Abolish All Free On-Street Parking, UWS Community Board Committee Says

An image from a short film about the madness of parking on the Upper West Side.

Some Upper West Siders may consider free curbside parking their birthright, to be interrupted only by alternate-side parking regulations to accommodate street-sweepers. But the Community Board 7 Transportation Committee says that no such right ought to exist. A resolution passed by the committee earlier this month urges the city to eliminate curbside parking or charge for it, as first reported by Streetsblog.

Locals have already been worried that the new congestion pricing law will entice drivers to park on the Upper West Side to avoid the fee for driving below 60th Street. That’s one reason the resolution is being introduced now, according to Streetsblog.

“We already have a nightmare on our streets, and it’s only going to get worse,” transportation committee co-chair Howard Yaruss told Streetsblog. “We have problems on our streets with double parking, people cruising for parking. This is going to get 10 times worse when congestion pricing starts.”

Among the possible alternatives CB 7 suggests: paid residential parking permits and dynamic parking meter prices that reflect demand, something DOT has started to do in parts of Manhattan.

Beyond arguments about congestion, the resolution argues that car-owners are wealthier than other people and allowing free parking “exacerbates income inequality by directing limited city resources to private car owners.”

The full text of the resolution is below. It will be discussed at the full community board meeting on June 4 at Congregation Rodeph Sholom (those meetings tend to start at 6:30 p.m.)

A congestion pricing plan was passed by the state government which will impose fees on cars that travel south of 60th Street. The committee is concerned that this will cause an increase in the number of non-residents looking for parking on streets just north of this border, so that they can park for free and then take public transportation into the congestion zone. This will cause an increase in people “cruising” the neighborhood looking for parking (already a significant problem).

Additionally, the committee believes that the city’s current policy of allowing the vast majority of street space adjacent to curbs to be used for free parking needs to be revisited regardless of this effect of Congestion Pricing.  This huge amount of city-owned land is a precious resource in a city as dense as New York and, as with all city resources, should be used in a manner that helps those in need and/or creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Free parking for private cars strongly encourages private car use over mass transit, thereby creating traffic congestion, pollution, environmental degradation and unsafe conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and other users of the street.  It also exacerbates economic inequality by directing limited city resources to private car owners (a group of people more economically privileged than non-car owners) rather than to New Yorkers in general or to New Yorkers who are disadvantaged either economically or physically.

Therefore, the committee resolves that the city discontinue the policy of providing free parking for private cars and consider (1) more productive and equitable uses of curbside space and (2) the most efficient way to get fair value for the provision of any private parking it does provide. The committee specifically recommends that the city’s review of this policy include, but not necessarily be limited to, paid residential parking permits, metering capable of surge pricing and the best practices of other major cities.

NEWS | 211 comments | permalink
    1. Lisa says:

      I strongly disagree with the premise that car owners are wealthier. The car owners on my street are not the wealthy ones. The wealthy ones park their cars in garages.

      • Sid says:

        Most studies show that higher-income individuals own cars in NYC, and can afford to have cars in the city.

        • Cyrus says:

          Could you please provide links to the multiple studies you’re referring to.

          • Sid says:

            “In New York City, car-free households earn 52 percent less than households with vehicles. ”

            That’s from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign


            • Lisa says:

              My super owns a car that he parks on the street. He’s not wealthy. Once again, wealthy car owners park their cars in garages. The people who park their cars on the street are not the wealthy ones.

            • Sid says:


              Your super lives on the UWS with a union-protected salary and free rent. He might not be in the 1%, but I can guarantee he’s doing better than the majority of lower-income individuals. You can ask my Super too!

            • Cyrus says:

              I can cherry pick stats too

              “Manhattan’s car-free households earn more ($69,360) than the city’s median household income ($55,752)”

              Turns out, those in Manhattan who don’t own a vehicle are actually pretty wealthy

              But you mention “most studies” show the opposite so let’s see those links as well

      • Ashley says:


      • BC says:

        You’re comparing car owners with car owners. The majority of New Yorkers do not own cars, and those who do earn on average twice as much as those who do not own cars.

      • mm says:

        Arjan, the median income stats (you listed above) are a red herring. What we need is stats on people in CB7 who own cars and what their income level is. Because that “tri-state” number is not reflective of the neighborhood. Give us stats on the UWS, and maybe we will believe you. Many people need their cars to get to jobs that are NOT reachable by public transport, and good luck getting there any other way. New Yorkers who don’t have cars have this awfully skewed and hostile view of those that do, but we’re not all cruising around for the sake of driving; a car is not a luxury, it’s a necessity for many and the garage prices are NOT an option given their price. Plus a median income of 134,000 is certainly NOT “well off” by UWS standards (or pretty much elsewhere in NYC) if one doesn’t live in rent stabilized, or rent controlled, or otherwise subsidized housing.

        • Sid says:

          The numbers quoted by Arjan were not tri-state, but specifically for Manhattan. The group has Tri-State in the name, but they did borough-by-borough research into car ownership.

      • Paul says:

        Of course we car owners are wealthier, in general, than non owners.
        But ban parking? What will garages charge if there’s no street parking?
        Charge a reasonable fee for street permits or leave the whole thing be.

        BTW, the claim that congestion pricing will choke our neighborhood doesn’t make sense. The people who drive to destinations below 60th street aren’t parking for free and are doing business. They’re not going to sit in cars for alternate side when they have to be at work.

        • LC says:

          Actually, congestion pricing will make parking worse on the UWS. People who drive in to work from north or west of Manhattan will now be motivated to park on the UWS and take the subway to work rather than drive below 60th street.

      • Tim says:

        I also strongly disagree with this proposal. This is one more initiative that will harm the struggling NYC middle class! A many of us with young kids need a vehicle and can’t afford astronomical private parking rates. Don’t to it!!

        • Ryan says:

          I pay my rent every month, you should pay for your parking. Unless you’re ok with me leaving my extra junk as storage in your apartment for free. I didn’t think so.

          There’s no free lunch in New York. Pay up!

          • Daniel says:

            No one is asking to park their car in your apartment and you leave your trash on the curb so what are you even talking about.

        • UWSVet says:

          If you can’t afford to park your car at market-set rates, then you can’t afford to own that car!

    2. Riversideboulevarder says:

      That is an excellent plan. It is important that the funds that are raised directed to UWS transit system improvements (i.e. another exit at 79th St.).

    3. Scott says:

      Yes to paid residential parking permits. But the point is to penalize out-of-towners, not taxpaying residents. Make the fee reasonable and in line with what other major cities charge.

      Not all car owners are wealthy. There’s a guy on my street who parks a dented 1979 Oldsmobile. You gonna tell me he should be targeted for his wealth?

