Loading...
Agenda Item - 2023-09-05 - Number 9.1 - Presentation - DLCD Oregon's Parking Reforms 9.1 01._itigis Stilt itaitarnaar - 111 / a •. llilti ;41:: ` ae CA. • - • Oregon 's 11, 3 e ■ 15 TO-fiRTEWYTC c i arkIn g :, tip ti «a `rev �.. • _ yy I Reforms Lake Oswego t � � g DLCD Evan Manvel Climate Mitigation Planner Key point No mandated p does not mean No parking provided . " n "' . .„,+fir. _�igh• b li dc: ' ti� r dl ,�! T f 2.0— . Parking Spaces Per Una 2 0 °�C••�x /(fr p� 'S 11 ■ OnSrk Parking Spaces Per Una I� / ® `�'ryi�8k f. ., 16— ■ Minimum Parking Requirement '`!3. / —1 111j„, i?ir ,/ i IA— 3 ` 1.2 r 1 k('. ..r Y N 1.2= ,: v. j r . • ,..-Jr I,. i a 0.e 0.e p �. J.1 - ,I a 0.4— i! 1 a I ,C =, h P 0 aPommml [undo \�d� - r az fir, •// /. ,� ]7s- Iti 13th and Olive in Eugene Los Angeles downtown Edge Corvallis student built two new 700 stall builders provided average housing providing parking garages even 1.2 parking spaces/unit 2.7 spaces/unit Example of concrete paving beyond the though none was required after reduced regulations (2.56 mandated) driveway apron to provide additional parking— Karniakan Street in Council Creek Subdivision Why Parking Reform Matters Opportunity Cost and Land Cost Sightline 1 12'-0„ L 1° 1 1 0 1: 1 1 1 0 1 r 1 ILL ----r r — . _ 1:2 ifi.____ 1 , ,, 1 io 0 [ [ir _ . ,r „. .. , 7 7 tb • .:..:i 't-:-:i III -,.4 , i rinJ '1 _ 1` _ 1 L a ^ r� IN — I'` W Io r I as ...r—ALL. 1 o i:.....barle 1:� • • 0 0 1 I OO it ELI I I 1 1 2 BEDROOM APARTMENT 1.5 PARKING SPACES 900 FT2 INCLUDING AISLES 488 FT2 Olympia , WA 54% of land in commercial sites for parking Site coverage, typical commercial -~ i•_ Parking development " 54% Data:City of Olympia,Wx. .. t and WA of Ecology • _fit • �l " Streetsand i devralk5 7% Land5tapirl Building 26% How Much Landis Used Corvallis , OR alleys 0.1% buildings, OS J included 12.8% 11 ° ° for parking building interiors 0.0% 10% for roads buff 1.0% decks 0.7% Los An eles, CA driveways, gravel 0.2% g driveways, paved .3.1 � Parking 14% for parking11 % parking lot, gravel 0.9% 10% for roads ! parking hot, paved 6.3% `# ALL SPACES path 1.4% 2010 road, gravel 0.1% roads, high ay 0.9% Roads 10 /° 4 .; -�� r _ road, paved 8.7% PARKING SPACES "►"' "«per SQUARE MILE „}i d e W V GI l k .4{Q <190 190-970 a- -• 970-206 0 Total Area Corvallis at 14.,3 mil 2006-3 206 �-' a 3,20P-4,700 + • =4700-5900 w.a�• .--� f =6,900-I 1,000 � 1 L000 ._ 4,i,. 0.,....,•,f... , • • . . r i - . .... ..-.-.....-. ....... Most cities a . ...: _ aL I n» .• •'r _ -r T _ ' •a; �. �•. j .a' have a it A " it ., , IN ail Pali Q. o la .- " 14:_.-. -1.. . iiii _ r r r. t, . III .? 4 ... ME rk p a i n g _ �II !II ii! di ptnv I management .. .._ ,...-_.. . --.„.:, ._ ....,....- ,,,,,,...„:„..,,:•,...„:„. „_., -••• . .„..„. •__ •_,., • , . .. .. ,,•, • ii.!.-il ...4.ic.;,.: -:,:;i -0,plinli .11,--Aal „.. . . ::'-E• - ';. !--- . , ::: - .- ::;--...' '-..i.' , ' i 4r* 1. . i. 1.,lit..'$..!:r.,. !•'-r._ : -.E problem, not • W .:k N� - �. [++ ^7f1;,1 r��;-._ .. .- �_----. - 1 '.' .i -- - --s •'�'.tea, .