Phoenix Considers Allowing Fewer Parking Spaces for Apartments in Push for Public Transit Article originally posted on AZ Central on July 18, 2023 Phoenix plans to sharply reduce the minimum number of parking spaces it requires apartment developers to build in an effort to improve housing affordability and the environment. The most significant changes would apply to apartments in downtown and midtown near light rail. Residents, who are among the first to weigh in on the policy, by and large oppose the change. But their opposition is likely not a barometer for the ultimate decision-makers: Phoenix City Council. For a decade, the council has sought to create walkable communities that rely more heavily on public transit. In 2015, it passed a law to regulate development in five distinct areas around the light rail to be more pedestrian friendly. This new law would redouble that effort, paving the way for creating communities with few cars, or in some cases, none at all. “The entire purpose of light rail and public transportation is to encourage people to not utilize cars, ultimately,” said Vice Mayor Yassamin Ansari, who for years has been pushing to reduce, and in some areas eliminate, parking minimums in Phoenix. “We have way more parking than we need in the entire city.” The proposal would put Phoenix in line with dozens of cities across the nation that have in recent years reduced or eliminated parking requirements for new construction entirely. Minneapolis, Portland and Austin are a few. The changes reflect a “pendulum swing” away from car-centric societies, David King, professor of urban planning at Arizona State University, said. “If we look at the broader demographic trends across the country and within the Phoenix region, younger people aren’t driving as much. We have older generations who are really interested in walkable communities,” he said. The shift doesn’t mean greater Phoenix residents will one day travel without cars, but rather, they will have options to travel by other means. “When you have a city that’s built around cars, it makes getting around by anything other than driving really difficult,” King said. “Having all of these easy places to park … incentivizes a lot of driving, which then makes it impossible to achieve any of your other transport goals.” Current city code mandates the minimum number of parking spaces multifamily residential complexes must have. Phoenix’s proposed changes would lower that bottom floor across the city but lower it even further for affordable housing complexes and developments in the Gateway, Eastlake-Garfield, Midtown, Uptown and Solano neighborhoods, which surround light rail. From the archives:New Phoenix code prioritizes walkable development Under the new law, a 100-unit apartment complex in one of those five communities near light rail could see the requirement lower from 113 required spaces to 50 spaces. If it’s an affordable complex in one of those communities, the parking quota would, in most cases, fall to zero. A 100-unit complex elsewhere in the city would go from 150 spaces to 125 spaces. If it’s an affordable complex but not near light rail, it would go from 150 required spaces to 63. Supporters of parking minimums say the regulations ensure individuals have space for their vehicles so they don’t spill out into other areas, creating congestion and disturbance. But detractors say they force developers to build parking spaces that sometimes go unused, unfairly pushing costs up for those who don’t own cars. In the case of affordable housing complexes, the logic goes that renters there often need fewer spaces, and by reducing the minimums, developers can maximize the space, providing more of the desperately needed affordable units at an even lower cost. Other detractors say reduced parking minimums will orient the public away from cars, reducing fossil fuel emissions to combat manmade climate change. It would also mean less asphalt to contribute to the Valley’s urban heat island effect, which refers to concrete absorbing and maintaining heat, leading to warmer nights, even after the sunlight has gone. “They really fill our city with a lot of empty space,” she said. “They ultimately create a greater distance between homes and businesses in our communities. They force us to spend more (money) on roads and traffic lights and other infrastructure. It’s very valuable real estate … that could be used for housing,” Ansari said. Phoenix City Council is scheduled to vote on the parking law change in September. Before that, the city Planning Commission will weigh in on Aug. 3 and Village Planning Committees are voting on it at meetings throughout July. Votes from the Planning Commission and Village Planning Committees are presented to Council for consideration but carry no weight beyond that. Seven of the 10 Village Planning Committees that have voted on the measure as of July 14 struck it down. Three committees voted yes: Encanto, Central City and Camelback East. What to know: The current law vs. the new law Current Phoenix law requires 1.5 parking spaces for every one to two-bedroom apartment and two parking spaces for every three-bedroom unit. Fewer spaces are currently allowed for apartments in the Gateway, Eastlake-Garfield, Midtown, Uptown and Solano neighborhoods. In those areas, a development within a quarter-mile of light rail can have 25% fewer apartments. Developments farther than a quarter-mile of light rail but still in those communities can have 10% fewer apartments. The new law would cut parking minimums in a few ways: All apartments, citywide would go from 1.5 to 1.25 parking spaces for one and two-bedroom units. Only 30% would need to be unreserved, whereas the previous formula required 0.5 unreserved spaces per apartment. Example: A 100-unit apartment complex would need 125 spaces (instead of 150). Only 38 would have to be unreserved (instead of 50). Affordable apartments would see the same formula change of 1.5 to 1.25 but add an additional 50% cut. Example: A 100-unit apartment complex would need 63 spaces. Only 19 would have to be unreserved. Apartments along the light rail would see the same 50% reduction as affordable apartments. Just like the current law, the new law would also let the developments include street parking as part of the total. Example: A 100-unit apartment complex would need 63 spaces. Only 19 would have to be unreserved. Apartments in transit-oriented communities would cut the requirement from 1.5 (minus 25%) to 0.5 parking spaces for one and two-bedroom units. Only 30% must remain unreserved. Example: A 100-unit apartment complex would need 50 spaces under the new law, versus 113 spaces now. Only 15 would have to be unreserved, as opposed to 38 now. Affordable apartment complexes near light rail would see nearly all parking minimums eliminated, going from 0.5 parking spaces required per unit to zero. An exception is for affordable complexes near light rail in districts considered low-intensity residential areas, where the requirement goes from 0.85 parking spaces required currently to 0.75 spaces required under the new law. A national shift away from the car-centric lifestyle The proposal to reduce parking requirements in Phoenix is reflected in cities across the nation. Minneapolis reduced parking minimum requirements around public transit in 2015, and then around the whole city in 2021. Portland eliminated the last of its parking requirements last month. Austin City Council eliminated parking requirements in May. In 2019, Tempe City Council approved a development agreement for Culdesac, a car-free, mixed-use apartment complex. The $140 million development is slated to have scooters, bicycles and some ride-sharing cars. It also has plans to offer residents of the 636 apartments deals on light rail, buses and rides with Uber or Lyft. The car-free development does, however, offer parking for some of the commercial businesses at the development. No-car communities:Tempe apartments for renters without cars are in the works The pivot to walkability is largely a correction from going “too far in the accommodate-all-cars-all-the-time direction. So we’re coming back,” King said. He pointed to Old Town Scottsdale, an area known for walkability that attracts droves of visitors. Other places want to replicate that vibrancy, King said. It’s also about resources, the climate and affordability. More land used for parking is less land where sales tax can be charged, King said. Cities in Arizona depend heavily on sales tax to fund their operations. Easy parking also incentivizes driving, which contributes to carbon emissions, he said. Also, “it adds to the woes of housing affordability” because developers have to spend money to build parking spaces, King said. “This is about providing more choices for people … who don’t want to drive anymore,” King said.