Comments on: Residential Parking Permits Spotted in PlaNYC Documents

By: brent

brent — Fri, 04 May 2007 14:04:05 +0000

Boogiedown is right. If residents get parking privileges that means tax payers are subsidizing it. If you don't own a vehicle, you are paying for other people's parking. The whole idea disgusts me.

By: Sean

Sean — Fri, 04 May 2007 12:51:21 +0000

It seems to me it's always a question of residential parking or meters.

Why not both?

Don't charge for the permit. But, created metered spaces that are only available if you have a permit.

By: Boogiedown

Boogiedown — Fri, 04 May 2007 02:40:44 +0000

Why give it away? Car storage should not be free, even for residents. EVERYone should pay to be able to park.

By: JK

JK — Fri, 04 May 2007 01:07:05 +0000

I agree that permits may not make sense for Brooklyn Heights other than as a part of an edge effect parking plan for congestion pricing.

When the specific question of parking permits for Brooklyn Heights was posed to parking reform guru Donald Shoup he opined that it probably was not the right place for them.

I would save residential permits as a sweetener for part of a deal that resulted in metering some spots on currently unmetered residential streets. West Brooklyn is just too dense for residential permits to be meaningful outside of a bigger parking reform effort.

By: RPP

RPP — Fri, 04 May 2007 00:58:41 +0000

Be clear, this is contingent on congestion pricing.

Implied is that residential parking permits are good from a livable streets perspective. Please explain this.

Brooklyn Heights is a neighborhood of multi-family dwellings. There is not enough parking for every household with a car. How will residential permits reduce driving? Traffic?

Save time and assume permits will not be auctioned or priced. You can be assured that the politically correct egalitarians in city council will not allow it. In any event, if your goal is pricing parking, metering is far more efficient.

Consider that maybe DOT is right on this one.