Commission reviews broad rewrite of parking rules that would expand off‑site credits and give staff 10% discretion

Consultant Gary Mitchell, who led the city parking workshop, presented a draft of proposed changes to chapter 24 of the zoning code intended to give businesses more flexibility in meeting parking requirements while protecting neighborhoods from overflow. "The main point…is the table that's in chapter 24 that has all how much parking you have to have depending on your land use," Mitchell said, describing the draft's emphasis on options to reduce required parking by awarding credits for on‑street, bicycle, shuttle or shared arrangements.

Mitchell said the draft removes several previous limits: distance caps on off‑site parking and a 25% cap on shared parking were taken out to allow more flexibility where shared or off‑site solutions are practical. He added that the draft includes a route for an applicant to do a special parking study that would come before the commission rather than be handled administratively. Staff explained the draft also creates a 10% staff discretion buffer above the automatic shared‑parking calculation so staff can approve modest adjustments without returning every case to the commission. "I think 10% is enough at the staff level," a staff member said when commissioners asked about the size of that buffer.

The draft adds narrow, quantified credits: bicycle parking can reduce vehicle spaces at a rate of one vehicle space for every two bike spaces, up to five vehicle spaces, and some on‑street parking that is striped in front of a property can be counted as a credit for adjacent businesses. The ordinance language would also require that accessible (ADA) parking remain on site, a constraint cited when commissioners asked how valet or 100% off‑site arrangements would work for people with disabilities. Mitchell noted that many of the menu options may not make the final cut and that the goal is to provide tools to support business reinvestment without moving parking burdens into residential streets.

Commissioners raised enforcement and equity questions: how shared or off‑site agreements would be enforced if a landlord or tenant later claimed exclusive control of shared spaces; whether staff approval could be reversed if a business relied on a later‑retracted administrative waiver; and how on‑street credits would be coordinated with public works. Staff noted existing enforcement pathways and the ability to elevate contentious cases to the commission or Board of Adjustment. The commission directed staff to continue refining the draft, to validate the parking-table ratios, and to plan a public hearing in May so residents and business owners can comment.