« Waldorf School Bound for Clinton Hill From Corregated Boxes to White Boxes on N. 4th »
June 12, 2007
Congestion Pricing and Resident Permit Parking
Regardless of your position on the Bloomberg administration's proposal for congestion pricing in Manhattan, it's not hard to imagine how the implementation of such a plan could have a very negative trickle-down effect for those parts of the outer boroughs that are both close to Manhattan and serviced by major subway lines. As Sheldon Silver said, "Some of those areas will become parking lots for the people driving around looking for parking spots in order to avoid congestion pricing fees." To counter such criticism, Bloomberg has has floated the idea of making resident-only permit parking available (for a modest annual fee) in neighborhoods like Park Slope, Downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City. Queens Councilman John Liu isn't buying the idea. "It doesn't necessarily improve the situation, it just shifts the boundary of contention," said Liu. "It sounds great, but I think the implementation would be a hard stretch." Of course, there's also another reason that residents of certain neighborhoods may want parking permits soon: Atlantic Yards. Are you in favor of resident-only parking permits?
Bloomberg Eying Resident-only Parking Permits [NY Daily News]
Photo by new hobby
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1364
Comments
YES!!! Living a few blocks away from Methodist Hospital is heinously painful - employees who don't want to park in the garage clog the streets.
Bring on the permits!
Posted by: IdriveToWork at June 12, 2007 10:14 AM
I heard the program is going to be tested in Brooklyn Heights and Fort Greene first
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:16 AM
I support it too. My parents live in LIC and a lot of people who live in Bayside, Whitestone and Nassau County would drive to LIC and park there and then take the subway to Manhattan. They already do this but the number of people will increase after congestion pricing. My parents often have trouble finding parking for their own car and sometimes have to park in less safe areas because of this.
Posted by: Emily at June 12, 2007 10:19 AM
Put me down for YES, as long as resident parking zones are not 100% of the area and still allow maybe 2 or 3 hours for those without stickers.
Lastly, in order to discourage car ownership in general, resident parking stickers should be quite expensive.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:21 AM
This is a complcated question. Get ready for a garage construction boom in a ring around Manhattan. Who wants a big garage on their quiet brownstone block?
COngestion pricing may be a good idea, and parking permits, too. But there needs to be some serious planning because there will be hubs, and increased traffic in many areas. Not unlike all the big development gfoing on without much thought as to where all the kids are going to go to school.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:27 AM
Permit parking is terrible, it kills small businesses
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:30 AM
I say NO. So people with permits can park in Park Slope (or other neighborhoods), people without permits can’t park anywhere but the few metered spots? This seems ridiculously inefficient—if a permitted resident drives away and leaves a spot, only a p[permitted resident will be able to park there. Someone from a surrounding neighborhood won’t be able to park there and will have to circle for a long time, or double park to shop at the local stores. I think it sounds better on paper than it would be in practice…….
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:30 AM
Resident parking SUCKS!! I've lived with it.
You will suddenly not be able to bring your car anywhere! I remember many occasions living in Boston that I simply gave up looking for parking in another neighborhood and went home.
Don't be so short-sighted people! Neighborhood permits will not solve your issue.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:34 AM
Not every neighborhood is a destination for shoppers. This would be a real issue in Park Slope. But who drives to Clinton Hill or Prospect Heights to shop?
Posted by: TW at June 12, 2007 10:34 AM
tell it Boston or DC where they've have permitted parking forever
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:35 AM
I'm in favor of resident parking with non-residents being able to park for 2 hours. That's how they do it in San Francisco. It allows people to shop at small businesses but not park to commute.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:35 AM
I agree with Anon. 10:30.
Sometimes people actually want to drive to OTHER neighborhoods.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at June 12, 2007 10:35 AM
One of my major concerns is that it makes it much harder for people to visit. Most everyone has friends and family who visit either for an afternoon or a week. And when you are traveling with multiple people long distances driving really is the only option. And if all parking is for residents what do they do? There aren't even many garages in my neighborhood.
Even Ratner is tearing down the buildings at the AY site to make parking for construction workers - I guess these guys can't be bothered taking public transportation.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:36 AM
One of my major concerns is that it makes it much harder for people to visit. Most everyone has friends and family who visit either for an afternoon or a week. And when you are traveling with multiple people long distances driving really is the only option. And if all parking is for residents what do they do? There aren't even many garages in my neighborhood.
Even Ratner is tearing down the buildings at the AY site to make parking for construction workers - I guess these guys can't be bothered taking public transportation.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:36 AM
There aren't any street parking spots left available in the a.m. hours for someone to use for all day anyway. (except maybe on Weds. when there is no alternate side parking regs). It is hard enought to find something night before - never mind in the morning.
(Boerum Hill, CobbleHill, Carroll Gardens).
And in general principle, I don't like idea.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:38 AM
Unfortunately, they'd probably add meters to DeKalb as well, which would be unfortunate and unnecessary for those of us who live here.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:38 AM
..but 10:35's suggestion could be a good compromise.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at June 12, 2007 10:39 AM
I've lived in a Boston neighborhood with permit parking only (see Allston-Brighton sign above) and it was brutal. So many spots in the neighborhood were designated as resident only, it was hopeless trying to find a spot if you were just stopping to run errands. I agree with 10:21 - there should be an exception for non-residents parking for only 2-3 hours.
The other issue is that in Boston, you had to have your car registered in the city to obtain a resident sticker. A quick perusal of the plates in my neighborhood (Brooklyn Heights) suggests that many people register their cars in PA, CT and elsewhere to avoid the sky-high insurance costs associated with registering in NYC. High insurance costs, plus high registration costs, suggest that only the very wealthy will be able to afford to resident park in NYC.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:40 AM
The Streetsblog frequently discussed the so-called Edge Effect, but many reports have gone to discredit it:
http://www.tstc.org/bulletin/index.html#article02
It's easy to gain political clout by standing up for a few of you to park your cars, but anyone with integrity would do the proper research and learn that the edge effect is a myth.
Posted by: Owen at June 12, 2007 10:42 AM
Its a balance - you want to discourage commuters from driving in and then parking in the surrounding neighborhoods to avoid the congestion pricing plans, but if you give people too "good" a resident permit (or too cheap), then your going to encourage car ownership in the Outerboroughs which will then just shift the problem from Manhattan, and be bad for small business (which may rely on some non-local residents driving in).
I think the solution is to 1. Charge for the permit and 2. Make 'permit-only' zones only on residential streets AND only at critical commuting times (i.e. No Parking except with a residential permit from 7am-11am Mon-Fri). And of course maintain alternate side.
Posted by: David at June 12, 2007 10:44 AM
To 10:30 - I think the whole congestion pricing thing will be very detrimental to business in Manhattan and BK. We often go shopping in the city for things that are a bit to heavy to wrestle onto the train. And I'm sure people from Manhattan drive to Brooklyn all the time to shop And not just shopping. I know Brownstone readers seem like healthy types who can manage the subway, but what about older people, people with young children, people with physical problems who may really need to drive?