____. • a parking _ = ry = J 47. supplyF jr • ,„ •shortage -4���- -.,� } :�. . �� -- _ - JA� _ __: How Much Does Parking Cost and What Does that Effect? Building a Parking Space (not including land cost and opportunity cost) Eugene : $42,000/space parking garage c2018> Corvallis : $ 11 , OOO/Space surface (including land) $62,000/space garage (including land, debt) Surface off-street: $ 1 ,500 - $ 12 , 000 Residential garage : $15,000 - $50,000 Parking ' s Share of Housing Costs Litman (2019) : 10 -20% of Total Housing Cost Gabbe and Pierce (2016) : 17% of Rent Choice : House Cars or House People ? Oakland , CA : mandate for one space/unit costs per apartment increased 18% ; 30 % fewer units built Ailri9gc— - . , . - ,-4-ie. ....• , .. .141. 4 , : _ le/ 2. ' -11Pik ' .. • ' . „.m- •".z'o,.• *' -0. ''• ' ' - -,-.-,5.... t , 4 . ‘ P.- - .1.. •-i: -4 ' ' - ' Y . I" v #.-, . A.ii . b • 4.4 `,-.6. 4 . a- , , . AO . 0 . 4 • firi:' .Tfr,- A - 4, . . • Jr - 74-r-... .r ait. • tr e .0, ..c.. ' 4 .:SWAt#41".'-' 411 4111 ' l',.•".....: 1 _ ,. • , i I - . - -e.',lit tr., f' . , ....47, ...... I 1 ,. , ni.....c. 4r" 111 . • r ' IP 14i ____-, ilP, . 11. - 1 . ;II IB I 4.-- -'• ' 441111111 --vg— ,•-'.- ,':, . w40k. tsc.. e II . • II _ . . ... .. . • . r ••• •. •. . ,r'.-, 11 1 ' . ,L. - -_ - .,. ., .. . Code Proposal ,...41.14,44.•,,1.":4 /A', If :•- ,•N--- • 18TH & WILLAMETTE INTEGRATED FOURPLEX + -1 BEDS + 2 BEDS Max units 2 4 4 UNITS \1 BUILDING \ 1 LOT Parking 1/unit 0.75/unit _........--- lat.. Reducing parking mandates means two more Eugene housing units could be supplied by the market OPINION 1 COMMENTARY WALL STREET America. Needs JOURNAL "exclusionary zoning laws— like minimum lot Parkingsizes, mandatory parking requirements and prohibitions on multifamily Y housing— have g have inflated costs and locked families out of areas with more opportunities." May 16, 2022 Suzanne P. Clark president/CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Brian Deese director, White House National Economic Council Affordable Housing Development (King County WA) one space/unit leasing costs + 12. 5% two spaces/unit leasing costs +25% Parking means cities build fewer affordable housing units How Much Built Parking is Unused ? ParkingOversuppluecP•MultifamilyDevelopments King County: 40% avg. unused Bay Area : 28% avg. unused Albany, OR: 30% avg. unused Hillsboro : 25% avg. unused Demand Versus Supply Quilt Parking Ratio -Market Adjusted Demand --True Parking Demand Ratio 2.25 2.25 Briar Creek 2.00 1•87 1.99 1.85 2.00 Supply: 1.50 1.75 1.61 1.75 l,sa 1.71 67 1.15 • s.4s 1•75 1 5 Family Sites Demand: 1.27 ■ 1.50 { 1.36 OM0.83 1.50 �■ . •A 1.25 ' 1.07 1.25 I D 1.2 Villa Capri - ''+� Amberwood 1.00 11 1.00 �' Supply: 1.30 .-'''Sierra West Supply: 1.95 075 • oT$ T0 - Demand: 0.95..ram■ Supply: 1.54 Demand: 1.45 0.50 «=3ill " 0.50 0'� Tarkin ton Square Demand: 1.29 -o 9 q * \ 0.25 I 0.25 C 01 I .-- Demand: .44 Sunset Gardens 0.00 0.0o m 0.6 Supply: 1.75 N a M o N y Demand: 1.30 * a * * * .-, .. .� ❑ Maples 7n 7-1 w N N � 6 w '• ■(-Supply: 0.61 a a a a a _ w _ 71 _ W a a a a a wW a 0.3 ' Demand:0.37 Trendline:y=0.79x-0.03 d T R2=0.97 SeniorlADA Sites I I i 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Supply (Stalls/Unit) Thus Far • Parking uses a lot of land • Parking is a significant expense and displaces housing • Many parking spots are underused There is significant room to more precisely meet demand and reduce excess costs Parking is Usually Bundled and Not Paid for Separately 1 96-99% of parking is bundled , meaning : - - higher rents and home prices, �� — �' lower paychecks , higher prices , .