Context

At the October 13 Diversity Task Force meeting, the idea of removing the overnight parking ban was floated as a way to address a racial and economic equity issue in town. I thought about the issue for several days, and collected my thoughts into an email which I sent to a few of the attendees on October 22. I’m sharing the body of that email so you can get a sense of my thinking on this issue.

Body of email sent on October 22

I was doing some thinking about the idea raised at the recent Diversity Task Force meeting to get rid of the overnight parking ban. I thought I’d share my thoughts in case they are helpful in thinking through the issue for the future.

My initial reaction was that removing the ban would be an unalloyed good in favor of those with less parking space (a set of people which likely skews toward those at the lower end of the economic spectrum in town). My subsequent thinking on the topic has led me to believe that removing the ban would have expected complexities and downsides and so care would have to be taken in developing a proposal.

I did go back and check out the 4/15/2021 “Ask the Police Chief” episode in which Police Chief MacIsaac discusses the overnight parking ban. Unfortunately, he doesn’t go into the reason for the bylaw. It is useful to know that the ban is a bylaw, however, since we know changing it would require the vote of town meeting.

Some thoughts that have occurred to me around the idea of removing the ban:

  • Removing the ban outright would effectively be a massive subsidy for car owners and car ownership in town, which would lead to a number of predictable, perhaps unintended consequences that are important to think carefully about.
    • Car ownership is already hugely subsidized in town given the amount of land the town allocates to roads and parking and the resources dedicated to maintaining all of it.
  • The effective subsidy would accrue primarily to the economically better off in town, those who can afford (multiple) cars. This equity point stands foremost in my mind.
    • Maybe there’d be a way to limit who can make use of on-street parking? Although that may make enforcement more difficult.
  • Removing the ban would likely result in increased costs for the town through traffic/parking enforcement, additional roadwork, etc. The costs would necessarily be paid in property taxes and would either be paid through shifting funds from other uses or through increased taxes generally. Given the regressive nature of property taxes, the greatest burden would fall on the economically less well off.
    • One thought is to relax zoning regulations around driveways so that it’s much easier for property owners to make more of their land into driveway space. This at least would address the concern over pushing the street parking costs onto others.
  • The subsidy to car ownership would likely result in many more cars being purchased and driven in town. There are environmental consequences to consider. I know that there’s a lot of concern over the environmental effects of fuel use in town - think for example of the DPW fuel tank discussions and the natural gas and homes article. (There are maybe road safety issues to consider too, but I’m uncertain whether more cars on the roads leads to greater or lesser risk.)
  • The additional parking would incentivize developers to build more housing without parking on site (not a bad thing necessarily), but the costs of parking for the residents of the new properties would effectively get pushed onto the town (i.e., property tax payers).

My own view is that the most impactful way the town could help with affordability issues and access to living in Belmont (and thereby help address racial economic disparity) is to relax zoning requirements dramatically, so that a lot more housing of different types can be built, including housing for people who don’t own cars. I realize my YIMBY-aligned views are politically unpopular and are unlikely to persuade voters, but I figure I should make the case all the same. (The book ‘Neighborhood Defenders: Participatory Politics and America’s Housing Crisis’ affected my thinking a lot on what’s possible in MA zoning policy.)

Given the above, I think a proposal to remove the overnight parking bylaw requires careful thought to make sure it helps address disparities, benefits those who need it most, and doesn’t lead to a bunch of undesirable outcomes. I acknowledge that I’m possibly making a lot out of nothing and people who know a lot more about housing policy than me […] will be aware of solutions to the kinds of concerns I’m raising.