I think it will cause a barrier between the 2 boroughs which will stifle economic activity and commerce. With all that BK has improved over the past ten years I would not tinker with the success by cutting them off from the borough that made it possible.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:44 AM
Serious question - OK, you give the 2 or 3 hour exception for non-residents, but where do my parents or brother park when they come visit for the weekend?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:46 AM
10:36, DC not only has 2-hour parking in the permit areas for non-residents, it also has 1-week temp permits for guests, available at the local police precinct. All you need is an area resident to vouch for you and show proof of residence. Enough of a pain to discourage some folks from trying to game the system, easy enough to get for those who really need/want it.
Posted by: formerDCer at June 12, 2007 10:48 AM
To Anonymous at 10:44:
The congestion pricing isn't a BAN on cars, it's an 8$ fee. If you're going in for shopping, surely you can factor this into the cost.
Posted by: Owen at June 12, 2007 10:49 AM
When you can't find parking it means that parking spots are too cheap. Permits should be expensive and street parking should not be free.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:57 AM
I suspect there are more cars than actual street parking space especialy place like Park Slope where there are so many multi-family townhouses and apartment buildings. How the system works? Residents with permits still have to fight for available space?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 10:57 AM
We lived in Philly for awhile, which has resident permits, but not by neighborhood. They cost around $40-50, iirc. So long as the city continues to sweep the streets, I'm all for it. For it to work in NYC, though, I think the whole city would have to be in one zone. There are a lot of times we drive to visit friends in parts of Bklyn, Qns not served by public transport.
Another good thing: you did have to present registration and proof of insurance to get the permit, so it eliminated a bit of the riff raff. A 2 hour exception for nonresidents makes sense to me.
Posted by: Pete at June 12, 2007 10:59 AM
So, if my family wants to visit me they have to register at the police station?
Is that a joke? I think it is better to leave this to a capitalist system, rather than trying to micromanage people's behavior.
And as to it being a 'three year pilot' - do you think there is any chance the city will give up the revenue once the program is in place?
They are already fighting over how they will spend the money!
This is a dumb idea which they should forget about.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:04 AM
Another bureaucracy, more paperwork and little benefit to some and pain in a** for others. Another regulation to make living in NYC more a headache.
And with congestion pricing and resident permits...get ready for big surge in 'handicap' permits because they will be exempt and easy enough to get. If you could see the # of SUVs parked on the block of midtown where I work who have NYC DOT special permits, you'd know that anyone with a connection can get them. Another scam.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:05 AM
I actually agree with anon 10:38. At least where I live, if you're not in a street cleaning space the night before you're in trouble. The solution: make all street cleaning during the middle of the day (ending 11 AM or later). Like we have in my part of Fort Greene. Commuters can't reasonably get on the train after they park at 11, can they?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:06 AM
I'm sick of all the PA "visitors" parking in Brooklyn - parking should be for people who pay to live here, this includes high auto insurance. Resident parking permits will help reduce some insurance fraud, as well.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:07 AM
The RPP and the CP that Mayor MB has floated are both very intelligent ways to solve enviro-congestion in NYC. People attack parts of his plan as (theoretically) unworkable. Indeed, in some instances, his critics may be luckily correct. However, upon implementation, if there were unintended (and harmful) consequences to the RPP and CP, then City Hall will make adjustments to correct for same. This is NOT a mayor intent upon wealth redistribution towards the affluent NOR committing enviromental crimes upon the poor. If CP and RPP need fine tuning this will be done for the benefit of the common good. One may not be inclined to give an executive such as President Bush such autonomy, but Mayor Bloomberg deserves the chance to implement and test drive the the plan and to make the adjustments so that it is fair to the greatest number of current (and future) residents of NYC.
Posted by: BH at June 12, 2007 11:10 AM
I'd be 100% happy if I could park in my neighborhood and that's it. I don't drive to other neighborhoods that often and when I do I often park at meters and people usually take the subway to visit me.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:11 AM
The second so-called "problem" noted by Anonymous at 10:40 is actually a feature, not a problem, of permit parking IMO -- it's outrageous that so many people flaunt the registration laws by registering their cars out-of-state.
Not only is this defrauding New York out of revenue, but it's also insurance fraud that drives up the cost for drivers who follow the law and register in New York. I'd like to see a single good reason why people should encourage this type of fraud.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:12 AM
who is BH? someone who works in Bloombergs press office?
gimme a break.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:14 AM
The intention behind congestion pricing is to create a dis-incentive to using vehicles for unnecessary trips. Resident parking permits function in a similar way. If you want to visit someone in a nearby community with resi parking permits you will try to take public transportation. I also agree with Anon 11:07 - this will help deter insurance fraud; which if you live in Brooklyn you know is rampant.
Posted by: D at June 12, 2007 11:15 AM
This will NOT increase Parking Garage construction. Nowhere in brownstone brooklyn or Harlem or Bronx is zoned for this and DOB rarely gives a new permit for same. Usually, must be grandfathered or part of new apt building construction.
Posted by: bh at June 12, 2007 11:16 AM
Congestion pricing, as proposed at launch, does nothing other than penalize those who use the Brooklyn or Manhattan Bridge - the $8 dollar INITIAL congestion fee is offset by the existing tolls at other bridges and tunnels. So, this is a long, eco-re-framed, convoluted way of Bloomberg finally getting tolls on those 2 bridges - which has been a bug up his butt since before he came to office.
While we certainly have a congestion problem, we have it in NEW YORK CITY, not just Manhattan. In fact, I think congestion is worse in many parts of Brooklyn than in much of downtown Manhattan... and I'm not talking about people driving TO Manhattan, I'm talking about people driving around in their own borough.
So really this boils down to an anti-borough tax. A tax that is felt more by lower and fixed income working class. A tax that says my crosstown limo is going too slow, you people from the Brooklyn - Take the subway.
If you want more people to use mass transit... make it better. Add LOTS more trains to existing lines. Add bus lanes and electric buses.
When you toss in that now we'll need Resident Parking Permits, (really great for businesses in those neighborhoods!) and over One Thousand Orwellian cameras and I really don't understand the wimpy oppostion.
There are better ways to improve mass transit and limit CO2 then this antiborough tax!
Posted by: SeamusMacD at June 12, 2007 11:18 AM
they are talking about neighborhoods with very good subway access (which is why people would park there and ride in). So, leave the car and use the subway.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:18 AM
How many of you who live within a few blocks of a subway station, actually have open street parking spots available on your block for commuters available to arrive in morning and park all day?
Please tell me where. Cause when can't find something around me, I'll know where to look.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:20 AM
BH- This is an administration that supported and aided the AY project. So they have zero credibility with me or anyone else who has followed this issue.
Nor do they have any credibility in caring about the envirnonment that citizens live in. They have completely sold out to real estate developers.
Sorry, i wouldn't trust them around a glass corner and this is just another piece of garbage they are foisting on us in a grab for more money.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:22 AM
re: 11:12 What's fraudulent is how high insurance rates are in NYC thanks to long running insurance scams and historically high vehicle theft rates which have come down dramatically in the last few years. Still waiting to see it reflected in my insurance rates.... Also, let's not forget, parking tickets generate a lot of revenue for the city.
