Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Change Of Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs Article 44 to remove parking trigger for change-of-use in business districts
Summary
Article 44 would remove parking requirements that currently trigger when a business changes permitted use, aiming to reduce permitting burdens and preserve walkable, historic downtown areas; presenters and committee members debated scope and next steps ahead of an April 9 public hearing.
The Town of Concord Economic Vitality Committee discussed Article 44 on March 26, a proposed zoning change to stop automatically requiring new private parking whenever an existing commercial space changes from one permitted use to another.
Mimi (presenter/staff) told the committee Concord currently mandates private parking for every business and cited studies presented in the slide deck showing that “60% of the parking that’s in the commercial district…is the max that’s ever used, where 40% is sitting empty.” She said the proposal would remove the parking requirement that is triggered by a change of permitted use when the building footprint and square footage do not change; the change would not allow uses that are not already permitted in the district.
Supporters argued the present requirement places heavy permitting and financial burdens on small operators, creates incentives for demolition to make more parking, and undermines walkability and historic character. As Mimi described it, “if that use isn’t permitted in the district, we’re not talking about that…we want to encourage uses that people are going to visit.” Committee member Mark said the proposal’s “punchline” is simple: some buildings (for example, the Phillips property) cannot physically provide parking, so forcing businesses through an expensive waiver process is impractical.
Other members urged the presenters to narrow the public presentation and focus on the specific change (examples like the Phillips building) rather than opening a broader debate about parking policy. Linda noted that parking remains a longstanding issue and suggested the public hearing will be a venue for continued feedback; she also observed that shared or public parking (for example, town-owned lots) is often more actively used than private, underutilized private lots.
The planning board offered suggestions on clarifying maps and examples. Committee members asked staff to condense slides for town meeting and to provide a clear, two-bullet rationale for outreach. No formal vote on Article 44 was taken at the March 26 meeting; staff will revise materials and circulate them ahead of the April 9 public hearing.
