Pols, DOT: Parking Permit Program For Many 'Hoods

What a potential debacle!
Brooklyn politicians carving up curbside parking like a crazy quilt.
DOT must be salivating at the thought of all those juicy parking tickets.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:18 AM

BRING. IT. ON.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:34 AM

If the parking-permit zone gets much bigger it will be a serious threat to the local businesses in the Slope, CG, Wburg etc. I drive all the time to these places to eat, shop etc. -- have a little kid and it's just not always feasible to do all this by public transportation. If a permit zone locks us out I'll just spend my money in other nabes.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:37 AM

ME ME ME NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY - I love how all the Anti-AY/development folks wrap themselves in the Eco flag when it comes to stopping development, but when the possibility exists for residential parking permits (i.e. cheap parking), congestion and pollution concerns go out the window.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:38 AM

The new battle of the "have and have nots"
As in cars.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:47 AM

This amounts to appropriation of a public resource (paid for and maintained by taxpayers) by a special interest group.

As a Park Slope car owner, I would benefit from this but it’s just wrong and unethical.

So many Park Slopers are all about “saving the puppies” but work damn hard to exclude the “others” from their enclave (whether the “others” happen to be homeless women at the shelter, ex-convicts at a halfway house or non-resident parkers).

Time to take your hypocrisy and stuff it in your tailpipe.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:49 AM

what about clinton hill and other hoods? especially near subways station where all this people out of town will be parking to get the subway into manhattan!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:52 AM

Paraphrasing 11:48:

A recent study found that 56% of violent crimes were committed by black men.
Excluding black men from Park Slope will work to reduce violent crime.

Another recent study found that 62% of street littering was done by children between the ages of 7 and 12.
Excluding children between the ages of 7 and 12 from Park Slope will work to reduce street littering.

Slippery [Park] Slope, eh?

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:56 AM

Resident parking is the WORST!!

If you'd ever lived with it, you'd know.

Suddenly you can't take your car ANYWHERE (except for outside the city)...

Another opportunity for corruption... How much money will it take to grease some palms and get a few extra permits for you and your friends?

People who support this are stupid. It is a direct infringement on your right to free passage.

So, now they've got you on parking, the MTA, and congestion pricing... how long till they tax walking?

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 11:57 AM

BTW, Yasskey has spots reserved for him and his staff on State Street between Boerum and Court already. That block and Schermerhorn -- bith of which are full of residential buildings -- are, however, excluded. So, if you don't live on a "brownstone" block you are screwed!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:01 PM

I am surprised at the naivete of so many new yorkers on this issue. Do they really think that congestion pricing is about the environment or helping people get through traffic? It is about revenue. The State has never gotten over mounring over the lost commuter tax. They need the dough. They are like an insatiable addict. more more more.
The RPP is not going to help you. It is going to give the DOT even more power to raise revenues by writing more parking tickets. I'm sure the rules will be so complex and poorly explained that they can count on at least ten million bucks a month in parking fines.
Wake up and smell the coffee. it is not about helping poor children with athma or the envornment or even helping business tycoons drive through deserted streets faster, this is New York, it's about the money stupid.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:03 PM

To 12:00pm:

Screw you gothamlawyer, you pretentious pseudo-liberal!

You reference a study that found that 50% of traffic in Park Slope was looking for parking spots.

Your solution: exclude the “others” based on where they live to YOUR benefit.

Sure, not based on race but the same logic.

As long as I’m around, I will not let rich special interest groups appropriate public resources that belong to all!

Why don’t you just pitch an idea for a portion of Prospect Park reserved for residents of the Park Slope Historic District!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:08 PM

I would benefit from the propsed RPP zone, but I find the patchwork nature of the map odd. (For the class warriors out there, notice that tony Cobble Hill is left out of RPP.) The only logic I see is that these neighborhoods (well mine, anyway) is where the Court employees park. They regard my residential street as their own private parking lot.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:09 PM

Who cares I already have my NYPD issued parking plaque - I park wherever I damn well please

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:11 PM

action jackson and 11:52 am: why would people drive into south brooklyn or clinton hill to take the subway into the city? those neighborhoods aren't that really that convenient, public transportation-wise. in fact, I moved out of clinton hill because my commute to midtown was long and annoying.