Posted by: beckersny at June 12, 2007 11:24 AM
Sorry. BH just happens to believe in RPP and CP and believes that Bloomberg believes in it for the right reasons and that he will try to make it work out fairly. Sometimes, when a society has reached the end of a nonviable trajectory (nonsustainable energy consumption), it needs to change course and try new approaches. Leaders who are pushing for change should not be ignored. Nor should they be opposed.
Posted by: BH at June 12, 2007 11:28 AM
Yeah, I've wanted permit parking for awhile in Ft. Greene -- especially with AY on the horizon. But I definitely think that a 2-hour window should be allowed for visitors/guests.
While it results in a several block walk, there's not a serious lacking for garages in FG/CH along DeKalb or Myrtle.
I just think that residents who consistently patronize local shops and tend to the area should have dibs on spaces, if they're needed. A weekly or weekend pass could help mitigate the inconvenience for the occasional visitor.
Posted by: JP at June 12, 2007 11:28 AM
Permit parking is a great idea. If there is a balance between resident permits and metered parking, as there is throughout DC and SF, it could work very well. Most people in NY don't even use their cars - they just move them around to different parking spots. If they had to pay for permits, some people may realize that they don't really need their cars. Bring it on.
Posted by: anon in bklyn at June 12, 2007 11:29 AM
11:18 agree completely with you.
They need to seriously improve the public transportation. If you dont live near a good "hub" it kind of sucks. I live in Bay Ridge - the stations themselves look like some abandoned part of Chernobyl - I am embarrassed to take visitors on the subway because of how disgusting the stations are. Not to mention the trains. There are some nice new ones on the 2/3 line (maybe others) but the R line trains look like they came from the jungles of Vietnam.
I personally take the subway to Manhattan, but I know lots of people who drive. They refuse to take the subway because it is incredibly dirty and unreliable. And to top it off, most trains are horriblty over crowded - you have to squeeze in like a sardine. There is no need for this. I have spent years in many European countries with my job and most have far better subway in terms of cleanliness, etc.
Why, in a city where apartments cost an average of over $1 million, can't the damn city clean the subway stations and have some modern, clean cars?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:29 AM
I live in boston and love resident parking. It allows me to avoid paying $250 bucks a month for a rented parking spot. If I have to run an errand often it is easier to go on foot or use mass transit. For food shopping etc there is usually a parking lot.
The advantage is 85-90% of the spots are reserved for the people who actually live in the neighborhood. Speaking to higher insurance costs etc, having a car in the city is expensive no matter what. If cost is an issue you should probably ditch the car and save a bundle. When I have friends who visit I recomend taking mass transit or sucking it up and putting the car in garage.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:30 AM
I like congestion in pricing in theory, and could live with parking restrictions if I have to - but someone needs to guarantee me that they're going to significantly upgrade the subway system to accomodate the addtional riders. And I don't believe they will - because they haven't bothered to keep up with the increase in riders in the past 5 years. All the folks moving to Brooklyn, pushing up property values (and readership for this blog)? They're all taking the subway already, or trying to. But the F, at least, is totally overwhelmed as it is from 15th Street through Manhattan. Now they want to add more riders? Great - add a LOT more trains.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:42 AM
a recent study said that HALF of all traffic in Park Slope is people driving around looking for a spot. I'm all for permit parking. STOP THE DRIVING
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:44 AM
for those of you for or against res. parking permits... I bet the idea being floated (since is part of proposed congestion pricing) would only be in effect for the M-F 6am-6p time frame also. So people visiting for wkends or you going out to dinner or shop in some other 'hood would not be effected so much.
And, of course, as said before, there aren't any spaces available for that commuter crunch anyway so maybe useless idea.
PS...And if Bloomberg wants to lower congestion and pollution in 'busiest parts of Manhattan'.... I say tax every cab and limo ride because far, far more of those on Midtown streets than 'private cars'. And if public transportation is so good in Manhattan below 86th street, why all those cabs and limos everywhere all day long.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:45 AM
I live with resident parking in Cambridge, and it was not a great solution. You can't have overnight guests. You can have a small dinner party and invite more than one friend. You can't drive to another part of town and use their business because you can't park. All it does is collect more taxes from local citizens.
With congestion pricing, how do you get from Brooklyn to New Jersey without getting taxed?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:56 AM
I am for resident parking permits. It is getting nearly impossible to park in Ft. Greene. And it should be implemented thoughtfully, with restricted times set to the middle of the day to discourage people who might drive in just to park and take up space. For visitors a temporary guest pass could easily be issued over the internet with scan codes (like a fedEx label). More importantly mass transit has to be improved intra borough. The subways in Brooklyn are good going into and out of Manhattan and woe to you if a nabe you want to go to isn't along the way. Take some of those billions in tax surplus and bring back the trolleys, Brooklyn is begging for a great transit system. It is our increased real estate value that is creating the tax surge, return some in services (schools and transit!). Give us subway service that runs on weekends in a more timely fashion, give us trains that run frequently other than just rush hour. Entice us to use mass transit over cars with better service.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:57 AM
I am for resident parking permits. It is getting nearly impossible to park in Ft. Greene. And it should be implemented thoughtfully, with restricted times set to the middle of the day to discourage people who might drive in just to park and take up space. For visitors a temporary guest pass could easily be issued over the internet with scan codes (like a fedEx label). More importantly mass transit has to be improved intra borough. The subways in Brooklyn are good going into and out of Manhattan and woe to you if a nabe you want to go to isn't along the way. Take some of those billions in tax surplus and bring back the trolleys, Brooklyn is begging for a great transit system. It is our increased real estate value that is creating the tax surge, return some in services (schools and transit!). Give us subway service that runs on weekends in a more timely fashion, give us trains that run frequently other than just rush hour. Entice us to use mass transit over cars with better service.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 11:57 AM
seems like the selection of the neighborhoods is kind of random. When I think of neighborhoods where I can readily find a spot I do not think of Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:01 PM
I have visited boston, specifically allston and i was a bit horrified by the implications of resident only parking. No one can come visit anyone in allston. Its awful. And to make matters worse even if you live there its hard to find a parking spot anyway. I shudder to think of doing the same thing here in brooklyn. While mass transit is an alternative, its not one for everyone. Some of us are serviced by lines that are almost always in constant state of flux. My line the F seems to be undergoing track work every other weekend and has some sort of service problem. Its kind of cruel to create all these measures to try to push people to use mass transit when it clearly is already a decaying and overtaxed system to begin with. I say the city and bloomberg can't tax people for driving/owning a car until our mass transit is completely overhauled with a modern working system that meets the required needs of the city.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:06 PM
Oh, the joys of not owning a car!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:07 PM
we obvioulsy need to reduce our sick, sick addiction to cars
Posted by: wow at June 12, 2007 12:09 PM
"a recent study said that HALF of all traffic in Park Slope is people driving around looking for a spot. I'm all for permit parking." Sorry, but that study was not done by an advocacy group - not objective and obviously absurd. I drive thru PS all the time and you can tell most people are driving through on their way somewhere.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:13 PM
Resident parking permits in Brooklyn Heights would enable those who live here to park on our streets. Visitors could use parking garages--which are scattered about the neighborhood. On a nice day too many people drive here to go to the Promenade, Dumbo park, etc., when they could take the subway. The 2345RFAC trains all come to the Heights. Leave street parking for residents. And everyone should drive less, anyway.
