Developers won’t have to add parking to new projects in Raleigh, council says
Raleigh will no longer require developers to include parking in their new projects, responding to growing sentiment that it’s better for the environment, helps housing costs and encourages other forms of transportation.
The Raleigh City Council voted 7-1 Tuesday to end parking minimums citywide.
“For a really long time, we have prioritized spaces for cars over people,” said Council member Jonathan Melton. “And that needs to stop. We’re in a housing crisis. Parking minimums drive up the cost of housing and make it more difficult for small business owners to operate and start small businesses, and [they’re] bad for the environment.”
Cities have used parking minimums for decades to ensure developments accommodate residents’ and visitors’ cars. Now, some urban designers argue parking minimums should be removed to cut down on emissions.
“The assumption was that every trip will be made by driving and parking is always a good thing, and the more parking is better,” said Jason Hardin, senior planner with the city.
The council’s actions apply to both residential and commercial development.
Two people spoke during the public hearing Tuesday afternoon, offering divergent opinions
“Parking spaces take up space that’s frankly better used by people than cars,” said Jennifer Truman, who backed the change.
“We’re consistently reminded that we need radical changes to meet our climate goals,” she said. “So when people resist change like this as too much, I think it’s important to remember that we really do need to change the default. If we want a different and less carbon-dependent future, then it depends on us, as designers, as citizens, on you as policymakers to make different and better decisions.”
Robert Mulder spoke against removing the minimum, arguing the city needs better transit first. He said he’s worried Raleigh will become the next Atlanta or “Los Angeles junior.”
“It doesn’t make any sense to eliminate parking requirements on a citywide basis,” he said. “And I think it’s no different than spending density all over the city, instead of focusing it along major transit corridors.”
Council member David Cox, who voted against the change, said he agrees there is too much parking in some places but couldn’t support eliminating parking minimums.
“The parking lots are too big; they’re empty,” Cox said. “And all they do is absorb heat and reflect back into the atmosphere. And we need to change that.
“But I think the sledgehammer approach, just eliminating parking minimums everywhere, is not nuanced enough.”
Parking permits considered
No longer requiring parking spaces for new developments has some worried about cars from commercial property spilling over into neighborhoods. Some say adding residential parking permit programs could help address that concern.
The city charges $20 per year per car to participate, and Council member Stormie Forte asked that the city staff look at ways to waive that fee for cost-burdened households.
The rules approved Tuesday also require bicycle parking for multifamily projects, depending on their size, and mitigation for going over a a project’s parking maximum.
“This text change is thoughtful and eliminates minimums for parking, requires bike parking and it addresses parking maximums,” said Mayor Pro Tem Nicole Stewart.
“Big box stores sometimes pave parking lots that will meet the demand of Black Friday. And it is no wonder that they sit half-empty or more most of the time,” she said. “This text change says, ‘Look, if you’ve got to pave the massive parking lot, then you need to offset those negative environmental consequences.”
This story was originally published March 15, 2022 at 7:28 PM.