- non -drivers subsidize drivers GI-IG Mitigation Potential The economy picks up the tab i '�° ,� ,�e�"'r area �m'°�i� V,Ai for free parking - an enormous inducement to drive More Parking4 More Driving 14% i Bundled parking correlates with : ,),_0 12% 10% R2= 0.86 o co , • Higher car ownership °cu' °'° 41 ' r 6% ,• ' `f • Higher rates of driving even with 4%0 2% . , . same car ownership0% • • ' -2% • -4% 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Parking behaviour: Bundled parking and travel behavior in American cities it Change in parking spaces per resident, '60-'80 (Nick far wdaooa Michael Manville*, Miriam Pinski Figure 1.More parking leads to more car ownership in San Francisco UCLA Luskin School of Public Agars,Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 100% • Bundled parking and vehicle ownership: Evidence from the kJ80% American Housing Survey lential parking and travel behavior,with a part r ct hide ownership. When the cost of parking is bu E 60% g parking near home falls. These lower casts Z 40% Michael Manville use transit less than households without parki o ten difficult to examine empirically. In this arti. 20% University of California, Los Angeles .e of the 2013 American Housing Survey. We c+ mkm253@cornell.edu D ° No Parking 0-0.33 0.34-0.66 0.67-0.99 1 or More ON-SITE PARKING SPACES PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT Abstract: This article estimates the effect of bundled residential park- Article history: Pricing Matters a Lot • Case studies LA, DC 80% +6 0% driving if 70% — 67°�L parking "free" 60/D 2 50% — w 42c, • California parking !O3tJ 3°% cash out reduced za��o drive to work 17% look 0% Driver-paid parking Employer-paid parking • Minneapolis : 11 % fewer employees drive to work under parking cash out ParkingEq y a n d it (Sightline chart) ACS 20215-year Table universe: Occupied Housing Units Most tenant households in the United States own either zero or one cars. p 2+ motor vehides 1 motoraehide El no motor vehicles Column I Lake Oswego,OR 100°Ya Owner occupied: 70,7% ±2.4% f lovehicle available 1 6 ±0.5% 1 vehicle available 15% ±1.9% 75% vehicles available 35.1% ±3% 3 vehicles available 15.4% ±2% 50% 4 vehicles available 2.7% ±0.8% 5 or more vehicles available 1.4% ±0.6% 25% Renter occupied: 29.3% ±2.5% No vehicle available 2.3% ±D.9% 1 vehicle available 14.8% ±2.4% 2 vehicles available 10. % ±1.8% ti •: •: ,;CNel/ ap `, 3 vehicles available 1. % ±D.7% Q Ca CsiN `` `� 4 vehicles available 0.5% ±0.4% 2018-2017 household income. 5 or more vehicles available 0.1% ±0.1% What Happens When Parking Mandates are Reduced ? Buffalo, NY (pop 256,000) - 2017 • Student housing 47% less parking • Mixed-use developments an average of half as many spaces; four none (shared ore D ■ parking) iverse • Most single-use multifamily about the Pa r ing Supply same as previous mandated; some more Minneapolis is building less parking Annual building-parking ratios 1.25- Minneapolis, MN 100- • Units near transit built 30% less parking 075 • Units without parking $200/month cheaper 0.50- P. a 025- 7/2015: 5/2021: p„ Parking Req. ParkingRon. Reduction Elimination 0.00- 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 Graph by Zak Yudhishthu Data from Minneapolis