Phoenix Apartments Need Fewer Parking Spaces From Now On. Here’s Why Article originally posted on AZ Central on January 25, 2024 Corrections and clarifications: A previous version of this story inaccurately stated who approves use permits. It is the zoning administrator. The Phoenix City Council approved a policy change to reduce the number of parking spaces required at apartment complexes, four months after the controversial idea provoked fury from residents. The change reduces the minimum number of parking spaces Phoenix requires developers to build at apartment complexes near downtown and the light rail, and at complexes for elderly and special needs communities. It is a paired down version of the initial proposal City Council considered in September that sought to more sharply reduce parking minimum standards citywide and for affordable housing developments. City staff reined in the proposal after fierce backlash from neighborhood groups argued the city’s public transit was not adequate enough to facilitate car-free communities, and that the change discriminated against low-income renters and would worsen traffic and burden renters. Vice Mayor Debra Stark called it a “good compromise,” saying, “We need to recognize we’re unique and not like every other big city. We have rural areas, we have urban areas, we have suburban areas.” The vote passed 8-1, with Councilmember Jim Waring voting no. Waring said he believed the city misread the situation and that Phoenix might need more parking, not less. The new policy reflects a city balancing goals of walkability, home affordability and climate pollution reduction against some residents’ concerns the changes would reduce their quality of life. “This balances a lot of different needs. It’s an important step forward for sustainability and housing,” Mayor Kate Gallego said, adding that the change will allow more houses to be built where parking spaces would have otherwise existed. The change puts Phoenix closer in line with other major U.S. cities such as Austin, Portland and Minneapolis that have reduced parking requirements in recent years, although one councilmember said it could have gone further. Councilwoman Yassamin Ansari, a major advocate of the initial, more aggressive policy change, supported the change but suggested the council join other major cities in considering parking-minimum reductions for retail developments, not just residential. David King, an urban planning professor at Arizona State University, said the nationwide shift to reduce parking represents “a pendulum swing” away from car-centric societies toward a future that allows for many kinds of transportation modes. Months long controversy preceded paired down ordinance City staff asked the council in September to sharply reduce the number of parking spaces Phoenix requires future apartment developers to build. The change would not cap how many spaces a developer could build, but rather, would lower the minimum threshold. The initial proposal included reductions to the citywide minimum threshold, plus steeper reductions for requirements at affordable complexes and apartments near the light rail. Proponents said it would improve rent affordability by reducing costs associated with building parking spaces, plus help the environment by steering people toward public transit and relying on less asphalt, which adds to the urban heat island effect. Critics, meanwhile, argued the proposal would worsen traffic and lead to new costs for renters who’d probably have to pay for parking spaces or deal with the ramifications of street parking, such as break-ins. Council delayed its vote and sent it back to the transportation subcommittee for additional conversation after neighborhood groups and the Planning Commission all recommended different tweaks to the policy. Staff presented a new subdued version of the policy change at the Oct. 18 subcommittee. The reduction citywide was essentially nixed, while the steep reduction near light rail would stay mostly the same. Instead of requiring half as many parking spaces at affordable apartments, the update suggested allowing half the parking spaces at complexes for targeted groups, such as seniors and people with disabilities, with some additional stipulations. What specifically changes now? The new policy reduces parking requirements at apartments near downtown and the light rail and for elderly and special needs communities. “Special needs,” would be loosely defined and determined by a city zoning administrator, Phoenix planning official Chris DePerro told Council in October. City Planning Director Josh Bednarek said extra reductions would be available to applicants who both provided a traffic study to show the special populations didn’t need as much parking and secured a use permit. The use permit would require a public hearing, meaning Phoenix residents would get the chance to weigh in before the zoning administrator made its determination. The details: For apartments citywide (not near downtown, by the light rail): Existing city policy: Four different requirements depending on the size of an apartment. The change: 1.5 parking spaces per apartment. The effect: A clerical change to ease the process for developers. This specific change won’t result in fewer parking spaces, DePerro said. For apartments near light rail, considered the “infill development district”: Existing city policy: 1.5 parking spaces per apartment, and the developer can count on-street parking. The change: 50% reduction of parking requirements (0.75 parking spaces per apartment) For apartments near light rail, subject to “Walkable Urban Code” regulations: Existing city policy: 25% reduction from the citywide standard (multi-pronged formula) when the development is within a quarter mile of the light rail, 10% reduction from the citywide standard when the development is greater than a quarter mile from the light rail. The change: 0.75 parking spaces per unit. New reductions: 50% reduction for seniors and “special needs populations,” so long as the developer provides a traffic study that shows the demand for parking is less for the intended population. Greater than 50% reduction is allowed for seniors and “special needs populations,” so long as the developer provides a traffic study and successfully applies for a use permit. The effect: Requiring a use permit means the public would get to weigh before the zoning administrator made a determination on the permit.