Comments on: “Parking Rock Star” Donald Shoup Plays Broadway

By: Jake

Jake — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 01:48:56 +0000

The City also began allowing private businesses to operate restaurantes on city parks by taking a 'concession' and promising residents the monies from these groups would fund park improvements and maintenance, and then cut the revenue streams to certain parks, like Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, forcing local neighborhood groups to fund maintenance.

A more savy approach would be to incrementally raise meter fees over 5-20 years.

By: JK

JK — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:30:29 +0000

Govt. Yes, your right Shoup does say that only new meter revenue above a certain target would be earmarked for local improvements, --- but the mayor/OMB will still covet the money and have a problem with creating dedicated revenue streams. Things also get a little complicated since the city is constantly changing revenue targets for metered spaces and is steadily expanding its commercial parking program, which presumably increases revenue.

In any event, it seems pretty likely that some kind of Shoupian 15% vacancy target already has enough support within the parts of the CBD covered by the BIDS to happen. In Manhattan's near future, Shoup's local revenue return "Sidewalk District" idea could be most important in the neighborhoods adjacent to the BIDS, which have free side street parking: the West and East Sides of CB 4 and CB 6.

By: government official

government official — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:22:16 +0000

JK, not mentioned in the presentation summary above is Shoup's clarification that a municipality would retain revenue equal to the current meter collection. Only the additional revenue would be directed to streetscape improvements (or other publicly acceptable enhancement, I would add. I personally would like to see a more holistic funding stream; e.g.: higher meter fees going towards improved public transportation.)

Also, the subject of placards did come up. I noticed that Chief Scagnelli left the theater before the Q&A. I wondered if he avoiding being drawn into a public discussion of that issue.

By: anon

anon — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:54:43 +0000

When the public, especially non-drivers whose taxes pay for the upkeep of those too-low-priced parking spaces, finally realize that this issue is about freeloaders vs reasonable economics, all traffic-ridden neighborhoods will incorporate market-based pricing for on-street parking.

By: Glenn

Glenn — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:05:10 +0000

One very worthy organization is the Doe Fund, which takes homeless folks off the streets to go around with a broom and trash can and clean it, provides housing assistance (if not a dorm room in many cases), a job, a chance to learn basic life skills like cooking and helps them find work further up the food chain. I would love if parking fees went to something like that.

By: JK

JK — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:52:21 +0000

Two points:

- Most livable streets advocates (including probably TA)are fine philosophically with the idea of returning parking revenue to neighborhood sidewalk and streetscape improvements. The issue is more a complicated political one. City Hall has to be convinced of a number of things: First, what's being raised is in fact new revenue and not a redestribution of revenue from the general fund. Second, it is generically OK to create a dedicated revenue stream and this will not lead to a stampede of proposals to create dedicated revenue streams of all kinds. Third, the city agency, contractor, BID or neighborhood/local group getting the money will use it for its intended purpose.

- Before kicking money back for neighborhood sidewalk improvements, a logical place to spend additional parking revenue is on cashing out government parking placards. So, a cop would give up their permit in exchange for a parking allowance they could either spend paying for parking or pocket.