Reason Behind the 48-hour Parking Rule

[wonkywheels.livejournal.com]

There has been some talk in this community about the 48-hour parking rule. Can someone explain the rationale behind this law? I have a car, but I take the "T" or ride my bike to work, so it doesn't make sense to me to have to move my car for no reason. I understand the need to move my car for street-sweeping, but this 48-hour thing doesn't seem to have a basis.

Comments

[ron_newman]

Some recent discussion here.

[wonkywheels.livejournal.com]

Oh, does this law only apply during snow storms? I thought it was all the time.

[thespian.livejournal.com]

The idea is that people who live in Somerville are therefore somewhere near their car, and might just move it every couple of days, while people who are non-resident won't be able to. You basically need to move the car to prove that it's possessed by someone who actually lives near said parking spot.

Now, this is a really stupid idea, thought up at least in part by people who drive a lot (as opposed to people who use public transit in town and use their cars as ancillary transportation), but that's the basis for it.

In winter its also used to make sure that people shovel out their cars, because you need to shovel it out in order to move it.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

I disagree that it's stupid. Sure, it's a pain in the ass for people who don't drive much, but if it weren't in place, you'd never find a parking spot the few times you DID use your car. Jerks who don't live here would be using the area as their own personal parking garage.

[on-reserve.livejournal.com]

Also, I feel like part of it emphasizes the "public-ness" of the parking spots. By having to give up your spot every so often, it's not "your" spot -- you are potentially making it available for other people in your neighborhood to use.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

I'd agree with this.

[wonkywheels.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's all well and good, but I don't think it's a good idea to encourage people to drive when there's no reason to. People should be encouraged to use public transportation to cut down on traffic and emissions.

[ron_newman]

But a 14-day rule (already in effect because of street sweeping) would be sufficient to do that.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

Having read through the earlier discussion, it seems to agree with my surmisation that the law exists to try to make it fairer for those who must use their cars. As in, I'd love to take the train to work, but that's not an option for me because of the town I work in not really being accessible, so when I get home, I should have as much of a chance at being able to park on my own street as the jerk across the street who moves his car every week just so he won't get towed again. (instead of pissing off his immediate neighbors, he instead parks in front of our house, and is right now blocking our carved-in-snow egress to the street.)

[frederic.livejournal.com]

It seemed that the only way the ticketers knew that you hadn't moved your car was by the snow halo around it (after a storm).

When this was an issue (when I was being penalized for taking the subway instead of driving to work), I would just move my car before getting onto the T a day or two after the snow storm.

I never got a ticket except for the times that there were the telltale snow ring around my car.

[nonnihil.livejournal.com]

In commercial lots, parking enforcers generally make a chalk tick-mark on tires; if the mark is in the same position when they come back, they know the car hasn't moved. I've not seen Somerville cops using that trick, though.

[nungnung.livejournal.com]

There's also the argument (though perhaps far-fetched) that the 48 hour rule will encourage people to live car-free when possible. This concept never occurred to me until I recently participated in a community meeting about developing a large residential building in Southie - the developers mentioned that they were encouraged by the city to NOT provide 2 cars worth of parking for each unit, as that can be seen as "rewarding" car ownership. It's a different scenario, of course, but in a city as public transport accessible as Somerville, perhaps there's a similar mentality?

I do think, however, that a 5 - 7 day rule might be more reasonable. And if you're going to be out of town for more than a few days, perhaps you should be paying for long term parking.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

I think a long-term parking setup might make some sense. Give the city your tags and proof of residency, tell them where you parked it, and charge maybe five bucks over cost. If reasonable limits were put in place, might make lives easier.

It does give a little satisfaction...

[snow-how.livejournal.com]

I'm all for the 48-hr rule if only because it makes life just that much more complicated for people who never bother to register their cars in MA even though they live here. I live on a non-resident sticker street, and it seems every student or recent-transplant in at least a three-block radius (all the nearby streets are sticker streets) comes and parks on my street, because in order to park on their own they would have to get MA plates. We've got a VT, an OR, two or three NHs, a MI and a couple CTs out there on a regular basis -- and that's just on my block -- and I only recognize about three of those cars' owners as people who live on this street.

On the other hand, I understand the frustration of those who have cars but don't use them regularly. I was in that situation (I walk to work) and I finally just got rid of my car because of all the musical chairs (at the time I lived on Beacon St, which is swept 2x/week) and the winter parking situation. I'm so glad I did - I spend much less on Zipcar and I use it more than I did my own car. And I won't consider getting a car again until I have off-street parking -- too much of a pain in the butt!

Re: It does give a little satisfaction...

[kalimba21.livejournal.com]

I'm so glad I have a driveway.
But, if I didn't, I'm wondering how I could possibly fly somewhere for a week long vacation? How does that work? Does a ticket become part of the cost of travel?

Re: It does give a little satisfaction...

[sekala.livejournal.com]

In some ways it's a little unfair to students. I'm not a student now, but I was. While you are still in traditional undergrad, even if you rent out an apartment, your residency is still in all technicality your parents house(unless you are an independent of course) so you aren't actually supposed to change your plates. That can make things very difficult for students who actually do live on streets where they can't park.

Quality Discussion

[tomchampion.livejournal.com]

See, this is why I like this discussion group so much:

Except for the occasional fling about "jerks" or "crap arguments," folks can have a wide-ranging debate that rings up a variety of salient and thoughtful points.