Planning Commission Collected by Alex Schieferdecker,updated July 2023 Los Angeles , CA downtown adopted 1998 Housing development increased nearly 4x with 1 .2 spaces/unit adaptive reuse ordinance 34-50% off-site Net New Housing Units 10,000 2.0 2.0 — • Parking Spaces Per Unit 9,000 1.11 — i On-Site Parking Spaces Per Unit • Minimum Parking Requirement 8,000 1.6 7,000 = 1.4 — 1.3 1.2 6,000 ARO W 1.2 units II 5,000 1' " . , cn 4,000 = 0.6 0.6 3,000 • 0.1 — 2,000 0.1 1,000 Q Apartment Como 0 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 Seattle reform 2012 -2017 saved $537 million ..•_ Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Land Use Policy Land Use Policy ELSEVIER journal horriepage: vvww.elsevier.cornlfocatellandusepol Parking policy: The effects of residential minimum parking requirements in i 1116 Seattle crroek��a C.J. al:6e`'`, Gregory Pierceb, Gordon Clowersc Department of Environment&Studies and Scierices, Santa Clara University_ 500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA, 95053, United States Luskin Center for Innovation, Luskin School of Public Affairs, University.of California, Los Angeles 3250 Public Affairs Building. Box 951666, Los Angeles, CA, United States `Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections, City of Seattle, 700 Fifth Ave, Suite 2000, P,O. Box 3401 R, Seattle. WA. 93121 J019, United States ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT San Diego , Sixfold increase in affordable housing units in density bonus program Density Bonus Housing Production in Sall Diego I April : Parkin requirements l eliminated in Transit Priority Zones 4,000 I I p August 2016: Density bonus l I MaR rrm 0M increased to 5 I 3,U3 a 1 I 3,000 I I I I I I 2,000 I I I I 3 T 1 I 1 I _OI I ex increase In 1,000 1 750 613 1 affordable units I I produced 14 s I r.i 1 i through OB I 2e' 0 2016 I 2017 2018 2019 I 2020 I I U Mai kr+..p eIe Mil 3 in&Miiy bonus Nr'I rc Ls • Al rurddt:le ury[I up d wise).bonus'MOM Fargo , ,125 000) University located architecture and Tax Impacts of Fargo's Renaissance Zone business schools downtown. $ °°°°° iiiiiiiiii ES00 } _ $�,� a.� a ==az --C■CCCCCCCCC .1===iiii� ii iii_iiiiiw r�i,. 104-unit mixed-use development 4 Emmm-mmmmillEommm=====CC C .imi. ====GECCCCCCCCCCCC'ECCCC AGE $1.5°°.®° ===i=====i========iii=i==i+� M1__ built in downtown core. g . ____ �� _______==•_�ii== 0 CCC======rCCMCCCC� mMIMC =C= x $1'000'000 I ____________= ii iiiiiiiiiiiii= __ __________ Over 4,500 more students and F ===.= .____.=_.= _•Ipprow..M=1======== __� --- C�CCCCCCCCCC�v ========== $600,000 - �iiii=iiiiii . i=iiiii=ii=i acuity living, working and studying ===ii— .r ==== ai __________ downtown. a, ______mm_m_,—�= i iiiiiiiiii LL �=====i======i�-i -===== --- 1999 2000 2003 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year Spurred small business Spurred small-scale housing Helped affordable housing Oregon ___..., , . • •, . _ : gr.-1%r., . -*iv-, .. _. . . •,_ •• . , - • � .._.• .' 414,_ -....." allio ii., __,L -- . ,r' •-..',. ."`' E P P - gli II 1 El DI , 4.-- - © 0P _ _t.I [11OCI .a CT L°" :1 '�C',III I rde e- _.posed R �a,p.r-i=�-r cE ErC'.lr.e=o; .. E L..RC,- o��_=d.-:E_ e, -!nplem F •1i .. w.Y perm sson ` �"c i f-_+ • l P FIF _• DOWNTOWN APARTMENT PROJECT,ABOUT TO BE 9IliIlk CRAPPED, RETURNS WITH 40 PERCENT MORE HOMES i. • ce,-.) all T...