If local street space privileges are to be distributed they should be to all equitably including the vast majority of residents who don't have cars, empowering and encouraging locals to use them for non-car activities such as portable bike parking, mobile dog runs, parks and green spaces, local meetings, school events and sports, etc.

http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/11/01/weiners-congestion-testimony-anything-but-pricing/#comment-39525

Infrastructure needed to enforce congestion pricing would be paid for by itself.

Extra police overtime needed for don't block-the-box enforcement would be paid for by the taxes of New Yorkers, most of whom don't drive. It's another subsidy to make it easier to drive at the expense of non-motorists.

Also, please take the "_Then let's talk" out of your handle. You know very well that Streetsblog is just as committed to permit reform as you are, and if they had the power they would have done it. Plus, when you say things like "a no cost alternative to CP," you're essentially saying that there's nothing to talk about.

You're obviously using this as an attempt to stall real discussion about how to get motorists (yes, even the ones who don't park for free) to pay for hogging the roads and bridges.

Its takeoff is not even close to being scale appropriate to how congestion pricing addresses the enormity of the climate change crisis.

Yet, congestion pricing is an urgently needed intervention starting the mitigation of one of the major causes of climate change at the same time initiating immediate benefits with no history and minimal potential for doing harm, especially implemented by an administration that has shown a rare competence in dealing with other major emergencies including 9/11 (with a level of complexity dwarfing that of congestion pricing), a major blackout, and a transit strike.

Weiner’s and other plans are strictly reactive and do nothing to forward the call to action and optimally a relic of antiquated leadership.

If we are to consider market rates as has been suggested, would the price for this permit vary by neighborhood? The going rate by me is $400/month so what $100/month or $1200 is fair for the permit? What about the neighborhoods where garages are $1000/month...do you charge them $250/month or $3000/year for a permit.

If you charge enough to discourage ownership in Manhattan you are going to get complaints from the boroughs. $50/month for all boroughs? You have to make the argument that car ownership is not a right but a privilege worth paying for. Permits should not be given away to anyone...and what do you with the projects and their off-street parking? The city would be better off to close the off-street lots and develop them for more subsidized housing...but how do you take away a free parking spot?

As for what is "right" drive to Boston or Philly and you will park in a garage because there is no parking for more than two hours on any residential street. I assume a two-hour window would be granted for non-residents as in Philly and Boston but beyond that it's a garage or a meter.

Which reminds me that we need to fight to get Sunday meters back in effect...their reversal completely distorts any parking remediation efforts and the fact that it was made to allow people to go to church astounds me.

The mindset in the city re: car ownership needs to change and it needs to come from the top. We have come a long way from the 40's when, as I understand it, overnight parking was forbidden on any street.

The city has been at odds with itself as it restricts the construction of off-street parking, yet gives away street parking for free. If parking on the streets had been restricted or permitted all along, we would be better off, wouldn't we?

If we can print out movie tickets at home, we can certainly print out parking permits coded with the make, model and license plate of the car, and valid for the zip code in which the car is registered (and let's just be generous and add in an extra block on all sides, for those people who live on the line between two zip codes).

Let the visitors park at muni-meters scattered around a little more liberally than at present. There could even be an overnight rate, so they wouldn't have to go out and feed the meter every half-hour.

The system envisioned where there are readers throughout the city sounds ugly and unwieldy...as are the exemptions for tolls already paid and for staying on the FDR or West Side Highway.

The city is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to maintain the ER bridges and to reconstruct the Harlem River bridges....that is reason enough to charge those who cross them a toll. And people are used to paying to cross a bridge...they've gotten away with no toll for long enough.

Only charging the CP would also eliminate the fee for driving within the zone which as a Manhattan resident I find grossly unfair. Why should I pay to drive a few blocks while residents of the other boroughs do so for free. And I should not be penalized for leaving the zone.

Implementing residential permit parking along with e CP cordon I describe would eliminate driving within the CP zone for free. If you can't park without a permit and are faced with a meter fee or parking charge you won't be tempted to drive around the zone.

Thought should be given to additional cordons for downtown Brooklyn and Flushing and other areas burdened by traffic. Use Manhattan as a test and then figure out a way to cordon off other areas (not as easy as an island, but there should be a way)

He should explain which part of "the urgent need to act now to mitigate emissions" he does not understand.

He should explain what scenario would make his plan much more expedient and practical than congestion pricing.

He should explain why he is not proposing his plan to complement congestion pricing rather than an attempt to derail it.

To discourage driving in the city it should be limited to their own neighborhood and the community boards or voting disctricts are a way to think about this. There is a system in place for parking tax exemptions for city residents in parking garages so we wouldn't be starting from scratch. And given the higher density of NY there cannot be a provision for visitors...let them park in a garage.

Why would we complicate the system by trying to put the free market into it? Start at a reasonable price per year and keep raising it until enough people get rid of their cars to have an impact.

And think of the increased tax receipts from tax cheats who live in the city and pay tax elsewhere. And the proceeds from the permits themselves...put it to the Second Avenue subway.

There's no reason to be defeatist about it. You can easily lock the permit to a vehicle by printing the license plate number on it.

That said, I agree that there's no reason to give special permission to residents. Parking space should be provided based on market willingness to pay, either via a Shoupian 85% or a revenue-driven 100% use goal.

http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/10/15/fact-remains-no-congestion-pricing-no-federal-funds/
5. Grant Agreements for Alternative Plan.

In the event that the New York State legislature enacts and the New York City Council approves an alternative congestion mitigation plan, the Department and the Urban Partner agree to negotiate the funding of such plan if it:

(a) Is reasonably expected to reduce average vehicle miles traveled by at least 6.3 percent across a geographic area of similar size and travel characteristics to the area proposed for pricing under the Mayor's Plan;

(b) Uses pricing as the principal mechanism for achieving this congestion reduction;
(c) Includes at least an eighteen month operation of congestion pricing;

Automobiles have access to 10 free bridges between the Bronx and Manhattan. Are you suggesting putting tolls on all of them?

Infrastructure needed to enforce congestion pricing would be paid for by itself.

Extra police overtime needed for don't block-the-box enforcement would be paid for by the taxes of New Yorkers, most of whom don't drive. It's another subsidy to make it easier to drive at the expense of non-motorists.

Or that's what they tell me.

um?