      • NotImpressed says:

        Are you saying that wealthy people only own nice cars?

      • Janice says:

        I think residential paid parking permits are great idea–especially if they’re reasonable.

      • Cindy says:

        I agree with Scott

      • Effie Emerson says:

        Who says ‘penalizing’ anyone is the point?

        All metered parking would be a revenue raiser, for ALL New Yorkers, ostensibly with the proceeds going to fund public transit.

        As a side benefit, it should encourage people to take public transit; and secondarily dissuade commuters and out-of-towners from choking streets with trafic.

        Taxation should have a persuasive effect more than a punitive effect.

        • Scott says:

          I say the point is to penalize out-of-towners because that’s the policy goal in numerous cities that protect their taxpaying residents.

          Chicago, DC, SF, Boston all protect their residents by making it harder for visitors to park.

          Only NYC, of all major cities, seems to spit on its own residents and roll out the welcome mat to anyone with a car who wants to park for free for 3 days.

          If you want to call resident permits “persuasive” I can live with that too. By the way, NO city in the world has an all-metered parking scheme.

    4. John says:

      I agree with Lisa…some people parking on streets are hardly wealthy in a relative sense. If anything, residents should be given free permits while others pay. Residents are already paying in the form of taxes.

      Has anything like this been proposed in other residential parts of Manhattan?

      • StephieG says:

        I agree! Residents should be able to park on their own streets! Saying everyone who owns a car is ‘wealthy’ is just ridiculous. Let those who don’t live there have to pay for parking, that seems fair.

        • Jay says:

          Every taxpayer in the city “owns” the streets and I’d like to use the streets more equitably. That means I’d like more of the streets dedicated to biking and pedestrians, who are the majority of the taxpayers that “own” the streets.

          • David S. says:


            Every New Yorker is certainly a pedestrian. But I’d love to see data to support your assertion that the majority of New Yorkers are bikers as well. And, as long as we’re targeting motorists as a revenue stream, why not do the same with bikers? My thoughts:
            1. Enforce the traffic laws that the majority of bikers ignore the majority of the time.
            2. Institute a registration program for bikes used for commercial purposes (rentals, deliveries, etc.) Just as we’re saying that car owners shouldn’t get a free ride on our taxpayer-funded streets, why not do the same for those bicycle owners who actually make a profit by the use of those streets?

            • Ryan says:

              David, you’re right, we do have many pedestrians here. I agree with you that we should remove one side of parking from each street to make sidewalks wider. Brilliant! That’s the equitable thing to do. Space that will be USED rather than wasted with a hunk of metal sitting there for days on end

            • Stuart says:

              Absolutely – all cyclists must follow traffic laws, and all bicycles (not just those used for commercial purposes) should be registered. All cyclists should be licensed and pass a test to obtain that license. While we’re at it, let’s charge a fee for licensing and registration. And to go along with the misguided CB7 plan, cyclists must be charged for locking their bikes onto a pole or tree. It’s only fair, right?

      • Seth G says:

        Free permits to residents sounds good. With a free guest pass for (inevitable) visitors.

        Maybe even restrict parking to residents only.

    5. Pedestrian says:

      I must respectfully disagree with CB7 on this one. It’s amazing how a parking space is now a symbol of wealth while this mayor gifts billionaires with billions in tax abatements. Where are the resolutions on that issue.

      Congestion pricing isn’t the solution the Mayor suggestions. It’s a tax. Lots of people are saying look at London. OK, let’s look at London. They actually have a public transit system that works. It’s not perfect but it’s clean! Shocker right.
      When congestion pricing was introduced, more buses were laid on. NYC is cutting bus service!

      Politics is already making is clear the political exemptions will flow like water as thenlobbyists work.

      This isn’t London.

      Leave people’s Parking spaces alone!

      • NotImpressed says:

        You do realize that all taxpayers are paying for your free street parking, yes?

        • Ish Kabibble says:

          What an absurd observation. How are taxpayers paying for street parking? With your logic, taxpayers are paying for the air you breathe – I want a break on that!

        • Scott says:

          How is this an argument? My taxes pay for lots of things I despise, like wars in the Middle East, NATO and Bill de Blasio’s Thrive boondoggle. Should I be able to demand immediate changes just because “I pay for it?”

        • dannyboy says:

          Are you suggesting that I should stop paying for the schools now?

          I’m NEVER Impressed.

        • David Vassar says:

          Right. For way too long NYC has sacrificed this essentially public space to storage of privately owned automobiles. It’s insult to injury given the pollution, noise, crippling injuries and loss of life 4-wheelers bring to our communities citywide on a daily basis. Recommended reading: Donald Shoup, ‘The High Cost of Free Parking.’

          • dannyboy says:

            Recommended reading: Garrett James Hardin
            Hardin, G (1968). “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Science. 162 (3859): 1243–1248.

            • UWS_lifer says:

              Recommended reading:

              The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien

              It’s really awesome!!! Am I doing this right?:)

            • dannyboy says:


              Those characters really worked together in pursuit of their common good.

              Wish it were so here on Upper Earth.

      • uwsider says:

        The real rich all have private garages. This is just an attack on the middle class who are striving to keep a toehold in the city. This is similar to the educational equity crusades re: inequality where the real rich could care less because they are all in private school anyway. All of this talk of reclaiming streets for the people seems like so much nonsense. How often on the UWS are sidewalks too crowded to navigate? Never.

        What I want is serious traffic enforcement which is a joke. Every single day I see cars dash through red lights with total impunity. I see cars treat pedestrian crosswalks like they don’t exist. I see bikers on Riverside blast through red lights so they can post a high time score to their bros on Facebook.

        • Deb says:

          The sidewalks are too crowded in front of Fairway and Zabars, especially when there are vendors at the curb hawking their wares.

          • John says:

            Broadway has metered parking already. There is no alternate-side of the street parking there. So this proposal would do nothing to impact that.

    6. Kat French says:

      The solution is simple. Mark BOTH curb lanes as bike lanes on all streets, but allow parking on one side at a time. Sell residential parking permits to Upper West Side residents only and let them stay put for three days at a time (stop making them do the street sweeper tango every other day). I think most would gladly pay to eliminate that hassle.

      This will reduce commuter parking and related congestion, add bike lanes (improve safety), and ensure curb lanes are clear for street sweepers (necessary for sanitation and vermin control).

      Charge a monthly residential permit parking fee for Upper West Side residents only.