gothamlawyer: just because 50% of the traffic in park slope is caused by people circling for parking spots doesn't mean that those occupying the parking spots don't live in park slope. a lot of people live in park slope and they own a lot of cars.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:15 PM

Talking about parking in Brooklyn is like talking about creationism in West Virgina.
People are emotionally engaged.
Lots of luck to the pols on this one.
I for one will gladly join a pitchfork brigade to the local offices of the clueless councilmembers and to Boro Hall if these revenue schemes screw up my life.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:17 PM

I guess 12:11 didn't read the article in today's Daily News. NYPD is now saying that the self-enforcement zone permits will only be valid--hey, here's a concept--in the self-enforcement zones.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:19 PM

I was at the 'Forum'. The map does not show proposed Parking Permit areas- but shows the area where studies took place to determine parking usage - by whom, how long, etc, etc.

There was very different ideas from the Forum
sponsor and the DOT on POSSIBLE parking permit plans. Whatever neighbhorhood groups want resident only permits at cost of $30 for 1st car and $300 for 2nd.

DOT on other hand sounded like they would want to balance all types of users - meaning residents and people who work in the area - vry different than community group
and to me the 2 would never agree. And permit cost would need to cover expenses - they estimate $75-$125 per year.

Both sounded unconvincing to me. I am against either plan and I live Boerum Hill area. Plan will help nobody and cause a bureaucratic nightmare for many.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:21 PM

This would be bad for Park Slope restaurants and nightlife. I, for one, don't live in the neighborhood, but drive once in a while to go to restaurants on 5th Ave. If they make it harder than it already is to park, forget it. Won't be going any more.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:28 PM

Not sure what all the fuss is about. It's really the retailers who are going NIMBY. If people stop driving to park slope for dinner, don't think for a minute they'll say, "Gee, I really have over-extended myself over the past few years, if I can't drive to 5th Avenue, then let's just stay in and eat tater tots while watching American Idol." No, they'll simply start going to local restaurants and stores more. Bad for current retail hubs, good for more diverse neighborhood options overall.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:39 PM

12:21 hit the nail on the head. this plan will help no one and will just create a bureaucratic nightmare.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:39 PM

I lived in Boston and neighborhood parking permits SUCK.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:40 PM

12:19 - 1st of all I have the REAL NYPD plaque (no B.S. self-enforcement zone B.S. (orange) plaque) and 2nd - no NYPD personnel is going to write a ticket against ANY plaque - Mayoral pronouncements or not
(and just wait till all the outer boro hacks kill congestion pricing - Bloomie is going to start printing plaques like a sliced bread factory)

Have fun parking - losers

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:48 PM

It is sadly hilarious to decry "cheap parking" (looking at you, 11:38) when that parking is currently FREE!

You want to talk about a robbery of the public trust, how about the fact that people who own private cars park them on our PUBLIC streets for nothing!

I do agree with Action Jackson's sentiment that the program should be borough wide or city wide or happen not at all.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:49 PM

If Bloomberg were to expand his clampdown on the abuse of parking privileges by public employees and really put some teeth into enforcement, some of the worst parking problems in Brooklyn would be reduced. Brooklyn Heights, and parts of Boerun Hill and Prospect Heights, are all close to impossible for local residents to find parking because of this abuse.

For those wanting to know more about the city's plans regarding RPPs and congestion pricing, there's a lot of information on www.nyc.gov under both the DOT and PLAnyc.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:53 PM

Congestion pricing is DEAD DEAD DEAD - thank you Democratic hack pandering - Say goodbye to MTA capital budget

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 12:55 PM

Gothamlawyer said:

"A recent Transportation Alternatives study showed that about 50% of the traffic in Park Slope was just circling for parking spots. This program will work to reduce that amount of traffic, and will prevent even longer parking searches once the congestion pricing plan goes into effect."

Where on earth did you get THAT? Permits don't mean nobody gets to park in your private club of a neighborhood. It means parking is limited to 2 hours long and no parking at night except those with permits. Which means MORE people will be driving around during the daylight hours MORE often because they will be moving their cars every 2 hours. It does help with parking in the evening usually after 7pm. However, buh-bye, there goes half the people eating in the Park Slope restaurants at night. Everyone in our neighborhood goes to Park Slope when they want to go out to dinner, and most drive their cars.

