Wednesday’s headlines

23 comments

1. Terence Corcoran in today’s National Post:

   “And then there’s the carbon footprint. When car drivers cruise Yonge Street on Saturday night, their metabolisms are more or less flat-lined. They just sit there, burning up little energy personally but paying for the cost of their automobile’s carbon footprint via taxes and fees. Bike riders grinding up the same route burn up a lot more carbohydrates, which their bodies convert into carbon dioxide and exhale, adding to their carbon footprint. The volumes are small, but it all adds up, and bicyclists don’t pay.”

   Wow. I don’t know what else to say.

2. Ah, Dundas West. Paradise of parking. I’m sure people drive there from across the city for their bounty of variety stores and dank, xenophobic sports bars. Why is it exactly that small business owners are generally respected as paragons of economic acumen?

3. re: Corcoran:

   That has to be satire, right? Right???

4. Agreed…that article is a joke, right? It’s April 1st today and I just forgot, right?

5. I thought Terence Corcoran’s article today in the post was a joke. Sadly, it wasn’t.

6. @Paul
   Instead of saying anything you could smile … it’s called satire

7. Oh come on, read the first line of your comment …”Terence Corcoran in today’s National Post:” … that should tell you all you need to know.

8. Re: Dundas West parking
   Actually, people do drive from all over to the neighbourhood. A lot of Portuguese people who have moved to the ‘burbs come back on Saturday in droves to shop at the butchers, bakers and grocers – just try making your way across Dundas St. at Gladstone at noon on Saturday without some driver ignoring the crosswalk completely – the only reason why you’re not run down is because traffic is at a complete crawl, with people parked all over the sidewalk on Gladstone.
   I’m not a pro-car person by any means, but I like the on-street parking because it slows down the traffic. I’ve written to Councilor Giambrone expressing my concerns, noting that I’ve gotten into far fewer screaming matches with drivers at the crosswalk because my street is no longer an expressway.
   And Paul, given your attitude, I think you have little idea of what it takes to run a successful small business. These folks are held in high regard for a reason – it’s not an easy thing to do.

9. Paul… regarding the businesses on Dundas St. W., they may not be to your likely or meet your particular standards, but who the f#@* are you to get so judgemental about them? In case you weren’t aware, among those protesting the removal of parking is the Lula Lounge, which has (whether you are aware of it or not) sparked an economic revitalization of sorts on this strip. So agree with their fight to preserve the parking (any BIA in the city would fight for these since doing away with them does seem to impact business) or disagree with them. But your comments seem to boil down to class/ethnic biases masquerading as comments about parking.

10. re: Dundas West.

    Research shows that, generally, removing on-street parking increases sales for business; people who buy something are much more likely to have arrived by foot or bike than by car.

    But I don’t believe all situations are identical. Bloor in the Annex would be fine if the city removed all on-street parking since there are many parking lots in close proximity (and all stores have alley access). But the strip of Dundas West between Dovercourt and Sterling (where these spots are being eliminated) doesn’t have these parking lots. Is there a way to put a small lot in around there to account for the lost 20? Meanwhile, I suggest the Dundas West Business Improvement Area do some surveying of paying customers to see how they got to the stores. Show some real research, and stop telling ‘the myth of on-street parking.’

    Also, if Lula Lounge isn’t turning a profit and the base of their argument is that most of their customers are coming from far away, why doesn’t it just move? I don’t see how one bar (no matter how great or ‘international’ it is) should have much sway in changing a street to benefit so many other people. Of course, maybe removing the parking isn’t good for anyone, but I don’t think a re-design of a street should be stopped for one struggling business.

11. Maybe Corcoran’s piece is meant to be satire. But it’s the flattest piece of satire I’ve read in a long time, and I get the strong impression it’s only a few inches off his real views.

12. Does anyone actually read the National Post? Why would anyone care what a Port reporter writes?

13. Corcoran’s comment about cyclists adding to their carbon footprint is something to take seriously. Perhaps cyclists (and pedestrians) held our breath for a minute just a few times a day, we could add our little part to reduce our contributions to climate change.

14. mark,

    Could you provide any links to decent research? All I could find was worthless.

15. Parking for bars is btw a monumentally wrong-headed idea: you think everyone has a designated driver?

    Also Bryant makes Bicycling Magazine, and comes off badly. Great article from a poor (but high circulation) magazine. http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/09/16/when-worlds-collide/

    As for this tool in the BMW, I’ve ridden and driven enough to know that he’s guilty BECAUSE it’s a BMW

16. Mark,
    If you could cite any actual “research” regarding how taking parking away increases business, that would be great. But only positive Toronto “research” I’ve seen is a poll of the Annex businesses showing that majority of them don’t think removal of some onstreet parking in their area would hurt their area. Mind you they are largely dependent on high-density University area, which happens to be on their doorstop — and they also don’t have the Dufferin Mall (with acres of free parking) just a stones throw from them (as the Dundas West merchants do).

