control. 1970, 12, 377-378. Candeub, I. Planning for parking in urban renewal projects. Traffic  Quarterly. 1964, 18, 17-29. Chadwick, G.F. Car parking in 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 in Vancouver. Civil Engineering and Public Works Review. 1959, £4, 1022-1024. Clark, F.P. Adequate parking in 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 facilities. Highway Research  Record, 1967, 168, 12-52. de Wolf, T. Parking in 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 district. 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 facilities in Baltimore. Traffic Quarterly. 1950, 4, 16-23. Faustman, D.J. Estimation of parking facility usage. Traffic Quarterly, 1963, 12, 68-78. Fisher, H.T. Traffic planning opportunities in 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 facilities. 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 in 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 facilities. 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 retail 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 retail location. Land Economics. 1966, 42, 293-303. Jackson, D.K. Parking needs in the development of shopping centers. Traffic Quarterly. 1951, 5_, 32-37. Jordan, F.G. The traffic engineer looks at parking. Traffic Engineering. 1967, 3j_, 16-18. Terminal planning for future highways. Journal of the Highway Division.  American Society of Civil Engineers. 1966. 92. 61-74. Parking in 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 in Los Angeles today. Traffic Engineering. 1969, 3_2, 42-45. Lambe, T.A. The choice of parking location by workers in the central business district. Traffic Quarterly. I 9 6 9 , 2_3_, 397-411. Langdon-Thomas, G.J. Fire protection problems in multi-storey mechanical car parks. Civil 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. The future of downtown parking. Skyscraper Management. 1970. 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, 12 (3), 2. Mertes, J.E. A retail 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 retail structure. Economic Geography* 1937, 1 ? . 425-428. Proudfoot, M.J. The selection of a business site. Journal of Land  and Public Utility Economics. 1938, 14, 370-381. Proudlove, J.A. Town planning in the age of the car. Engineering. 1964, 128, 311-313. Reeder, E.J. Off-street parking and loading in 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 al. Traffic and parking requirements of off-center medical office buildings. Highway Research Record. 1964, 49, 1-12. Smith, W.S. The relation of traffic and parking to retail 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, 12, 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 facilities developed in 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 fire 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 al. 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 facilities in 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  district. Washington, D.C.: Chamber of Commmerc© of the United States, 1954. Heath, W.D. et al. Parking in the United States: a survey of local  government action. Washington, D.C.: National League of Cities, m?. Highway Research Board. Parking as a factor in business. Washington, D.C.: Author, Special Report 11, 1953. Highway Research Board. Parking and it 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  in the urban central core: underground highways and parking  facil 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 facilities  in 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 in 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 fire by-law. Brief presented to the City of Vancouver Council, 1965. Rothwell, D.C. Marketing strategy and i t s effects on retail 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 lot probe urged. The Vancouver Province, March 1, 1966. Three-tier parking lot 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 stall, 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 (1970) Definitions of Garages Automobile garages are defined ass Garage, Repair means a building or part thereof where facilities 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 in 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 facilities ares 3.3.7? 7(H) A repair garage shall be separated from other occupancies by at least a 2-hr fire separation unless otherwise approved. Openings shall not be permitted in the fire separation between a repair garage and a Group A (Assembly), B Constitutional), C (Residential, and E (Merc-antile) occupancy. 3«3«7.7(12) A storage garage shall be separated from other occupancies by at least a lj-hr fire separation, unless otherwise approved. 3.3.7.8. Facilities for dispensing gasoline shall not be installed in any building except in buildings of Group F occupancy (Industrial, including storage garages) when approved. 181 APPENDIX A PART II 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 for showrooms and with or without floor space i n the building especially reserved for parking purposes. Operations may involve the use of open flame devices, welding and cutting equipment, the use of flammable liquids, and the dispensing of motor fuels. Enclosed Parking Garages are garages having exterior enclosure walls, used for the parking of motor vehicles. 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 driver, 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 floor. Dispensing of motor fuels and motor vehicle servicing are commonly provided at these garages. Open Air Parking Garages are structures having not less than 5 0 per cent of two sides of the structure open at each storey and. used for the parking of motor vehicles. These structure may be of the ramp type i n which the motor vehicles are parked by garage attendants or the driver; 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 fuels and motor vehicle servicing are sometimes provided. Storage Garages are garages used solely for dead storage of motor vehicles. Basement and Underground Garages are garages located below grade, used solely for parking purposes. Motor vehicles may be parked by a garage attendant or by the driver. 