06-16-2025 - Agenda Packet Planning Commission - Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

14 Maximum Number of Parking Spaces Required. The maximum number of off-street parking spaces for any building or use shall not exceed the amount determined as follows: 1. Parking lots of more than twenty and less than fifty-one spaces. Park- ing lots may not have more than one hundred twenty percent (120%) of the number of spaces identified in Table 15-C, not including accessible spaces, unless a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the parking area is landscaped in accordance with the standards of this chapter. 2. Parking lots of fifty one spaces or more. No more than one hundred ten percent (110%) of the number of spaces required as identified in Table 15-C of this chapter, not including accessible spaces, are permitted. Based on Helena’s minimum parking requirement for retail uses of 4.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, a 5,000-square-foot retail store would be required to provide 21 spaces and could provide no more than 25 spaces (unless 20 percent of the parking lot is landscaped)—a very narrow range. (Note that maximum standards of 125 or 150 percent of the minimum are more prevalent and provide a somewhat wider range.) Gen- erally, communities with minimum parking requirements that are set par- ticularly low (i.e., below typical demand) might consider higher maximum standards (e.g., 150 or 200 percent of the minimum) when using this method. A third method is a limit on the overall number of parking spaces in a particular geographic area. Cambridge, Massachusetts, uses parking maxi- mums as part of comprehensive set of strategies to reduce automobile de- pendence (Millard-Ball 2002). The Cambridge zoning ordinance, for ex- ample, states that “the total number of parking spaces serving non-residential uses in the North Point Residence District shall not exceed 2,500 spaces, allocated to each lot in the district at a rate of 1.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet of lot area.” Cambridge also uses the more popular ap- proach of setting parking maximums for many individual land uses. Some communities offer automatic exceptions to maximum parking standards if certain objectives are met. For example, San Antonio, Texas, which incorporates maximum standards for an extensive number of uses in its zoning code, exempts structured parking and parking located on pervious pavement. The pervious pavement exemption is subject to stan- dards that describe the underlying soil permeability, level of the water table, the slope of the lot, and maintenance of the lot (e.g., sweeping and washing). A note of caution: maximum standards that are set particularly low may result in spillover parking that could erode support for such standards. On-street parking restrictions accompanying maximum standards are one way of dealing with this issue, though such restrictions are also controver- sial in many places. Resident-only parking restrictions are often both a response to and a source of friction between the wishes of area residents, who like having on-street parking available for themselves and their guests, and businesses and institutions that rely on the ability of their patrons to find places to park. Time will tell whether maximum standards completely replace minimum requirements as concern continues to rise about traffic congestion, low-density development, and the environmental consequences of automobile dependence. Downtown Parking Standards In recent years, a number of communities without a traditional downtown have attempted to create such a place. Parking in downtown areas is complex and subject to a variety of competing interests. For example, the needs of busi- nesses that rely on the availability of short-term parking are sometimes af- 131