Town approves zoning change to expand joint parking, using hourly analysis to limit excess pavement

Voters at Concord’s third night of the 2026 annual town meeting approved Article 36, a zoning bylaw amendment that broadens which businesses may use joint parking and requires an hour‑by‑hour demand analysis to justify shared off‑site parking.

The planning board’s presenter, Boardman, told the meeting the change would replace outdated language in section 7.7 and clarify the meaning of “location,” add a requirement that long‑term leases for off‑site parking be executed by all owners and tenants, and require a traffic consultant to produce an hour‑by‑hour analysis of peak demand. “The hour by hour analysis is the key innovation in this bylaw,” Boardman said, arguing the approach lets the town “prove” when shared parking is adequate rather than using arbitrary caps.

Wendy Ravelli, speaking for the select board, urged support, saying the amendment “broadens joint parking eligibility to all businesses and zones with permitted uses and applies hourly parking requirements to calibrate actual parking needs.” She added the building commissioner may require immediate review and a public hearing if problems arise.

Opponents raised operational concerns. Carol Savoy said Article 36 “removes those guardrails” that limit joint parking and could shift parking demand into neighborhoods; she asked the meeting to vote no. Other residents described real‑world uses — delivery trucks and staggered employee shifts — that can create overlapping demand not obvious in industry graphs, and asked who would enforce post‑approval problems. Boardman and the town planner, Elizabeth Hughes, said the proposal is aimed primarily at plaza developments that can build adequate parking and that site‑specific planning board review, building commissioner oversight and the required hour‑by‑hour analysis are intended to address those risks.

Boardman illustrated the potential reduction in built parking with an example shown to the meeting: under current rules three proposed uses would have required 323 spaces but the bylaw would require 229 based on the hourly analysis — a difference of 94 spaces, which he said represents about 16,920 square feet of impervious surface. He characterized that reduction as an environmental win where it avoids unnecessary pavement and encroachment into river or wetland areas.

The moderator closed debate and put the article to a vote; she declared Article 36 passed by the required two‑thirds vote.

What’s next: the revised zoning language will be incorporated into the town’s zoning bylaw; any joint‑parking application will proceed through the planning board’s public hearing and building commissioner review.