According to DOT:

Traffic volumes were higher during the morning on days when ASP was in effect than when ASP was not in effect. Traffic volumes were 19% higher between 8 AM and 9 AM on days ASP was in effect, as compared with days that ASP was not in effect (either during the suspension or on non-ASP days). There were no differences in afternoon or evening traffic volumes.

Larry is right. ASP creates more traffic, especially in those morning hours when schoolchildren are outside. Can't we do something about this?

You still haven't shown that "auto owners are paying for the maintenance of NYC public streets". The existence of income and sales taxes don't support that statement, as non auto owners are also paying for the maintenance of NYC public streets. What's so unreasonable about asking drivers to cover the internal costs of their destructive habit?

Ian, my point is that auto owners are already paying for the maintainence of NYC publc streets so an additional levy or "residential parking permit" scheme would in effect be double taxation.

Okay, let's take that general tax money and use it for pedestrian improvements instead of roadway improvements, since everyone's a pedestrian. Problem solved!

I used the term "probably" to mean that you comfortably live without a car as opposed to the other areas of NYC I mentioned where a car is a near necessity for intra-borough travel and shopping. If I'm going into Manhattan I take the express bus or the ferry depending where I'm headed. For Brooklyn trips it's easier to drive in. The car and mass transit are not mutually exclusive means of transport.

Total NYC population increased approx 3.03% between 2000 and 2007.

Brooklyn population increased approx 2.34% between 2000 and 2007.
Brooklyn auto ownership increased approx 6.47% between 2000 and 2007, the highest % increase of any borough.

Staten Island population increased approx 7.92% between 2000 and 2007.
Staten Island auto ownership increased approx 3.01% between 2000 and 2007, a surprisingly lower % increase that I expected. Most likely related to zoning chnges which reduced number of new houses after 2005.

I'm not sure what your point is. We don't expect the proceeds of sales taxes on computer hardware to go only to computer hardware users, why would gasoline be any different? And I also don't know why you're bringing up income and property tax; of course these are used to pay for roads, but the taxes are assessed regardless of whether (or how much) one uses said roads.

As you concede, most residents in almost every part of the city do not own cars, so I don't know why you are so bedgrudging that one can "probably" do without one. Wouldn't the fact that most New Yorkers get along without one be clear proof that it is not only possible but rather normal?

You can't look at the change in the number of cars without looking also at the change in the city population. More people also took transit in 2007 than in 2004.

As for your claim that you still see "tons of cars", the reality is that you see this because cars take up so much space. Even if only 10% of residents owned cars, it would still be enough to fill up all street parking in most neighborhoods --- you can do the math.

But the states usually pay for improvements to interstate highways within their borders. NYS recently added a bus lane to the Staten Island Expressway (I-278) and is paying for the long-delayed reconstruction of the Gowanus Expressway (also I-278). I think some federal money went to these projects too.

Most NYC residents do not own cars, but I still see tons of cars parked in neighborhoods with good public transit like Park Slope. In places like Staten Island (where I live), eastern Queens, and northern Bronx you really need a car to get around. In Manhattan and a lot of Brooklyn neighborhoods you can probably live without one.

BUT suprisingly more (+4.03%) NYC residents owned cars in 2007 than in 2004:

Passenger Car ownership (2007) by borough:

2007- Passenger cars
BRONX- 225,024
KINGS- 387,328
MANH- 225,047
QUEENS- 657,196
RICHMOND- 244,375
NYC Total- 1,738,970

Passenger Car ownership (2004) by borough:

2004- Passenger cars
BRONX- 215,300
KINGS- 362,289
MANH- 215,521
QUEENS- 639,849
RICHMOND- 236,989
NYC Total- 1,669,948

Sources:

http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/Statistics/regin07.htm
http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/stats-arc.htm

You may be surprised to learn that gas taxes do not pay for construction or maintenance of local streets; rather, they go to the national highway trust fund, which funds most of the freeway construction. The balance (including all local streets and some freeways) is paid for from general revenues, most of which come from drivers and non-drivers alike.

Given that the state provides a subsidy to drivers equal to about $0.60 a gallon, the question is: How come, even with all this free support, most New Yorkers don't even own a car? And the answer is, because it's not the best way to get around town.

Any proposal to extend ASP to those areas will be shot down by the city council.

These non-ASP neighborhoods generally have the cleanest streets. ASP is a revenue generating gimmick that started in the late 1950s. Charging for on-street parking is double taxation. Motorists pay income taxes and sales taxes on gasoline. Those taxes are used to maintain our public streets.

I also object to other anti social behaviour like double parking..eg today i saw a van double parked and thus causing traffic problems - there was plenty of space for him to park alongside the kerb but he couldnt becos there was a fire hydrant. I realise freeing up the hydrant spaces wouldn't give many more parking spots to what I call "No-Park Slope " (apparently only 3% of spaces available at any time ) but what is this big deal with hydrants? In other cities, fire trucks do not expect some 30 feet of space for a foot wide hose, and please don't tell me that a fire truck is going to parallel park in an emergency... In fact, some months ago I saw a fire truck on an emergency unable to pass a double parked car which had chosen to park this way instead of next to the adjacent hydrant! (By the way I understand many of these hydrants are not even operational). The squeeze on parking spaces caused by hydrants (amongst other things) leads to people justifying double parking.

Keep alternate-side rules in effect, whether the cleaning is done by man or machine.

That said I'd consider getting a car if parking weren't such a nightmare, so maybe other people would too.

Well, you can collect money to maintain the streets by fines, which Alternative Side produces in abundance. Or just charge to park on the street, and use that money to maintain the huge share of public space occupied by cars.

I'd choose the latter. If the revenues could somehow by prevented from being borrowed against or diverted (fat chance), at least the streets would be maintained.

Streets could be kept much cleaner by workers with brooms. Yet, horrors!, that would require actual manual labor.

On the other hand, it creates an amazing amount of stress and undue burden for car owners; as if drivers don't have enough things to deal with in NY.

As someone mentioned above, it's also quite a burden on cyclists. Even more hostility is created when sharing the even further-limited street space due to double-parked cars. I've noticed lately that on streets that have bike lanes, the bike lane is left clear and cars are double-parked on the other side. This creates quite a bit of danger for cyclists and the risk of being doored is increased, not to mention that on every block at least one inconsiderate parker will block the bike lane anyway, pushing the cyclist into the even further limited space on the main roadway.

It also makes it hard to go on vacation without having to go and take a spot in someone else's neighborhood where alternate side parking is not active. As well, I despise having to drive to work when I'd rather ride my bike, but can't because the car has to be moved and everyone and their mother is out on the street trying to find a spot.

With the sharply rising gas prices, maybe the city could regain the lost revenue of suspended alternate parking regulation by shelving those damn street cleaner machines and cutting down on brownies, saving everyone a whole lot of hassle in the process.

i'd be interested to know how much alternate side regulations affect people's decisions to keep cars in the city. it didn't affect mine, and i live in a 4 times a week neighborhood. and really 4 times a week might make sense if we were living without sewage systems or something. but as it is, it's definitely just increasing traffic and making folks surly.