Downtown Cold Lake parking requirements could see some changes in the not so distant future.
During their corporate priorities meeting on Tuesday, March 19, city council discussed the direction they would like to go with their downtown parking regulations.
After receiving feedback from stakeholders and business owners that would be impacted by the amendments, city staff have narrowed it down from their original four options.
“We had a total of 12 people come out for the open house, which is about on-par for what we typically see,” noted Brad Schultz, planner for the City of Cold Lake.
He added, “We presented four options ranging from some of the most prescriptive status-quo to the least… and some varieties of options in between. These are based on approaches we’ve seen taken in other communities to deal with downtown parking."
The first option requires downtown locations to provide the same amount of parking as any other business, regardless of location.
According to Schultz, the advantage of this option is it keeps requirements consistent for all businesses.
"It also reduces the stress of on-street parking to accommodate all of the demand."
“The disadvantages of course, is typically businesses downtown don’t have the land available to provide parking that’s required by the bylaw, and that in-turn, makes the downtown less attractive to new businesses or for businesses who are already there and want to expand,” he continued.
An alternative, is to "back-off" on the requirements by creating a blanket parking reduction.
This would allow newer or expanded businesses in the downtown area to provide a reduced amount of parking compared to other areas in Cold Lake.
Generally, municipalities cut back the requirements by 30 to 60 per cent.
“The advantage is once you start reducing that requirement for parking, that potentially removes a barrier for businesses downtown that want to expand, or the new businesses coming in. The disadvantages, is it’s going to put increased pressure on the on-street parking, in order to accommodate those wanting to go downtown for business,” expressed Schultz. “It also has the potential to impact businesses that do have on-site parking, because they then become the default public parking in the minds of a lot of people… and it may be perceived as an unfair advantage by the businesses that are outside of the downtown."
The third possibility is basing their parking on the square footage or seat capacity of a building.
"The intent of this, is smaller businesses who have less of a direct impact on an individual basis, would have a lower and potentially no parking requirement, while larger businesses that will have a bigger impact on the overall parking allocation and demand, would be required to continue to provide some parking, or more parking,” Schultz noted.
The final option, which was the most favoured by those who attended the open house, is to eliminate the requirement for parking for downtown businesses altogether.
Schultz explained, "Under this option, new or expanded businesses wouldn’t be required to provide any parking. You completely remove that barrier for anyone who wants to locate or expand in the downtown area, and the costs associated with that."
This possibility would completely remove the parking barrier for businesses coming in, he noted.
“It may make developments viable that wouldn’t be otherwise, just because of that cost and ability to find parking."
Some of the downfalls, is the fact that on-street parking would now have to accommodate the demand of every business downtown.
"The potential to impact other businesses that do have on-site parking, the fact that it may be perceived as an unfair advantage by the businesses outside of the downtown area, and it shifts the responsibility from providing parking from the business owners, essentially onto the city, because the on-street parking, and any public parking downtown, is absorbing 100 per cent of the demand,” stressed Schultz.
As part of their open house, city staff had attendees fill out a survey.
The first question had residents rank the four options based on their preferred choice.
According to Schultz, the majority were in favour of the fourth alternative.
When asked if they felt stricter enforcement of the two-hour minimum for on-street parking would help alleviate the issues downtown, most respondents answered no.
"No one wants to risk getting a parking ticket," stated Schultz.
A vast majority felt that the space behind downtown businesses could be better utilized, for example, as staff parking.
However, Schultz noted, one person did express some worry.
"They felt staff parking at the rear of the property might be a safety concern, but that might be something the city could incentivize somehow, to have some of those areas cleaned up and marked out better for parking by the private owner,” Schultz said.
Coun. Chris Vining agreed with the resident.
“I’m not quite sure what we would be able to do in order to help out with that in order to make it more open back there, because that’s my concern, that when you go to this style of parking, are you just going to end up chewing up big chunks of it just with staff?”
He explained if council does decide to go this direction in terms of parking, they would need to lay down the hammer on the two hour limit.
"If you’re going to go to that style, now you have to start holding people accountable,” he expressed.
If council decides to go-ahead with changing their requirements, Schultz recommended creating an overlay.
"That’s a land-use bylaw to modify the existing regulations within a defined area. For example, the downtown area encompasses a number of different zoning districts, so you simply draw a line of the map and say ‘within this boundary, those requirements are going to be altered in a certain way,’” he said, adding they have also created a map for the lakeshore commercial area, "because they function in a similar sort of way."
The topic will be brought back to the table for further discussion and a decision at a future meeting.
