Property Owners Oppose Parking Freeze

"Our belief is there are serious problems with the plan, especially for developers in the South Boston area," David Begelfer, president of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties, tells GlobeSt.com.

The parking freeze plan was first proposed over 10 years ago out of an interest in pollution control but city and state officials didn't start counting spaces until last year. Initially the number had been 33,000 spaces but officials have now reduced that number to 23,000, a number that Begelfer and other property owners in the area dispute. Calls to the city were not returned by press time and it is unclear why the number of spaces was reduced. Begelfer contends that the city has not been forthcoming with that information, and has only offered that it took a harder look at the plans.

Begelfer also points out that the freeze could have far reaching implications for property owners in the area who want to build on their land. According to the parking freeze rules, a developer who wants to change the use of his or her site will no longer have the right to the number of parking spaces currently on the lot but rather the city will reallocate a new number of spaces to the developer. "The developer may not get those spaces back," notes Begelfer. "There is no clear formula. The rules are to some degree arbitrary. The process does not give enough certainty for financing."

The issue gets very tricky for developers because their projects will still have to conform to existing ratios in terms of number of parking spots per unit or per sf. "This will limit what [developers] can build," says Begelfer, who adds that while the city wants to see 14 million sf of space built in this area he believes that the parking freeze won't allow for that much development.

"We feel there should be some performance standards," says Begelfer, referring to pollution control. "But it doesn't necessarily have to refer to traffic. Cars are much more efficient now. This is an outdated solution to a current problem."

Begelfer says that because the state's Department of Environmental Protection has agreed that property owners need more time to respond to the freeze, the department has extended the comment period on the issue through the middle of February.