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 facilities ares 1120. Garages should be limited in height and area, depending upon the type of construction and private fire protection provided, to minimize the possibility of fire 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 fire protection. 1130. Enclosed, parking garages, open air 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 fire 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 fire 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 fire resistance ratings appropriate to the type construction. Communi-cations 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 in 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 in 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 in 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 in 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 in the term garage, private. Public garages shall be classified according to their specific use in 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 uti l i t i e s , large businesses, mercantile or similar concerns; and in 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 will accomodate not more than nine (9) passengers, and in 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 facilities 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 fi r e division shall be continuous and unpierced by openings; except that door openings equipped with self-closing fire doors shall be permitted. 905.24 Gasoline Dispensing: Areas for dispensing of gasoline in 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 fac 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 in 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 in Schedule »B" (See Table .;2" to this By-law, (b) Size; Al 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 in 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 in width for right angle parking; for angle parking the manoeuvering aisles may be reduced in width to a standard satisfactory to the Director of Planning. (d) Location; Cff-street parking facilities 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 fa 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, (ii) For a l l other uses: not over 150 feet from the building they are required to serve, except in 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, in which case the distance may exceed 150 feet. (e) Units of Measurement: Where gross floor area i s used as a unit of measure-ment in 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 in (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 faci l i t i e s . (f) Change in Use-Additions and Enlargements: Where there i s a change i n use, or alteration or addition to an existing building, the standard of parking hereby required need not be provided until a development occurs at a time when, or as a result 187 of whichs (i) The required parking provided on any given site i s more than 10 percent deficient, or ( i i ) The fl o o r area i s increased i n excess of 10 percent over the floor area existing at June 18, 1956. (g) Mixed Occupancies and Uses Not Specified? In the case of a use not specifically mentioned i n Schedule MB M the requirements for off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s shall be the same as for a similar use. In the case of mixed uses, the total requirements for off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s shall be the sum of the requirements for the various uses computed separately. Off-street parking f a c i l i t i e s for one use shall not be considered as providing required parking f a c i l i t i e s f o r any other use. (h) Collective Provision? Except i n the case of dwellings located i n R Districts nothing i n this clause shall be construed to prevent collective provision of off-street 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 total of such off-street parking spaces supplied collectively shall be not less than the sum of the requirements for the various uses computed separately. Location of Parking Garages Zoning regulations r e s t r i c t the location of public 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 Di 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 Di s t r i c t (Medium Density): Outright use. (e) (C-5) Commercial Di s t r i c t (Amenity Commercial): Subject to approval by the Technical Planning Board (see p. 131). (CM-1) Commercial Di s t r i c t (General): Outright use. (CM-2) Commercial Di s t r i c t (High Density): Subject to approval by the Technical Planning Board, (see p. 131). (h) (M-l) Industrial D i s t r i c t (Light): Outright use. (i) (M-2) Industrial 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 district defined, designated or described in 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 in 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 in 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 in 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 installa-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 tire 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 in 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 in an (RM-4) District, a side yard shall be provided of not less than 5 feet in width in the case of a Parking Area (Public) and 10 feet in width in the case of a Parking Garage (Public). 