Posted by: punko at June 12, 2007 12:16 PM
punko - I am very happy for you that BH has parking garages. PS doesn't so where does that leave us?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:29 PM
Something that no one is talking about is the possible (and likely) increase in garage rates for those of us who in live on the perimeter. Instead of $300/month we pay now in downtown Brooklyn, we coud be seeing $600/month as it is in Manhattan. All those people driving in who used to pay for a lot/garage in Manhattan will look to do it here. There are a lot of garages (almost every new building has one) but nothing to protect residents from being gouged by the operators if/when this goes into effect.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:29 PM
I wish the anti driving ranters would give it a break. Great, you prefer the subway. Great, you think cars are evil. You know what, shut up allready. Some people have cars for good reasons, some for bad reasons. Posting "take the subway" is not likely to convince anyone to sell their car.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:31 PM
I think resident only parking sounds great but it would be a nightmare, especially in over-crowded neighborhoods like Brooklyn heights.
There are not enough streets for the residents to park. So not only would you need to buy a sticker, you also would need to rent garage space.
There is also the sadistic aspect of this by which I mean that perfectly nice ladies and gentlemen are gleeful over the prospect of other people getting huge fines. At the Brooklyn Heights Assoiation, which is really just a small clique of snobs with little diversity, the talk is of charging $400 per ticket. The whole thing is absurd, elitist, exclusionary, and anti-democratic.
I vote no to the old dinosaurs imposing yet another tax on our heads.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:33 PM
Crack = Cars
Posted by: court_st_ at June 12, 2007 12:34 PM
i wish the pro car people would give it a rest.
what was your point, 12:31??
you'd rather pick on the people who actually do use mass transportation and walk than those that drive their car 10 blocks to the store??
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 12:35 PM
12:35 Well if you think everyone who has a car uses it to drive a few blocks to the store, I guess you just don't get it. My point is that that is an easy stereotype, and could even be true in a few cases, but some people have a car for a good reason, and regardless telling people to not use their cars is pointless.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:51 PM
haha I love not having a car so much. Sheep bahh...
Just rent when I need one.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 12:59 PM
telling people to not use their cars is pointless.
i don't agree. i think telling people (or at least encouraging them) to not use cars has many points, actually.
sure there are people who have valid reasons for using cars, but this whole congestion pricing idea along with the permit parking is being created to get people to LIMIT USE OF THEIR CARS!!!!
why don't you tell bloomberg to stop telling people not to use cars instead of me, if you're so pro-car. i know you'll do whatever you please. and by the sound of your comments, you don't even see why the excess use of cars in our society is a huge problem, apparently.
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 1:01 PM
I have often wondered how so many parents dropping their children off for school at PS 321 in the morning, can be both zoned for 321 AND, judging from their licence plates, have a primary residence outside NY State...?
Really bugs me.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:06 PM
I have learned the tricks of the NYC elite class. Publicly denounce cars and the awful people who drive them. Don't even admit you have a car, although when pressed admit your spouse "needs" the Lexus to get to the farm in Columbia County.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:07 PM
The way it works EVERYWHERE with resident parking is residents are given visitors permits for friends and family. You have to write the date of validity and can order quite a few. I lived in Chicago near Wrigley Field and never had a problem with it. The parking would have been a nightmare during Cubs games if they didn't have it.
Posted by: Ex-Chicago at June 12, 2007 1:15 PM
I also rent a car when i need one, gave up owning one a year ago. However, it is really a drag, especially when I feel like doing something spontaneously. I am still in car withdrawal and its not getting better. I miss not having one. All the pols have their private cars and parking stickers that let them park everywhere. The little people have to just shut up and try figure out how to get around on the weekends when the goddam subway diversions make it impossible to use new york's supposedly great subway system.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:17 PM
Dear ex-chicago,
That may be the way permits work in the wind-swept expanses of Chicago, but in Brooklyn where there is no room for a rat to fart, there will be NO GUEST PASSES, you know why? because there is no place for them to park with or without the stiker.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:20 PM
Big YES.
Permit parking will be too bad for all the people who post here, "[Neighborhood X] is great, and you can always drive to Park Slope!"
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:30 PM
But can Park Slope foot traffic alone support all the trendy shops and restaurants that have sprung up there?
Maybe, I don't know.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 1:51 PM
But can Park Slope foot traffic alone support all the trendy shops and restaurants that have sprung up there?
Maybe, I don't know.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:02 PM
Great Idea, but they MUST build more parking garages and/or allow visitor passes
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 2:04 PM
Anti car people. I have 3 kids under 5.
It would take me either 2 trains or 2 buses to take my son to preschool vs a 15 min car ride.
I am 50 /50 on the permit parking it would depend on how it works.
I have this one guy on my block who has 3 cars and all he does is move them from one side of the street to the other and drives 1 car away. So if permits get rid of those annoying people I am all for it
You all say take the train, have you ever tried to take a train by yourself with 3 kids under the age of 5.
Please do not give me this oh New Yorkers are great and help you down the stairs with the strollers..
If every station had a elevator from street level to platform level, maybe more people would take the train.
Maybe clean bathrooms at every stations.
Posted by: AL at June 12, 2007 2:16 PM
Maybe if you had thought of the environment before binging on child conception, you wouldn't have this problem!
Just kidding. (Figured I'd post this before someone else posted it seriously.) But while I don't begrudge your right to drive, I don't think the city should base its policy on making driving as convenient as possible for you--especially a city as densely populated as New York.
Sounds like you'd gain some and lose some, like most of us would, but the city's concern should bee what serves the greatest overall good.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:23 PM
It is true that many MANY cars in park slope are looking for parking (on the streets, not the avenues). I can tell immediately. They drive slow, and pause before each hydrant spot before the hydrant is visible. I'm one of them, and I live here. The street parking situation is insane.
Bring in the 2 hours max for non-residents right now. Nobody can visit anymore? bullshit! take the freaking subway, or pay for a parking garage, or wait like everyone else has to for a spot. Most slopers don't have people coming in for all night parties by car anyway.
The other option would be to introduce ticket machines (very expensive ones) like they have in the city now, pay and display, and resident exemption stickers. Why should the area offer unlimited free parking to outsiders when the garages can charge over $20 for a couple of hours?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:24 PM
2:16, my first reaction was well too bad, take the subway. That's what it is there for. You live in a CITY - it is not ment to be driving all over in your huge SUV taking 3 normal parking spots so you can avoid a little walk.
But, I do understand your comment about the subways. It is a disgrace the current shape they are in. The stations need to be "gut renovated" and the old trains all need to be replaced with new clean ones.
