Time to revisit parking minimums?

[Pete]

In the modern era, most cities require a minimum of parking spaces per square foot of development...

In Oklahoma City, for example, most commercial development (office, retail) require 1 space per 200 square feet. There are also very specific requirements for things like golf courses, swimming pools, multi-family housing, etc.

These standards came from elsewhere and seem to be relatively universal in almost every American city. Somewhere along the line, someone developed these guidelines and cities just copied them into their municipal code and zoning regulations. (If you read through these documents from any U.S. municipality -- big or small -- they are shockingly similar).


Now, think about how often all the parking spaces are used ANYWHERE. What you see is that during the day, some very small percentage of a massive parking lot is being used. And at other large chunks of time, these lots are virtually empty.

Not only are parking lots the ugliest thing you could possibly ever construct, they are barriers and completely non-contributing in terms of revenue.


This article talks about this issue, and it's interesting to think about:

Strong Towns Blog - Strong Towns

There is no penalty for the local planner zoner that mindlessly copies a parking regulation from somewhere else, applies it dogmatically to their community and then uses their position of power to justify it after-the-fact with pithy statements like, "Well, the day after Thanksgiving...." That bureaucrat pays no price but the costs to society are enormous.

For small businesses -- especially a startup -- providing parking is a huge, expensive burden. When the parking required is excessive to the actual needs of the business, a local government is forcing that business owner to allocate scarce capital to unproductive uses. If you are pro- small business, you are anti- parking minimums.

[Pete]

BTW, I should have mentioned that OKC has already waived most the parking requirements in several urban districts, but that's a very small percentage of the City.

[Plutonic Panda]

Edmond really needs to. Everywhere you drive around here there is a 500 space parking lot with maybe half or less of it being used.

[hoya]

The only time I ever see parking lots full is during Christmas season. That's basically one month out of the year. The rest of the time they're at least half empty.

[Plutonic Panda]

The only time I ever see parking lots full is during Christmas season. That's basically one month out of the year. The rest of the time they're at least half empty.

Bro, if you ever see Bryant Square in Edmond(off of Bryant and Second) full during anytime, call me immediately because I want to take pictures of the flying pigs.

[CaptDave]

This sounds a lot like people who want to lay down huge roads to facilitate traffic escaping from a ball game six or seven times a year.......

[Pete]

This sounds a lot like people who want to lay down huge roads to facilitate traffic escaping from a ball game six or seven times a year.......

Or hundreds of millions spent on stadiums that are only occupied less than half a day 8-15 times a year.

Or people that haul around 3 or 4 tons of SUV even though 98% of the time they are driving alone or nearly alone and without any real cargo and never, ever go off-road.


The U.S. is such a culture of excess. The government shouldn't be facilitating and even demanding it through it's own regulations.

[Zuplar]

They should eliminate ALL parking requirements and let the business owners worry about how many spaces to provide.

100% agree.

Or hundreds of millions spent on stadiums that are only occupied less than half a day 8-15 times a year.

Or people that haul around 3 or 4 tons of SUV even though 98% of the time they are driving alone or nearly alone and without any real cargo and never, ever go off-road.


The U.S. is such a culture of excess. The government shouldn't be facilitating and even demanding it through it's own regulations.

This may be a country of excess but could you imagine if people stopped spending money on all these things?

[Plutonic Panda]

Or hundreds of millions spent on stadiums that are only occupied less than half a day 8-15 times a year.

Or people that haul around 3 or 4 tons of SUV even though 98% of the time they are driving alone or nearly alone and without any real cargo and never, ever go off-road.

I kind of agree with you but disagree at the same time. It is freedom of choice if someone wants to buy a huge SUV and the stadium provides a lot of revenue in the little time it is functioning.

I do think the US is a culture of excess, but not for the reasons you listed.

[Plutonic Panda]

I kind of agree with you but disagree at the same time. It is freedom of choice if someone wants to buy a huge SUV and the stadium provides a lot of revenue in the little time it is functioning.

I do think the US is a culture of excess, but not for the reasons you listed.

EDIT: It is freedom of choice if someone wants to buy a huge SUV, that is their choice to do so and some people just prefer how it drives and the convenience of having it should the need arise. The stadium provides a lot of revenue in the little time it is functioning.

[Zuplar]

EDIT: It is freedom of choice if someone wants to buy a huge SUV, that is their choice to do so and some people just prefer how it drives and the convenience of having it should the need arise. The stadium provides a lot of revenue in the little time it is functioning.

Exactly. Just take Oklahoma Memorial Stadium for example, look how much money that thing makes for the university, businesses in the area as well as jobs it provides not only when its open, but in maintenance as well. Who cares if it isn't used 95% of the time.

[hoya]

EDIT: It is freedom of choice if someone wants to buy a huge SUV, that is their choice to do so and some people just prefer how it drives and the convenience of having it should the need arise. The stadium provides a lot of revenue in the little time it is functioning.