    7. Eddie Perez says:

      This is OUTRAGEOUS for CB7 to suggest charging for curb side parking. Parking spaces are limited as it is, having limited free parking spaces has nothing to do with income inequality. To state that those who own cars are more well off than those without is ignorant and false. I challenge CB7 to show us independent studies that state their position. What this ridiculous proposal from CB7 has to do with and to no surprise, MONEY!….TIME TO VOTE EVERYONE FROM CB7 OFF THE BOARD. Enough is enough, time to consider leaving New York City.

      • Arjan says:

        Eddie, in 2015 the Tri-State Transportation Campaign did a survey into the income and vehicle ownership of households. They found that households that owned a vehicle had median income of $134,000 vs $69,630 for households that didn’t own a vehicle.

        You didn’t define what being “more well off” means, but I guess you meant income. So in that case I’m sorry to break it to you, but you’re wrong.

        I personally hate to see the city turning into a landfill a couple of days per week because there is no place for underground garbage containers because people want to park their car for free. Just to give you an example of what you could do with that space becoming available. I think there are much better things to do with the space that those parked cars are currently consuming.

        • Lisa says:

          Unless there is a study that compares income of car owners who park on the street (excluding car owners who can afford garages), then these stats are simply not relevant for this conversation.

          • dannyboy says:

            What’s a smart and practical person doing in a place like this. You’re unraveling the Ideology.

    8. Sara says:

      Yes yes yes !

    9. Sara s says:

      Walk bike or public transit. A car is grossly inefficient way to get around – 8 mm people can’t own cars. Having any car is a luxury, free parking subsidizes car ownership. On the days where there is no parking on your street you see how much congestion we have created by allowing unfettered parking in the city.

      Pedestrian and cyclists will be far safer in a city with fewer cars. Especially those driven by suburbanites coming in and accessing our “free parking,”. They make
      Right on red illegally and also go through Red
      Lights at an alarming rate. We live near an exit ramp and see them drive in. They are a nightmare. Maybe they will train in if they have to pay $40’ for a garage.

      • B.B. says:

        You do realize not every UWS nor even Manhattan resident works in that borough. This and or neither does mass transit take them remotely near areas of Westchester, LI, NJ, Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island where they do work.

        Do you also realize many UWS/Manhattan residents need motor vehicles for all the same reasons as anyone else. To get around, collect/drop off children, go shopping (outside of Manhattan), etc…..

        The days when living in Manhattan meant your life pretty much was centered in this borough (including having your parents/family, friends and employment) all located in same are long gone for many.

      • dannyboy says:

        Sara s – You are writing this to seniors, many who are disabled:

        “Walk bike or public transit.”

        Take a walk!

        • GG says:

          This is why past a certain age living in NYC becomes more and more impractical.

          Back in the day, senior citizens couldn’t wait to get down to Miami Beach. These days….not so much.

          In typical fashion, the Baby Boomers want what they want and everyone else is going to have to deal with it.

          • dannyboy says:

            “This is why past a certain age living in NYC becomes more and more impractical.”

            It is HIGHLY practical. Conveniences, friends, family, health care, supports…

            You hear of Aging in Place?

      • Cato says:

        — “8 mm people can’t own cars.”

        Well of course not. How would their tiny feet reach the gas or brake pedals?

        (Or was that an Ant Man reference??)

    10. carol says:


    11. Uppa West Sidah says:

      What about UWS residents who have a car for their job that doesn’t pay enough for a garage? What about UWS residents who have been here for ages?
      Residents should get a permit at an extremely low fee as they are already taxed by NYC. For the people who live outside the city and want to visit, take mass transit or use a car but park in a garage. I ran for CB7 at one point but have since given up trying again for many reasons but one example would be this notion of banning all parking? WTF? As someone else here posted, a consideration of moving out of this city is starting to occur more and more. Disappointed.

      • Arjan says:

        Those residents that have been around for a long time with a car they should be grateful that they have been able to park for free on the streets for such a long time and use that public space for their private pleasure.

        • Cyrus says:

          Owning a vehicle in the city isn’t as glamorous as you make it out to be. As for “using public space for private pleasure”. I take it you’ve never picnicked in Central Park or strolled along riverside park.

        • LK says:

          Well, at least the CB7 statement just shamed the wealthy people and didn’t say anything about white privilege. I think we should also rotate living arrangements. Wealthy people in townhouses should allow people from condos live there for a month. People from condos – allow coop folks. Coop folks allow rent-controlled tenants. Rent-controlled tenants allow homeless people. And those rich folks from townhouses – they can sleep in the card boxes that they can place in those car spots that are now going to be free of cars…

    12. Peter C says:

      I park on the street and live on the UWS. I can’t afford a garage but I would pay for a permit, if necessary. The notion that disallowing parking would get people on to public transport is a poor argument until public transport actually works much, much better.

    13. Neal Dannenberg says:

      Remove all street parking in Manhattan, period!

      • dannyboy says:

        This Pronouncement provided me with a faint remembrance of our youthful democracy. Thank you for that.

    14. Ricky says:

      LMAO the very next story on this site is how over crowded and dangerous the 79th street subway station is getting. FIX PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION before you implement congestion pricing and eliminate free parking!!

    15. GG says:

      Like it or not, a having a car in Manhattan is a luxury. Period.

      Most people can’t afford it (car, gas, parking, insurance, tolls, etc.) so guess what they do….they don’t have one. They take the bus, subway, walk….

      The people that are complaining about this are not going to get much sympathy around here. Sorry.

    16. davidaron60 says:

      I am not a motorist, but they can’t be serious with this!

    17. L says:

      There continues to be no accountability for this City to keep taking and taking with no give back. Precious resource? Tax car owners to park their beat up cars? Next we will be taxing people who walk on certain streets- or tax residents who walk into certain restaurants- because someone thinks they can ” afford” it— when will it stop? it will become more like the Unlivable Upper West Side!

      • dannyboy says:

        “Unlivable Upper West Side!”

        you’re on to something

        and not just a catchy slogan.

    18. PedestrianJustice says:

      Totally support CB7 on this.

      Parking is not a right, free or otherwise. The more we can encourage fewer, idle vehicles taking up precious space, the better.

      • David says:

        I suspect most who own cars are neither the very wealthy (with drivers or doormen who whistle down cabs) nor, and more obviously, the poor. So the middle group who need cars for one reason or the other (and those who believe there is no such category, they are practicing an obnoxious sort of reverse snobbery) will be at the mercy of parking garage gouging? Or perhaps another regulation to monitor pricing for residents? It’s a tough one

    19. B.B. says:

      This is one of the dumbest things I’ve heard in a long time. And that is saying something considering state of NYC politics over past six or so years…..

      Just where does the CB and or those backing this dog of a resolution think all those who work on UWS (but cannot remotely afford to live)thus must commute in are going to park.