Also have you all figured out who gets permits? Only owners? Tenants AND owners? How many per building? This proposal has appeal on the surface, it seems to answer all the prayers. But it's just not going to do that entirely, and there are big downsides people are underplaying. The expectations are really unrealistic.

It's also insanely inappropriate for the city to implement permit parking without building public parking facilities to support local businesses in these areas. No other city in this country that has permit parking does so without public parking decks for shoppers to use. Any talk of ANY of this at these meetings? Didn't think so. Typical NYC lack of effort to provide adequate infrastructure.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 1:40 PM

I would LOVE parking permits in FG. Have often wondered if parking permits could/would EVER be institute in NYC and was surprised at the recent activity.

We have a car that "lives" out of state so might not be able to get a parking permit in FG...oh well...

But I would love not to see the nabe being used as a Park-n-Ride on weekdays. Gets on my nerves. Lots of people drive in to avoid a longer subway or LIRR trip and drop the car in FG because it is so convenient to the subways. Sometimes they park very badly taking up more than a space...what's going on with drivers these days? Parking skills have gone down...or selfishness has gone up.

Right now, it may be cheaper for people to drive and take the subway than take the LIRR into Manhattan or an express bus from further out in Qns and Bklyn.

I have to say again, I am pleased at the idea of parking permits but also am skeptical how this will play out...and again, my other half may not even be able to register the car since it lives in another city out-of-state at our other address.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 1:45 PM

Hey, 12:48 - bad news for ya:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02062008/news/regionalnews/nypd_cutting_parking_perks_639409.htm

Oh, and since cops won't be writing tickets, I'll be sure to call 311.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 1:50 PM

Listen up folks - One similarity in the POSSIBLE plans (none yet are proposed) by the community groups and the ones of the DOT -DO NOT INCLUDE NIGHTS OR EVENINGS OR WEEKENDS.
They would be approx from about 7A to 7PM
DOT said IF (BIG IF) a plan came to fruition - neighborhoods could opt in or out.

The neighborhood groups are trying to eliminate the daytime parkers - probably mostly people that work in are around the neighbhood. BUT - to me - DOT almost said NO WAY would they limit permits to just residents.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:13 PM

oh, and those dark blue lines indicate metered parking areas (I think).

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:14 PM

permits just mean the cars will overflow into nearby nabes. Whenever I visited my friends in Boston, I'd have to park a few blocks over - but I still frickin parked! Will bedstuy and clinton hill get permits if fort greene does? Will prospect heights get permits if park slope does? Its nonsense, damn greedy city.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:30 PM

not sure what you mean Jackson.
All I said is all the proposed ideas for the parking plans (from DOT and the community groups) would only be from approx. 7a to 7p weekdays.
I don't favor either. Bunch of nonsense to me. I know if you don't have a space for alternate side parking the night before - you're not going to find 1 in the morning near any subway station. So I don't see how people are going to drive into area to use the subway.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:32 PM

I, too, find it hypocritical that many alleged environmentalists are so attached to their cars in a city with such extensive public transportation. I know a woman who pontificates about environmental issues, yet drives to work in lower Manhattan from her Windsor Terrace home every day. Talk about chutzpah!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:40 PM

The simple solution is to figure out how many spaces there are, multiply by 1.25, and have a dutch auction every six months. The permits would last six months, and be re-sellable.

This would get a lot of revenue for the city, and would end a lot of fruitless searching for spots -- either you have one or you don't.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 2:56 PM

2:56, that was a joke right?

Simple solution?!

You forgot to include the phases of the moon in your calculations, duh!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 3:06 PM

Exactly, 2:40.

They rip out perfectly restorable older elements in a house, send them to landfill and install all new green-building materials. They install central AC, without looking into exactly how much more electricity it uses than window units, because it doesn't really matter to them. They live walking distance to subways but use a car every day.

Hardly "green".

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 3:08 PM

2:56 - that doesnt sound simple - want to make it simple:

Make registration of a car in the 5 boros cost $2000 a year; impose $15 toll on cars coming into NYC - that is congestion pricing for WHOLE city. Impose $1 a gallon tax on gasoline
Take all money and put it into capital budget for mass transit.