    People often cite Kensington market as an example of an area that thrives with little parking. But of course, to make that case, you basically have to ignore all the Green P spaces that the City built in the area (and Chinatown) post Spadina ROW.

    I’m sure some high-density business strips with lots of condos within walking distance won’t be affected by removal of parking… but this strip of Dundas W. isn’t a particularly high-density area. If parking wasn’t a factor affecting business, you wouldn’t have the merchants on Roncesvalles fighting tooth and nail to maintain parking on both sides of their street (and winning — even though they have a streetcar on their strip, like the Dundas W. merchants.)

    Also, Mark let’s be clear, your post mentioned a “redesign” but nobody is yet talking of the “redesign” of Dundas … the City is merely talking about curtailing parking privileges. Let’s also be clear that the Lula Lounge people have been very vocal, but they are by no means the only business protesting — most businesses are upset.

    I’m not necessarily for or against what the City wants to do on Dundas (though I think they should be increasing Green P spaces in the area). But I also think it’s hypocritical for the City to pretend removing/curtailing parking doesn’t affect the business in this area … especially when you have the Councillor next door (Pantalone) who has long been an advocate for maintaining parking privileges on College that the City wants to take away from the Dundas St. W. merchants. The City knows parking affects business on most (not all) business strips, especially those near malls. The only people who don’t seem to know that are some commentators on A Spacing.

17. To JamesMallon,
    The DundasW issue isn’t just parking for the LulaLounge crowd… it’s with respect to parking for the businesses on this strip of Dundas St. W.
    It would be nice if people actually read about the issues they comment about.

18. It’d be nice samg if you weren’t a jerk. We don’t all get what we want, eh?

19. @samg @glen

    I totally agree that Bloor in the Annex is a different case (which is what I said in my previous post). But it’s not a mall’s or store’s parking (it’s not free for the taking!). Rather it’s the ‘green P’ lots off Bloor at Lipincott, Markham, Euclid, Clinton, and more. And you are right about Kensington Market having a parking structure (and Queen West is also served by parking lots).

    I don’t know of any research specific to Toronto about parking and business. The best I can direct you to is the Clean Air Partnership report that was done earlier this year:
    http://www.cleanairpartnership.org/pdf/bike-lanes-parking.pdf
    Yes, it is about bike lanes, but the survey research shows that people who buy things are very likely to have arrived by bike or foot – not by car. This ‘general finding’ is also presented in William (Holly) White’s late 70’s study of New York ‘The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces’ (book and film). More recently, Jan Gehl (the main guy who made Copenhagen what it is today and commissioned to re-design Melbourne Australia) insists on clear research and presents this in various publications like ‘Life Between Buildings.’ I suggest looking at the Melbourne project, though. But aside from all the literature, the City should’ve done their own research first before making the proposal – they knew the businesses would react the way they have and the City should’ve had a study for it to point to. And, I implore the Dundas West BIA to do it’s own research before it drags out the tired ‘myth’ of on-street parking. There are hordes of urban planning students in Toronto that would love the opportunity to do something like this.

    To parry, I would ask for research that finds on-street parking is essential for business. samg, how does “[t]he City know parking affects business on most (not all) business strips”? I don’t think it’s “hypocritical” that two councillors disagree with one another.

    You are right that I mis-spoke about this being a ‘re-design’ of Dundas; it is just removing some parking. And to be honest, I wouldn’t recommend that parking just be eliminated. I think it would turn it into a ‘highway’ situation like on Richmond and Adelaide (which another councillor is trying to undo!!). But this is a different situation and different argument than the myth of on-street parking.

20. JamesMallon,
    It would be nice if you dispense with the name-calling… but that might be too much to ask of you. In any case, peace to you.

21. Mark,
    regarding your post, didn’t see it till quite late (I have weird hours)… but I will comment briefly now (I’m off to bed) and then get back to you (I think you deserve a response because you’ve obviously thought about the issues). What I will say up right up front is that I’m not particularly for or against on-street parking on Dundas W. or elsewhere … but I think it’s important to understand why most street-side merchants fight to maintain it. I would also suggest that for these merchants street parking itself isn’t so much the issue but rather ease of access for potential customers.

    I put the stress on “ease of access” rather than on “street parking” because looking at the issue in this way helps identify what approaches could be used to compensate Merchants who depend on street parking for loss of that amenity. I think that if a municipality approaced the issue from that perspective, there would generally be more fruitful discussions around these issues.

    I also don’t think that all street-side merchants require “street-parking” to ensure sufficient “ease of access” for potential customers. Other factors — such as area density (proximity to a lot of customers) and how well served your site is by transit are also factors that might eliminate the need for on-street parking (depending on what your selling). Another factor might be availability of off-street (or off-main street parking… side streets, GreenP or other parking lots). I think all three of these factors contribute to the Annex situation (near a campus, on a subway line, lots of pay parking in the area) where a majority of merchants in that area don’t feel they will be negatively impacted by removal of some street parking. But I think we’d both agree that other areas might not have the presence of these factors that would reduce the need for on-street parking from a merchant’s perspective. (I don’t think, however, the Annex is the only area in TO where on-street parking is not considered crucial… there’s also Yonge south of Bloor, much of Queen’s Quay, etc.)