Re: Quality Discussion

[nungnung.livejournal.com]

That's what keeps me reading, too. This board has proven time and again to show me multiple POVs that I would never have considered.

[boblothrope.livejournal.com]

Why does Somerville need to force people to circulate their cars, while Boston, Cambridge, and other nearby cities don't?

For a car that doesn't get used for a few weeks at a time, how does it help anyone if it's parked on this side of the street for 48 hours and that side for the next 48? Unless one of the frequent-car-users we're trying to help shows up during the minute the car-warehouser is looking for a spot, nothing has been accomplished.

[ron_newman]

I thought Cambridge had some similar rule, though it may be for more than 48 hours.

[pierceheart.livejournal.com]

Here's the official reason that's published, all opinions aside:

"The "Over 48 Hour" regulation is designed to prevent non-resident vehicles from being stored on city streets and to identify and remove abandoned or stolen vehicles."

So, if it has a resident sticker, the first portion doesn't apply, in theory, on resident streets.
Stolen vehicles are identified by police reports.

That leaves abandonment.

48 hours isn't abandoned.

[wonkywheels.livejournal.com]

I think we all have to be honest here. Part of the reason that this law exists is for the city to make extra money on parking tickets. I'm not abandoning my car if I use it 2 or 3 times a week.

Meta Comment on the Karma of Parking

[tomchampion.livejournal.com]

(A shorter version of a comment nested in a sub-thread.)

Maybe, in the end, all of this, on both sides of the debate, boils down to our natural territorialism. Both sides are defending a different version of the natural territorial imperative, with pro 48-hour rulers saying "Don't tie up the spaces in MY neighborhood for more than a couple of days" and anti 48-hour rulers saying "Don't force me out of MY space unless there is a truly compelling reason."

It all reminds me of the study they did some years back of the way people behaved in parking lots at malls and grocery stores. It turns out that if people know that someone is waiting to take a space that they're about to leave, they actually take more time to clear the space than they do if no one's waiting.

http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/1997/B/199701123.html

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00661.x?cookieSet=1&journalCode=jasp

Remember: your neighbor doesn't want just ANY space: she wants the one you parked in a couple of days ago -- that really good one just ten feet from her front steps. So she'll be grateful when you switch to the other side of the street because of that dumb rule you both hate. She'll just never tell you to your face.

[josephineave.livejournal.com]

On Josephine Ave., we had one asshat who used the street to park his collection of autos --- some fancy, some old, some just big and ugly. He had such a feeling of space ownership that he actually tarped his car (parked on the odd side for snow emergency convenience, natch) for the winter. He would catch occasional tickets, but I guess he felt it was cheaper than paying for real storage. I did see him get into a shouting match with a cop once over towing one of his cars, so he did have some hassles.

He still lives here, but most of his space-eaters are gone.

Until a couple of weeks ago, someone had a car parked on Morrison which was missing 2 wheels! And it took a long time before I saw an orange 'move-it' notice posted on it.

Enforcement is the key.

[ron_newman]

To report a truly abandoned car (such as one that is missing wheels), I'd use this 311 form.

48-hour rule

[somer-villains.livejournal.com]

i was perusing the alderman meeting minutes recently and thought i remembered something about petitioning to get the 48-hour rule changed to 72 hours.

Re: 48-hour rule

[wonkywheels.livejournal.com]

That would be good!

[mycroft.livejournal.com]

I don't think the causality works this way, but note that the combination of the 48-hour parking rule and 48-hour notification rule for non-emergency temporary parking restrictions work well together to "guarantee" that everyone is notified.

[josephineave.livejournal.com]

That's true. I always worried when I was away for work that my spot would suddenly be needed for a moving truck.

[wallacestreet.livejournal.com]

Parking is quite a popular subject. We discussed the 48-hour rule a few weeks ago in the context of the snow emergency and here was my suggestion (http://community.livejournal.com/davis_square/1085713.html?thread=10389521#t10389521):

The ideal solution from my point of view is zoned parking where you're allowed to park near your house for significantly more than 48-hours, but a 48 (or 24 or 36)-hour rule is strictly enforced for cars from elsewhere in the city. Rebekah tells me that any kind of zoned resident parking at all is a political non-starter.

Barring that, I think the best response would be to formalize the resident complaint rule as follows:

1. Annoying Parker (AP) parks right in front of Annoyed Neighbor's (AN) house
2. AN calls 311 to complain
3. Traffic & Parking leaves a warning notice on AP's car
4. 48 hours (or 72 or whatever) passes
5. If AP's car hasn't moved, T&P writes a ticket
6. 24 hours (or whatever) passes
7. Return to 5 for additional tickets

Enforcement without the need for a complaint or a warning notice could be retained following snow, to allow the streets to be cleared.

With this system, residents don't have to worry about returning to the same spot, and there's explicit notice for anyone who hasn't just dumped their car on the street, but AN still has some recourse. It's a little bit like the system for abandoned bicycles with notice before ticketing or removal.

[nungnung.livejournal.com]

This is the best solution I've seen proposed so far.

[tut21.livejournal.com]

It is a stupid law that penalizes people who try to do the right thing by using public transportation to and from work. Make it seven days and I would have no problem with it.