Roughly 97% of parking spaces in NYC are free.

Boygabriel said:

My biggest hope is that people who think the current level of pubic space devoted to automobile parking is in any way proportional to need and usefulness read your post. Especially the parts that focus on public parking spaces and solutions.

Just to clarify, the public space devoted to automobile parking...

That refers to parking on the street next to the curb, right?

modsquad2.0 said:

This argument that biking is somehow a legitimate means of commuting is false.

Thank you for informing me that I've been using an illegitimate form of commuting. I'll hang my head in appropriate shame.

modsquad2.0 said:Seriously can the MTA eliminate running an extra train or two on a daily basis because we can count on these people taking to their bikes daily?

Uh, has this ever been a goal? Have cyclists on the Manhattan Bridge been shaking their fists at the passing trains, shouting, "damn you and your efficient mass transit!"? I don't recall ever seeing that...

More to the point, I think that it's just a wee bit disingenuous to say that commute via cycling can't be done - merely pointing at the existing, successful cycling communities around the world is enough to disprove that assertion.

Thank you for informing me that I've been using an illegitimate form of commuting. I'll hang my head in appropriate shame.

More to the point how can you justify spending mucho resources on a dilettantes cause? What would be the point of dedicating all this space and money if there were no PC benefits. Because you ride a bike is there a long term benefit to the environment based on the resources dedicated to making that bike lane for your use? Not to mention the maintenance,(the lines seem to disappear with in year) I watched with saddened amusement as the DOT tried to plow bike lanes with little success, especially those lanes with fiberglass pots full of untended and dead plants.

I would very happy with vertical parking lots being built, especially for commuters @ stations or in high density neighborhoods that aren't well served by public transportation, esp. trains.

Of course you would be happy, but what about the people who would be living next to these towers of cars. Exactly where is this space coming from if you eliminate on street parking. Maybe emanate domain can eliminate a brownstone of your choosing near all train stations.

1. The idea that significant energy or resources are devoted to creating bike lanes

BONUS 1: that the point of bike lanes is to reduce the number of people who ride trains.

BONUS 2: that there shouldn't be a comprehensive bike lane network b/c it gets cold in the winter and rains sometimes.

Enlighten me then. What is the point of spending limited resources on bike lanes causing much congestion?

Boygabriel said:

- minimal wear and tear. (10-15 bikers weigh as much as one regular 4 door non-SUV with one person in it)

And let's face it - even the equivalent weight in cyclists does not have the same destructive force on the roadway. To wit, I recall homeowner that have petitioned to remove speedbumps in front of their homes citing the foundation damages that resulted from automobiles running over the bumps.

Boygabriel said:

Completely agree. Hence my firm belief that too much public space is devoted to private individual automobile parking.

You speak of parking spaces as though they have displaced space that could have been public parks. The space on the side of the road isn't usable for much of anything that isn't traffic related.

This is a useless obfuscation in an attempt to make some kind of objective point. if you'd like to discuss the value of public space, let's do it. But otherwise, spare me this nonsense.

I'm definitely curious to hear the missed value of curbside space, particularly in low density areas. There are SOME areas that could be improved, but again, out where there are single family homes w/driveways, backyards and very few people on the sidewalks (aka about 1/2 of NYC by area) where's the benefit in more sidewalk?

Bike lanes make EVERYONE safer.

Where they are fully utilized.

Wider sidewalks make everyone happier.

Proof of this? How would a wider sidewalk make someone who commutes by car happier? Who is commuting by sidewalk?

Loading zones reduce congestion and pollution.

Wholly agreed and probably the one place where the city needs to really make significant headway. But outside of completely barring street parking on busy streets (which the city already does in many cases), I don't see what other options there are, and I def don't see what a "parking tax" would do to aid that end.

If you think there's a shortage of useful things to do with narrower streets, I beg you to work on your imagination just a bit.

I'm not saying there's a shortage of things to do. I'm just asking what value these things would bring to the city, especially in areas where there's no war between pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. Like I keep saying there is more to NYC than Manhattan and North Brooklyn, which is why I find the whole thing so dubious. We need more info before we start razing streets, especially wholesale.

This is demonstrably false. 54% of New Yorkers don't even own a car. Only 30% use one to commute.

And less than 1% of NYers commute by bike, most of whom def don't do so year round, yet you have no qualms dedicating limitless public space to their needs. So what's fair about that?