      Doormen, building workers, all sorts of employees from healthcare to retail and so forth drive into Manhattan because there just isn’t any other reasonable way to commute.

      Anyone who works in NYC pays taxes even if their primary residence is in another state/area. So it isn’t as if they are freeloading or anything by parking on NYC streets.

      Keep it up CB7, make it even more difficult for businesses/employers to attract and retain employees. That and or people to come to the area for shopping or other purposes. The UWS will turn into an even greater place full of empty commercial space than it is already.

      • Susan says:

        I think this makes a lot of sense. Many people who park on the UWS from out of the city are the people working here, such as our bank tellers, grocery store workers, porters, etc. The wealthy who drive in can easily afford parking spaces downtown on Wall Street where they work—they certainly aren’t parking on the UWS and then taking public transport to save a buck. And I love the comment about the rich getting huge tax abatements on their luxury apartments. Fix the obvious tax giveaways and put more buses back on the street so people will be able to use public transportation!

      • David says:

        Excuse me, but there no longer is a NYC non-resident tax that is withheld from salaries of employees that work in the five boroughs but live outside of the city.

    20. Dave Smith says:

      1) tearing down the 108th St parking garages eliminated hundreds of spaces, which has caused more people to look for curbside parking. Dumb move.
      2) “directing limited resources to private car owners”? This makes no sense; will people who don’t own cars use the curbside parking spaces? What are they talking about?
      If the city continues to persecute more affluent New Yorkers, who have the means to leave the city, NY will become a city of homeless shelters and low income people who cannot contribute enough tax revenue to keep the city going.

      • West 108th Street Resident says:

        Thank you for reminding all of this same board’s idiotic support for the demolition of the 108th Street garages. Just keep making things worse, CB7. Cars are here to stay. Get over yourselves.

    21. Dorothy Parker says:

      I own a car (not wealthy) but don’t mind having some kind of paid for assigned street parking via stickers or whatever here on the UWS. They have done this successfully in various municipalities in NJ, like Hoboken and Jersey City. But how can you have one city neighborhood doing one thing, but not the entire borough or city? Makes no sense. It needs to be uniform, nor should we give away all the public real estate to scooters and bikes, which don’t even pay attention to traffic laws.

    22. Jeremy says:

      When Helen Rosenthal uses 20% of her community board appointments for anti-car “cycling activists,” you get the most extreme nonsense bubble up to the top. Presumably, any final resolution won’t call for a moratorium on street parking, but if Rosenthal packs more TransAlt on to the board, that could actually happen.

    23. Virginia says:

      This is another example of putting the nail in the coffin of middle class New Yorkers. An elderly friend bought me a used car to travel to CT to visit. I’m not rich. I certainly don’t have $500 a month for a parking space. I accept at times I have to wait an hour to get street parking. My car is not the problem of congestion. I can look out my window any give time and see 2 of the 3 lanes blocked by delivery trucks. How about overnight deliveries? If that’s not possible, make the companies pay for a permit to deliver during the day. I don’t use my car to go twenty blocks away. I use it frequently to bring friends shopping or other reasons out of the city. Those that say paying taxes is paying for free parking,how about this? I don’t have children however, I gladly have paid 45 years of taxes for kids to go to school. So, from here forward, I propose, my taxes, that should go to the schools, now will get me a parking permit.

    24. Anoizy1 says:

      The people who park on the street are the ones who can’t afford to park in garages. Who is being penalized here? People who are having a tough enough time already. Sometimes public transportation does not get you to work or even a bit of respite out of the city. Check your privileges!

    25. Rodger Loder says:

      As far back as the 13th century is was well-established in England that an encroachment on the King’s roads was an encroachment (i.e., therefore forbidden) on the King himself. The arguments here for free on-street parking are the usual Bernie Sanders’ demands for free everything by claiming there’s a moral right to free stuff if you just look hard enough and keep talking about it.

    26. Mulnar says:

      What about all the people who drive in to their jobs on the UWS ever day? If my building is any indication, doormen and staff commute from outside the city and need a car to get to their shifts at all hours. Not to mention small business owners like dry cleaners. They’re neither residents or tourists. Nor are they rich.

      • Arjan says:

        Have your building pay for their parking costs in a garage, you all want to live in a place with luxury of a doorman.

        • David says:

          Arjan, “having your building pay” equals a raise in your rent or monthly maintenance costs.

          You seem to be an expert on this situation due to your many posts in this article. Please tell us all about your qualifications and your living situation so we can be more knowledgeable.


      • Woody says:

        Why should doormen and building staff get special treatment? Everyone who drives has a reason for doing it. In fact, it’s doormen and building staff who have worked out logistics for rotating cars into permanently-held spots thereby depriving other people of using the parking spaces that they monopolize and hoard.

        • Nina York says:

          The super in my building used to sit in his car every day–along with stay at home moms and a bunch of other people–just waiting for the street cleaner to go by. They would then jockey back into the spot and lo and behold the spots were all filled up again. Nice if you have the time to secure your spot.

    27. UWSer says:

      I think it’s a false assumption that people who own cars are wealthier than others. I have a very modest compact SUV which I use primarily to drive my child to his sport practices outside of the city. I park on the street since I cannot afford to pay for a parking garage. My son cannot do his sport if I cannot drive him, and I could not afford a car if I have to pay high parking prices. That being said, I am all for paid residential parking permits. But I do not believe we should have metered parking spaces for side streets.

    28. Ina says:

      A car is hardly a luxury especially if one parks on the street. It means you can’t afford a paid garage and are willing to risk some idiot scratching your car or worse, someone breaking into it. How has it become OK to literally shame people who have cars or jobs or a bank account. I don’t even own a car, but I am disgusted that these are times when people can consider you to be privileged and/or judge you because you own a car or anything else for that matter. I recommend everyone strays taking care of their own well being and well being of their community at a real level, instead of looking into other people’s so called “wealth”. There is no shame in being successful at one’s job and being able to afford a car or other luxuries, there is should be a balance between give and get.

    29. UWSHebrew says:

      If you live in Manhattan and own a car, you are wealthy. As such, you do not deserve free parking. I don’t want to hear “I own a car and I’m not wealthy”. You. Are. Lying.

      • Virginia says:

        UWSHebrew, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Tell you what, though. Should I win Mega or Powerball this weekend, I’ll be really, really rich and I won’t trouble you with my money concerns of today.

      • UWSwith integrity says:

        Simply stated, you are a fool that has NO clue or respect for others. How dare you call someone you have zero knowledge about a liar. Grow up and get your head out of where the sun don’t shine!

