Councillors voted 9-3 against the motion put forward by Coun. Aldo Ruberto on Monday, after hearing advice from city administration that the structures justify their roughly $200,000 annual combined loss.
“In our view, the parkades provided by the city are a public benefit, and they do represent good value for money,” said city manager Norm Gale.
The parking capacity they offer allows the city to set lower minimum parking requirements for businesses in the downtown, staff have said, allowing for increased density and flexibility for future planning.
The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce and Waterfront BIA each urged the city not to put the parkades up for sale, at least for now, given new developments that could transform the downtowns, impacting parking demand and availability.
Those include the demolition of the Victoriaville mall, redesign of streets in the downtown north core, and the opening of a market in the former Eaton's building on Red River Road.
Ruberto argued there’s an oversupply of parking in the cores, and that the consequences of losing the parkades wouldn’t be so dire.
“If we don’t have parking right downtown, what happens? People have to walk a little further – Oh my God, what a horrible thing. Or they might have to catch the bus, or they might carpool. What’s the downside of that?”
Coun. Peng You said there was nothing to fear from handing the assets to the private sector, suggesting businesses would have greater incentive than the city to attract users and keep fees competitive.
“Why are we so scared if there’s a private owner, they’ll turn the parkade into [something else]? It will still be a parkade,” he said. “I know… we worry about affordability [under private ownership]. I don’t understand – if [it’s] not affordable, people won’t park there.”
The Parking Authority itself, an arms-length city agency, formally opposed the sale of the parkades, saying strategies were underway to slowly increase fees, reduce capital costs, and attract more interest, including by renting to outside groups like car rental or storage companies.
Those could reduce annual losses to around $150,000 in the short term, city staff have said.
Ruberto argued the parkades largely serve to subsidize parking costs for nearby workers – city staff in the south end, and St. Joseph’s Care Group staff in the north end.
“If we were subsidizing shoppers… I’m all for it, because they’re going in and supporting the businesses,” he said. “But we’re subsidizing people that have good jobs in the core areas… I don’t think that’s fair.”
Coun. Albert Aiello agreed the situation was untenable, but said given feedback from the business community, it wasn’t the right time to make the decision.
“The rate structure has to reflect the cost of operating, and it’s not even really close,” he said. “We’re subsidizing too much. I’m not opposed to divesting from the parkades, but… the timing really couldn’t be worse.”
Coun. Andrew Foulds spoke passionately against the proposed sale.
“Clearly from all the documentation we’ve received, it’s not the right thing to do,” he said. “Our Parking Authority doesn’t think it’s the right thing to do, the Waterfront BIA thinks at best it’s bad timing, the CEDC, the Chamber of Commerce – this is not the right decision.”
The motion was ultimately defeated 9-3, with only councillors McKinnon, Ruberto, and You in favour.
A proposed amendment to consider selling just the Victoriaville Parkade failed on a similarly lopsided vote.
The Victoriaville location accounted for more than 94 per cent of the parkades’ combined losses of $281,500 in 2019.
The losses are currently covered by metered parking and other revenues to the Parking Authority.
