Park Slope Permit Parking

As long as I get a pass to park on or near my block-sounds fine to me. I can't imagine anyone going all the way to WT to park their car-it wouldn't even cross my mind to do that.

Do you have a link to the details of the proposal? If I have to pay I want a dedicated spot. Otherwise I'm sure it will still be a pain in the ass to find a space. I think it's the if you build it they will come. If parking suddenly becomes easier, more residents may buy cars and after a few years it will be back to where it was before but now you have to pay. I'm actually ok with the way it is now. The only thing that would make it better for me is a dedicated spot.

WTGirl wrote: [quote=LongTimeSloper]As long as I get a pass to park on or near my block-sounds fine to me. I can't imagine anyone going all the way to WT to park their car-it wouldn't even cross my mind to do that.

You don't get to park near your house....you just get the right to park somewhere in Park Slope.

There will be less spots available because of the muni-meters for the merchants but then I guess you will have less cars from the people who come all the way from Manhattan to park in the slope?

Hmm-i thought it was meant for certain blocks-at least, that is how i thought it worked in Boston-as always, i could be wrong. Either way-still good to me!

willregistersoon wrote: Do you have a link to the details of the proposal? If I have to pay I want a dedicated spot. Otherwise I'm sure it will still be a pain in the ass to find a space. I think it's the if you build it they will come. If parking suddenly becomes easier, more residents may buy cars and after a few years it will be back to where it was before but now you have to pay. I'm actually ok with the way it is now. The only thing that would make it better for me is a dedicated spot.

this would be my big fear. in the end there would be less parking and the hassle of getting(paying for) a permit. I'm pretty sure every bit of research ever done on roads, parking spots, etc. demonstrates that the more you offer the more cars just fill them up.

I don't even have a car, but just as a pedestrian, I'm all for local parking permits. Berkeley, CA has had a similar system in place for years and it works well. There, several-block areas are clustered into zones, and if your permit is for that zone you can park anywhere within it. If you don't have a permit, you can park for a couple hours - long enough to shop but not to leave your car all day.
In my part of the Slope, permit parking will discourage employees and visitors to Methodist Hospital from parking on the side streets - there are probably more cars belonging to Methodist workers on my block right now than there are cars belonging to residents. When Methodist completed its big expansion several years ago, it did nothing to ameliorate the additional crush of commuters that expansion created, and I don't see why the neighborhood should continue to bear the entire burden. Nor do I see why it shouldn't be made a little less convenient for people to drive their car to work when it is possible to take public transit. I know people come from all over the place to work at the hospital, but so many bus and subway lines are nearby that it can't be *that* much worse than hunting half an hour for a space. Cars are expensive to buy, insure and maintain, so the "working class" argument I hear anti-permit people use doesn't ring true to me either.
I've heard other Windsor Terrians voice the worry that people will park their cars in WT and commute from there, but I think that is too much of a hassle for most people; most will prefer to either drive or take public transit the whole way. If it does happen, then I don't see why WT or other surrounding neighborhoods can't get permits as well, especially if there's a system already in place.
Also, do you really think that just the ability to get a permit will encourage the now car-less to go and buy a car? It's the additional housing units coming on line w/ new construction that will make street parking that much more competitive, but permits won't help that...

WTGirl wrote: [quote=LongTimeSloper]
As for parking my car in WT and taking a train or car service back home-I would never do that.

But apparently if you read the long thread on Brownstoner, a lot of people do in fact park in other neighborhoods and hop on the train.

yeah, I guess so. i cannot imagine doing that-seems nuts to me.

I'm 100% in favor. And I hope they price them high enough to raise some real revenue. When I park my car on the street, I'm using a public resource--it's right that I should pay for the use of it. And I believe the program will at least somewhat improve the chances for someone to find a parking space in the neighborhood they live in.

I'm also 100% in favor of having the permits in other neighborhoods (like WT), but that's the business of the people who live in those neighborhoods.

Another problem with permit parking (and I don't think I'm being paranoid in suspecting that this is intentional), is that it makes it much more difficult to use one's car to perform errands in other neighborhoods, and thus reduces the value of having a car in the city.

And yes, I know we have an excellent mass transit system... I ride the subway 10 times every week... but there are times when you want to run errands in several disparate neighborhoods (or even boroughs) in a given morning or afternoon, and when it is useful to have a trunk to store the stuff you're picking up or dropping off, and then the subways and buses just won't do.

Some of us already pay for monthly garage parking. It is an imposition to have to pay also for a street parking permit, for those occasions when we need to park on the street for a few minutes, an hour or even overnight.

Not that I expect my grousing to slow down city hall... just wanted to express an opposing view.

booklaw
PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 3:49 pm Another problem with permit parking (and I don't think I'm being paranoid in suspecting that this is intentional), is that it makes it much more difficult to use one's car to perform errands in other neighborhoods, and thus reduces the value of having a car in the city.

Yes, I think it is intentional; the City wants to reduce the number of people with cars in the city. But permits would go hand in hand with the installation of new parking meters (with higher costs to achieve higher vacancy and turnover rate) near commercial areas so it may actually become easier to find parking near a store if you need to run errands. .
Visiting a friend would probably be a little more difficult, though I imagine that would depend on how the permits are enforced. I doubt there would be a 24/7 roving permit patrol. I think you will probably still be able to park in front of a friend's house for a few hours during the day.

booklaw
PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 2:56 pm Post subject:
I totally disagree. Car owners already pay for the privilege of parking on city streets. We pay income taxes and real estate taxes to NYC. We pay taxes on the gas we buy and we pay ridiculous tolls when we cross bridges and enter tunnels... ridiculous because the tolls are supposed to pay for road and bridge infrastructure but instead go into the general city and state budgets. The result is the huge number of deep potholes which ruin the suspensions of our cars as well as our tires and wheels. I'll bet Beirut has better roadways than we do in NYC.

No doubt car owners pay taxes that others don't (e.g. gas), but it does not follow that a tax on gasoline or a toll to use a particular roadway is payment for storage of the car. If you think that is true then you are vastly undervaluing the cost of a parking space. If $200 a month is a reasonable price for the area, then the value of storing a car on the street all year is $2,400. I only paid $1,200 in income tax to NYC last year. Property taxes are ~$4800 less the $1,200 from above means that to account for storing my car on a street, I must get all other City services for ~$3,600 per year.

Everybody pays income tax, and all homeowners pay property taxes. In exchange for my money I would like wider sidewalks, more trees, more bike lanes, and fewer cars polluting the air and making the streets dangerous.

Another problem with permit parking (and I don't think I'm being paranoid in suspecting that this is intentional), is that it makes it much more difficult to use one's car to perform errands in other neighborhoods, and thus reduces the value of having a car in the city.

I agree with vidro3 - this will benefit people who just want to park for a couple hours to do errands/shopping, because it will reduce the number of cars holding a space for 8 hours or more. Either through meters or a grace period of 2 or 3 hours, other cities that use permits make allowances to protect local shopkeepers from losing customers.

But I would also like fewer potholes and more unmetered, permit-free street parking, at least outside of Manhattan.

Thing is, there will never be enough street parking as long as it is free.

If I recall Gibbon correctly it was Emperor Romulus Augustus' decision to eliminate 20% of chariot parking placards that resulted in split allegiances allowing Odoacer to depose him.