Today’s Headlines

  • Woman Killed by Tractor-Trailer Driver in Red Hook; No Criminality Suspected (Gothamist, Bklyn Paper)
  • Bus Time Will Expand to Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens (TransNat, SAS)
  • NJ Transit Wants $1.2B in Federal Storm Aid (TransNat)
  • NYC EDC, Seth Pinsky Give Go-Ahead to Flushing Commons and Its 1,600 Parking Spots (Courier)
  • City Council Land Use Committee Approves Hudson Square Rezoning (Crain’s)
  • CB 7 Committees Endorse Plan to Remove Parking From Central Park Entrance (DNA)
  • Paths in Fort Greene Park Suffer From Neglect, Group Says (DNA)
  • Julio Acevedo Indicted on Top Charge of Leaving the Scene (News)
  • MTA to Adopt Touch-Screen Kiosk Program (SAS)
  • Lhota and Other Mayoral Candidates Raise Money (NYTCapNY)
  • More People Are Moving to the Bronx Than Leaving (NYT)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Anon

    Why has Bus Time been so slow to roll out here? Other major US cities (DC, Boston) have had it for years. The “tall buildings make GPS tough” excuse only really holds up in Manhattan, no reason they couldn’t have done this years ago in the rest of the city

    Union foot-dragging? General gubmint incompetence?

  • Daphna

    The Streetsblog headline about the DNAinfo article about removing parking as a Central Park entrance is misleading.  What is really being proposed to to move 4 parking spots 80 feet north into a bus stop area, and to move the bus stop 80 south.  It’s a swap – no loss of parking.  This was proposed by a local resident and endorsed by the Transportation Committee of Manhattan Community Board 7.  This would place the bus stop in a very unconventional place: in the center of the intersection BETWEEN the two crosswalks.  It is unknown whether the MTA or the DOT would agree to a bus stop in such a location.

    A much more courageous decision would have been to ask the DOT to remove the parking in front of the plaza at West 106th Street and to leave the bus stop where it is on Central Park West just north of 106th Street.

    Andrew Albert, the co-chair of the above committee, is notorious for being against and street changes that make the streets safer, that calm speeding, that increase space for pedestrians or for bicyclists.  He does like buses though.  The best service he could do for his community is to resign from the Community Board and keep his regressive ideas to himself.

  • Daphna

    Here is some bad news:

    This is in amNY today.  Washington Heights and Inwood now can have street cleaning just once a week.  These two neighborhoods can look forward to dirtier streets, to far less turnover of parking spots, to more people driving in circles for longer periods of time in a futile search for parking, to greater pollution from the parking searchers, to more double parking, to less curbside availability for visitors, merchants, customers, deliveries, etc.  Instead, the lucky first ones to snag the free on street parking will be able to store their personal property on city real estate with greater ease and will only have to move it for 1.5 hours a week.

  • Jeff

    @88b32fb69e499718d95067da9d3d7b03:disqus , while I understand your sentiments, and the notion of free on-street vehicle storage bothers me from a fairness perspective, I do think that alternate-side parking tends to induce additional auto trips.  Speaking to the few people I know who own cars, it does seem that they are often inclined to make a particular trip by auto just because they know they have to move their cars anyway because of alternate-side parking rules.  Similarly, they are often drawn to make a given trip by transit on days when they don’t have to move their cars, because they don’t want to give up their spot.  So yes, it’s frustrating that storing one’s personal property on public land has become that much easier, but I think that minimizing auto trips is a more important metric by which to judge parking regulations.  Perhaps once-weekly street cleaning is a happy medium between ensuring a reasonable turnover, but minimizing superfluous auto trips generated by alternate-side regulations.

  • Daphna

    To Jeff,  We agree that we want less car trips but I think the once a week street cleaning will cause more driving, not less.  While you know of some people who make a trip with their car during the 1.5 hours when they have to move it during street cleaning, I do not see street cleaning inducing trips by auto.  What I see during street cleaning is all the cars illegally double parked on the opposite side of the street waiting for the street cleaner to pass; then they move their cars back immediately after the street sweeper passes.  They do not make a trip nor do they move their car to another legal spot during the street cleaning.

    Now the drivers in Inwood and Washington Heights will only have to move their car to be double parked waiting for the street sweeper to pass once a week.  This makes it even easier for those car owners to store their cars on the street.  In a way it induces car ownership.  However, it creates more car driving because those looking for short term parking will have to circle around many times more than before since there will be even less turnover of spots than before.

  • jrab

    Daphna & Jeff: NYC DOT has studied (PDF)this and found:

    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.

  • Ian Turner

    @88b32fb69e499718d95067da9d3d7b03:disqus : You probably want to read this study:

  • Daphna

    I understand from the study cited by jrab and Ian Turner that I was wrong about less street cleaning causing more traffic.  However, I wish the whole parking situation were being dealt with differently.  First, the wording “alternate side of the street parking” is not accurate.  NYC has no rule that you can park on only one side of the street on one day and then the other side on the next day.  People can always park on both sides with the exception of the street cleaning hours.  I think it should be called “street cleaning hours” instead of “alternate side of the street parking” – it would be more accurate.

    Secondly, I would like curbside parking priced at an appropriate level so as to always keep 15% of the spots open per block.  This would mean metering streets that currently are not metered.  I know this is happening in one section of one Brooklyn neighborhood, but I wish it could be citywide.  Even short of proper pricing, if more streets were metered, even with under-priced metered rates, that would still be a huge improvement.

  • Driver

     Daphna, from my experience, metered parking does a pretty good job of making parking available, even in busy areas of Manhattan. I drive into the city in my personal car from time to time, and I have no problem finding short term metered parking in most areas. In my experience, it is not the cost of the parking that allows for free spots, but the 1-2 hour time limits.  Creating more metered spots would likely exacerbate the looking for parking situation on streets where all day parking is currently the standard.

  • JamesR

    Daphna:  “Washington Heights and Inwood now can have street
    cleaning just once a week.  These two neighborhoods can look forward to
    dirtier streets, to far less turnover of parking spots, to more people
    driving in circles for longer periods of time in a futile search for
    parking, to greater pollution from the parking searchers”

    This is just not true. I own a car and live in Riverdale, where DOT reduced alternate side hours like this a year or two ago. None of what you say materialized. Really, it made no difference one way or the other. If anything, it probably reduced pollution as all cars pollute more on short trips, and there is no trip shorter than the one from one side of the street to the other (or even worse, idling while illegally double parked as the NYPD looks the other way).

  • HamTech87

    1,600 parking spots in the midst of a great urban center?  I wish Seth Pinsky would just move to the exurbs instead of bringing the exurbs to NYC. 

  • Bolwerk

    Bloomberg’s legacy will be as the ammonium and bleach of urban design. For every ped plaza out there, you can bet Pinsky alone built a number of parking spaces, never you mind the delusional policies of the EDC encouraging so much more in the private sector.

    @88b32fb69e499718d95067da9d3d7b03:disqus: I’m about as anti-parking as anyone, but street sweeping/vacuuming is its own kind of racket. There are plenty of policies that would make it obsolete, not least of them higher fines for littering and better regulation of consumer waste – for instance, a deposit on plastic bags.