Quite Possibly My Last Substantive Contribution to Cycling in L.A.

The last two years have been very tough for me personally. I went from a single guy working a very relaxed clerical job to a stressed out father and small business owner. The time I used to spend digging through plans, municipal code, budgets, audits and the like is now spent worrying about my bottom line at the shop and whether all this stress and work is worth it (or if anything in life is "worth it").

That is all a long way of saying that I've pretty much given all that I can give towards bike advocacy, political strategy, research, and community organizing. I can chip in to help the efforts of others, perhaps write a few nasty comments on Streetsblog LA; I have no new ideas nor new research to contribute.

Well, I do have one more idea I'd like to put out there: a bike parking swap.

Preamble to the Bike Parking Swap Idea

In Los Angeles, whenever someone builds a new building, or changes the use of a building to a more intense use, that someone will have to provide private automobile parking spaces for users of the building. The cost of adding an extra floor to a building is increased a great deal by the cost of providing the required parking for that extra floor.

I worked in real estate development for a little over two years, working in everything from property acquisition, permit filing, tract maps, construction insurance program management, to sales of individual units.

The economics of real estate development are not too hard to understand after a few months spent on the job. You buy property, build on it or improve it, and then sell it (or rent it) at a price that will make you a profit.

There are a lot of complicated side issues to seeing this through to the end, but that is the basic idea.

One of the biggest hurdles our small company faced in all of our projects was paying for the construction of "enough" (according to the zoning laws in whatever city we were working in) private automobile parking.

Let's get down to anecdotes, shall we? There is a project I remember spending a lot of time on located on Colorado Boulevard in the Eagle Rock area of Los Angeles. The property had (and still has) a single family home on it and the lot was a little over 7,000 square feet. That is not a lot of room to work with. The zoning code was actually pretty enlightened (but half implemented, legally) stuff - it allowed for multi-family residential and commercial uses on the same property. Putting this type of mixed-use code into effect took a decade (or more) of hard work by a recently retired generation of baby boomer planners.

Reading the code, we could get away with a pretty nice project: ground floor commercial offices of some sort with four two-story apartments above. Our plans fit in really well with the direction of the neighborhood (gentrifying; area specific plans called for light commercial that was walkable). Our plans also fit in rather nicely with the mixed-use zoning code ... until it came to parking.

Car parking requirements forced us to shrink everything - the ground floor commercial was squeezed into a tiny 300 or 400 sq. ft. space. The building had to have an extra story added just so we could stuff a bunch of cars underneath. The cost of the project on paper shot up, meaning that our four 1-bedroom apartments turned into four studio condominium units.

Once you subdivide a property into condos, you have to go through a whole bunch of planning hoops - bumping up the cost of the project some more.

This $200,000* construction project turned into a super risky $1.2 to $1.5 million*, four-story, dingbat parking stall, condo'd, micro fiasco.

[*I'd like to apologize to anyone working in development, these numbers are pulled from memory and are not exact figures.]

To make a profit, we'd have to sell 800 square foot studio units for $300,000 to $400,000 apiece! Even at the height of the boom, that was an insane proposition. So, after the months of meetings, research, and design sessions this tiny project was scrapped.

The bloody car parking requirements killed our project! This project was precisely the sort of infill development that politicians and neighbors say they want: low density, modest building heights, with room for small, local, businesses to thrive (whereas larger projects tend to work best for franchises, chains, and the typical auto-sprawl industries of fast food, auto care, hair salons, and the like). Plus, we could have made some real money. $200,000 spent (on our part) and a relatively quick $300,000 to $400,000 returned once we sold the property (as a rental income property). A net profit of $100,000 to $200,000 in a few months of construction and design work would have been brilliant!

So, to end this long pre-amble to describing my idea: in real estate development, car parking costs a lot. Car parking requirements kill small, profitable, properly scaled projects in favor of larger, out of scale, riskier projects that favor the big boys of finance and high-profit margin chain or auto-based retail and services only.

I quit that job in real estate and moved on to a more mellow position somewhere else, always remembering the huge, negative, effect that car parking requirements have on development in the Los Angeles's urban core.

My Big Idea

Reading municipal code in a big city can turn up some interesting stuff. Some time in 2009 (later in the year, I think) I stumbled upon Los Angeles Municipal Code Sections 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16.

This section of the code allows for something quite unique (I think?). LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16 authorizes a building owner to swap out some of the required car parking spaces with high quality, covered, bike parking spaces.

Wow! You can fit 12, or 13, bikes in one car parking space (more if they are folders, less if they are bakfietsen or niholas). Swapping car parking spaces for bike parking spaces could drastically reduce the footprint of a project - meaning that small scale mixed use projects like the one we gave up on in Eagle Rock could stand a chance at making a profit.

I'll admit, I got a little carried away and almost published a post demanding to know why so few buildings in L.A. had turned over their car parking lots to other uses while providing quality bike parking in exchange.

Well, there are a couple of catches in LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16.

First, you can only take part in the swap program if your property is in a C (commercial) or M (manufacturing) zone.

Second, your property has to have 10,000 square feet of active C or M uses (small properties in historic parts of town need not apply).

Third, you can only swap 2% of your required car parking for bike parking. You'd need to have a lot for 50 cars in order to be allowed one bike parking space to replace one car parking space.

Bleah. That sucks.

But there is hope!

Yes, there is hope - because LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16 is not written in stone. It is a local law. We would need only 8 votes on the 15 member city council to make changes to it. What sort of changes?

First, instead of limiting the bike parking swap to only C or M properties we could make the swap available to all zones in the city (A, C, O, R, M, etc.,).

