Reduce Parking Minimums in CODE Tucson '26
City of Tucson Planning Commission
Sponsored by
To:
City of Tucson Planning Commission
From:
[Your Name]
Tucson for Everyone is writing in support of parking requirement reform and greater code corrections at the August 26th Public Hearing before the Planning Commission. We greatly appreciate the time PDSD staff has taken on this project, including public outreach and the incorporation of some of our proposed edits. We still believe that while the proposed code amendments resolve many issues with the current UDC, they leave many issues untouched. These include cross-reference errors and generally unclear language. The current changes proposed in CODE Tucson ‘26 also do not go far enough in removing the many barriers to housing that exist in the code.
We urge that the current parking waiver for middle housing be clearly expanded to other uses, including all 1-5 unit residential developments. Many other comparable cities such as Minneapolis, Raleigh, Sacramento, Baltimore, and Portland, Oregon have removed parking minimums citywide. Nashville has removed parking minimums in its downtown and surrounding areas, while Dallas has removed parking minimums near transit and for all multifamily developments under 20 units and any bars or restaurants under 2,5000 sq. ft. As a result of changes like these, cities like Minneapolis have seen increases in development and decreases in both rent and carbon emissions. Despite many stated fears from those who oppose parking reform, research demonstrates that when parking is reduced, parking is still included in new housing and existing parking becomes used more efficiently. This code clean-up project should be taken as an opportunity to simplify and reduce the UDC’s parking requirements to align with a growing consensus on new best planning practices.
In addition, Tucson for Everyone supports more of our proposed clarity and usability changes to be adopted to make the UDC more intelligible for those who use it. While these may be individually small in importance, the cumulative effect of small and substantial errors makes using the UDC unnecessarily complicated. Adopting changes for clarity and consistency will help make this crucial regulatory document more legible and usable.