        • UWSHebrew says:

          If you live in Manhattan. And you own a car. You have lots of money. So you do not deserve free parking. I don’t believe any of you when you say “I only make 50k a year and own a car”. There is no reason to live in Manhattan and own a car with the subway, buses, uber, etc. To have the $ to buy a car, pay for the insurance and upkeep, and you live in Manhattan, it means you are well off. So free parking IS NOT FOR YOU.

          • \_(**)_/ says:

            So zero schoolteachers who work in places like DobbsFerry live on the UWS and drive to work.
            Who knew?

            Or maybe school teachers are within some people’s definition of “wealthy?”

            By the way…Painting with broad brushes, how has that worked out for Jewish people?

        • UWSHebrew says:

          “a fool”, “get your head out”. INTEGRITY? 😆

      • dannyboy says:

        He has Spoken!

      • Cyrus says:

        I own a car in the city, I’m not wealthy and I’m. Not. Lying.

      • Upper West Side All Star says:

        I make 50 grand a year. Does that make me rich? I own a car. I have to park on the street. I pay rent, light, cable, cell, phone, groceries. Sounds like you don’t have any expenses to worry about. I’d like to be you, or maybe not!!!!!

      • Lisa says:

        My super has a car that he parks on our street. He’s not wealthy. Nor are most people who park on the street. The wealthy people park their cars in garages.

    30. Alicia Kaplow says:

      I am curious as to how you define “wealthier”. Indeed,I would challenge the assumption that those who may own a car, ipso facto, have great means. Apparently you must assume that no one living in the still remaining Mitchell Lama buildings nor in the various New York City Housing Authority buildings scattered around the neighborhood own a car! Moreover you also seem to believe that the only reason one owns a car is enable one to drive around the City rather than utilize public transportation. Also, apparently it has not dawned on you that one may own a car in order to facility leaving the City, rather than to use within the City. Not everyone works in an area easily accessible to public transportation.
      On the one hand one may bemoan that high cost of living in the City – making living here (certainly this area) more and more only for those with six and seven figure incomes, but then propose to drive out (no pun intended) those of lesser means by imposing additional costs to live here.-

      If one is concerned about out of neighborhood folks vying for parking, one can do as the City of Philadelphia does and issue resident parking stickers. They are, by the way, free!

      And just what would “more productive” curbside space be?

    31. Zelda says:

      We have a car so that my husband can go to work in NJ and so that we can access the outdoors. If I don’t have a car, I won’t be getting on public transportation to get to Jones Beach or Storm King. I will be taking zipcar or Uber.

    32. Josh says:

      I want to go one step further: pay for people
      Walking in our PUBLIC sidewalks! What gives people the right to walk without paying.

      Entry fees for playgrounds and parks!

      We have to stop free loading. Why should people without kids pay for public schools. Charge tuition.

      I’m joking of course. But one could make an argument that everything that is not used by all that is public should have fees. I don’t think that is how our society operates.

      • Disappointed says:

        And I am one of those people who doesn’t own a car, but has to rent one every once in a while. So I can’t ever park on the street? It would not make sense to pay for a parking permit. AND are we going to get more garages on the UWS? There isn’t a building on WEA that has a parking garage above the upper 60’s. AND where does CB7 get off deciding this for the neighborhoods? Did they take a survey / hold a town hall meeting? AND I just read that parking rates are going up substantially. More reasons not to live on the UWS!

        • dannyboy says:

          “AND where does CB7 get off deciding this for the neighborhoods? Did they take a survey / hold a town hall meeting?”

          That would indicate some representative government at work. This is self-serving and self-dealing. Just attend one of their meetings and see for yourself that they discuss their own streets and how to make things more beneficial for themselves.

        • Deb says:

          Many parking garages were torn down to make way for luxury buildings that now do not have parking garage in their building, plus the street parking outside the building has now been prohibited.

      • Frank says:

        I don’t understand why the committee members have not suggested charging for walking on the sidewalks south of 96th St since the people living north are generally poorer and so in the interests of curing income inequality we should charge those living in the wealthier areas of the city. Ah, forget that, let’s just confiscate what they own and give it to people who have less. Then everyone will feel better about the fact that some people are smarter, luckier, harder working, have well connected friends and relatives, went to prestigious schools, are more selfish, and are able to afford things that others cannot afford, and we will level all of that at least until inequality builds up again. Ah forget that, just tell everyone who thinks it is better to live in this country rather than other countries where they now live that they can come here without any requirements or anything else. Why should anyone have something that is not available to be given to everyone else, and if that is the case, then let’s just take it away from those who do have it. Or how about giving cars to everyone who cannot afford one so that they can try to find a place to park just like the wealthier residents do? Maybe we can find a way to force out of NYC everyone who earns more than $100,000 a year and then we can sit back and relax. No sense in just choosing parking spaces and doing a half assed job, let’s just do it all at one gigantic step and then we will all feel cleaner and better. How about it?

    33. v says:

      Car-owners are wealthier than other people and allowing free parking “exacerbates income inequality? If I were wealthy, I wouldn’t spend hours looking for a parking space! Income inequity? Most New Yonkers don’t have cars because of the hassle.
      Resident parking permit, possibly, since New Yonkers pay a boat load of taxes to live here!
      Did any of you geniuses calculated how much income NYC generates from parking tickets.? Apparently not. Last year NYC brought in 545 Million dollars in parking fines. Should we pay higher taxes to close the gap? I’ve never had a parked car attack me as I’ve walked down the street. Move to Florida!

    34. Cindy says:

      There must be a Private Parking Garage owner on the board. As it is now, it cost more to park a car in a garage than the cost of the car itself…upwards of $900 + per month. That’s where the “rich” people park.

      • dannyboy says:


        They are a self-dealing and self-serving committee. Last meeting I attended made it clear that they were NOT REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY, but rather, themselves.

    35. Harvey Finkelstein says:

      Exactly what city resource are you directing to “wealthy ” car owners. You mean paving? Street cleaning? That argument makes no sense.

      • dannyboy says:

        Many streets are being used to dump construction materials from coop apartment renovations.

        I think that might be what they had in mind.

    36. Lisa A says:

      The reason I park my 14year old car on the street is for the very reason that I am NOT RICH. (hardly on $35,000 a year in NYC!)
      Believe me if I was RICH I would park a NEW CAR in a nice easy & expensive garage.
      Funny how all the people who do not have cars are quick to accept a ride when they need to go somewhere out of the city or in a hard to get to area or need to pickup large or heavy things. Being judgemental, especially without the facts, does not solve any of our car issues in NYC.

    37. DAVID A HILL says:

      This is an excellent idea.