189 PROVIDED, however, that in the case of a corner site where a side yard adjoins a flenking street the side yard shall be not less than 10 feet in either case. Where a side yard, is required, i t shall be subject to the provisions of Section 1 1 ( 1 2 ) of this By-law. 2 . Where a side yard in any such district be provided where not required by the provisions of this by-law the said side yard shall be not less than 3 feet in 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 SPACESa Use Buildings containing three or more dwelling or house-keeping units located i n (RM-i) or (RM-2) Multiple Dwelling Districts. Buildings containing three or more dwelling or house-keeping units located i n (RM-3) Multiple Dwelling Districts. Buildings containing three or more dwelling or house-keeping units located i n (RM-4) Multiple Dwelling Districts Buildings containing three or more dwelling or house-keeping units located i n C or M Districts. Boarding or rooming houses, fraternity or sorority houses, personal care home, or other similar uses. Hotels and motels. Tourist Courts. Hospitals, or other similar uses. Required Parking Spaces One parking space for every 725 square feet of gross floor area of a l l floors of the building. One parking space for every 725 square feet of gross floor area of a l l floors of the building. One parking space for every 850 square feet of gross floor area of a l l floors of the building. One parking space for every 725 square feet of gross floor area of a l l floors or portions there-of used for residential purposes, provided, however, i n C Districts located within Dis t r i c t Lot 185 the amount shall be one space for every 850 square feet. One parking space for every 350 square feet of floor area used for sleeping units, exclusive of bathrooms. One parking space for each dwelling unit and one parking space for every two sleeping units. One parking space for each dwelling unit or sleeping unit. One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area i n the building. 191 TABLE .2- (oont.) Use Institutions of a religious, philanthropic, charitable or philozoic character, or other similar uses. School-Public or Private. Required Parking Spaces One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building. Two parking spaces per three teaching areas in elementary schools and one and one-quarter parking spaces per teaching area in secondary schools provided always that in 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 play-ground 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. -exceeding a gross floor area of 3,000 square feet. Churches and similar places of public assembly. One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building. 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. For such area as i s used for 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 in 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 con-currently, may assess the amount of parking spaces required by reference to only one of such areas, in which case, the assessment shall be made by reference to the area which, by its e l f , requires the greatest num-ber 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. Community Centres or other / similar places of assembly. Bowling Alleys. Office Buildings, Retail Establishments, or other similar use; -up to and including a gross floor area of 39000 square feet. -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. -exceeding a gross floor area 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. For such area i s used for public assembly; One parking space for every 100 square feet of such floor space. For such area as i s used for public assembly; One parking space for every 200 square feet of such floor space. Two parking spaces for each alley. One parking space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building. Three parking spaces plus one parking space for every additional 500 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 3,000 square feet. One parking space. One parking space, plus one parking space for every additional kOO square feet of gross floor area in excess of 1,200 square feet. 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 Manufacturing and Industrial Buildings and. uses, Whole-sale Distribution, Servicing and Repair Establishments, or other similar uses. Warehouses, Storage Buildings or Yards, or other similar uses. Golf Driving Range. Marina. Boat Launching Ramps, Required Parking Spaces 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 in the building, whichever i s the greater. One parking space for each 2,000 square feet of gross floor area in the building, or not less than one parking space for each five employees on a maximum working shift, whichever i s the greater. One parking space for every installed golf driving tee. One parking space for every two-boat mooring berths exclusive of parking spaces required in connection with 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 Facilities, see p. 185) of the Zoning By-law, the number of Off-Street Vehicular Parking Spaces required for any development on any site located in any zoning district shall be as set out above; when the number of required parking spaces results in 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 in which there are no facilities for repairing or servicing such vehicles. Garage, Repair means a building or part thereof used or intended to be used where facilities 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 fire regulations concerning the internal site features of automobile parking garages are: 3.12.7. Garages 3.12.7.1. General All 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 in Sub-section 3*12.7.9 shall conform to the other requirements of this By-law. Automobiles may be stored or displayed in 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.s when erected within the districts 195 or areas defined in this By-law as Fire Limits Nos. 1,2 and 3» shall conform to the requirements in respect to the construction of buildings situated within such Fire Limits. (b) Fire-resistive Construction Save as provided for open-air parking garages in article 3*12.7.5.9 every garage greater than one storey in 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 in article 3.12.7.5.» a l l garages constructed of fire-resistive construction shall not exceed the height area limitations set forth in Table .3, except that; (i) the limiting area of a building of Type A fir-resistive construction (3-hour rating) may be increased at the discretion of the Building Inspector when used as a storage garage only, and (ii) the height of a building of Type B fire 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 in 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 in Table ;'• 3' for Group G, Division 3 occupancy. 