[kettal]

- Parking economics is already weird enough. In downtown toronto monthly (i.e. regular commuter) parking is a loss-leader for developers. $75k for a space does not justify $3500 a year in rent. Parking is subsidized downtown the same way it is subsidized at a suburban walmart ($3000 to build, free to park) or a busniess park in Mississauga with a parkade ($20k to build, free to park). What makes you think increased property taxes will not be simply absorbed by the building owners and passed on in higher rents (i.e. the same way things work now)? Do you really think that a Loblaws in Vaughan will charge people $5 to park just because they have to pay a parking property tax? They won't, but you'll pay more for brocoli. There's a real danger owners would absorb costs and the whole complicated program would have minimal impact on behaviour.

They can hide the cost anywhere they like... They can put it into the price of broccoli if they want, fine with me. That means that the local grocery shop which is easy to walk to, and does not require a parking spot for every customer, will become more price competitive. Thereby influencing behaviour. The end result is positive for lowering car traffic in that scenario too.

 

[Glen]

You don't think the City can calculate how many parking spaces are in each commercial space? They're specified in the zoning by-laws! It's not that hard to go through with a calculator, or to write an algorythm to do it.

And yes, the tax would be administered to the commercial property owners, likely as an adjunct to property taxes. If the parking on the property already has users paying for parking, the property owner may choose to raise parking rates to offset the taxes, creating the same effect as charging more for parking.

And I never said it would be easier, I said it would be more effective. There's a big difference.

While I agree with a parking tax, the notion of adding more tax to Toronto's commercial properties without any offsetting reductions in the property tax rate is foolish.

Urban planners need to do a better job at looking at the economics. Here is a start... http://iapr.ca/files/iapr/iapr-tp-07008.pdf

 

[gweed123]

While I agree with a parking tax, the notion of adding more tax to Toronto's commercial properties without any offsetting reductions in the property tax rate is foolish.

Urban planners need to do a better job at looking at the economics. Here is a start... http://iapr.ca/files/iapr/iapr-tp-07008.pdf

How would you hope to create a change in development behaviour if you're merely offsetting the new tax with a reduction in an old one? That would also mean reduced revenue for some other city service, because the intention is that the money from the parking tax be used for transit expansion. Taking the money off property taxes to balance out the parking space tax would amount to using property tax dollars for transit expansion, which is pretty much where we are today.

 

[leopetr]

In terms of development incentives, it would be simpler to institute a minimum price for parking (ala minimum price for plastic bags) than a tax. This would change behaviour but raise no revenue.

 

[gweed123]

In terms of development incentives, it would be simpler to institute a minimum price for parking (ala minimum price for plastic bags) than a tax. This would change behaviour but raise no revenue.

That would be an alternative, yes. However, any tax or user fee directed at the general population would be met with much more opposition that something directed at commercial property owners. People have a very "I want the money to come from somewhere, just as long as it's not from me" mentality. Even if the money would indirectly come from them in the end (higher parking rates, slightly higher prices for commodities, etc), that would raise much less of a stink.

I know it's a very cynical way of looking at it, but people are dumb. They don't read beyond the headline, so if the headline reads "commercial parking space tax to fund transit expansion", that will be met much more kindly by the general population than "parking rates to rise to pay for transit expansion".

 

[Glen]

How would you hope to create a change in development behaviour if you're merely offsetting the new tax with a reduction in an old one? That would also mean reduced revenue for some other city service, because the intention is that the money from the parking tax be used for transit expansion. Taking the money off property taxes to balance out the parking space tax would amount to using property tax dollars for transit expansion, which is pretty much where we are today.

What I proposed was far more encompassing than a simple offset.

Even if we added a commercial parking tax and reduced property taxes accordingly, it would cause a shift in development behavior. For the benefit received, parking at shopping malls and big box stores is not adequately taxed. According to the TABIA, the parking lots are separated from the store section and have a different zoning.