    38. Isabella Calisi Wagner says:

      This is an outrage. New Yorkers like myself maintain private cars because, the alternative, public transportation IS NOT AN OPTION.
      Why do I park my car on the street?
      I park curbside because I absolutely CANNOT afford the exorbitant parking garage rates in my neighborhood. Really? $700/$800 monthly?
      Want to push out the middle class from Manhattan…?
      Take away their parking spots and they’ll all have to move away. Their rent stabilized apartments will disappear as well.
      Great, now their former reasonably priced apartments can become market value apartments.
      It’s hard to fathom how this plan could possibly help NYC.

    39. NYWoman says:

      “Fatality rates are 17 times higher [for senior citizens] than those of 25- to 64-year-olds.” We have a lot of senior drivers on the UWS – rich or not, and many shouldn’t be driving any more. There was one elderly woman in my old neighborhood who had to be assisted to her car, because she was frail and elderly – then off she drove! Older people cause more accidents and deaths then younger drivers. Here’s some sobering stats:
      >> Fifty percent of the middle-aged population and 80 percent of people in their 70s suffer from arthritis, crippling inflammation of the joints, which makes turning, flexing and twisting painful.
      >> Weaker muscles, reduced flexibility and limited range of motion restrict senior drivers’ ability to grip and turn the steering wheel, press the accelerator or brake, or reach to open doors and windows.
      >> More than 75 percent of drivers age 65 or older report using one or more medications, but less than one-third acknowledged awareness of the potential impact of the medications on driving performance.
      >> Per mile traveled, fatal crash rates increase beginning at age 75 and rise sharply after age 80. This is mainly due to increased risk of injury and medical complications, rather than an increased tendency to get into crashes.
      >> Since older drivers are more fragile, their fatality rates are 17 times higher than those of 25- to 64-year-olds.
      >> In 2009, 33 million licensed drivers were over age 65 – a 20 percent increase from 1999. And by the year 2030, 70 million Americans in the U.S. will be over age 65 – and 85 to 90 percent of them will be licensed to drive.4
      >>In 2014, nearly 5,709 senior drivers were killed and 221,000 were injured in traffic crashes.
      >>In 2009, more than 58 percent of deaths in crashes involving drivers over age 65 were older drivers themselves and 12 percent were their passengers. Twenty-eight percent of these deaths were occupants of other vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians. By comparison, in the same year 40 percent of deaths in crashes involving at least one driver younger than age 21 were attributed to the younger drivers themselves and 23 percent were their passengers. Thirty-six percent were occupants of other vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians.

    40. j says:

      Howard Yaruss who is a member of the board of cycling lobby Transportation Alternatives?
      No conflic of interest?

      Seems odd that this was first reported on Streetsblog.
      Wouldn’t it have been appropriate for the Community Board to reach out to West Side Rag?

    41. JS says:

      Actually wealthy people park in garages.

      There are plenty of non-rich people with cars, who park on the street. For example:
      People who work outside of Manhattan or out of NYC altogether. for example teachers who teach in other boroughs and schools not accessible by subway.
      Workers who are commuting in (often car pool) to jobs as building janitors, nursing home aides. And especially those with late/night shifts.

    42. DAE says:

      The biggest issue with UWS congestion and traffic is not with the privately owned curbside parked cars, but rather with the double parked UPS and US Mail trucks at every other block. This impact both public transportation (buses) as well as Taxis. Also for those of you who feel only the wealthy own cars, this is simply not the case, and even it were, please acknowledge they are also paying 2x+ as much in taxes, with no additional benefits

    43. EconUWS says:

      Ask any economist–perhaps not the most popular go to these days–and (s)he will tell you that free parking creates enormous external costs to society that are not being borne by the motorist parking (look up Shoup’s article “Cruising for Parking” or his books “The High Cost of Free Parking” or “Parking and the City.”)

      Free parking is akin to a world without any environmental regulations: free from any restrictions, a factory will “over pollute” as the marginal cost of its activity is borne by society, while it collects the marginal benefit. That’s what is called a negative production externality. Driving, parking and smoking in public or a crowded elevator is what is known as a negative consumption externality.

      Free to park and free to pollute create enormous external costs that should be internalized by the user.

      Unfortunately, there is not much economic thinking about parking. It seems that the reptiles have taken over, or more precisely argues Shoup, “the reptilian cortex…said to govern instinctive behavior involved in aggression, terrioriality and ritual display–all important issues in parking.”

      • NYWoman says:

        Making decisions made on scientific and economic facts…. it can make you unpopular, but will help improve the citizens, even the ones that disagree with you.

        • Krasnaya says:

          We, the citizens, are so grateful that you have taken it upon yourself to “improve” us with facts and science from whatever sources. Please keep at it and perhaps we will achieve perfection.

    44. Bruce Amick says:

      All residents pay a price for “free” curbside parking: dirtier, more congested streets, where traffic backs up to a standstill every day at some point on every street, noise and air pollution from vehicles crawling along at an average of 4 mph and horns honking from impatient drivers. Garbage trucks have to stop at least 6 feet from the curb and sanitation workers have to heft 40 lb leaking bags of garbage over car hoods. Delivery trucks and tradesmen have no safe legal place to park. Wake up folks! This isn’t Maybury R F-ing D, and it’s not 1955. Private 2ton vehicles used for occasional transportation are not anyone’s entitled right.

      • Cato says:

        You lost me at the “F-ing” part. If you can’t express yourself without resorting to profanity (wink, wink), then you’re not someone whose opinion interests me.

    45. Drew says:

      Residential parking permits issued only to vehicles registered to an uws address would be great

      • Christine E says:

        No, need to issue to the resident, not the car. I am an UWS resident, who occassionally rents a car, that sometimes needs to be parked. Resident car renters should not be subordinate to resident car owners. Car ownership is not a privileged class.

        • your_neighbor says:

          I think the vast majority of car renters are renting the cars to get out of town, not to come back into the neighborhood and park it.

          If you have to park it for a while, there are always going to be meters.

          Permits should only be issued to vehicles. If you issue them to anybody with a license, I can guarantee that a black market for permits would spring up immediately.

          One idea that might work would be requiring your vehicle to have a permit to park overnight, like midnight to 7am. That would at least preserve most street parking for neighborhood residents. Lots of cities and towns do this.

          • Christine E says:

            Overnight is precisely when one needs to park a rented car! Because one has not yet left for the trip, or one returns home at night and is not returning the car immediately.

            I reiterate, I am a resident who is trying to park a car. It should not matter that I do not have the car full time. Nor should car renters be subordinate to car owners. Resident car renters should be able to qualify as residents. Because they are residents!

            If there are to be resident permits, then car renters and car owners should both be eligible. Otherwise, make all spots metered, regardless of residency.