3.12.7*4. Separation Requirements (a) Exterior Walls For the purposes of determining the fire separation of buildings in accordance with Subsection 3*4.6. of this By-law, a fire 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, open-air 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 auto-mobiles shall be of fire-resistive construction and shall be fully separated from the remainder of the building by not less than a Grade 2 construction separation in which a l l openings are protected by self-closing fire-resistive closures having a fire 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 in 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 in the closed position. (B) No servicing or repairs to automobiles shall be undertaken, nor shall any gasoline, other than that contained in the tanks of the automobiles be stored, used, or sold in any such building nor shall facilities for dispensing gasoline be installed in 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. (ii) 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 auto-mobiles shall be of fire-resistive construction and shall be fully separated from the remainder of the building by not less than a Grade 2 construction separation in which a l l openings are protected by automatic or self-closing fire-resistive closures having a fire resistancerating of not less than 2 hours. (B) Facilities for dispensing gasoline shall not be installed in 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 in 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 Construc-tion may be erected in the districts or areas defined in this By-law as Fire Limits. No servicing or repairs to automobiles shall be undertaken, nor shall any gasoline, other than that contained in the tanks of the automobiles, be stored, used, or sold in any open-air parking garage nor shall facilities for dispensing gasoline be installed in 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 non-combustible construction column protection may be omitted from columns which are 15 feet or more from an interior lot line or which face upon a street 20 feet br more in width. (ii) 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'-6M0 ( i i i ) a l l openings, including those resulting from the omission of exterior walls, shall be provided with approved^curbs and guard rails. (iv) no combustible trim, partitions, or finishes shall be per-mitted in such garages. (v) no tarpaulins, glass, or other materials shall be used to close required exterior openings at any time. (c) Height and Areas See Table .4'.'.'. (d) Area Increases The limiting areas set forth in the next preceding clause may be increased in 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 in each storey and which faces upon a street not less than 20 feet in width. Such openings shall be distributed throughout the length of each storey. In addition to complying with the separation requirements con-tained elsewhere in this By-law, every exterior wall of an open-TABLE 3 HEIGHT AND AREA LIMITATIONS OF BUILDINGS OF GROUP G, DIVISION 3 OCCUPANCY Major Occupancy of Building Unprotected Combustible Protected Combustible 3/4 hr. rating Unprotected Noncombustible Heavy Timber Protected Noncombustible 1-hr. rating Protected Noncombustible 2-hr. rating Protect. Noncomb. 3-hr.rat. Group G Industrial & Storage Div. 3 (2) 6,000 (1)15,000 (3)10,000 (1)32,000 (4)10,000 (1)48,000 (M 15,000 (1) 48,000 (6)24,000 (1)96,000 (UN)32,000 (1) 96,000 (UN) 48,000 (1) 96,000 UN means "unlimited" Figures or letters in brackets refer to storey heights and are shown before the maximum permissible areas in 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 Fire-resistive, Type B Fire-resi stive, Type C Unprotected Noncombustible Unlimited 45,000 per tier 30,000 per tier 18,000 per tier Unlimited 6storeys, 7 tiers 5storeys, 6 tiers 4storeys, 5 tiers Source: City of Vancouver. Building By-law No. 41' Vancouver: Author, 1967, p. 33 (part 3). 199 air parking garage shall be void of openings unless such wall i s provided with not less than a Grade 1 space separation,, (ii) Occupancy Separation (A) Except as permitted in 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 fully separated from such other occupancy by a wall which provides not less than a Grade 2 construction separation in 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 in 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 in 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 in connection with the operation of an open-air parking garage are permitted. Such offices shall be fully separated from the open-air parking garage by not less than a Grade 1 construction separation in which a l l openings are protected by self-closing fire resistive closures. (f) Means of Egress (i) A l l open-air parking garages in 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. (ii) A l l open-air parking garages in 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) (ii) of this article, floor openings for shafts and vehicular ramps may be unenclosed. (ii) Elevators installed in open-air parking garages for the 200 transportation of the public shall be enclosed as required by-Subsection 3.4.12. of this By-law. ( i i i ) Elevators installed, in 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 in a l l open-air parking garages exceeding 50 feet in 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 GARAGES 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 PARKING DISTRICT B J W PLANNING DEPT • CITY OF VANCOUVER DRAWING N ° D R A W N BY DATE D.B.M. 400 S C A L E l " = 4 0 0 ' D A T E : 1 9 6 3 

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}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101943/manifest

Comment

Related Items