Comments on: New Congestion Pricing Plan, Same Jeffrey Dinowitz

By: Janet

Janet — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:52:43 +0000

Because there is ridiculous traffic and no free parking in the Manhattan business district, commuters are already using the outer borough neighborhoods as "park and rides".

By: Permits

Permits — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:36:24 +0000

When I visit friends in Somerville or Cambridge, MA, they lend me a permit to park on their block. I don't know how many permits they get or what they pay for them, but these are neighborhoods with two-family houses with driveways, so we're talking about a totally different supply-demand ratio. Does anyone know a model for allocating street space in high density neighborhoods?
One challenge here in NY is getting everyone to recognize that they are part of a HIGH DENSITY city, even if they live in an enclave that is not. One high-rise building on the avenue around the corner adds hundreds of people to a neighborhood of cozy bungalows. Don't they have as much right to the streets as the bungalow hobbits? I say yes.
The homeowners are already privileged in their tax rates.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:17:53 +0000

"Larry - but what about the occasional overnight visitor?"

Two possibilities -- pricier per diem daily permits (I think that's what they have in Beantown), or allow non-permit parking at smart meters on nearby commercial streets, with a small overnight charge.

By: Permits

Permits — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:21:33 +0000

Larry - but what about the occasional overnight visitor? There are many neighborhoods that do not have parking alternatives to the street. Those streets will be "owned" by the permit holders?

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:02:33 +0000

(By allowing residents easier parking, they will lock in the use of cars for routine commuting, but prevent visitors from using their cars in that area. How do you deal with your parents visiting from the boondocks (for example) if residential parking permits prevent outsiders from parking?)

That's why I prefer a permit applicable to the overnight hours, and that's why many cities have a permit that works that way.

By: Michael1

Michael1 — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:22:28 +0000

Going with Ed Ravin, Dinowitz is just another ignorable figure to bear. It's annoying to hear how they keep saying the congestion pricing will place a burden on the working and middle-class. I'm middle-class and I don't think it will be a burden but rather a path to a shakey alternate (the subway). I mean if the working/middle can afford a car, insurance and the gas to go to Manhattan and back, then surely they have the money to take the train or bus. I see it as a relatively small percentage of people in the outer boroughs (talking about the far reaches of Brooklyn and Queens) that are not near the subway, nor even have to commute to Manhattan. The only thing that has to be surefire is to make sure that the congestion funds go directly to mass transit improvements. If and when the congestion plan goes through, there's gonna be a lot of driver to straphanger conversions and I dont think the subway can handle the influx unless the funds are there for some serious improvement (more trains, BRT). The only way I can see the working class take a hit is the trucks serving businesses. I'm sure they can afford the tax and there has to be some parking regulation changes to accomodate for trucks in order to deter double parking.

By: permitnonsense

permitnonsense — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:52:46 +0000

Residential parking permits are not the way to go and should be avoided. By allowing residents easier parking, they will lock in the use of cars for routine commuting, but prevent visitors from using their cars in that area. How do you deal with your parents visiting from the boondocks (for example) if residential parking permits prevent outsiders from parking?What if you need to transport a lot of stuff to your friends house- must you then use a taxi or limo because you can't park? These are the situations when not using of a car may prove particularly necessary. All city residents should be equals in the parking free for all.

By: Ed Ravin

Ed Ravin — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 22:37:54 +0000

I'm kind of amazed at Dinowitz's cheerful ignorance of his own previous stands on these issues. But this is consistent with his past statements on the congestion pricing plan - he has always denigrated it, with absolutely no effort at constructive criticism.

He seems to grab whatever argument is handy, like at the October 11 2007 public forum in Riverdale where he worried out loud that the local Staples shopping center at 234th and Broadway would be overrun with commuter parking. Yet he knows perfectly well that the management of that strip mall has a reputation for towing or booting anyone who parks and steps off the property.

His Riverdale Press editorial shows that he thinks so little of congestion pricing that he doesn't even bother to spend any time reasoning out a good argument against it. I feel he is really doing his constitutents (I'm one of them) a great disservice.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:50:01 +0000

Glad to hear about the extension of the CP zone to the FDR and West Side Highway. I live next to the Henry Hudson Pkwy uptown -- if CP results in less traffic on the highway, I get less pollution and noise.

By: Konrad

Konrad — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:31:39 +0000

There is no way of knowing, for example, if this plan will actually result in cleaner air for Manhattan or, even worse, perhaps more pollution for the residents of the Bronx.

The way that this statement by Dinowitz is worded, it sounds like he thinks cleaner air for Manhattan is a bad thing. (read as: even worse than clean air in Manhattan, more pollution in the Bronx) I'm sure he didn't intend it that way, but funny nonetheless.