-_..,.. __.. . . ,, _. Si htline INSTITUTE For cities in metro areas Adopted July 2022 Oregon 's Many reforms effective Jan 1 , 2023 Parking Further reform to local Reforms schedule : Lake Oswego Dec 31 , 2024 ✓ Implement best practices for parking code details Improving ✓ Cities choose a Parking parking reform approach Management ✓ Populous communities do Overview more parking management k J City of / Praparb aN • i 112+nr+IC a; USE T,_ r }k .' 0 1/--- - ,„„,--- AhrAmtki / f- ler-Witti /. Ar • • yhi11r� �r =U=- -iti 4r1 • • • I .A111r6 _F I . IL111 :Pi I `.. µ. .. ! aft• NoMandates ,,,,,,,..,,,,,,±„.... .... . : _..... .... W 3 . _ - This *+ }u 41zin t r -41/1 —] 'I. .; : _. li \ rl 1 R. # . �' * V a�.1 LIM' — lItio '. ::�i um+. . ' - 'fir :1 ai�■1.111 •. 1 == ; lI Try r - • k. Y LII • . zg,. 1 '. I \ .41'; ...1:.:4--.1)Pb••••,,-.lir.••,-. +9 ll F 1*5 ]...;;---.---_____ci- -�� L No mandates for these types Affordable housing Publicly subsidized housing Residential units <750 sq feet Reduced Single-room occupancy Childcare facilities Mandates for Emergency, transitional , domestic Types violence shelters Facilities/residences for people with disabilities and in treatment No more than one space/unit for multifamily may be mandated elm a I Iv r • Garages (ping-pong rooms) and carports Source:Pexe can't be required mp lamen • Leased or off-site parking can meet parking requirements Best Practices • New large parking lots provide either for Parking fsolar or eatu estrees, and have walkability • Ease conversion of existing parking lots • More rOption 1 : Option 2: Option 3: No mandates Fair policies Reduced red tap Implement Repeal at least two of mandates five policies for more uses, Repeal parking more areas mandates Reduce burdens of how mandates can be met Nothing further Waive mandates for certain types of development Reduce mandates in Metro centers Remove mandates near frequent transit Al Implement at least two Parking rented separate from units, residential Parking rented separate from units, Option 2 commercial Flexible commute benefits (parking cash Fair Policies out) of $50+/month if parking free at employer Tax on parking lot revenue Mandates no higher than 0.5 space/unit multifamily No mandates Studios/one bedrooms Dormitories/group quarters Transit-oriented/mixed-use New uses/expansions Buildings in historic districts Option 3 LEED/Reach Code Reduced Buildings vacant 2+ years Small businesses Red Tape Schools Bars % mile around Metro town centers Also One residential/benefit district or unbundled parking for residential Option 1 : No mandates citywide • Albany • Beaverton • Bend Paths Taken • Central Point • Corvallis • Portland • Salem • Tigard Working on Option 2 : Fair Policies • Sherwood z 7 i �.. .yiw .- .,yii ",+VT \''''‘ . . ••a•, S•. •PIE1 S• V•: A i L 6 , .., lll/ • i '.+1.% F y .. .4 r NE9E �� '� K . ' 4 r 1 r171}i , , 1 _ {r rtis '4y � w ' Learn WESA i HIGHW. 4 .ore l . . r ..r •`9 --.„ On i ne . ��iii. : „mak ,..... ..., „,„.„--44‘\'' 0 11.1 44- ._ voiew \-.7 it .,_ _._,_______,_,,._,..„._. Search NP, iiiik. r 7 W41-,,14 i416t-.i1 1. 1171-1,,,.11 t.N10.li"_1 2:11: 1..,.-., ". ., ,°'0 : i •i.mx. - i i 1, , i :_IFF i 6 6 DLCD55 ;WS ,_ . .1'0 DLCD _ I. " CFEC " Evan Manvel evan.manvel@dlcd.oregon.gov