Item 10 — Bicycle Parking Exemptions

Understanding what changed, why it happened, and what both sides say about it

What Happened

Bylaw 21P2024 added a new subsection 546.2(2) to the Land Use Bylaw. This subsection created an exemption from the requirement to provide Class 1 bicycle parking stalls for residential developments with two or fewer dwelling units.

What Is a Class 1 Bicycle Parking Stall?

The Basic Definition

A Class 1 bicycle parking stall is a secure, weather-protected space for storing a bicycle within a residential development. It is distinguished from Class 2 bicycle parking which refers to short-term unsecured racks typically found on sidewalks or in public areas.

What Makes It Class 1

A Class 1 bicycle parking stall must meet specific standards:

• It must be enclosed or covered to protect bicycles from weather

• It must be secure and locked to prevent theft

• It must be accessible to residents of the development

• It must be large enough to accommodate a standard bicycle

Why Class 1 Matters

Class 1 bicycle parking is the type that actually encourages regular bicycle use. An unsecured rack outside is useful for short visits. A secure enclosed stall is what a resident needs to store a bicycle they use daily for commuting, errands, or recreation. The requirement for Class 1 parking in residential developments was intended to make cycling a practical transportation option for residents who do not have private garages.

What Did the Old Rules Require?

The Old Requirement

Before Bylaw 21P2024 the rules in subsection 546.2 required a minimum number of Class 1 bicycle parking stalls calculated at a rate of:

• 1.0 stall per unit or suite where a unit or suite is not provided a motor vehicle parking stall located in a private garage or mobility storage locker

What That Meant in Practice

For a development with 6 units where none of the units had a private garage or mobility storage locker the minimum requirement was:

• 6 units x 1.0 stalls = 6 Class 1 bicycle parking stalls required

The logic was that residents without private garages needed somewhere secure to store their bicycles and that the development should provide that space.

What Do the New Rules Require?

The New Exemption

The new subsection 546.2(2) states that there is no requirement for Class 1 bicycle parking stalls for parcels with two or fewer dwelling units.

What That Means in Practice

• A single detached home: No Class 1 bicycle parking required

• A single detached home with a secondary suite: No Class 1 bicycle parking required

• A duplex with two units: No Class 1 bicycle parking required

• A development with three or more units: Class 1 bicycle parking still required at the old rate

Why Did the City Make This Change?

Proportionality

For small residential developments with one or two units the requirement to provide formal Class 1 bicycle parking infrastructure is disproportionate to the actual need:

• A homeowner with a garage has a natural place to store bicycles

• A homeowner without a garage can use interior space, a shed, or other storage

• Requiring a formally designated and constructed Class 1 stall in those contexts adds cost without a clear benefit

Reducing Barriers to Small-Scale Development

Adding infrastructure requirements to secondary suites and duplexes makes them more expensive and complex to create. Removing the bicycle parking requirement for small developments reduces one barrier to adding gentle density in established neighbourhoods.

Consistency With Mobility Storage Locker Exemptions

As covered in Item 9 the bylaw also exempts developments with two or fewer units from mobility storage locker requirements. Making the bicycle parking exemption consistent with that threshold creates a coherent framework for small residential developments.

Recognising Existing Practices

In practice many homeowners with secondary suites already provide informal bicycle storage through garages, sheds, or interior space. The exemption recognises that reality rather than imposing a formal infrastructure requirement on top of it.

What Are the Concerns About This Change?

Cycling as a Transportation Choice Requires Infrastructure

The most substantive concern about this change is that it undermines cycling as a practical transportation option for residents of small developments:

• A tenant in a secondary suite who commutes by bicycle needs secure weather-protected storage

• Without a requirement to provide it the landlord has no obligation to do so

• The tenant either stores the bicycle inside the unit which is impractical or leaves it unsecured which creates theft and weather damage risks

• Critics argue that reducing bicycle infrastructure requirements is inconsistent with the City's stated goals around active transportation and reducing car dependency

The Combination With Reduced Parking Requirements

Critics point out that Items 8, 9, and 10 need to be read together:

• Parking requirements were reduced in Item 8

• Mobility storage locker requirements were exempted for small developments in Item 9

• Bicycle parking requirements were exempted for small developments in Item 10

The intended logic is that reduced car parking is offset by better active transportation infrastructure. But exempting bicycle parking and mobility storage lockers at the same time as reducing car parking undermines that logic. Critics argue the City reduced car parking requirements without ensuring that alternative transportation infrastructure was in place to support residents who do not own cars.

Tenants Have No Leverage

When bicycle parking is a legal requirement tenants in secondary suites have a basis for expecting it to be provided:

• Without a legal requirement landlords have no obligation to provide secure bicycle storage

• Tenants who raise it as a condition of renting have limited leverage in a tight rental market

• The practical result is that tenants who rely on cycling for transportation are disadvantaged

• Critics argue this disproportionately affects lower income renters who are most likely to rely on cycling as a primary transportation mode

The Two-Unit Threshold

As with the mobility storage locker exemption some observers have questioned whether two units is the right threshold:

• A property with a primary dwelling and a secondary suite has two households

• Both households may include regular cyclists who need secure storage

• The exemption means neither household has a guaranteed secure storage space

• Critics argue a threshold of one unit would be more appropriate

What Does This Mean in Practical Terms?

For Homeowners Adding a Secondary Suite

• You are not required to provide Class 1 bicycle parking as part of the suite

• If you have a garage or shed you can offer it informally as bicycle storage

• There is no legal obligation to do so

For Tenants in Secondary Suites

• Your landlord is not required to provide secure bicycle storage

• If cycling is your primary transportation mode confirm what storage is available before signing a lease

• You have no legal basis to demand Class 1 bicycle parking if it is not provided

For Developers of Larger Developments

• The exemption does not apply to developments with three or more units

• Class 1 bicycle parking is still required at the rate of 1.0 stall per unit or suite where units do not have private garages or mobility storage lockers

• This requirement remains unchanged for larger multi-unit developments

For the City's Active Transportation Goals

• The exemption applies to the smallest scale of residential development

• Its impact on overall cycling infrastructure across the city is limited

• However combined with the mobility storage locker exemption and reduced parking requirements it represents a pattern of reducing active transportation infrastructure obligations that critics argue is inconsistent with the City's stated policy direction

Key Facts

• Section of the bylaw added: Subsection 546.2(2) of Land Use Bylaw 1P2007

• What the old rules required: 1.0 Class 1 bicycle parking stall per unit or suite where units do not have private garages or mobility storage lockers

• What the new exemption does: Removes the Class 1 bicycle parking requirement entirely for developments with two or fewer dwelling units

• Who is affected: Homeowners with secondary suites, duplex owners, and their tenants

• Who is not affected: Developers of three or more unit developments who still must meet the old requirement

• The City's argument for the change: Proportionality, reducing barriers to small-scale development, and consistency with mobility storage locker exemptions

• Primary concern among critics: The exemption combined with reduced parking requirements and mobility storage locker exemptions undermines active transportation infrastructure at the same time as car parking requirements are being reduced

Read the full bylaw: calgary.ca

See the related proposal: [Link to Item 10 Proposal — insert once created]

Next: Item 11 — New Uses Allowed on Former School and Community Facility Sites →