Article content continued

It’s one thing to worry your neighbourhood will not feel the same if suddenly there are apartment buildings where there didn’t use to be. It’s quite another to oppose the development because there aren’t more parking spaces.

The area is in the news these days because the city’s planning committee gave the go-ahead to new apartment buildings geared towards students.

We’re talking 300-odd units in four buildings. Under normal rules, the developer would have to build 132 parking spaces divided among those buildings. We call this “minimum parking requirements” and it’s a rule that belongs in the same era as your favourite boomer’s Betacam.

The city approved the plan with fewer parking spots; only 62 in total. The developer instead offered to build one bike parking space per unit.

Apparently people are upset. I really don’t get it.

It’s one thing to worry your neighbourhood will not feel the same if suddenly there are apartment buildings where there didn’t use to be. It’s quite another to oppose the development because there aren’t more parking spaces.

Even Coun. Mathieu Fleury, who is normally much more sensible about these things, opposed the development for that reason, saying it’s “unrealistic” to think residents of those buildings won’t have cars. Others fear all those vehicles will end up parked on the street. At City Council on Wednesday, he and his colleague, Riley Brockington, voted against the plan. But it went through anyway.

Good. First of all, parking spaces aren’t for people. They’re for cars, and we should think of those last. Second of all, if on-street parking is what worries you, it’s easy enough to ban it. Something I wish would be done right where I live on Craig Henry, by the way, as parked cars block the bike lane on both sides every day of the year.