Plus those who don't commute by car might still need them. I.e. people who are retired in the city and need their cars to get around, or people who work in the city but use their cars to get to commuter lots, drop their kids off at school and take care of things they wouldn't be able to without a car. You go to the edge of any borough and pretty much all the neighborhoods are like this. Plus w/the recent MTA cuts, what little bus services that were available became even less of an option, especially out in the far reaches of the city.

Given car ownership %, commuting usage, pollution, congestion, noise, and other negatives of car ownership (among established positives of course) I think less public space should be devoted to private individual automobile parking.

That's fine, you are entitled to that opinion. But many of the people in NYC who commute by car have no other choice, so until viable alternatives are made for them I don't think it's fair to demonize or penalize them because you're anti-car.

I have no thoughts on your comments about taxes or personal accountability and I'm impressed you even managed to tie it into this post.

I think they are important points to bring up because you are so gung ho for more taxes, but you absolutely refuse to acknowledge the fact that the city and state have been unable to manage their books for decades. So I'm at a loss as to what your end goal of your anti-parking rage is. Do you want to do away with all street parking to make for more public space? Then you need to either make other free parking arrangements or cheap public travel arrangements for people with strange commutes like my friend who lives in Queens + works in a subway-less section of the BX. Believe me, if people could do without cars in NYC they would, there is nothing fun about commuting by car in NYC.

Do you want to levy another tax that will hit many people who simply can't afford it that would do little to nothing to solve the state/city's fundamental issue of spending more than they get (no matter how much they get)? What problems will that solve? As I said NYC is already one of the highest taxed cities in the nation, and we are still bankrupt due to a lot of waste and overreach. So what will more taxes do?

I don't know your background, but I've been in NYC for 26 years, I've lived or worked in all 5 boroughs, I've commuted by car, train and bike, and FWIW I'm an engineer. I don't own a car nor do I have plans to own one and I currently commute by train/bike, and even still, I think an initiative to further penalize drivers in NYC... ALL of NYC, not just Midtown and organic food co-op land by the 7th Ave B/Q stop... is short-sighted, unfair, and a solution to a "problem" that is highly subjective in nature. If certain blocks could be rearranged to better serve the people of NYC, be it through reducing available street parking, additional bike lanes, w/e, let's do it... but let's not demonize or prioritize one group over another unfairly & broadly w/o objectively looking at the impact of the changes on the city to EVERYONE (yes- even drivers!).

Boygabriel said:

in aggregate, a well designed system of bike lanes reduces pollution.

I can point you to multiple cities around the world that prove this. Just ask.

Indulge us.

How are they reducing pollution? It's not like the people who commute by car will sell them to commute by bike. The only way I can see this literally being true is from the fact that bike lanes physically lower the number of motor vehicles that can fit onto a roadway, which I suppose in a way does reduce pollution, but introduces a whole host of other problems.

This obsession w/bike lanes is counterproductive. If there's hope anywhere it's not in roadspace dedicated to a tiny part of the population that will only utilize said space when weather is perfect. It's in those Select Bus Service lanes. I would kill to be able to take a quick bus ride down to my job (even if it took more time than the train or bike), and of course anyone, even the handicapped and elderly, could use said service year round. The idea that NYC is some cycling utopia waiting to be released from the shackles of cars & bureaucracy is a destructive pipe dream... we def need to make some accommodations for cyclists, but not to the extent that we have, IMO.

I think people are getting way off topic.

I'd like to talk about charging for on street parking in dense areas, and reducing the amount of space that is allocated to it in those areas.

The rest of the city I would not bother.

...I also find it interesting that people are focused on the miniscule number of people who are commuting via bike. As someone who could not imagine commuting by bike, I find these stats less than surprising, and not very interesting.

When I think about it, I don't care what purpose (bike lanes, loading zones, benches, trash areas, etc) they allocate the parking spaces that are taken from cars.

All of these uses would be uses that served more people than the owner of a private vehicle. As a citizen, I am merely concerned that the most people get the benefits from our limited resources.

Boygabriel said:

For starters, CTK, stop referring to my "rage".

I've been calm throughout this and most other transportation discussions.

After that, accept that this isn't a "war". It's a challenge for us to think more critically about use of public space.

When bikers write letters, or stage peaceful protests, or support advocacy groups, or come on message boards to talk about things, there is nothing war-like about it.

Accept that in discussion of public space and policies going forward, few people are attacking cars, or demonizing them.

I'm sure a few are. But your sweeping generalizations are extremely unhelpful.

If you can accept these terms I'm happy to continue the discussion.

