Oh yeah, I landed in a 60’s house 3 years ago, 3 miles from DT for less than 200k. It’s appreciated by $50k in 3 years according to comps/Zillow estimates. Crazy…
Back to parking, if we really abhor parking structures downtown then we need to focus on increasing density and affordability, not parking. The killer of parking requirements is transit and density. As @ADUsSomeday has analyzed, we are adding very little net new residences ITB. Without increasing density, DTR will always be car dependent, thus parking required.
So true, look at cities that are not covered with parking decks and you will see a very robust transit system. But downside is by time you get dense enough to support a robust transit the cost of housing gets very high as well,
I think its more that parking and living for all but the wealthiest will be the end result like any exclusive community. So long as those with the money continue to want to be there and that is certainly the trend now.
I was priced out of Raleigh a LOOONG time ago, lol. I’d love to move back, but I paid $64 sq ft/~4200 sq ft with a guest house, pool and 3 acres walking distance to work. Not to mention I pay in property taxes a year what some y’all might pay in a month. Course, I am in the middle of nowhere, lol. Also, there is no mass transit, lol.
Good guess, but no. I should’ve said the town in the middle of no where (but close 2 hours to a lot). I can walk to campus from the house, .08 miles. But it truly is up hill in both directions. (I have to walk down to the creek bottom either way). The neighborhood grew up around the house after WWII, hence the acreage. Crazy thing is this house is built the same year as the house I grew up in Raleigh, 1925. My dad walked to State & I get to as well.
In April, the committee discussed off-street requirements for commercial uses.
This memo examines that subject further, focusing on three key topics
Requirements in downtown
Requirements in areas served by transit
Maximum requirements or alternative provisions for projects that provide
much more parking than the minimum required amount.
This memo addresses options for parking reform that would address those
issues and align parking requirements in Raleigh with those in peer cities in the
state and region. The recommendation is to leave unchanged the amount of
allowed parking, while adopting modest reductions in the amount of required
parking. Property owners would still be able to provide current levels of parking
if they chose but would be able adapt to decreased demand by providing less
Downtown (DX) Parking Requirements for Nonresidential Uses
• Remove parking requirements in DX for commercial and/or residential uses. As noted above,
this would not mean that parking is not provided for large projects. However, it would avoid
situations where more parking is required than is needed for the users of a property.
• Consider a smaller reduction or the maintenance of the current requirement. If a smaller
reduction is considered, a reasonable possibility might be requiring no more than Charlotte’s
requirement, which is .5 spaces for every 1,000 square feet of nonresidential space.
Seems like a nudge in the right direction. The committee consists of:
Article I read today from the American Planning Association about the changing shift when it comes to on-street parking (to other uses such as transit, ride-share etc…): Curb Control
Miami Beach is slowly weaning people off parking curbside by escalating the price to do so vis-a-vis parking in garages. If one looks at the most expensive hourly rate curbside vs. the least expensive in a city owned garage, I think it’s up to 4 times more expensive. While it’s taking time, curbside parking has slowly been shrunk by adding bike lanes, more landscaping, bike share stations and drop-off zones.
What I’ll be watching this weekend. Options have been on the table to remove all parking requirements in DX zones for commercial uses. It’s working through the Healthy neighborhoods committee so I’m trying to catch up.
Here’s from May 28, I’m trying to find info from the July 1st meeting.
I just watched the video for the Healthy Neighborhoods Committee on July 1 and they voted unanimously to recommend eliminating minimum parking requirements (MPR) for residential and non-residential (so all uses?) uses in the DX-zoned areas.
Major takeaways for me:
To develop a small lot, a big, if not the biggest, inhibitor to develop it is the MPRs.
Large developments are more market and finance driven so parking requirements are a negligible factor.
Of all cities that staff compared, the ones that removed MPR, none have reinstated the requirements.
You can watch the discussion below. I thought it was interesting.
Next steps would be text change which heads to planning commission. I’m guessing after that, council approves and then it’s done. This would be fantastic to making it more realistic to fill in some of the smaller empty lots around downtown.
On a side note, I have no idea what Russ is talking about at around 16:50 when he goes on about urban frontages and high-frequency transit. Anyone care to listen and translate for me?