            • geoff says:

              i too am a resident who does not own a car but i want access to the right to park, should i ever buy a car. in fact, i might want to sublet my right to park. sort of like air rights, i guess.

    46. We lived in San Francisco for many years and permit parking designated for residents by street/ neighborhood worked really well. Pay for it. Great. But. At least accommodate neighborhoods and their residents.

    47. Madmuse says:

      Free parking never made sense to me. When you consider what we pay for housing in NYC, no scrap of real estate should be free.

      • dannyboy says:

        You are recommending park entrance fees?

        • Christine E says:

          National parks and state parks DO have entry fees. Not that we are advocating that for NYC….

          • dannyboy says:

            I will continue to pay my fair share for playgrounds, even though I don’t use them, because they are a public good.

            As are schools and roads.

    48. Pqdubya says:

      What’s wrong with being “wealthy”. I don’t own a car in the city but I do not see why this is an issue. I work in mid town and it takes me 45 to 60 mins to get home on the subway. 4 miles roughly. (55th to 91st). Take a cab or Uber? Only “wealthy” people can afford that especially with congestion pricing Bike? I am not physically capable and would not feel safe in any case When it rains bikes really aren’t an option. So through more money at MTA to improve. ?? We already throw BILLIONS to them and they are still awful. And what use would this “valuable city resource” be used for. It only has value to car owners. Not to poorer residents. The whole resolution is poorly thought out and just another Example of erosion of freedom by elites

      • Stuart says:

        Let’s say that the distance between your home and your work is 40 blocks rounded up for argument’s sake. If 20 blocks is equal to one mile, isn’t the total distance two (and not four) miles? If you are capable, you can walk home faster than taking mass transit…

    49. Adam Cherson says:

      I’m surprised the word ‘quota’ hasn’t been uttered here yet since we are looking at a limited-resource and over-demand type of situation. What good would residential permits do if there is an over-supply of permits and not enough space for them? There should be a quota-based lottery system for residents and everyone else can pay for a meter or a garage.

    50. Lubomir says:

      $500/year for residential parking would be great. Any cars bearing any other plate than NY should be towed away, unless they park inside the parking garage.

    51. Velma says:

      Please allow for Handicap Parking!

    52. Chrigid says:

      what is “more productive and equitable uses of curbside space?” lemonade stands? art galleries? stickball? roasting mickies?

      and why do I get the feeling the board wants UWS cars off the streets in order to make room for out-of-town cars?

      and I’d have much more faith in their egalitarian approach if they were asking the rich to garage their cars so that it would be much more convenient for the rest of us to find curbside spaces.

      that’s if there were any valid sources for their assumptions in the first place.

    53. Patricia Gilman says:

      Excellent idea. I support it 100%

      • Frank says:

        After reading the comments which show a substantial group that finds this proposal in the category of an idiot’s delight, it sounds like we ought to start a 3 part petition — first to oppose the recommendation, second to replace the people serving on the committee with residents possessing sound judgment not clouded by their personal, inflamed ideology, and third to pledge to oppose any local politician who comes out in support of this nonsense. We have more than enough nonsense to deal with at the local, state and national level without some minor group coming out with a nut job proposal from left field to screw us in our own neighborhood. Sounds like what happened in Seattle when the city council came out with their dumb idea to tax tech employers based on the number of people they hired, and then were forced to retreat and cancel their stupid plan by the populace who had so much more sense than they had.

    54. Upper Wesr Side All Star says:

      If anyone walks down 83rd Street between Amsterdam and Columbus you will notice on any given time between 8-10 car rentals on the street. They never move for street cleaning because when they get a ticket they pay a small percentage of it. Get these freaking rental cars off the street!!!!! The other thing is the Citi Bike stations. I don’t mind them, but why so many so close to one another. Central and Riverside sidewalks are huge. Why not mount them on the sidewalks and give people back their parking. Fresh Direct, UPS, FedEx etc. on the car lanes causing traffic jams. Give them a designated area for a few hours to make deliveries where they aren’t on the road. Just my input.

    55. Bill says:

      Finally!!!! Get that revenue!!!! No free parking in Manhattan!

    56. Chris says:

      How about protected, enforced bus lanes instead of parking! Then we can all get around with no problems or traffic delays, especiallythe majority of us non-car iebers. We can’t all ride bikes anymore.

    57. alberts,R says:

      crazy idea
      people who own cars may be handicapped or elderly

      bus service is disnal and all buses are not handicapped accessible
      for hited cars/shared rides actually clog streets. – these services “cruise” searching for fares.

      Why are ubers, via, lyfts etc allowed to “use” cell phones” while driving!

      Residential parking permits might be a solution to this feared problem. But truly, congestion fees are an outgrowth of the lack of Limits on hired cars on streets of manhattan. We, the residents, are being punished

    58. Joe Lichtig says:

      This parking is very wrong.

      New Yorkers know to minimize driving; just find a legal spot and take public transit is what we do. Only tourists want to drive. As it is thousands of previously legal spots were removed by bike racks and for safety reasons. Many non-rich people own cars. The really rich ones park in garages that are often full and charge huge amounts.

    59. Bruce Reznick says:

      these guys are nuts.. there are actually people who use their cars for business…you know the businesses that generate income, revenue and taxes… congestion pricing is a neccessary thing but banning parking is idiotic… perhaps parking stickers for residents of the uws.. might be better…
      further the board is “lost” inside its own self righteous bubble… im a car owner who uses mass tranist oberys the traffic laws and cares about bike riders… restricint uber and lyft cars and liberating cabs from their odious costs to increase volume will be better… that of course requires vision and leadership which is lacking in city hall… and apparently amidst the ideologically lost on the board

    60. michael stearns says:

      I have no problem with the use of residential permits to ensure that local car owners have space to park their cars. A number of cities have had such a system successfully for decades, including Boston, Chicago and Cambridge, Mass. Its needs to be remembered that car owners pay for the use of city streets though their city and state income taxes. They also pay state gas taxes and registration fees for their cars so are entitled to use curbside parking spaces. Also, many car owners use their vehicles to reach their jobs in areas and at hours of the day not well-served by public transportation.

    61. Jan Cox says:

      No free parking! That’s expensive real estate — why should it be handed over to obnoxious drivers who idle their engines and all that gunk down our lungs, meanwhile having their windows open with their cigarettes hanging out — they don’t want to inhale that but give it freely to us. Instead of free parking, why not use that space for something worthwhile, like more trees, which we desperately need. We need oxygen, not pollution! And who needs the honking horns when they are trapped in their spots?

