Frequently Asked Questions
Parking
Is the City of Dallas trying to get rid of parking?
The City of Dallas is considering removing regulations that require certain amounts of parking per property so that parking around Dallas can match what we need rather than generic government mandates. By allowing right-sized parking, we can encourage a safe, walkable city with more room for homes, more opportunity for small businesses, and a more responsible impact on the environment.
Dallas is a car-oriented city. Won’t removing parking mandates be harmful?
No. Builders will continue to provide enough parking, based on market demands. The market will continue to require parking in almost all projects and lenders won’t fund projects without enough parking. However, without parking mandates, there’ll be less unused excessive parking, meaning more land for housing, local businesses, and other beneficial uses.
Won’t removing parking mandates cause parked cars to overflow onto neighborhood streets?
No. Most new developments will continue to provide parking. Even if there is overflow, this can be effectively managed with existing tools. The change will also be too gradual to make a noticeable difference on local streets.
Won’t there be more parked cars near schools, making it harder and less safe to drop off and pick up kids?
No city that’s eliminated parking mandates has reported problems around schools, most likely because the impacts are too gradual and because a school’s presence means there are fewer other nearby destinations that would generate parking.
Will removing parking mandates negatively impact people with disabilities?
This change will not affect handicapped-accessible parking. The Federal government requires accessible parking spaces depending on the number of parking spaces built. The very first parking space constructed must be accessible. Additionally, the City allows anyone with a handicap marker or license plate to park for free in metered curb parking spaces.
Why not just reduce or eliminate mandates in certain areas of town, rather than eliminate mandates citywide?
Parking mandates don’t make sense anywhere. At best, mandates are redundant. Where mandates require the same or less than what builders would have provided anyway. At worst, mandates are harmful. Rigid rules can never predict every situation for every type of building project.
Aren’t parking mandates a useful bargaining chip to extract more affordable housing concessions from developers?
Eliminating mandates removes the need for affordability bargaining chips in the first place. Without mandates, there will be less excessive parking spaces, leading to more housing units and lower rents, as other cities have experienced.
Will eliminating parking mandates harm low-income people who need to drive?
This proposal is not expected to make life harder for our daily trips by car. This proposal does not remove parking spaces or prevent any property owner from building all of the parking they need. Property owners would need a very good reason to actually replace valuable, existing parking spaces with anything else such as costly new housing units or commercial floor space.