Salem staff and MAPC propose cutting or eliminating multifamily parking minimums to unlock housing

Salem City planning staff and consultants from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) told the City Council on June 25 that Salem’s long‑standing parking minimums for multifamily housing likely constrain housing production and raise development costs.

The presentation, led by Elena Eimert, senior planner (joining by Zoom), and Robin Lee, planner with the City of Salem, summarized a MAPC “Perfect Fit” analysis of multifamily sites in Salem and outlined two policy options: eliminate parking minimums for multifamily housing or reduce the minimum to a fraction of a space per unit with a special‑permit path for lower parking in targeted cases. After questions and discussion the council voted to receive and file the presentation and to refer the study back to the full City Council for further consideration.

The study’s key findings, presented to the council, were: an average of 1.18 off‑street parking spaces were provided per multifamily unit at surveyed properties, 62% of those spaces were occupied (leaving 38% vacant), and measured resident parking demand averaged 0.85 spaces per occupied unit. The city’s base zoning currently requires 1.5 spaces per multifamily unit in many districts; staff reported that requirement dates to 1969. The presentation cited the 2024 Gateway Cities Housing Monitor estimate that Salem needs about 2,229 additional housing units over the next decade.

Why it matters: planners argued that municipal parking mandates raise construction costs and can reduce the number of housing units a site can deliver. “Mandatory parking minimums increase the cost of housing,” Elena Eimert said, “and that means more required spaces result in fewer and more expensive housing units.” The presentation also noted developer interviews and MAPC feasibility work that estimated typical costs of $35,000 per space for podium/structured parking and $10,000–$15,000 per surface space (figures cited from MAPC’s 2022 developer interviews and feasibility work).

Two policy paths

Robin Lee laid out two staff options for council consideration. Option 1 would eliminate mandatory parking minimums for multifamily residential citywide, allowing developers to provide market‑driven parking. Staff said elimination provides the greatest flexibility and the clearest path for increased “gentle density” infill on small lots. Option 2 would reduce minimums citywide (staff discussed a citywide minimum no larger than 0.5 spaces per unit and referenced a 0.75 threshold in internal analysis) and include a planning‑board special permit to allow projects to go below that level when they meet criteria such as deeper affordability, proximity to transit, and transportation demand management measures.

MAPC’s Alexis Smith, who conducted the feasibility work, told the council she was deliberately conservative in recommending immediate changes to inclusionary requirements for large projects. “I don’t want to make a recommendation based on the assumption that developers are going to all of a sudden go down to 0 parking spaces,” Smith said, adding that the recommendation could be revisited if market behavior changes.

Community engagement and methodology

Staff said MAPC used surveys of property managers and overnight parking counts (counts began after 11 p.m. and extended into the early morning) at selected multifamily properties across the city. The team also held two public open houses and other outreach; staff reported comments from more than 60 residents and about 45 event attendees. Staff noted that community responses largely matched American Community Survey estimates: about 60% of Salem households report access to one or fewer vehicles (45% one vehicle; 15% none), while roughly 40% report two or more vehicles.

Council questions and concerns

Councilors raised several concerns during the discussion: limited transit in Salem and reliance on commuter rail for trips outside the city; potential spillover of vehicle parking into residential streets; how developers and lenders would decide how much parking to build without a minimum; shift‑work patterns that could affect overnight counts; and whether private parking might be rented separately to tenants. Staff responded that financing and marketability drive developer decisions and that special permits and zoning conditions can impose project‑specific mitigations; staff also said Salem’s inclusionary ordinance already caps rents for designated affordable units and that unbundled parking costs would be included in the affordable unit’s maximum rent if parking is offered separately.

Public comment and next steps

Resident Caitlin Halapa commented in favor of eliminating parking minimums and provided a historical perspective on why minimums were adopted nationally. Staff said presentation materials and the slide deck will be posted at ImagineSalem.org and that any ordinance change would apply only to future multifamily projects (buildings of three or more units) and would require public hearings and formal zoning amendments.

Formal actions taken

The council voted to receive and file the presentation; a separate motion to refer the matter back to the full City Council for further consideration was approved by a recorded show of hands. No ordinance change was adopted at the meeting; staff and MAPC will return with materials for subsequent public hearings and proposed zoning language.

Ending

Staff advised the council that additional documentation, including the MAPC Perfect Fit analysis and the slide deck, will be posted on ImagineSalem.org and that forthcoming steps include drafting a zoning amendment and public hearings before any regulation changes would take effect.