Analysis

BEST supports Eugene eliminating off-street parking minimums citywide

By Rob Zako
May 5, 2023

As the City of Eugene works to implement state rules for Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities, BEST supports parking reform Option 1: Do not require private developers to provide a minimum amount of off-street parking but rather give them the flexibility to determine how much their buyers and renters need.

UPDATED 10/19/24: Added more further reading.

Require private developers to provide off-street parking?

As of January 1, 2023, the City of Eugene is no longer requiring private developers to provide a minimum amount of off-street parking in areas within a 1/2-mile walking distance from a frequent transit corridor.

By January 1, 2024, to comply with state Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules, the City of Eugene must decide if and how to require private developers to provide off-street parking in other areas, which are generally less developed and have less need for parking. The City of Eugene is considering three options:

BEST supports the simplest—and least expensive—approach: Option 1. Do not require private developers to provide a minimum amount of off-street parking but rather give them the flexibility to determine how much their buyers and renters need.

Regardless of what the City of Eugene decides, ON-street parking will remain; there will be no changes to existing OFF-street parking; and private developers will continue to have the option to provide as much OFF-street parking as is needed for new developments.

As of January 1, 2023, the City of Eugene has no off-street parking minimums in the shaded areas. The issue now is if and how the City of Eugene should require private developers to provide off-street parking in the unshaded areas. Source: City of Eugene

Key dates & public meetings

Why parking minimums are bad

Donald Shoup argues, “Minimum parking requirements subsidize cars, increase traffic congestion and carbon emissions, pollute the air and water, encourage sprawl, raise housing costs, exclude poor people, degrade urban design, reduce walkability, and damage the economy. … We are poisoning our cities with too much parking.”

Strong Towns explains, “Parking minimums are local laws that require private businesses and residences to provide at least a certain number of off-street parking spaces. These requirements are one of the most significant factors that shape how our cities are planned and built. At Strong Towns, we believe every community with mandatory parking minimums on its books should seek to abolish them. These rules are not only unnecessary: they are destructive to our communities’ financial strength and resilience.”

Under rules in effect at the time, the City of Eugene required the developer of the 13th & Olive apartments to build a parking garage at great expense. Today, most of those parking spaces are unused, wasting money and space and driving up rents. Source: Rent.com

Common objections to eliminating parking minimums

Strong Towns further explains, “The most common objection to the idea of removing minimum parking requirements for businesses and residential buildings goes like this: ‘But how can we make sure there’ll be enough parking if we don’t mandate it?’ … I have literally never been anywhere where there was, in fact, ‘not enough parking.’ What people really mean when they fear that there won’t be enough parking is that there won’t be enough free parking exactly where they want to go.”

Here in Eugene, why might some support parking minimums away from frequent transit service?

If someone already has their own off-street parking, they might want new developments to include off-street parking because they don’t want others parking on the street. Or perhaps they want to make sure their guests can park for free in front of their location. Or maybe they want fewer neighbors and understand that requiring off-street parking reduces the size of new development.

If someone doesn’t have their own off-street parking, they might want new development to include it so that they won’t have to compete so much for free parking on the street.

Whatever the details, they are effectively wanting the public to give them something for free at the expense of others.

Source: Streetsblog USA

External links

Further reading

See other posts concerning

, ,