News   Mar 28, 2024
 949     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 538     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 833     0 

Green P

mrgrieves

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Messages
197
Reaction score
67
I moved to Toronto from Montreal a few years ago and was very surprised initially at the concept of Green P lots. In Montreal as far as I know there is no concept of a city owned parking lot. It is not considered necessary for there to be parking lots everywhere, and the city certainly does not encourage people to drive and park everywhere rather than take public transit, especially where it is available.

I'm not saying Green P is necessarily a bad thing, in fact I find it very handy for the most part. However it just seems contradictory that a city which invests so much in the TTC would at the same time subsidize parking. The reason I say subsidize is because many of these lots could obviously be sold off for more productive uses. It also seems like the Green Ps charge below market rates. I know that if a development occurs on a Green P lot, the spots have to be replaced by the developer.

Is the Green P a sort of legacy thing from back in the day when TO was very car-focused? Or is this something that many cities of TO's size have?
 
Interesting question - it is in the history section on their website:

50s
Following the Parking Authority’s establishment on June 24, 1952, its general manager and commissioners began developing congestion solutions for the city. Called the “practical parking picture,” it took shape throughout the 1950s to meet the demand of the downtown core and surrounding neighbourhoods. With the implementation of the TTC’s “cut-and-cover” trenches above subway lines, the spaces loaned themselves to surface lot conversions. The City could prohibit curbside parking in areas served by carparks, improving traffic flow while meeting needs of local stores. In 1957 three state-of-the-art above ground parking garages were unveiled. Later, two mechanical garages were built, providing a combined 684 spaces, and raising cars to upper levels using a ground-level hydraulic platform. Serving over 4.6 million patrons in the last year of the decade, it was clear the practical parking picture would serve the city well in challenging years ahead.

60s
Toronto entered a boom period in the 1960s, bringing new construction downtown. Newly completed roadways like the Don Valley Parkway and Gardiner Expressway also brought the need for supplementary parking space beyond downtown. In 1963, City Council enacted legislation that allowed developers to make a payment to the City in lieu of providing parking. These monies were channeled into a municipal parking fund to create essential parking facilities. In the 1960s a beautification program was implemented featuring trees, flowers, decorative cut-stone walls, and wrought iron detailing. At the turn of the decade, the City began taking more conservative approaches to matters of growth, transit and traffic to which the Authority would prove well adapted.

http://parking.greenp.com/about/

AoD
 
I think it comes down to the city revenue. The parking industry is a very, very lucrative business. As condos swallow surface lots, parking companies increase the prices nearby to adjust to the demand. Fewer and fewer spaces are available in the city and that is greatly increasing the prices of lots across the city. I have a friend who works in the parking industry and he reckons Toronto isn't even close to reaching the ceiling for hour and month rates.

The big guys in the town - VinciPark and ImPark (multinational); Target Park, Canada Auto Parks and Unit Park (local) - are integral members of the Toronto development and property management world. The city rightfully wants a piece of the pie.
 
Removal of street parking, replaced by off-street parking lots or garages, would also allow putting bicycle lanes where the street parking was. Maybe also add bicycle racks in the Green P near the street.
 
Removal of street parking, replaced by off-street parking lots or garages, would also allow putting bicycle lanes where the street parking was. Maybe also add bicycle racks in the Green P near the street.

Removing street parking and building more parking lots and garages is just terrible urban policy, exactly the opposite of what Toronto sohuld be doing. I hope you are joking.
 
I am with W K Lis on this one. in other cities, also in the suburbs of Toronto, you'd be correct, but downtown Toronto has relatively narrow main streets and street parking is a frequent problem when it comes to adding bike lanes.
 
Street parking is big problem on St. Clair West between Vaughn Rd and Bathurst St. The road gets blocked by parked cars and cars waiting to turn left.
 
Street parking is big problem on St. Clair West between Vaughn Rd and Bathurst St. The road gets blocked by parked cars and cars waiting to turn left.

There is a Green P at 1445 Bathurst Street (0.1 km from St. Clair Ave. W. & Bathurst St. ) and at 11 Kenwood Avenue (0.3 km from St. Clair Ave. W. & Bathurst St.).

They are just misers if they don't want to park in the Green P lots. Ticket them.
 
Removing street parking and building more parking lots and garages is just terrible urban policy, exactly the opposite of what Toronto sohuld be doing. I hope you are joking.

In most parts of the city, I agree with this. There are too many places where the city prohibits street parking so as not to remove any traffic lanes. As a pedestrian, it feels safer to have a barrier of parked cars next to you rather than cars speeding by at full speed.

But if you read the second post in this thread, the following is taken from the Green P's website's history section:

"The City could prohibit curbside parking in areas served by carparks, improving traffic flow while meeting needs of local stores."

Which brings me back to my original question as to whether the Green P is an antiquated idea, which is a relic from TO's much more car-focused days?

Someone mentioned that the city collects juicy revenues from the Green Ps. If that's the case, can't the city sell off these lots to private operators and realize on all these future profits today, and pour that money into transit? While you may or may not agree with that, it just seems like that is better policy for the city. (not trying to start a Rob Ford type argument about a war on cars...don't want this to go there. Let's just assume that a post-Ford mayor will be much more transit friendly!)
 
If Toronto sold it's Green P lots, it would be a short-sighted decision like selling (sorry, leasing) the 407 was. Short term gain, long term headache.
 
In Montreal the parking is run by a company, Stationment de Montreal. It describes itself as:

"Since its creation in 1995, the Société en commandite Stationnement de Montréal has been a major player in the development of operational solutions for urban travel. Originally founded to ensure the optimal management of municipal paid on-street and off-street parking, the Société was quickly recognized for its innovation, its advantageous use of cutting-edge technologies and the harmonious integration of its installations into the urban landscape. "

It is actually owned by the Montreal Board of Trade - I think the City sold off the parking in 1995 to raise money in the same way that David Miller sold off the streetlights here in Toronto. It would be interesting to compare the operation of the two bodies to see which provides the best service, raises the most revenue for public services and is most civic minded. (See http://www.statdemtl.qc.ca/index.php?page_id=42&lang=en )
 
As condos swallow surface lots, parking companies increase the prices nearby to adjust to the demand. Fewer and fewer spaces are available in the city and that is greatly increasing the prices of lots across the city.
Is this really true? Most of those new condos have underground parking garages. I've always heard that if anything, number of parking spaces downtown has actually increased.

As a pedestrian, it feels safer to have a barrier of parked cars next to you rather than cars speeding by at full speed.
On the other hand, if the space currently used for street parking were dedicated to wider sidewalks and landscaping, that would provide a buffer as well. Dundas between Yonge and Bay (why they didn't continue that streetscape west to where One City Hall and Motion were developed is beyond me) and the new Bloor streetscape come to mind. I'd love to see that kind of streetscaping take the place of parking in more of the city. Of course, then the war on cars types would scream about it, but the fact is a downtown as big and dense as Toronto is becoming simply can't function by relying on driving.
 
On-street parking not only provide a buffer/protection to pedestrians, it also calms down vehicular traffic. If there is a way to do these things along Toronto's main streets without on-street parking, then by all means remove the parking. But in no way should any new surface parking be added.
 

Back
Top