    I saw the Clean Air Partnership report you referenced… and I’d think we’d both agree it’s very specific to the Annex situation. Regarding the other research you cite, I would ask how applicable it is to the Toronto situation, where you have the proliferation of bigBox outlets and indoor malls with ample free parking not only in the inner suburbs but also in the downtown urban core? (In Toronto, these types of retailers have seriously eroded the viability of Toronto’s store fronts — which is why you see vast stretches of main-streets in TO with nothing but restaurants, variety and dollar stores.)

    With respect to Dundas W., it doesn’t have a lot of density (and gentrification has lowered the density even more), it’s not sitting on a subway, and there’s very little area parking off the main street, and apparently the sitting isn’t committing to building up GreenP.

    As for your request for me to pony up research showing “on-street parking” is essential for business, I want to stress that I don’t think it is essential. But when you are dealing with an area that is relatively low density, isn’t particularly well served by transit (eg not on or near a subway line) and has very little parking away from the main street, on-street parking becomes much more significant as a factor contributing to “ease of access”.

    Can I cite specific research? No. But in a sense, the “research” on this is embedded in actual real estate transactions. Anyone who knows anything about real estate in the retail sector will recognize that for store-fronts, on-street parking is generally a factor that affects valuation (both sale and lease). Business people don’t generally like to pay for something they don’t see as contributing to the bottom line. (Density, transit, and area parking are also important factors in valuation.)

    Am going to say something else on BIAs (Roncy, etc.) and regarding “hypocritical councillors” but at this point I need to get to bed… will say it later. Again, I am not necessarily for store-front parking… but I think it’s important to understand the merchant’s POV. Store-front merchants are an essential part of the vitality of so many neighborhoods… when we hobble them and make it difficult for them to thrive, our neighborhoods become less attractive.

22. To add to samg’s post, the value of parking is different for different types of merchants. A variety store or a food merchant will have a much smaller catchment than a entertainment establishment. Furthermore, other factors such as turnover which can be influenced by parking rates, also can play a role.

23. Mark,
    On to a comment regarding what I feel is hypocritical action by many Councillors regarding on-street parking. First example up — Counc. Gord Perks (who might want to explain himself if he chances across this post). Back in April/09, on a story on the Roncesvalles makeover, Counc. Perks explained to the Globe why bike lanes (which many cyclists wanted) were not part of the plan. Here’s a blurb from the Globe’s story: START..Mr. Perks, a long-time environmental activist before being elected in 2006, said in an interview that the street is simply too narrow to include proper bike lanes and the on-street parking local merchants say they depend on. “A lot of these businesses survive because everyone comes from Mississauga and buys their Polish sausage on Saturday. You need to have some on-street parking,” Mr. Perks said, adding that the plans come after community meetings and consultations. END OF QUOTE. Yet on Annette bike lane issue, which Councillor Perks supported strongly, he seemed to have no sympathy for the concerns of the Annette merchants that removing a lane of parking would damage their business. But then those Annette merchants protesting were in Councillor Saundercook’s ward. In other words, Councillor Perks only seems to be sympathetic to merchants’ concerns about on-street parking when it’s merchants in his ward who are complaining.

    Second example — Councillor Giambrone. People whose memory goes back more than a few months might remember the brouhau over the plan to expropriate the Matador (in the Dovercourt/College area) to make room for GreenP parking. Initially, Counc. Giambrone’s response to those trying to save the Matador seemed to be that more parking in the area was necessary for establishments in the area to thrive. And to put things in more context, these establishments near the Matador already HAVE the on-street parking privileges that the Dundas St. W. merchants are fighting to preserve. I don’t suppose the fact that College merchants are in a more gentrified, trendy area (which also happens to be apparently closer to where Councillor Giambrone resides) had anything to do with it. No it couldn’t be that. In the end, Councillor Giambrone did what he had to do to stop the expropriation (apparently, too many of his core supporters were aghast that regarding the Matador plans), but he still seemed to stand by his comments regarding the need for more parking in the area. Funny how he can recognize the correlation between parking and thriving with respect to the College/Dovercourt area but with respect to the merchants along Dundas St.W., who admittedly are in an overall less trendy, more working class part of his ward.

    Again, I’m not arguing for or against on-street parking, or bike lanes or whatever. But I am pointing out that there is a connection between “ease of access” for customers and success of establishments on our mainstreets and that on-street parking is in most cases, an important part of this access. I’m also underlining that municipal politicians know this (see positions of Perks, Pantalone, and Giambrone, Saundercook). Again there are factors that can mitigate against the need for street parking — but the bottom line is that our Councillors are rarely willing to implement these measures, especially in another Councillor’s ward or in a less trendy section of their own ward.