Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews parking changes: CBD affordable-housing exemption and new state rules on residential parking
Summary
Draft amendments would exempt affordable housing in the Central Business District from minimum off-street parking requirements; staff also outlined new state requirements governing residential parking, tandem spaces and tree-retention conflicts.
The Planning Commission on Sept. 17 reviewed proposed parking changes in the development-regulation amendments package, including a staff recommendation to exempt affordable housing in the Central Business District (CBD) from minimum off-street parking requirements and a presentation of new state law that restricts local parking rules for residential projects.
Why it matters: Parking requirements materially affect the feasibility and cost of housing developments, and exemptions for affordable units can enable projects that would otherwise be financially infeasible. Recent state legislation also constrains local parking standards, requiring cities to allow tandem parking, limiting minimum stall dimensions and protecting tree retention in some circumstances.
Staff proposed that affordable housing within the CBD be exempt from minimum off-street parking requirements to support development of affordable units downtown. Commissioners noted the exemption would apply citywide in the CBD and is not tailored to a single property; staff said similar relief for other zones is possible but most residential development in MS zones is limited today.
Grage also reviewed state statutory requirements included in the draft: local governments must allow tandem parking configurations and may not require parking to be enclosed; nonconforming gravel parking areas may remain in some circumstances; and the code cannot require additional parking if strict tree-retention rules make parking infeasible. The state also caps dimensional requirements for residential parking spaces (no larger than roughly 8 feet by 20 feet as presented in staff materials).
Commissioners asked about approaches that encourage pervious or low-impact parking surfaces rather than standard pavement; staff said the city’s stormwater code already prioritizes low-impact development techniques and that pervious pavers and similar materials are options where feasible.
No final ordinance was adopted; staff will refine the CBD affordable-housing exemption language and return with comparative options for other zones and potential design standards for pervious surfaces.
