I support HB262 from Del. Simonds and oppose HB888 from Del. Shin. HB262 appropriately removes unnecessary requirements for local businesses that stifle investment by local entrepreneurs. In Newport News alone, after the removal of parking minimums in certain cases, several new businesses in the Hilton historic district have popped up, including a local pizza shop and a local wine shop. Several large vacant parking lots in other parts of the city on Jefferson Ave have been converted to commercial space. Overall, it has been really good for the city, and I'm sure that will continue. HB888, however, over-legislates and unnecessarily complicates this issue. This is an unnecessary government restriction that should not exist. There is no logical reason to continue to lay out various cases for restrictions when the benefit is clear, and it is clearly not the role of the government to dictate parking to businesses. While it may be an OK medium-term step in changing existing legislation, I see this half-measure as over-complicating a simple issue.

I support HB 888. Parking mandates are well understood to stifle the building of homes and businesses because they significantly add to the cost of construction and take up land that could be used for other purposes (e.g. more housing). The increased cost of building housing is often passed on to the renter or resident, increasing the cost of housing. Parking mandates cost cities money, too, by increasing impermeable surfaces and runoff, generally increasing the amount of streets and roads per capita, and resulting in more liabilities for the city. This bill is a critical part of a larger effort to reduce car-centric design and emphasize dense development with reliable transit opportunities for all residents.