Supporters of Colorado’s new law relaxing parking requirements near transit have high hopes for the impact it could have on housing costs, transportation and the environment across the Denver metro area.
“We quickly realized the parking thing takes a lot of problems down with one swoop,” Rep. Stephanie Vigil told The Colorado Sun in an interview last week. Vigil, a Colorado Springs Democrat, was one of the main sponsors of the parking measure, House Bill 1304.
“I don’t think it’s a silver bullet, because I don’t believe in those,” she said. “But I think as far as policy shifts that have the potential to have a number of good positive impacts and a lot of them with one lift, I think this is a big contender.”
The optimism is understandable. As we explain in our article this week, the abundance of parking in American cities has come with clear downsides, driving up the cost of housing and increasing urban sprawl, which leads to longer car commutes and more greenhouse gas pollution.
But can relaxing parking regulations really fix all of that? Experts say it can help — but with a caveat. Your mileage may vary from one community to the next.
A growing body of evidence shows that relaxing those requirements can make a big difference in large- and mid-size cities that have tried it. For instance, after Seattle eliminated or reduced parking requirements near transit, researchers found that developers built 40% less parking than they would have otherwise, saving builders $537 million from 2012 to 2017.
When you eliminate or reduce parking minimums, “developers build less parking,” said C.J. Gabbe, an associate professor of urban planning at the University of Santa Clara and the lead author of the Seattle study. “Developers didn’t build — in general — no parking, but they built considerably less than they would have under the previous requirements.”
Gabbe’s finding dovetails with a handful of other studies that show cities often force developers to build more parking than residents and customers actually use. But while top national experts say the evidence in urban, transit-oriented areas is clear, there’s not much research on how relaxing parking rules could play out in a more suburban setting.
Partly that’s because best practices among urban planners have only turned against parking minimums over the last 20 years. The topic is also just really difficult to study, Gabbe says.
“It’s really hard to get data from cities about how much parking has been built, despite it being a really central part of land use regulations,” he told The Sun. “There haven’t been too many studies.”
Welcome to The Unaffiliated, the politics and policy newsletter from The Colorado Sun. Each week, we take you inside the political arena to deliver news and insights on Colorado politics. Keep reading for even more exclusive news.
If you’re reading this newsletter but not signed up for it, here’s how to get it sent directly to your email inbox. Please send feedback and tips to jesse@coloradosun.com.
SUBURBAN IMPACT MAY BE SLOW
Due to the lack of suburban studies, no one’s sure how changes to parking rules might play out in different parts of the metro area.
But it’s safe to expect changes to take hold faster in a city like Denver — which has already taken steps to reduce parking requirements in recent years — than some of its more sprawling suburbs.
“My sense from the research is that it seems to have the biggest impact in places that are more urban and better served by transit,” Gabbe said. “It’ll take a longer time to catch (on) in those lower density areas.”
Matt Frommer, a senior transportation associate at the Boulder-based Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, agrees — parking minimums won’t change how Colorado’s cities develop overnight.
“If a project isn’t near transit and everyone needs to drive, you best bet the developer will build a lot of parking,” said Frommer, a proponent of the Colorado bill. “They will. We know they will, because they go above the minimums there now at their own expense.”
The law’s requirements kick in July 1, 2025. After that, affected local governments won’t be able to enforce minimum parking requirements for most multifamily housing projects within a quarter-mile of transit stations or qualifying bus stops. It applies only to cities and counties within a metropolitan planning organization.
The measure does have some flexibility. Local governments can require one space per housing unit on a case-by-case basis if they can justify to the state why a particular development needs it. The state also has to provide technical assistance to cities to help them plan for less parking, with things like on-street parking permits and shared lots that serve residents and businesses at different times of day.
Gabbe says those sorts of programs will be needed to avoid blowback from residents.
“Parking issues are kind of inherent in densifying neighborhoods,” he said. “Cities, when they reduce off-street parking requirements, need to take a more active role in managing on-street parking as well.”
WHAT TO WATCH THIS WEEK
DO THE MATH
$521,643
New spending by America Leads Action, a federal super PAC, opposing Colorado GOP Chairman Dave Williams in his 5th Congressional District Republican primary bid against conservative commentator and activist Jeff Crank.
The additional expenses last week reported Saturday brings America Leads Action’s spending to beat Williams to at least $1.2 million.
The money went to “media placement/media production,” according to the group’s filing with the Federal Election Commission. That likely means TV ads.
The total PAC spending to beat Williams is now approaching $2 million.
From the Politico Playbook this morning: “The most concerning race for the GOP’s governance wing is the Colorado Springs-based seat from which Rep. Doug Lamborn is retiring. Establishment-minded Republicans there have assembled against Dave Williams, the chair of the Colorado Republican Party.”
GROWING PRESSURE ON WILLIAMS
Williams continues to battle the big money being spent to defeat him by using the Colorado GOP’s campaign account as his personal piggy bank. The party sent out yet another mailer highlighting how Williams has been endorsed by Donald Trump and attacking Crank.