And the police need to keep the damn homeless people off the subway who sleep in the cars and piss in the corners. Throw them all in jail or ship them off to Guantanamo - whatever - just get them the heck out of the subway!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:25 PM
Dear 2:16,
I hear you and of course what you say is absolutely true, however there is no point in arguing with the antis, they are a little nutty, like religious fanatics. My advise is to just agree, nod, and say uh-huh, while you attend to the business of having a real life and caring for your family.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:26 PM
Has there been any expert comment on this issue? There seem to be a lot of feelings going around here (as whenever use of one's property is involved, it seems), but I am curious how in theory this should work, optimally and also in practice. And with the monies generated from congestion pricing and residential permits, what will be going to alleviate problems of mass transit, of no transit, how would transit be expanded, how would it be made to serve all of us? I have heard little of fact in this debate and little information from political sources who float large ideas with little or no details (released to the public or discussed in back rooms). Anybody have links to any real proposals, studies or possibilities?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:32 PM
Has there been any expert comment on this issue? There seem to be a lot of feelings going around here (as whenever use of one's property is involved, it seems), but I am curious how in theory this should work, optimally and also in practice. And with the monies generated from congestion pricing and residential permits, what will be going to alleviate problems of mass transit, of no transit, how would transit be expanded, how would it be made to serve all of us? I have heard little of fact in this debate and little information from political sources who float large ideas with little or no details (released to the public or discussed in back rooms). Anybody have links to any real proposals, studies or possibilities?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:32 PM
The NY SUN had an excellent editorial on the subject yesterday. The crux of the editorial was that congetion pricing is really just a new tax that will help the MTA meet its budget shortfall. Evidently the program in London has done squat to alleviate traffic but it has raised a good amount of money. So do not expect any mass transit improvements nor any relief from congestion. the money will go to barely make ends meet at the MTA and perhaps to delay a fare hike to $3.
The black hole that is the MTA will use this new tax and will beg for more, in a year the fee will be doubled to $16. in four years? Who knows? $50 to drive in? It's New York, taxpayer's money is cheap.
Its just another tax, to those folks who have never met a tax they didn'tlike, this is for them, for those of us who think New Yorkers already hve to shoulder a huge tax burden -by far the highest in the country- it is not alright. It is not alright to lie to the pbi and to sell a new tax as something else. The congestion in Manhattan may be relieved for wek or two until it gets back to the way it was before just with a new tax.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:42 PM
"So do not expect any mass transit improvements nor any relief from congestion."
in case you haven't noticed, there have been SIGNIFICANT improvements to nyc's tranist system over the last 5-10 years. if you don't realize that, you haven't been living here long enough.
new cars, renovated stations, uber clean compared to what they were, new hybrid buses as well as new bus stations.
you all want a whole new subway system overnight??
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 2:45 PM
expert comment? this is brownstoner - we are all expert bullshitters. you should ask the forum about particle physics, too.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:45 PM
Ignore the morons that say, you live in a city, take the subway or walk or bike.
People like you should be praised for raising your family and contributing to the economy of NYC. Not be harassed by smug egocentrics, or have the city make your life here more difficult and chase you away. (same for all those idiotic trash on 'Pk Slope moms' types).
And to me, parking permits and congestion pricing are things designed to make middle class city residents life tougher.
If they don't drive, what do they care about parking problems and traffic jams anyway.
Posted by: subwayriderandchildless at June 12, 2007 2:52 PM
you go into the Union Square subway station in the summer and wait for a train in 100 plus gegree heat, and tell me of the marvelous improvements in NYC mass transit!
OUR SUBWAYS SYSTEM SUCKS.
STATIONS ARE UGLY, NOISY, DIRTY, RAT-INFESTED, and DECREPIT. TRAINS ARE DIRTY, SMELLY, and OVERCROWDED.
other than that, the system is great.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:52 PM
First, I would love there to be less congestion. But, this is not the solution.
London has congestion pricing. I use to live there. It has not made any difference. The only noticable difference is the amount of money in your wallet.
It may have stopped a few people but nothing noticable.
But the really bad thing is taht now that the congestion fee is here and people are use to it, it will never go away. It will only be raised more and more as time goes by.
It is essentially just a tax.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 2:54 PM
The "right of free passage" requires a place to park.
All of you people for neighborhood parking will be against it once you have lived with it for awhile. You will likely always have a spot in your neighborhood, but forget visiting your friends in other neighborhoods, forget patronizing other neighborhoods. Watch as your local restaraunts close down because only people within walking distance can now patronize them.
I've lived with neighborhood parking. It totally sucks.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:03 PM
Al at 2:16 . . . dont get me started on stroller congestion on Smith st and/or 7th Ave. There is the real problem. Little kids. eww.
Posted by: CG_hus at June 12, 2007 3:03 PM
The whole premise here is specious. There is NO EVIDENCE that this kind of edge situation will take place. In every case where this has been documented, most recently in London, a study was recently conducted that found NO EVIDENCE of any negative impact around the congestion zone. Think about it for a second, is someone so desperate to drive that they'll add $4 a day to their trip, and take the subway rather than pay $8 and drive? I have a feeling that people will just, as planners have been hoping, switch modes of travel rather than try to beat the system and save $4. Wouldn't serious car commuters rather put another person in their car and just drive?
The whole idea is a scare tactic.
Posted by: Dan at June 12, 2007 3:23 PM
The kind of local business that you need to drive to and then park at for more than 2-3 hours is either
a. A Bar. - too bad. Take a cab or walk home drunk (and stop peeing on my brownstone, you slob)
b. An illicit business- as in, your driving over to my North Slope block to go sit in your friend's car (also parked) and smoke weed or sell or wait for a pickup, and then you'll go to the bar on Flatbush (and then pee on my brownstone.)
Bring on the permit parking if these are the local businesses that will suffer.
Or open up your bar on the roof of a parking garage.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:25 PM
All great cities thrive on congestion.
If you go to a city where there is no congestion, you are either in a dying city or one in a totalitarioan state where people are kept on a very tight leash.
Old pictures show tremendous congestion in NYC a hundred years ago for Pete's sake.
Congestion is a pain but it is part of a thriving city, to try to reduce it by imposing a new tax is just reidiculous. It is a political trick foisted on the naive public.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:28 PM
Aren't they considering reduced fee or no fee for car-pooling?
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 3:36 PM
My rule of thumb is that if something will make my life easier and less expensive I'm for it. If something involves having to buy an additional license for my car or pay an additional toll to drive on the broken down streets, I'm agaisnt it.
These two ideas, congestion pricing and neighborhood parking stickers are full of shit. I do not want to have to go to City Hall and spend an hour and forty bucks for a sticker that isn't going to guarantee me a place to park anyway. Huh? What is that? like protection money so I don't get ticketed? The hell with it.
Who are the geniuses that dream of these schemes to complicate our lives and harrass us further?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:40 PM
Those old pictures of new york also show diptheria, rampant slums, horse poop, segregation, etc... Some of them also show prohibition.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:40 PM
Put your car in a garage. Do you live in downtown brooklyn and use it on a daily basis? What the hell for? Do you commute to a job in the suburbs?
