LA does away with parking requirements in new neighbourhood plan

[windsorshane]

Link:
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2012/1...field_area.php

Here is the plan:
http://planning.lacity.org/EIR/Cornf..._FinalPlan.pdf

This potential ZBL is amazing.. it sets MAX. setbacks, MIN building heights, MAX block sizes, and last by not least has no parking requirements..
Now i'm not familiar with any other LA zoning by-laws, but it seems to me this is a solid code without taking the shape of a typical transect based "smart code"

Thoughts? Criticism?

[OfficialPlanner]

Puts down coffee...

Thanks for posting this. This may be the first of its kind in North America?

[ColoGI]

This potential ZBL i... it seems to me this is a solid code without taking the shape of a typical transect based "smart code"

Thoughts? Criticism?

About time.

[Cardinal]

I don't know how many times I have recommended something like this in a plan... and never seen it implemented. Kudos to LA. Wow, never expected to say that....

[mgk920]

I recall reading several years ago about Jefferson County, WI (located along I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee, WI) setting a maximum lot size limit in its unincorporated areas as a way of controlling sprawly big-lot exurban development. Assuming that this is true, does anyone have any information on how has this been working out?

Agreed, I do find it interesting.

Mike

[mendelman]

Yep...sounds like a no brainer to me. I am always perplexed that high density central places (like this example or central Chicago, etc) continue to mandate parking.

The modern development industry understands the market requirements for parking in any given market or specific site, much better than the local planners (to be honest).

[OfficialPlanner]

Toronto's zoning bylaws have minimum parking standards, but the city council has been very accommodative to developers that provide less parking than the minimum standard. So much so that in 2009, a 315-unit condo was approved with no residential parking spaces. It's interesting to note that the city overruled planning staff to allow this development to proceed without parking.

http://www.yourhome.ca/homes/newsfea...article/696394

The staff reported stated that, "exempting the project from the city's parking standards would create a negative precedent that undermines the integrity of the parking provisions of the zoning bylaw." I agree with this logic, which is probably why communities have not embraced removing parking requirements, even in areas where it makes sense. (IIRC, Manhattan's zoning might prohibit parking spaces in new residential development now that I think of it, so maybe LA isn't the first?)

Another article on the same Toronto development from the buyers and developer's point of view:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...rticle4410227/

[terraplnr]

One of the commenters on the Curbed article feels very strongly that the lenders will require the developers to put in substantial parking, even if the “market” doesn’t “require” so much parking. I wonder if that actually is a significant issue. The overall amount of parking would then be highly dependent on how flexible the lenders were for the first couple of developments, then subsequent developments would follow their lead.

[Cismontane]

We worked on this plan, a few years back - my previous employer was the planning and urban design consultant, but if I recollect correctly we still recommended some parking requirements - albeit highly shared. It's interesting that they decided to go even more aggressive than our recommendation.

The trick is going to be to figure out how to make this work as the area is phased and developed, especially since it's rather horribly not ped friendly right now. I have no doubt that the district can be beautiful and highly walkable when it's completed, but I think they may find it challenging for early-comers to have no parking available do them. Transit access within a quarter mile doesn't help if you have to walk through a post-industrial waste-land to get to it.

[windsorshane]

terraplnr I think you are correct. Donald Shoup in The High Cost of Free Parking notes that developers tend to provide parking anyways..parking usually regulates it self.
but what I like about this code is that it does set maximum land area use for surface parking and states that No at-grade parking space shall be located within the front yard" so I would imagine IF lenders require off street parking, at least it will be implemented in the least offensive way.