Buffalo has done it. Colorado Springs has done it. And, late last year, Hartford, Connecticutdid it, too.
立法，作为San Francisco Examiner reports经过12月4日的监督员6-4投票的投票，是最广泛的，与旧金山成为最大的美国城市，在全市的基础上击中此类停车要求，使开发人员提供自由和灵活性在他们想要的时候包括少量停车位。
The general thinking is that fewer available parking spaces ultimately leads to fewer cars on the road. And this, of course, means reduced greenhouse emissions for this congestion-plagued California city where vehicles, as in most urban areas, remain amajor source of air pollution.
The move is being heralded as a win for environmentalists, housing advocates, proponents of sustainable development and anyone and everyone who champions methods of getting around the City by the Baywithout私人车辆。
Minimums already minimized in many parts of the city
Over the years as the city has grown, the rules have been relaxed in several zoning areas. Today, the minimum number of parking spaces that developers are required to provide varies by the size of the building in question as well as its location. Residential developments in close proximity to public transit — BART, in particular — have been required to provide less dedicated parking than developments further from mass transit since the 1970s. In some parts of city, the minimums have already been eliminated altogether.
And in neighborhoods where the minimums haven't been loosened, some developers have come to rely on legal loopholes (the installation of dedicated on-site bike parking being one) to further drive down the number of required parking spaces in their projects. This impetus to不是include off-site parking is due largely to the exorbitant cost involved with providing it. PerNext City, the cost to build a new parking spot in San Francisco is second only to Honolulu, where the price tag attached to a single underground parking space is a staggering $38,000.
金的提案 - 遏制举报that it enjoyed early popularity amongst residents when presented during public meetings — simply expands the no-minimum rules.
除了新住房,丢弃城市最低parking rules also applies to new commercial development. This isn't likely to cause major shockwaves amongst commuters in the city given that, as Next City explains, San Francisco has one of the lowest proportions of car commuters in the entire county.
Making room for more housing, not parking
要重申，旧金山开发商可以 - 并且可能会 - 继续满足停车最少。
在通过旧金山规划部门的城市设计师的立法通过之前，保罗·克森，告诉审查员that residents in certain parts of the city will still likely demand that a certain number of parking spaces be provided at new residential developments although, to be clear, parking最大值will not be increased.
"They operate under political constraints where the neighborhoods will probably pressure them to build parking," he says of the developers who will continue to provide off-street parking as normal.
Developers who choose to eschew the minimums are presented with a new world of opportunity. Instead of spending a pretty penny to meet the required number of parking spots, they could — gasp — use those funds to build more places for people to live, not places for people to park their cars. And in housing-strapped San Francisco, more money, time and physical space dedicated to additional housing is no small deal. Developers could also dedicate land that would have otherwise been reserved for parking to create green space, additional bicycle parking, you name it.
"There is no good reason for the city to force the private market to produce parking spaces for every housing unit built," Arielle Fleisher, a transportation policy associate with venerable Bay Area nonprofit SPUR, tells the Examiner. "Eliminating minimum parking requirements reduces the cost of producing new housing and enables us to use our land more efficiently by replacing spaces for cars with spaces for people."
This all being said, the ultimate aim of the legislation isn't just to formalize. It also seeks to encourage other major cities that are looking to institute, loosen or expand parking minimums beyond their downtown cores. It's one thing if Hartford does it. But with San Francisco doing it, too, this significantly ups the ante for other "major" American cities to follow suit. (Not that Hartford and the growing list ofother citieswith relaxed or eliminated parking minimums for new development are small potatoes.)
读到来自Lyft和Pro-Development Group Yimby行动的主管委员会发送联合信：
Lyft当然有自己的特殊年代的理由upporting nixed parking minimums given that it could, first and foremost, be a boon for ride-sharing programs. Fewer San Franciscans who own and operate private cars means more potential customers for Lyft. Per local CBS affiliateKPIX, Supervisor Norman Yee, who voted against the legislation, sees this as problematic as it "could increase the number of ride-hailing service cars such as Uber and Lyft clogging city streets."
The ordinance will be subject to a second vote by the Board of Supervisors, which will be held next week. A spokesperson for Mayor London Breed, who ultimately has the power to veto the legislation, has signaled that she is in favor of it.