Call you insurance company and tell them your car is in a garage and that you live in New York City (not PA or NC or FL or NJ) Assuming that you were legally insured to begin with, your insurance will now go down (just a little).
Now park in your garage. You won't get tickets anymore. I bet you got at least 6/year. You also won't get dented, broken into, keyed, etc.... Now your actual cash outlay on your car goes down.
Now tell your employer that you want your T.R.I.P. tax deduction, and your garage fees get paid pretax.
Now you don't have to park in my neighborhood and take the subway anymore. Why the hell did you want to do that anyway?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:47 PM
Much easier to solve all your parking problems and don't have to pay for congestion pricing is get a NYC DOT handicap permit. (and if you can't get one, file for your grandmother and use it for your car. Or, there will soon be plenty on the black market)
Read the details on city website
Where can I park with it?
This permit allows the driver to park at most curbsides on city streets including:
In all No Parking zones except those marked as taxi stands; "No Parking" or "No Standing" spaces authorized for doctors, press, diplomats and government agencies; at parking meters without depositing a coin; in "No Standing, Trucks Loading and Unloading" zones except for specified restricted hours.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 3:55 PM
There has been quite a lot of research on congestion pricing. Anyone seriously interested in it could learn a lot doing a simple Internet search. Those who claim it has done nothing to reduce congestion in London are wrong on the facts.
If Bloomberg achieves congestion pricing, I will have to revise my negative opinion of him (based mainly on Atlantic Yards). This will be one of the single most important changes for the better that New York City will ever see.
We are already paying for congestion in many ways -- in our quality of life and in our health. We simply have to find a way to reduce how much people use their automobiles in New York City. Those who oppose congestion pricing have not offered any alternative on how to get this done.
The fear that there will be a ring-effect is unfounded -- this hasn't happened in London.
The majority of people driving into Manhattan's central business districts have a viable mass transit alternative and most of them CHOOSE to drive rather than take mass transit because they prefer the privacy you get in an automobile.
No one is arguing that we have to get rid of cars altogether (although as a bicycle commuter, I wouldn't mind -- there's nothing like commuting by bike to inculcate a passionate hatred of automobiles). There will likely always be a place for automobile travel -- for the elderly and disabled, in bad weather, when you have to transport something heavy, and so on.
But if you are driving your car into Manhattan every day from Bay Ridge, just to take a location mentioned in the comments above, you are very likely a government employee who enjoys free parking.
I haven't learned as much about residential parking permits as I have about congestion pricing, so I don't have an opinion about it, other than to say I don't think there's much danger of a "ring effect" with congestion pricing, so probably we don't need it.
I have to say, this is one of the more exceptionally ignorant comments threads I've ever seen on Brownstoner.
Posted by: SPer at June 12, 2007 4:02 PM
You see posters? Anonymous 3:55 has posted a truly helpful tip that is not only practical but also in keeping with the best New York City traditions of getting around stupid laws.
Handicap permits are the way to go.
I'll try e-bay first.
Resident parking stickers will also create a nice opportunity for the local entreperneurs to produce fakes. How long do you think it will take them?
25 minutes? 18 minutes?
Where there is a will, there is a new york way. God bless you guys.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:08 PM
If resident parking is implemented in PS the boundaries will shift even more toward Victorian Flatbush. On the weekends on Marlborough and Rugby Roads you may see only ten cars parked on the entire length of each block between Church and Dorchester. Anyone frequenting a business on Cortelyou Road can easily find parking. During the weekdays, these streets are literally parking lots for commuters who drive to the neighborhood, park their cars and then get on the Q/B train at either the Cortelyou, Beverley or Church subway stations. I see the communters return in the evening and drive off, often times I've seen them dump their trash at the curb or block dirveways. Unlike our PS and FG/CH neighbors we have ample parking due to most driveways being long enough to accomodate at minimum four cars so parking is not an issue for homeowners. My driveway will probably fit eight cars. I notice that many of the cars parked have "Town of Babylon, Hempstead, etc." stickers affixed to the windshields, which leaves me to believe that many all day parkers are not even NY city residents. Brownstone Brooklynites could not park in the town of Hempstead all day with out paying. I am all for resident parking as long as all Brooklyn residents are considered residents.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:14 PM
Re: "Put it in a garage"--where? In Park Slope, for instance, I know of two garages total, to serve 200 blocks or whatever the neighborhood adds up to.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:17 PM
4:14,
I don't think your solution of all brooklyn residents would make the ladies and gentlemen of Brooklyn Heights very happy. They don't want any shmutz from outside the neighborhood polluting their public streets during the day.
Posted by: drive on at June 12, 2007 4:23 PM
i think most of you have neglected to realize that the congestion pricing is not simply to less congestion.
it's about helping reduce carbon dioxide emissions along with the city's latest effort to lead pretty much the u.s. (along with california) on boosting efforts to become a more eco-friendly society.
for those of you in park slope...you should be more supportive of this than the most as you're known to be so eco-friendly. getting unecessary traffic and cars off the road is a good thing for everyone and whatever helps (parking permits etc) would be better than continuing to clog the air.
Posted by: anon at June 12, 2007 4:24 PM
Here's something else to consider: Many people who drive to work, or at least closer to Manhattan, before taking a train, come from the outer parts of the boroughs, where a car is a neccessity, mostly due to the fact that public transportation is very limited. Since we are getting more and more successful at pushing the middle and lower class working stiffs out there, as they can't afford to live anywhere else, the city, in their vast wisdom, conveniently forgot to extend the subways, or run new and more bus routes to help these people get to work.
Take the people who live out near Starrett City, just as an example. There is a lot of new housing going up near the Gateway Mall. There is virtually no subway service out there, and only a couple of bus lines. Is it no wonder all of those people have a car in the driveway, or every street is full of parked cars on both sides? As several people suggested above - let's improve the public transportation BEFORE we implement restrictions on driving or parking.
Another thing no one has mentioned. All of these people circling looking for parking to take a train in from Harlem, central Brooklyn, the South Bronx, and every other nabe that is close to a reliable train line, are adding fumes and pollution to neighborhoods which already have abnormally high asthma rates among children. This is not going to help. And if you don't care about lower income kids' health now, you will care when their medical care costs are passed on to you in the form of higher health insurance costs and taxes. And not just the kids' health either. Everyone will suffer.
This plan has not been thought out well. How are they going to implement it? Put a ring of toll booths around the city, on every north/south street? How long will it take to build toll booths, how many buildings are going to be grabbed by eminent domain to build toll facilities? Will the subways and buses be improved and increased? Will buildings in Brooklyn, Harlem and the Bronx and Queens be grabbed to make parking garages? Is there a plan? When does the other shoe drop?
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 12, 2007 4:27 PM
AL 2:16,
Thousands of NYers also have 3+ young children, but still manage to get their children to daycare of school without a car. What makes you so special?
