Anti-Curb Cutting Rule Inches Forward
It was merely advisory, but a vote at Community Board 2 on Wednesday spoke very clearly about how most people in brownstone neighborhoods feel about curb cuts and other actions that destroy the residential streetscape: According to a post on The Local, the board unanimously voted to support the Department of City Planning’s Residential Streetscape…
It was merely advisory, but a vote at Community Board 2 on Wednesday spoke very clearly about how most people in brownstone neighborhoods feel about curb cuts and other actions that destroy the residential streetscape: According to a post on The Local, the board unanimously voted to support the Department of City Planning’s Residential Streetscape Preservation Text Amendment. The amendment would prohibit the creation of front yard parking in areas with predominantly one- and two-family houses (by implementing stricter planting rules) as well as block curb cuts for new buildings less than 40 feet wide in R4B through R8B districts. Hopefully this will be lay-up.
“As far as I know, no compensation is paid by the property owner for this.”
Unless you’re talking about illegal curb cuts…you do have to pay to take a street parking space away.
“If you can’t get your car in, sell it.”
Posted by: cmu at January 15, 2010 10:39 AM
My parents’ garage which was built with the house in the 1930’s looks great although it would not have the height to accommodate a SUV.
I will third the comment that parking cut-outs “destroy the streetscape” is just silly. Maybe these ideas only make sense in the echo-chamber of the uber-preservationists’ minds? The real problem with cut-outs is that they take away a parking spot on the street, which is public property, and turn it into a garage spot, which is private property. As far as I know, no compensation is paid by the property owner for this. Whoever said that new cut-outs should have to add to the parking supply by having space for more than the one car-spot they take away has the right idea.
What’s additionally stupid about curb cuts is that they flare out to 12-15ft for no reason. They should be the minimum width required to maneuver your SUV in (say 8ft) to lessen impact on street parking. If you can’t get your car in, sell it.
anyone who doesnt have a curbcut is usually just jealous of the people that do….
tybur6,
Please stop saying NY doesn’t have alleyways. I spent a good portion of my childhood playing games in them…
Park Place — totally agree that the “destroying the residential streetscape” is a ridiculous argument, but for some reason it still hold sway. If the city was designed differently (i.e., had alleyways) I would feel differently, but when you’re in a neighborhood as dense as Park Slope (regardless of the absurd “beauty” argument), the curb cut decisions should be made according to INCREASING CAPACITY.
Or, actually, if you want to support the ol’ sustainability and urban living thing… Curb cuts should be disallowed precisely to *prevent* easy parking of cars. Again, nothing to do with the “streetscape” but all to do with the community as a whole.
Tybur6,
Born and raised in Brooklyn, and let me tell you WE GOT ALLEYWAYS BABY! The block I grew up on in Marine Park has row houses with a community driveway in the back that allows Garbage collection and parking in the rear of the houses. I think everyone would have to agree that this makes for a much neater, more aesthetically pleasing street-scape.
I agree w/ you about the 4 for 2 rule, sounds very logical.
Dave, the stable look would go with existing period garages but as long as the color matches and it’s not garish it’s ok in my book.
It’s far less of an eyesore than that place to the right with all of those vehicles in the front yard.
And I’m not for curb cuts and agree with tybur6 that all of the illegal ones should be closed up.