Current trends in retail have created a car culture lured by “acres of Free Parkingâ€. Free parking puts public shopping streets at a great disadvantage and erodes neighbourhood shopping. The use of land for retail malls and big box stores with free parking encourages automobile use. The free parking areas are considered undeveloped land and not taxed appropriately. The property tax paid by this form of retail development is far less than a typical neighbourhood retail street of the same size.
http://www.toronto-bia.com/index.php?Itemid=113&id=87&option=com_content&task=view

 

[valkoholic]

But if the goal of this is to target behaviour, why target retail and office only? Here's some uses that would be exmpted for political reasons:

- residential
- residential visitor parking (even though it is sometimes pay-parking)
- hospitals (hospitals are often the biggest generator of traffic in a community and have horrendous travel patterns)
- municipal parking (Toronto won't tax the TPA which is likely the biggest parking operator in the City)
- schools (again, horrible commuting patterns but would be exempt)
- universities (York U has 10,000 parking spaces for commuters, that's enough parking for 30,000,000 sf of downtown office space). York isn't going to cut Metrolinx a cheque for $5 million a year.
- on-street parking (which is often free)
- the GTAA would try to exempt itself on federal immunity grounds
- TTC has thousands of commuter spaces
- GO is actively building commuter lots

If you're going to influence behaviour you can't make the judgement of good commuter versus bad. Target drivers directly with road tolls.

 

[Glen]

^ My original suggestion was not to target commercial parking only. I merely stated that even if you did there would be an effect on development.

 

[Ansem]

Road tolls is the best solution

1-It would make many drivers use the Go Train or Go bus=Increases Transit revenue

2-For those who can't, they would get to work/home faster since there would be less cars on the roads=Toll Revenue

3-Transit Revenue+Toll Revenue=Increase in transit service and quality of service

4-Increase in transit service + better quality of service= attracts new commuters

5-new commuters increases transit revenue= increase ridership on major arteries, bus lines, subway lines and Go lines

6-Increase ridership= new extension projects reaching more residents-->More transit revenue + Less Cars on the roads

7-Less Cars on the roads=Faster travel time for those who cannot use public transit-->justifies paying the tolls

8-Increase quality of life, environment and regional economy


Problem to this...

a)Lack of political will...
b)Seeing Transit as spending or luxury rather than an investment...the Europeens got that right a LONG time ago
c)Politicians greedy to get reelected by not wanting to lose drivers votes.
d)lack of courage
...

Driving is a privilege, not a right

 

[kEiThZ]

^^ So what? It's still a worthwhile policy despite the few holes it may have. And while we may not want to tax residential, residential visitor, hospital or school parking, I see no reason why the TPA and the TTC can't raise prices in lieu of a tax increase for commercial parking space owners. Ditto for GO. What's stopping GO from charging for parking inside the 416? And I don't see any reason why York would not be able to cut a cheque to the city and simply increase the price of parking spots for its students. Seems fair after they got a subway line to the campus.

As for the GTAA, they aren't in Toronto so they really aren't relevant to the discussion at hand.

And really, this is not an either/or scenario. In reality, a parking tax is only part of the solution. This would have to be done in conjunction with other measures (including road tolls).

 

[valkoholic]

This is a regional issue, not a City issue. Any major shift like this would have to be regional, not City of Toronto only. Otherwise, it's basically the City of Toronto raising property taxes to fund regional transit, which won't happen.

Do you think if York U could raise $5 million a year from parking by increasing prices they would'nt have done so already?

And it's not a few holes. It's tens of thousands of high-turnover parking spaces that generate huge volumes of traffic.

I feel bad for continously wailing on the parking tax idea (sorry, just don't think it's practical or effective).

What are the issues with road tolls? I can think of a few:

- may divert traffic onto non-tolled streets
- expensive initial start-up (I'm thinking ten or hundreseds of millions of dollars)
- directly charging tax-payers can be a tough sell

I think the first one is solvable, we have to suck it up on, and the third will require another ten years of debate and soul-searching.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Politically, I think the key to make road tolls happen politically is for the governments to legislate all tolling power irrecoverably to Metrolinx. Then when Metrolinx moves to institute tolls, politicians at both the municipal and provincial levels can wave their hands and yell about how they don't think there should be tolls but, oops, it's out of their hands and there's nothing they can do.

 

[Tewder]

What about the idea of an added fee for driver's license renewal? Add an extra $25 or $50 per year per license. This would be easy to administer and renewal fees seem pretty low to me to begin with.

 

[Ansem]

What about the idea of an added fee for driver's license renewal? Add an extra $25 or $50 per year per license. This would be easy to administer and renewal fees seem pretty low to me to begin with.

In Quebec, I paid my licences over 80$ per years and license plate 255$ per year...

If in Ontario driver paid both every year that alone would be a start and a huge difference....

 

[saiho]

While I agree with a parking tax, the notion of adding more tax to Toronto's commercial properties without any offsetting reductions in the property tax rate is foolish.

Urban planners need to do a better job at looking at the economics. Here is a start... http://iapr.ca/files/iapr/iapr-tp-07008.pdf

I agree a commercial tax increase will make the businesses jump out of the 416 to the 905 faster than ever, then the subway would be useless as no one will work downtown anymore.