Whiner.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:35 PM
4:17- Put it in a garage. You'd have no problem find one. Yes. There are two big ones on Union Street. There are lots of day garages up and down pacific street. There's another big one on Flatbush near the park cirle, and also one on Union near the park circle. There are smaller ones on side streets running all the way up 7th and 8th Ave. There are tons of listings on Craigslist for private garages in the south slope and windsor terrace. There are empty lots where people rent parking spots.
If you're a car owning Pork Slopper. Pay your 300/month for indoor parking or 150/month for outdoor parking, or 200/month for your craigslist ad parking. Get your car off the street (and take care of it better).
This is an easy conversation. If you live in park slope and you own a car, even if you have kids, this is a luxury purchase and lifestyle. Get your luxury item off the street. If you can't afford to park the sucker, get rid of it.
If you're someone who drive to park slope and leaves your car there all day, then I hope you pay more. I pox on you.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:42 PM
Sterling, the plan will not involve toll booths it will involve monitors that will read license plates and then automatically charge the driver somehow.
It is scary in a Big Brother sort of way. People crossing the Brooklyn Bridge say, and heading up the FDR to go to Conn. or NJ will not be charged.
Bottom line, I concur that it is simply a new tax. It will do little or nothing to lessen congestion.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:43 PM
'I pox on you'
That's too much.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:47 PM
I work in a huge bank based in Lower Manhattan. So many of our senior mgmt types drive to work from Jersey and CT in big lexus or mercedes or SUVs. There are parking garages all over the place. These people must drive like two or more hourse each way in traffic and then they pay 400 or more a month just to day park (plus tolls, plus gas). I'm sure they make enough that it doesn't matter. The company they work for should be held accountable to discourage the behavior, provide an alternative (like the google van) or pay some sort of carbon offset tax for on its employees behalf. The congestion pricing won't eliminate these people.
Stand on corner in manhattan and watch the cars go by. If they're not yellow cabs, they are mostly very expensive luxury cars.
The congestion pricing isn't meant to get all cars off the streets. It's an easy way to get a smaller number of cars off the street owned by poorer people. That said, it's still a good thing.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 4:54 PM
Great, 4:43, more classism. Many lower income people do not have charge cards, or even bank accounts, they depend on check cashing places and post office money orders to pay their bills. Unless the city declares "no one without a charge card/bank account can drive into Manhattan", which sounds unconstitutional to me, they are going to have to allow for some kind of pay as you go system. Since most of your delivery people and other lower income jobs are going to be affected by this the most, this will have to be addressed. It's getting more complicated.....
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 12, 2007 5:02 PM
I am regular rider of subway who works in mid-town Manhattan and I do not drive to work.
I feel the so-called 'Congestion Pricing' proposal although a worthy objective is flawed, misdirected and unfair.
1) Private Vehicles are Not the Major cause of Congestion in Midtown. As I walk streets of midtown and look out my office window I observe the far vast majority of vehicles on the streets are yellow cabs, 'black cars', commercial vehicles and buses. There are relatively few 'private vehicles' driving around. I concede that at 'rush hour' they are more numerous at bridges/tunnels and highways but they are very small percentage of vehicles stuck trying to go crosstown during business hours.
2) 'Black Cars'/limos are a major factor that is being completely ignored by mayor. These ovesized, gas guzzling, omniprescent limos, 'town cars' etc. are parked waiting outside any major office building, blocking bus lanes, standing idle waiting for next call, hogging truck loading zones on side streets. This forces trucks unloading to double park and further create traffic gridlock. The number of these vehicles is enormous. But has the mayor even given us a count of them?
3)Yellow Cabs - drive around picking up and dropping fares and blocking traffic wherever they like. Take a look down any street in Manhattan. It is swarm of cabs not private vehicles. I do applaud the mayor for announcing effort to change the fleet to hybrid vehicles since they are large percent of vehicles on the street. LETS EXPAND THIS TO the 'black cars' also.
4) How are 'private vehicles' any less desireable/polluting/congestion causing than cabs and limos? My impression is mayor is trying to make it faster for the limo set to travel around.. Why not lower the number of cabs, 'black cars' but charging $5 tax on Each fare in congestion area? No, the mayor is only interested in 'private cars' not the bigger limos that his crowd uses for transportation.
5) Displacement of traffic. Will trucks trying to avoid $21 tax that would usually use Lincoln or Holland Tunnel to New Jersey from Brooklyn or Queens now further clog BQE to Verrazano and CrossBronx to George Washington Bridge. These highways that are already clogged with diesel vehicles running through highest asthma neighborhoods be further burdened?
6) NYC and New York State Government employees permits. City and state (and yes federal too) have high percentage of workers driving to work because of widespread abuse of parking permits. Mayor and governor need not tax the populace further to remedy this situation but he has ignored it. Midtown and all our neighborhoods are burderend by special parking for schools employees, court employes (including judges), police and fire depts, etc. Besides encouraging the employees to drive to work they are parking in no-parking areas causing further problems. How much you bet these same people will be exempt from congestion pricing?
7) Overcrowded subways. Already trains are vastly overcrowded and move slower at rush hour because can not handle number of passengers. Congestion pricing is aimed at 'commuters' meaning more passengers at peak times when system can not handle them.
I know promise of improved public transit. But that is unproven and not believable.
I have to wait for trains to pass now at rush hour before I can get on one and MTA already has said can not handle more. Non-rush hours system can handle more riders but not during rush hours.
8) Extreme commuting times for some NYC residents. Using subways is very convenient for me. But for many NYC residents it is not. Large numbers of people do not live near subway line and even in Manhattan many people work long walk to subway. My impression (although I do not have stats) is that the many hospitals along 1st Avenue and the many businesses along Far West Side of Manhattan which are all long walk to a subway line constitute a fair percentage of people that opt to drive cars to work. Think about how long it would take by public transport and walking to reach man of these places. (say Rosedale to NYU Hospital)
9) Creates a divide in our city. Addressing congestion in one area of NYC without addressing congestion in our neighborhoods further creates impression that our leaders are only concerned with Manhattan and not the majority of NYC residents. Congestion pricing can be viewed as tool to restrict and tax the 'bridge and tunnel' people to make it easier for 'elite' to get around Manhattan in their limos.
I am all in favor of improving traffic flow, improving mass-transit and better air-quality. Although the mayor purports that congestion pricing addresses these important issues I feel strongly it is not equitable, ineffective and counter-productive.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:07 PM
Yes congestion pricing is a new tax - so what! Unless we are going to have a flat tax, it makes sense to tax things that you don't want ( i.e. - "the power to tax is the power to destroy") -
Someone must pay for the mass transit of the future?
Why not those people who are driving into the city center at peak times - even if they still drive - don't you think they should pay for the privledge?
