December 4th, 2025, by Seward Folly Staff

At the November meeting, Vice-Chairman Brenan Hornseth submitted a 24-page “laydown” filled with data, history, and research behind the proposal. He also introduced a formal amendment that would leave parking decisions almost entirely to property owners or developers, except in auto-commercial zones, which would require a conditional use permit and individual review. This would include hotels.

“People do get nervous about change, but code is a living document. Slowly, the City will see development. History is showing that eliminating parking requirements is leading to positive outcomes,”

Daniel Meuninck, Seward Community Development Director

Pros of Eliminating Parking Requirements

• Over 2,300 U.S. cities have removed parking minimums since 2017, with little reported trouble.
• Seward’s downtown and harbor have functioned for decades without such rules.
• Reduced development and housing costs, as developers don’t need to overbuild parking.
• More room for new homes and businesses, fostering a walkable, compact community.
• Environmental benefits: less car dependency and lower emissions.
• More flexibility for property owners and developers to meet market demand.
• Lower costs for residents who do not own cars.
• National momentum and Seward’s own track record suggest it can work.

Cons of Eliminating Parking Requirements

Some community members, including Carol Griswold, past Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission, have raised significant concerns:

• Eliminating minimums can also eliminate federal requirements for ADA-accessible parking; the current proposal would provide ADA spots at block ends, but Griswold argues, “ADA parking needs to be as close to the entrance as possible, not at the ends of the block. People with disabilities lose under this proposal.” *see clarification*
• Potential for parking shortages and spillover, especially during the peak summer season, as street and neighborhood parking absorb overflow.
• Short-term decisions by developers may not meet long-term needs. Future residents might suddenly need off-street parking, and adding it after a building is finished is costly or impossible.
• “Maps showing parking lots that are called ‘wasted space’ and better suited for housing are unrealistic,” says Griswold. “These parking lots are critical to a functioning town. Where would the patients at Providence park if the parking lot were converted? Ditto all the business and organization parking lots. And harbor parking lots. We need those private and public parking lots.”
• Paid parking downtown, potentially needed if minimums are removed, could deter shoppers, push employees into neighborhood streets, and bring high costs to install and enforce meters or phone-based payment systems. Revenue might not offset those costs or the potential loss of Seward’s welcoming atmosphere.
• Some worry about prioritizing short-term development over Seward’s long-term sustainability.

Opponents also point out that while property owners and developers might see savings, the broader community could pay the price if parking problems grow, especially in Seward’s busiest months.

“Eliminating parking minimums will not change the Harbor and Central Business Districts. Enforcement strategies and reforming ideas will make the difference.”

Courtney Bringhurst, Seward City Planner

Alternative Solutions to Parking Issues

Meuninck points to Harbor Area lots that fill up at $10 per day. “Sometimes, when a lot is always full, it’s because the price is too low, not because there aren’t enough spaces,” he explained. Raising prices could reduce long-term parking and encourage more turnover, helping reach the 85% occupancy target and easing congestion during peak months.

Other potential solutions under discussion include the introduction of special, low-cost parking permits for local residents and employees. These permits would allow Seward locals and workers to access convenient parking without the burden of higher summer rates, while visitors would pay market prices in congested areas. Such programs could help balance the needs of the community, keep parking available for shoppers and tourists, and reduce impacts on nearby residential neighborhoods.

Better enforcement, time limits, and improved signage could also help direct drivers and free up space, while minimizing disruption to neighborhoods and businesses.

Officials also emphasize that walkability is a separate but related issue. Even the best parking policies may fall short if sidewalks and lighting do not support people walking to shops and attractions. Improvements to sidewalks, crossings, and the overall pedestrian environment can help reduce demand for parking by making it safer and more comfortable for locals and visitors to travel without cars during the busy summer months.

The Road Ahead

Ultimately, Seward City Council will make the final decision on the code amendment, following feedback from the Planning and Zoning Commission. They will also decide on any future paid parking increases. The city’s Parks and Recreation Department, which runs the parking at the Harbor, says at least one more seasonal worker would be necessary to handle added enforcement if parking management shifts away from minimum requirements.

As these issues are debated, city officials reinforce that neither the Harbor nor downtown will see immediate changes to their parking regimes, and that any successful transition will depend on careful enforcement and ongoing adaptation.

The public will have another chance to comment when the Planning and Zoning Commission takes up the amendment on January 6, 2026.

*Clarification from Seward Community Development Developer, Danny Meuninck.

For the parking article under the Con list, there is a statement that eliminating minimums can also eliminate federal requirements for ADA-accessible parking. That is not true. City code would never supersede federal law. Eliminating parking minimums would allow developers to install parking based on their needs, but any parking plan must still abide by ADA regulations. Also, there is no proposal to put ADA spots on block ends…I believe Commissioner Hornseth was sharing that other cities do that, and it was a possible recommendation if the City wanted to increase ADA accessible spots. Planning and Zoning has no authority to make that recommendation. That would be a City Council decision.