Second, we could remove the section required 10,000 active square feet of C or M uses from the code. Why not have no minimum requirement of active uses? That way, any project would be able to swap out car parking for quality bike parking - from a 100 square foot notary public in the historic core in an under car parked building to a university campus with thousands of employees.

Third, we could bump the percent of car parking you can swap out for bike parking to some larger percentage: 50%, 60%, 66.67%, or (what the hell) 100%.

Once I put this all together, I started chuckling. This would be a bonanza. Every tiny retail space in a older part of L.A., built to service walk-up customers along a street car line could spring to life with a fly-by-night cafe, restaurant, book store, skate shop, cottage manufacturing, or what have you. Tiny (by sprawled out 20th century standards) commercial properties could have and additional story added to bring in rental income, making money for the businessmen that built these small projects. Small lot conversions of single family home along massive arterial highways, and transit hubs, could profitably be re-vamped, expanded, or torn down and rebuilt - at a profit.

All of the users of these buildings would be unable to drive to them. They would walk, take public transit, or ride a bike (which they could securely park in a covered parking stall).

Money would be made, lots of money, and it would benefit cycling.

The idea almost feels like a practical joke. I feel quite deeply that these changes must be made to LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16.

Standard models for predicting the effects of new buildings, or more intense use of a property, are based on car parking being provided on site. A new cafe on the corner? Oh, that's going to generate XX new numbers of trips per day. That means you'll have to lease parking nearby (a beautiful blacktop lot, I'm sure) pay for street improvements to make driving to your store easier (and inevitable) and if you can't afford that then sorry, thanks for playing. Take your micro-credit based business and stuff it.

Changing this law could reverse all of that. We could stop with the variances, the valet parking, the vacant lots acting as heat islands. We could stop with the out of scale real estate projects and risky development loans. We could all stand to make some serious cash - and bike riders would be smiling all the way to their next covered parking stall.

So, there it is. Amend LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16:

1. Allow the bike parking swap in all zones (A, C, O, R, M, etc.)
2. Remove the minimum square foot requirement - all buildings, and all uses, should be able to take part in the bike parking swap.
3. Allow a larger percentage of required car parking to be swapped out for bike parking: 50%, 60%, or (why not) 100%.

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not quite sure how to best amend the code, but I do know how to copy and paste! Here are the relevant sections of LAMC 12.21-A.4(c) and 12.21-A.16:

SEC. 12.21. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

A. Use.

[...]

4. Off-Street Automobile Parking Requirements. A garage or an off-street automobile parking area shall be provided in connection with and at the time of the erection of each of the buildings or structures hereinafter specified, or at the time such buildings or structures are altered, enlarged, converted or increased in capacity by the addition of dwelling units, guest rooms, beds for institutions, floor area or seating capacity. The parking space capacity required in said garage or parking area shall be determined by the amount of dwelling units, guest rooms, beds for institutions, floor area or seats so provided, and said garage or parking area shall be maintained thereafter in connection with such buildings or structures. (Amended by Ord. No. 145,088, Eff. 10/18/72.)

[...]

(c) For Commercial and Industrial Buildings. Except as otherwise provided in Subparagraphs (1) through and including (7) below, there shall be at least one automobile parking space for each 500 square feet of combined floor area contained within all the office, business, commercial, research and development buildings, and manufacturing or industrial buildings on any lot. (Amended by Ord. No. 177,103, Eff. 12/18/05.)

A specific plan may impose less restrictive parking requirements, if it expressly states that the specific plan’s parking provisions are intended to supersede the standards set forth in this paragraph.

In the case of buildings where bicycle parking spaces are required by Subdivision 16. of this subsection, the minimum number of required automobile parking spaces may be reduced by the same number as the number of bicycle spaces required for the building. (Added by Ord. No. 167,409, Eff. 12/19/91.)

[...]

16. Bicycle Parking and Shower Facilities. (Added by Ord. No. 167,409, Eff. 12/19/91.) Off-street parking spaces for bicycles and facilities for employee showers and lockers shall be provided as follows:

(a) In the C and M zones, for any building, portion thereof or addition thereto used for non-residential purposes which contains a floor area in excess of 10,000 square feet, bicycle parking spaces shall be provided at the rate of two percent of the number of automobile parking spaces required by this section for such non-residential uses; provided, however, that at least one bicycle parking space shall be provided for any such building having a floor area in excess of 10,000 square feet of non-residential use. If the calculation of the number of required spaces under this paragraph results in a number including a fraction, the next highest whole number shall be the number of spaces required.

(b) The bicycle parking space requirements in Paragraph (a) shall also apply to any building, regardless of zone, owned by the City of Los Angeles and used by the City for government purposes which contains a floor area in excess of 10,000 square feet.

(c) All bicycle parking spaces required by this Subdivision shall include a stationary parking device which adequately supports the bicycle. In addition, at least half of the bicycle parking spaces shall include a stationary parking device which securely locks the bicycle without the use of a user-supplied cable or chain. Devices which hold the bicycle upright by wheel contact must hold at least 180 degrees of wheel arc.

(d) Each bicycle parking space shall be a minimum of two feet in width and six feet in length and shall have a minimum of six feet of overhead clearance.

(e) Bicycle parking spaces shall be located no farther than the distance from a main entrance of the building to the nearest off-street automobile parking space.

(f) Bicycle parking spaces shall be separated from automobile parking spaces or aisles by a wall, fence, or curb or by at least five feet of open space marked to prohibit parking.

(g) Aisles providing access to bicycle parking spaces shall be at least five feet in width.

(h) Signage which is clearly legible upon approach to every automobile entrance to the parking facility shall be displayed indicating the availability and location of bicycle parking.

(i) Showers and lockers shall be provided as required by Section 91.6307 of this Code. (Amended by Ord. No. 177,103, Eff. 12/18/05.)