To be clear: We haven’t seen or heard of the party, which has limited cash, helping out Republican candidates in other races. And up until this year the party has not gotten involved in primaries.
Meanwhile, Jeffco Republicans Chair Nancy Pallozzi is telling reporters she has collected the necessary signatures from Colorado GOP central committee members to force a vote to oust Williams from his leadership position. She didn’t return a phone call from The Unaffiliated on Monday seeking proof of the signatures.
OTHER PAC SPENDING IN CONGRESSIONAL RACES
In the 3rd Congressional District, Rocky Mountain Values PAC, a Democratic group, continues to promote former state Rep. Ron Hanks, an election denier, in the six-way GOP primary. Over the weekend, the super PAC reported spending $150,000 on TV and radio ads about Hanks and Trump and $15,000 on digital ads about Hanks.
Our American Century PAC reported spending $89,000 on ads supporting retired businessman Lew Webb, another Republican running in the 3rd District. That’s on top of $96,000 it already has spent to help Webb and oppose Hanks.
Welcome PAC, a super PAC that supports moderate Democrats, reported spending $19,000 on mailers and digital ads supporting veteran Joe Reagan in his 5th Congressional District Democratic primary against River Gassen, a science educator.
And a new super PAC, American Freedom Coalition, spent $18,500 to send mailers supporting U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert in the 4th Congressional District GOP primary. She’s competing against five others for the Republican nomination.
CHART(S) OF THE WEEK
Some $2.3 million from political groups poured into state House and Senate primaries through Monday.
Here’s a summary of what has been spent:
A Whole Lot of People for Change is the biggest political group spending on legislative primaries thus far, at nearly $500,000 in six Democratic contests. That group’s money comes from the state-level super PACs One Main Street Colorado and We Are Colorado Business Coalition. The former is getting its money from a nonprofit of the same name, while Education Reform Now is the biggest donor to the latter. Business and some labor groups are also chipping in.
Colorado Labor Action has spent $416,000 in five contests. Their money has come from the Colorado Education Association and the Colorado AFL-CIO.
Below is a graphic showing the legislative races with the most political group spending thus far. You can find a complete list of political group spending in legislative races here.
Want to reach Colorado political influencers and support quality local journalism? The Sun can help get your message attention through a sponsorship of The Unaffiliated, the must-read politics and policy newsletter in Colorado. Contact Sylvia Harmon at underwriting@coloradosun.com for more information.
THE POLITICAL TICKER
3RD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
Democrat Adam Frisch is reserving more than $1 million in TV ad time from late September through Election Day in the Pueblo, Grand Junction, Durango and Denver cable and traditional television markets, according to contracts filed with the Federal Communications Commission. With six Republicans vying to face the former Aspen City councilman, Frisch, who is running unopposed in the June 25 primary, has a huge financial advantage over his Republican challengers. He had nearly $6 million in cash in the bank at the end of March.
4TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
In-person voting is now available in the 4th Congressional District where, in addition to the primaries, there is a special election June 25 that will determine who serves out the rest of former U.S. Rep. Ken Buck’s term. There is at least one in-person voting center open in every county in the district. Voters may find polling places or ballot drop boxes by entering their address on this webpage.
READ MORE
🔑 = source has article meter or paywall
CAMPAIGN FINANCE
Steve Wells closes out his state-level super PAC
Weld County rancher Steve Wells last week closed out the state-level super PAC that he funneled $11 million into ahead of the 2022 election.
Wells, who has made a fortune by leasing out his 40,000-acre parcel of land for oil and gas drilling, spent only about $4 million of the money he gave to the committee, Deep Colorado Wells. That includes the $3.3 million he spent trying unsuccessfully to get Republican gubernatorial candidate Heidi Ganahl elected.
Wells also spent $500,000 last year on a documentary about fentanyl and fatal overdoses of the drug called “Devastated.” The film, produced by former conservative talk radio host Steffan Tubbs and Mountain Time Media, is now showing in Colorado. You can watch it here.
The committee refunded the final $277,412.37 left in it to Wells on June 6. Its balance is now zero.
Without his super PAC, Wells is constrained by Colorado’s individual donor limits if he wants to help political candidates or causes. The exception is that he may still give unlimited amounts to super PACs that aren’t under his control, as well as issue committees.
“It’s just time to refocus and do something different with what I’ve learned,” Wells told The Unaffiliated on Monday.
He called politics a “nasty game” but said he’s not done playing it.
In the short term, Wells, 66, plans to focus his attention on the Weld County Commission and Greeley City Council. He also wants to work on increasing the penalties for fentanyl possession and distribution, possibly through a future ballot measure.
THE BIGGER PICTURE
🔑 = source has article meter or paywall
The Colorado Sun is part of The Trust Project. Read our policies.
Corrections & Clarifications
Notice something wrong? The Colorado Sun has an ethical responsibility to fix all factual errors. Request a correction by emailing corrections@coloradosun.com.