Federal Bill Strips Local Parking Mandates Near Transit: Developers Get Final Say on Spots

The newly introduced People Over Parking Act of 2025 is a direct shot at one of the biggest headaches in urban development: minimum parking requirements. Essentially, this bill says that if you’re building or seriously renovating a project—residential, retail, or industrial—within half a mile of a major public transit stop, state and local governments can’t force you to include a specific number of parking spaces. The developer gets to decide how much, or how little, parking is necessary.

This is a massive shift in power, moving the decision from city planning commissions to the property owner. The idea is to cut down on construction costs and encourage denser development right next to transit hubs, which is a major win for the real estate sector. Since building parking garages is expensive—often adding tens of thousands of dollars per spot—removing that requirement could, theoretically, lower the overall cost of new housing and commercial space.

The Transit Test: Who Qualifies?

Before local parking rules are wiped out, the project has to pass a strict transit test outlined in Section 2. It’s not enough to be near any bus stop. The rules are specific: If you’re near a rail or subway station, you’re good to go. But for bus stops, the rules are much tighter. The stop must connect to at least two other bus routes, and all those routes must run every 15 minutes or less during morning and afternoon rush hours. This means the bill targets only the most robust, high-frequency transit corridors, not the local bus routes that run once an hour.

This focus is smart because it limits the preemption to areas where people are most likely to ditch their cars. For someone living in one of these new apartments, it means they might pay less in rent because the developer didn't have to build an expensive parking podium. The trade-off is clear: you save money, but you might not get a dedicated parking spot, encouraging you to use the train or the frequent bus line right down the street.

The Neighborhood Parking Crunch

While developers and transit advocates might cheer, local governments and current residents have reason to be concerned. When local minimum parking requirements are preempted, developers could choose to build zero parking for a new apartment complex. This saves them money, but it doesn't eliminate the demand for parking from the people who move in, especially if they commute or need a car for errands.

This is where the rubber meets the road—literally. If a new 200-unit building near the light rail goes up with only 20 parking spots, the other 180 cars don't just disappear. They spill over into the surrounding residential neighborhoods, clogging up street parking and creating friction with existing residents. This bill removes the tool local governments use to manage that density and traffic flow, shifting the burden of planning—and the cost of dealing with the fallout—onto the neighboring streets. For the average person living a few blocks away, this bill could mean finding their own street parking spot just got a lot harder.

The Fine Print and Future Ambiguity

One area that could be tricky is the definition of a “significantly renovating” project. The bill applies to new construction or significant renovations, but doesn't define what makes a renovation “significant.” This medium level of vagueness (Section 2) could become a loophole. A developer might argue a large remodel qualifies as a “significant renovation” to get out of existing local parking rules, even if they aren't adding much new housing or commercial space. This ambiguity gives property owners flexibility, but it leaves local planning agencies guessing about when they can enforce their own rules.