Austin, Texas, is now the largest city in the country to abolish parking requirements for new developments as part of efforts to combat climate change and address affordable housing needs.
The Austin City Council set a new policy that allows developers of any property type to build their projects without having to include a minimum number of parking spots for tenants or visitors.
Eliminating minimum parking requirements for all new developments is expected to discourage driving — a major source of carbon emissions — as well as free up space for more housing units to be built and lower development costs that can be passed on to savings for the renter.
“Minimum parking requirements have resulted in an overabundance of parking in many locations throughout Austin and have continued to encourage people to drive to their destination," city staff said in a report to council members before Thursday's 8-2 vote. "These parking spaces are expensive to build and maintain and promote automobile use even when short trips can be easily accessed by walking, bicycling, or by taking transit."
Austin, with a population of about 1 million residents within its city limits, is the largest U.S. city to pass such a policy. San Jose, California, with only about 2,000 fewer residents than the Texas capital city, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, is the second-largest city to eliminate parking mandates. California was the first state to pass legislation that eliminated parking requirements for housing and commercial developments near public transportation.
Austin's new policy applies to any housing, office or retail development within city limits. A statement by the city’s Housing and Planning Department said homebuilders are expected to significantly benefit from eliminating mandates on parking requirements.
“Parking spaces occupy the developable area of a given parcel and add to its impervious cover, reducing its capacity to provide housing units," the statement said. "Eliminating parking minimums will allow home builders to build less parking where appropriate and use more of a property for housing units or other land uses required in residential projects, such as onsite detention ponds."
Lower Costs
Eliminating minimum parking requirements can lower development costs and, in turn, lead to lower rents for housing. Building parking spaces can cost between $5,000 and $10,000 per space in surface lots and between $20,000 and $60,000 per space in parking structures, according to the Transportation and Public Works Department. Those expenses are often reflected in increased rents of up to $200 per month per unit for one additional parking space, according to the Austin Strategic Housing Blueprint.
Council member Zohaib “Zo” Qadri, who authored the policy eliminating local parking mandates for developers, said the new policy will benefit local residents and small business owners.
“If we truly want to achieve our progressive goals of making Austin a less car-dependent city, we cannot be forcing developers to provide car storage in every single new project that goes up in our city limits,” Qadri said at the council’s Nov. 2 meeting. “It gobbles up scarce land, it adds burdensome costs … that get passed on to renters and buyers, it makes it harder for small businesses to get off the ground and it harms walkability.”
Developers still have the option to build parking for general use at their projects. And developers are still required to provide accessible parking for people with disabilities, consistent with federal law.
The abolishing of minimum parking requirements did have some opposition. Council member Alison Alter, who was one of the two elected officials on the dais who voted against Qadri’s proposal, worried the elimination of the parking mandate would lead to unintended consequences.
“Although I think that our existing parking requirements do need reform and there are many scenarios where I would relax or eliminate parking requirements, this universal elimination of requirements is a step beyond what I consider to be prudent,” Alter said. “I'm concerned that there will be unintended consequences in scenarios that create real problems for navigating areas where residential uses abut commercial uses, particularly in areas that have older, narrow streets.”