Ah, but what if I want to drive the Canyonero?

Can you name the truck with four wheel drive,
smells like a steak and seats thirty-five..

Canyonero! Canyonero!

12 yards long, 2 lanes wide,
65 tons of American Pride!

Canyonero! Canyonero!

Why don't they make the lanes wider to accommodate my larger vehicle? Why is the minimum vertical clearance in urban areas only 14 feet, despite my SUV's 14' 6" height?

The government is infringing on my personal choice, man.

--

The point, you see, is the government eventually has to set and follow standards. There's nothing inherently immoral about driving a 17 foot tall vehicle. In the abstract, it's perfectly fine to have such a truck. But no matter how popular these vehicles might be, they just don't fit on our roads. The government has a legitimate interest in promoting certain choices over others.

The government does that with a lot of things. Standardized safety equipment. Limiting what types of vehicles can carry flashing lights and sirens. Fuel economy standards. Exhaust standards. Curb weight standards. I suppose in the abstract you could argue you should have the right to drive a car with no headlights, but few would agree with you.

Now currently, those big SUVs are perfectly legal. There is no government restriction against them. But we're talking about the government's ability to place restrictions on the types of vehicles allowed on the road. And they clearly have that ability. The fact that SUVs currently fall within those boundaries is simply the status quo, it's nothing special. It's just the way it happens to be right now.

One of the government's interests is being a good steward of taxpayer dollars. Sometimes (actually, no, EVERY time) that involves telling one group of people they can't have the shiny thing they wanted because it's too expensive and a waste of money. I'm looking at you, 6 lane highways.

[Just the facts]

They should eliminate ALL parking requirements and let the business owners worry about how many spaces to provide.

[LakeEffect]

They should eliminate ALL parking requirements and let the business owners worry about how many spaces to provide.

Ahh, if we did that, though, I'd suggest parking maximums...

[Just the facts]

Why? There is no predefined maximum now.

[LakeEffect]

Why? There is no predefined maximum now.

Because many of our area developers, even in areas with no minimum, think they'll need large amounts of parking when, in fact, they won't.

[BoulderSooner]

Because many of our area developers, even in areas with no minimum, think they'll need large amounts of parking when, in fact, they won't.

There are also several studies that deal with driving customers that need to see x amount of open spaces to be inclined to stop and shop

[Dubya61]

There are also several studies that deal with driving customers that need to see x amount of open spaces to be inclined to stop and shop

I was not aware of this concept. That's kind of sad and takes it back to the chicken/egg / vicious circle concept.
1) How do you make it more walkable? Step 1 -- reduce parking.
2) Business entities will do this on their own in order to draw in more customers who prefer walkable areas.
3) Except in the situation where we have so many customers who don't know what walkable is and drive EVERYWHERE.

[BoulderSooner]

When dealing with big box stores they have 30% more parking then what they think their usage will be

[tomokc]

The problem with many big box stores - Best Buy in particular - is that they stripe their parking spaces to the minimum allowable size. I'd rather not go there and risk door dings & fender benders.

[Just the facts]

It's a good thing big box stores with large parking lots are going away.

The Era of Big Box Retail Dominance Is Coming to an End - Bloomberg

When Best Buy Co. (BBY) said yesterday it was closing 50 big stores and opening 100 smaller ones, the world’s largest electronics retailer was adjusting to reality: The era of big-box retail dominance is coming to an end.

The new mantra is small box. While Best Buy, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) and Target Corp. (TGT) are still opening large stores, all are putting increasing emphasis on smaller ones. Best Buy plans to double the number of its smaller Best Buy Mobile stores by 2016. Wal-Mart is building as many as 100 small-format stores this year, while Target is opening five CityTarget locations.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's a good thing big box stores with large parking lots are going away.

The Era of Big Box Retail Dominance Is Coming to an End - Bloomberg

It's an economic cycle, I'm willing to bet there will be a comeback of big box stores. I don't have a problem with them.

[bluedogok]

The problem with many big box stores - Best Buy in particular - is that they stripe their parking spaces to the minimum allowable size. I'd rather not go there and risk door dings & fender benders.

If you are talking about the Best Buy at 59th & May they had nothing to do with that, that was the property owner who hired a striping company that had no clue what they were doing. In fact most of the big box malls don't have anything to do with parking layout, they just want a minimum ration of spaces.

When dealing with big box stores they have 30% more parking then what they think their usage will be

Walmart is 150% of required.

[jerrywall]

It doesn't work with big box retail, but with small retail, and downtown areas, it seems like the only way to eliminate minimums or even implement maximums would be with coordinated city planning. Community parking lots (such as what's used for the Farmer's market in Edmond), walkability (crosswalks, pedestrian paths, and such) and cheap/free public transportation are all keys I think.

[Plutonic Panda]

That's taking a bit extreme, doncha think?