In 2025, the urban planning world is shifting: parking minimums, once ubiquitous, are being scrapped in favor of people-focused mobility. Cities recognize that mandating excessive off-street parking inflates housing costs, drives sprawl, and eats public space.
Now, reforms—from zoning changes in California and Colorado to dynamic curb pricing and mobility hubs—are unlocking walkable, equitable neighborhoods. Leaders like Donald Shoup (who passed away in 2025) championed the economic and social costs of free parking, framing reform as essential to sustainable, affordable cities.
This article explores what parking reform actually means—from reduced mandates to smart pricing and shared mobility infrastructure—illustrating steps cities are taking, costs, measurable outcomes, and the future of curb space as a mobility asset, not a parking bank.
Why Ditching Parking Minimums Matters
- Housing affordability & supply: Parking spaces can cost anywhere from $28,000 (surface) to $56,000 (underground) per spot—costs that inflate unit prices by ~20%. Removing parking mandates allows more housing units to be built at lower cost.
- Land productivity & walkability: Minimums make cities park-dominated, reduce density, and stretch destinations apart. Reform frees land for housing, retail, public space, and walkable design.
- Equity & climate: Free parking subsidies benefit car owners (lack transit riders), perpetuate inequality, and lock in car dependency that drives emissions.
Cities and states are responding: Oregon, California (AB 2097), Colorado, and Washington have passed legislation to eliminate or cap parking minimums—especially near transit or for affordable housing.
Over 3,000 cities globally have partially or fully reformed minimums, though only ~20% have done so citywide. Several major U.S. cities—including San Francisco, Berkeley, San Jose, Sacramento, and more—have fully eliminated parking mandates. ([search2], [search32–34], [search6])
- Boulder, Colorado is poised to abolish parking minimums citywide following a 2024 state law.
- Bridgeport, Connecticut has removed residential parking mandates to stimulate housing—though local residents worry about spillover parking and congestion. ([news24])
- Houston, despite being unusually car-oriented, maintains strict mandates outside downtown and sees drawbacks: expensive developments, low walkability, and underused parking garages—yet its downtown area uses a market-based model. ([news23])
Smart Curb Pricing & Mobility Tools
With fewer mandatory slots, cities are redefining what curb space should do: not store cars, but manage mobility.
- Performance pricing: San Francisco’s SFpark system—dynamic curb pricing—kept 60–80% occupancy, slashed cruising for parking by 50%, and brought meter pricing down on underused blocks.
- Curb equity and economics: Parking space is valuable real estate. Managed pricing dissuades driving, raises public revenue for transit and amenities, and creates space for greener uses.
- Mobility hubs & shared fleets: Bremen installed car-sharing parking hubs that reportedly removed 5,000 cars from roads, freeing 40 km of street space. In Rio, loosening parking rules unlocked development of over 1,000 new apartments.
- Parking demand vs. shared mobility trade-offs: Modeling shows an 86% reduction in parking could be possible with shared autonomous fleets—but may increase vehicle travel by ~24%. Though a 57% cut is feasible with just 1.3% increase in VKT.
People-First Street Strategies
Shifting from parking minimums to mobility-first design employs several tactics:
- Remove or cap off-street minimums, especially near transit or for affordable housing.
- Just-in-time curb use pricing: Charge for loading, ride-hail, deliveries, and short-term pick-ups.
- Develop mobility hubs: Shared bikes, scooters, car-share, and transit passes at strategic locations.
- Reallocate freed parking to parklets, bike lanes, seating, or housing.
- Use meter revenue strategically for multimodal improvements.
- Pilot dashboards: monitor metrics like housing units built, parking reduced, mode shifts, and walkability scores.
Snapshot Comparison: Parking Policies in Action
| Reform Measure | Typical Target | Outcomes / Spec (2025) | Notable Cities & Costs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remove Parking Minimums | All new developments near transit (within ½ mile) | Lower housing costs; more units | CA AB 2097, OR statewide, CO HB 1304, Seattle SB 5184 |
| Citywide Abolishment | Entire zoning code | Infill growth, walkability | San Francisco, San Jose, Berkeley, Sacramento |
| Pilot District Reform | Core neighborhoods only | Incremental benefits; still small-scale | Many of 3,000+ reforming cities |
| Performance Curb Pricing | Maintain 15–20% vacancy | Cruising ↓50%, occupancy stabilized | SFpark (San Francisco) |
| Mobility Hubs / Shared Parking | Transit nodes | Reduced private vehicle ownership | Bremen car-share hubs; Rio housing development |
| Shared Mobility Parking Trade-offs | Minimal infrastructure | Potential 57% parking drop for small VKT increase | Modeled for on-demand fleets (Singapore) |
| Removal Concerns | Parking stress in low-transit areas | Need for balance—loading, street design | Bridgeport backlash; Houston context issues |
Real-World 2025 Examples
- California AB 2097 bans parking minimums within half a mile of transit. Cities such as SF and others have already removed minimums broadly—boosting housing affordability and reducing car dependency.
- Dallas, May 2025: Approved a code amendment that replaces one-size-fits-all minimum rates with context-sensitive, multimodal-focused off-street rules. Not on-street.
- Bridgeport: Parking mandates removed; housing enabled—but local dispute reflects need for community solutions like managed on-street or shared infrastructure.
- Houston retains onerous mandates, with densities and walkability suffering, though core areas use market-based models.
- UI: Global forum UITP Summit 2025 launched a Parking Transformation Working Group, promoting parking as a mobility lever. Examples include Rio’s housing boost and Bremen’s shared hubs.
- Fewer spaces boost housing: World Bank modeling links removing minimums to lower housing costs and higher supply.
- Don Shoup (1938–2025): His legacy endures—underpinning reform worldwide, emphasizing hidden parking costs and the power of pricing reforms.
Why Parking Reform Gains Traction Now
- High structure costs stifle new development and affordability.
- Parking adds ~20% to unit costs, and each structure may cost tens of thousands per space.
- Crises of housing affordability, climate urgency, and shifting mobility preferences (e.g. fewer teens driving, more shared modes) demand alternatives.
- Policy shifts—state laws, city council actions, plan language—reflect political feasibility.
- Practical results from SFpark, European mobility hubs, and housing studies reinforce reform effectiveness.
FAQs
Each required off-street parking space costs ~$28k (surface) to ~$56k (underground). Eliminating that requirement allows more units to be built with lower overall costs—studies estimate ~20% reduction in rent and increased unit supply.
Yes—San Francisco’s SFpark dynamic pricing reduced cruising by 50%, stabilized occupancy at 60–80%, and reduced citation revenues due to less violations.
Absolutely. Cities like Rio built over 1,000 new apartments by relaxing parking mandates. Bremen converted curb space into car-sharing hubs, removing ~5,000 cars and freeing tens of kilometers of roadway.