Which is why resident passes don't make sense unless they cost $ and are simply designed to discourage drivers from commuting to 'near' center city and then using the subway. It would make no sense to encourage car ownership among boro residents while trying to discourage it by commuters
Posted by: David at June 12, 2007 5:15 PM
anon 4:42--
I've lived in Park Slope 15 years and I know of one garage south of Union (on 11th or 12 Street between 7th and 8th Aves). If you can name any specific other ones--other than "there are lots on the side streets"--I'd love to know about them so I can park there, but clearly someone's been hiding them from me.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:16 PM
Very well said, indeed! Anon 5:07. You forgot diplomatic vehicles, too. They already do whatever they please, and I'm sure we don't want to offend any of our foreign guests by asking them to pay to come into Manhattan. Although many embassies are in midtown, many diplomatic staff members, especially the lower echelons, live outside of midtown Manhattan.
The exceptions are going to only leave the poor working schlub holding the bag. Not fair!
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 12, 2007 5:17 PM
The political class was apoplectic when the commuter tax was nixed by Albany.
This is the replacement.
the new commuter tax to feed the insatiable maw of the NY bureaucracy.
as we say in brooklyn: moh money, moh money, moh money.
I love that some clueless types think this is about the environemnt or
carbon footprint or nonsense like that.
Its about MOH MONEY.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:28 PM
5:16- there are at least two over by the ansonia, if not three. Not sure of the blocks- but I used them when my girlfriend lived on 15th. Parking over there is the worst. There is one on Garfield- not so far south of union, but still. There's parking on 9th street near 4th ave. If you live that far south- go to Craigslist and you'll find people near PPSW who are renting there backyard garages out for far less.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:38 PM
There is a lot of misinformation being thrown around here.
Please go to NYS Senate website and read Bill S6068 - the bill seeking a homerule message for congestion pricing and resident permit parking among other things.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:44 PM
This one?
http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/bstfrmef.cgi?QUERYTYPE=BILLNO+&SESSYR=2007+&QUERYDATA=S6068+&QQDATA=S6068+&GETSEL=TEXT+&LST=+&BROWSER=EXPLORER+&TOKEN=34944223&TARGET=VIEW&SELECT=TEXT
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 5:52 PM
ANN 4:35. I am not a Whiner.
I live in Ditmas Park and I have a DRIVEWAY...
I am just simply saying the transit system is not family friendly or friendly for the elderly...
I would take the train a lot more with my 3 kids if the system was better.
2nd... like I said I am 50 /50 on the parking permits.
Bring it on to Victorian Flatbush.
I think permits would hurt place more like Park Slope more then it would Victorian Flatbush..
We are not as large of a shopping destination like the Slope is...
Give 3 hour passes for shopping and we are set....
Posted by: AL at June 12, 2007 5:52 PM
Several comments:
1. ARE THE CP CAMERAS AN INVASION OF OUR PRIVACY? Yes. But how much does it matter? If you consider how it helped the London police quickly nab the post 7/11 subway bombers, perhaps it's not such a bad thing after all.
2. VISITOR PARKING. First, that assumes that visitors to Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope etc can CURRENTLY find parking in those neighborhoods. Not so, from my experience. But there are ways to mitigate that -- like selling visitor passes to residents.
3. CITY WORKERS. This is my personal bugaboo. The NY Times recently ran a long article on driving in NYC that identified that a staggeringly high number of car commuters are city workers. Why? because they are given parking privileges. Hey Mike: cancel those special petmits and reduce traffic volume in one fell swoop! (Thanks to the 5:07pm poster for also addressing this issue)
4. IMPROVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. As many others have said, the trade off for reducing car traffic has to be comprensive improvements to our public transport system: options, frequency, conditions, price.
Posted by: NeoGrec at June 12, 2007 7:02 PM
How the hell am i supposed to read through 125 post... 125 long posts?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 8:02 PM
i am totally against RPP - it is just another entitlement feature for people already entitled enough to live in million dollar mansions.
we will not have parking lots resulting from congestion pricing as long as we have alternate side of the street parking during mid day hours most weekdays. You simply cannot park in Fort Greene any day and commute except Wednesday. Congestion pricing will not change this.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 8:03 PM
Let's be clear. This proposal will be a huge drain on resources of our neighborhoods that are serviced by subways. And is ridiculous especially in light of the fact that the mayor backs the AY proposal. Where the heck is anybody going to park anywhere near downtown Brooklyn is beyond me. And why do we think our roads will not be clogged by those driving around Manhattan from places like Queens or upstate New York or even Boston for that matter. They will clearly go over the Whitestone or the Van Wyck and in to Queens and through Brooklyn to avoid paying the fee to go in to Manhattan if they are heading out of town. New Yorkers aren't the only ones on the road going through the city.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 12, 2007 8:03 PM
Really everyone... is parking that important? How about the cars belching exhaust on their way to Manhattan? The proposal will reduce traffic in the downtown Brooklyn neighborhoods by 29% according to some studies. It will feel like Sunday during the week.
As it is now, people from Staten Island get a free ride in the morning (one way toll over the Veranzanno, and then free over the Manhattan Bridge.) If the tolls were even, they'd pick another route.
We all worry about traffic because of AY. Well, Congestion Pricing will reduce car travel by over 100,000 trips a day.
My neighborhood, near 4th avenue, is a parking lot anyway. I want it to stop being a highway for people traveling to Manhattan. If you care about Brooklyn's neighborhood feel, tell your politicians to support this now, before they pave us all over.
Posted by: a 4th avenue resident at June 12, 2007 9:36 PM
I live in Amsterdam where like most European cities there is only residential parking. And the wait time, depending on neighborhood is 6 months to 5 years- yes 5 years. The effect, less cars and traffic.
I've been on the waiting list for three years and won't get a car until I get the magic permit.
It's a good idea and worth it if you don't want your neighborhood overrun with cars and traffic.
Posted by: amsterdam at June 13, 2007 7:13 AM
Why is everyone pretending that congestion pricing is a new idea that's never been tried? Other cities have tried it, and there's been no edge effect, as mentioned above. Stop bringing it up, already.
That said, I think parking permits are a great idea. Enough with the free parking. Your visitors can park outside the city and take a train (which is what happens in London). If you live in Clinton Hill and want to shop in Park Slope, take the bus. If the bus service sucks, it's likely due to the congestion anyway.
Posted by: ed at June 13, 2007 9:33 AM
I AM OUT OF STATE AND MY CAR IS OUT OF STATE!
I pay $780 insurance for a FULL YEAR, and FULL COVERAGE (liability, collisin, glass, EVERYTHING!) That is about 5 times cheaper than NY Residents.
I been parking on the streets for 18 months now, saved about $6,000 in insurance and received total of 2 (yes TWO) $55/tickets in that time.
I am all AGAINST the permit parking, that will totally srew up my whole system of saving money by having car registered out of state
AGAINST IT!
All of you, find a way to register your car at your parents, aunts, friends etc houses - make it something like North Dakota, Nebraska or Michigan, you'll save a bundle.
BROOKLYN ROCKS!!! Lived here for 7 years, had a car for 1 1/2 years - LOVE DRIVING ON THE WEEKEND, take subway on the weekday.
Posted by: OUT OF STATE at June 13, 2007 4:55 PM
I am in favor of permit parking.
driving is not a right, it is a privilege
i am tired of cars,
get out of here satan!
Posted by: cgriggs at January 29, 2008 3:06 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.