After resulting economic tsunami - NYC will be congestion free, environmentally #1 with great mass transit and plenty of parking

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 3:13 PM

I was at the meeting too. This map above, as mentioned, was of the study areas not proposed RPP areas.

Anyway, since everyone here seems to have strong opinions based on apparently knowing nothing about the plans -- I invite you to read about the DOTs proposals (4 options currently) and the community proposal. They are online at the DOT site.

And attend a meeting! Believe it or not, I don't think bullshiting on a blog actually gets anything done one way or another.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 3:18 PM

I was at the meeting and I wasn't b.s.ing on the blog.
The concept for parking permits between the comm. groups sponsors and the DOT are very different - because DOT would want to 'balance' (their word) need of all parkers- residents and workers, visitors, etc
and comm. groups are looking to keep workers out - whether they work in area or park in area to use subway.
Although I live in the area, and most of time do not have a car, I do not favor either idea - whether congestion pricing happens or not.
Pain in the butt bureaucracy - and bunch of busybodies (Joann Simon, Susan Wolfe, etc ) trying to tell others how to live.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 4:07 PM

I wasn't at the meeting but I actually owned a house on a street with permit parking in CA for several years and know what its actual (not speculative) benefits and downsides are.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 4:12 PM

I own a house in Clinton Hill.
I think I would like to be able to park in front of my house.
But that means you can’t park anywhere else.
You want to drive to Park Slope, that is fine but make sure you park your car behind you, in front back in your house.
Are you people crazy!!!!!
This is designed to benefit the city only and collect extra money from us.
What is the point to have a parking permit if front of your house if you can’t park where you want to go?
Stupid idea!!!!!

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 4:37 PM

New Yorkers are irrational on the subject of private transportation. Irrational. I pity the politicians and DOT officials who have to deal with the nutty neighborhood associations from dense, multi-use, urban districts like Brooklyn Heights, who want to be more like Forest Hills Gardens or Breezy Point.
And, I don't want to be sexist here, but I notice it is mostly the ladies at the forefront of this. What is it about women and cars? Is it something very deep having to do with fathers, boyfriends, and mechanics?
Now there's an area of study.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 6:02 PM

It can work in Boston. And LA. And Chicago. And DC. And London. And Hong Kong. Somehow all these people can figure it out.

But here? In NYC? I guess we can't even TRY something new here.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 6:50 PM

Johnife and RJLovie,

Guest 1:45PM here. I'm sorry I misexpressed myself and was misunderstood. At least it got your juices flowing! My, my! Anyway...the car that lives out-of-state really DOES live there. It is used there and the person who owns and drives it works there, pays taxes there, votes there, etc. The driver and car only come down to Brooklyn, maybe, once a month for a couple of days.

As I said, even though the driver of the car is also a homeowner (on the deed) here in Brooklyn and emotionally considers it a second home, the driver is out-of-state with the car most of the time.

So, as I was saying. We will probably not be able to get a permit (and if the permits are $125 it might not even make sense to bother getting one for the couple of days per month it might be used).

Yes...long distance relationships have their issues.

;-)

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 6:55 PM

Hey RJLovie, thank you for your sane response. In answer to your question, the people who make it hard for residents to park in local neighborhoods aren't shoppers, they are local city employees. The sad political reality is that they run the place (thank you term limits!) and will never allow RPP unless they get to park, too.

The areas under consideration are pretty much at the intersection of nearly every form of public transportation. There is no reason whatsoever why these people have to drive. But there is no point is protesting. They must have their parking goodies, or no deal for the rest of us.

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 6:58 PM

I guess I just have to repeat my premise:
New Yorkers are irrational when it comes to cars and driving.

They can't even make sense when talking about it.

Read that past several posts. Kafka? Bad Iranian translator? Korean assembly instructions?

Posted by: guest at February 6, 2008 7:18 PM

I am about to move into a condo in Downtown Brooklyn (presumably will be zoned for the RPP) and I don't own a car but rent every couple of weeks. I think quite a few people in Brooklyn are like me. This plan presents a real hardship for people like us.

Posted by: guest at February 11, 2008 12:31 PM