Alright I will play nice.

Off the bat just a few questions.

1, what do you think is the most appropriate use of said public space, and why do you feel that use is best for the city?

2, what is fair or beneficial about a parking tax for people with no choice but to own & park a car within NYC?

3, I know bikers, and while I know you hate generalizing, I know that many, dare I say most, disregard traffic laws & to a degree abuse the fact that many of them are not held accountable. I am on a bike message board, and the amount of crying about the crackdown is out of control.

4, most importantly, and the backbone of my whole point here, roads were created to facilitate travel. If you have 3 sections of the population using 3 different transportation means (private cars/cabs, public buses, bicycles) on said roads, in order to decide how to design said roads you have to divy up the roads to fit the end uses fairly.

In congested areas like Manhattan & North Brooklyn, IMO buses should take precedent- but only if the MTA can provide adequate bus service. As you said, 30% of NYers commute by car, but that is aggregate. In some neighborhoods, it might be 10%. In some neighborhoods, I know for a fact it's at least 90%. So road design should accommodate specific needs, which also includes the use of public space for parking. And finally the cyclists... even in BK/Manhattan the cycling population is at most 5%, and of that 5% maybe only 10-20% commute year round. So like I said, to me it just seems to make no sense to dedicate entire lanes of traffic for such an underutilizing segment. To me it would make more sense to make changes to minimize car congestion & get more people on buses and trains than it would to try to turn NYC into a bike city. It just won't happen.

Whynot, the invective of the two articles cited in the initial post of the thread claimed outrage that 97% of the miles upon miles of "public space" aka the sum total of "space" (hardly parks) present along *all* NYC streets were given away for free for the sole benefit of car owners.

The conversation was framed here as a travesty that only 3% of all, yes all, city streets are metered and apparently that means that the city is just giving public space away for the sole benefit and subsidy of car owners.

But yeah, for the tiny percentage of city streets actually within highly concentrated, commercial areas I agree that there should be enough metering to encourage frequent turnover of spots for those coming in and out of the neighborhood by necessity, and enough parking on residential side streets (perhaps by paid zone permit holders only) to serve a reasonable amount of residents with cars.

In other words, unlike what the cited articles suggest, a balance for highly-concentrated commercial areas. Not an additional would-be tax on the entire miles of streets present in NYC used as the basis of the argument in those articles.

whynot_31 said:

I think people are getting way off topic.

I'd like to talk about charging for on street parking in dense areas, and reducing the amount of space that is allocated to it in those areas.

The rest of the city I would not bother.

...I also find it interesting that people are focused on the miniscule number of people who are commuting via bike. As someone who could not imagine commuting by bike, I find these stats less than surprising, and not very interesting.

When I think about it, I don't care what purpose (bike lanes, loading zones, benches, trash areas, etc) they allocate the parking spaces that are taken from cars.

All of these uses would be uses that served more people than the owner of a private vehicle. As a citizen, I am merely concerned that the most people get the benefits from our limited resources.

Well, the bike stats are important because so much of said public space in this discussion is being used for bike lanes. I mean BG complains that parking spaces only benefit 54% of the population, but has no problem redesigning that space to benefit 5% of the population who won't even be using the space year round. Doesn't seem fair to me.

It strikes at the essence of the question- how can the public space currently occupied by parked cars benefit everyone in the city as much as possible? If we're playing the % game bike lanes are prob the worst way to go (and again, I commute by bike!)

In certain instances, I think the best use might be to facilitate faster bus service. But I think about my old apt on Bergen St, and the cross town bus that ran along Bergen/Dean... parked cars had no effect on it, except for the occasional double parked car (which is illegal anyway, and even still didn't completely stop the bus from passing). The B44 on Nostrand got held up a lot by double parked cars... IMO parking on aves like Nostrand should just be banned completely. In the city parked cars rarely interfere w/bus service, and during certain hours on certain streets parking is banned. Perhaps more has to be done to that end... but it's not like NYC is some parking utopia.

The article is just bad man. Doesn't look at the variations in population density or the efforts already being made to best utilize said public space.

CTK,

how about the other ideas?

-designated trash spots on every block.

-loading and unloading zones

-public benches

-On some streets we'd ban on street parking almost entirely to facilitate BRT

...as a result, we'd lose about 5 spaces per block on the average "urban" block, yet not bother the folks in Bayside.

Because I think the money would be wasted, I'd be like you and not let the city muni-meter the remaining ones.

Deal?