    62. Jan Cox says:

      Please eliminate free parking — we don’t get free subway/bus rides — and people taking public transportation are the true NYC heroes — not polluting the air and honking horns. Cars should be banned from NYC. We need trees, not cars.

    63. Sue Ebeling says:

      Please eliminate free parking — we don’t get free subway/bus rides — and people taking public transportation are the true NYC heroes — not polluting the air and honking horns.

      • Inspector Cloiseau says:

        Hmmmm…#62 AND #63 each say pretty much the EXACT SAME THING, and BOTH posted at THE EXACT SAME TIME !!!

        Zere iz something verrry suspicious here, Oui?

    64. Ettienne says:

      Best and most equitable solutions: (a) paid neighborhood parking permits (b) no new building construction without off comparably sized garages.(3) strictly limit Uber et al “ride share cars” in midtown. (Zero would be ideal)(4) eliminate all Zip Car street parking. How was it that a public asset eg parking spots were moved into private sector ???

    65. Frank wagner says:

      Resident parking permits are the way to go. Adopt Boston’s model on parking protocols for residents and visitor parking regulations. Parking permits should be based on seniority, i.e., years of living in the community. It’s outrageous to me that the community board would even entertain the idea of street parking.

    66. Buddy Revell says:

      Guess some of you people are pissed the free ride is over? All for residential parking permits. Not sure what the price point is but $500/year sounds fare.

    67. Ellie says:

      I don’t think that car owners are necessarily more privelaged than non car owners in NYC. If you have to own a car it means you drive to work. If you have to drive to work it means you don’t work in the city so you’re probably not making more money than the people living on the upper west side. If you can afford to live on the upper west side you probably can afford a nice parking garage where your car is protected from bird shit and break ins and scratches. I bet the people parking on the street are visitors who don’t want to pay for a garage. I’ve live in the Bronx and Inwood and Jersey and God knows every time I’ve had plans in Manhattan I park on the west side, above 60th, because that is just over the GW and that is where the parking is. This isn’t about addressing income inequality. It’s about reducing congestion and giving preference to residents over non residents. It’s about more exclusivity in Manhattan, not less.

      • Dorothy Parker says:

        Important to note that the number of actual parking garages (though not affordable) on the UWS are rapdily disappearing to make room for new construction — like the one up on 108th St. Moreover, there still aren’t enough parking garages to handle the likely explosion of car owners who would be forced to park in garages. I use my car for commuting to work upstate and NOT wealthy. What are these idiots thinking…

    68. STOP, Awreddy says:

      Re: (street-parking) “also exacerbates economic inequality by directing limited city resources to private car owners….”
      Anyone who, even occasionally, thought of CB7 as THE BEST CLOWN-SHOW IN TOWN now has suspicions confirmed:

      1) HOW does occupying a non-metered curb-side parking space direct city resources to car-owners ?? For WHAT ELSE would that space be used, except maybe for a side-street bike lanes…two on each side-street 😱 !

      2) So, now CB7 has jumped aboard the Income-Inequality Bandwagon? Hey, CB7, read some history! NYC has ALWAYS had Income Inequality, and today’s is much less-devastating than that of The Gilded Age and others.

      3) And about Income-Inequality in general: shouldn’t doctors, nurses, dentists, lawyers, accountants, corporate executives, school teachers, skilled craftsmen etc. who spent years preparing for their role DESERVE higher economic reward than some high school dropout? Think about it,…Comrades!

      • geoff says:

        what the city can use the curbside space for is income generation. it has overlooked that option til now. it is economically inefficient and in fact, negligent to not make this move.

    69. Bruce says:

      The issue has nothing to do with whether car owners are wealthier or poorer; it has to do with unilaterally appropriating public space for private use. I’d love to store my off-season clothes in an all-weather shed conveniently located right in front of my building, but I can’t. That’s the analogy.

      • Cato says:

        Actually, that’s not a good analogy at all. Presumably your apartment has closet space for storing your clothes, so you *can* keep your clothes at home.

        It’s physically not possible to take your car into your apartment.

        The question is one of physical possibility, not personal preference. Your analogy doesn’t work at all.

      • dannyboy says:


        This is why we can no longer have nice things in our neighborhood. Self interest and resentment fight against community.

        It’s a race to the bottom.

    70. Linda says:

      If street parking is eliminated in front of my house. Will the City take over the maintenance, and repairs to the sidewalk and curb, including snow removal?
      West 83rd St

    71. Anatoliy Nepom says:

      I am car owner & my the only income is SS, THIS PROSPECTUS is very unwanted / unacceptable.

    72. Avi Tennenbaum says:

      and lastly, I own a car because I travel for work and there no option for mass transit. I guess we now have to explain ourselves for owning a vehicle.

    73. Michael Danon says:

      I live here on the West Side and have done so for the past 30 years. Need my car for my work in NYC. Use my Apt as my home-supply center, l would be terribly hurt time wise and financially if l could not park near my Apt. l do use local garages when car not in use, therefore would agree to a resident tag or similar but please don’t hurt my financial well-being.

    74. Carran says:

      You are mad I am disabled and the only way I can get around is to have a car and there is no more parking places for disability on the upper Westside and you say wealthy people own cars your all disoriented. Wealthy people pay for chauffeurs and garages. A car is my life it gives me freedom and relaxes me from thinking how can I do what I do without a car with my disability

      • UWSHebrew says:

        Any disabled people should absolutely have free parking. The fact that you are not using Access-A-Ride saves the city an enormous amount of money and the least the city could do for you would be to give you a free parking permit.

        • WhyseGuy says:

          Re: “the least the city could do for you would be to give you a free parking permit.”

          And why not a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card as well ??

    75. LivesonUWS says:

      Everyone is missing the point of congestion pricing and this proposed FREE parking ban/permit. Cars burning fossil fuels are destroying the planet. Defending the privilege of driving is defending;

      Collectively, cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of all US emissions, emitting around 24 pounds of carbon dioxide and other global-warming gases for every gallon of gas. About five pounds comes from the extraction, production, and delivery of the fuel, while the great bulk of heat-trapping emissions—more than 19 pounds per gallon—comes right out of a car’s tailpipe.

      Too bad we can’t leave the same world to our children that we grew up with. But by all means keep driving your car.

      • Paul says:

        The point of congestion pricing is alleviation of congestion. Because time is money and congestion costs billions.

    76. Paul Fischer says:

      This is not true . Car owners are not economically privelidged by any means . We are hard working people who need our cars for work , family vacations etc, the committee has been biased against auto owners for some time now , . Bike lanes, street configurations have caused the. loss of to many affordable parking spots already , free parking is affordable parking

    77. Ted says:

      One thing that really discourages the use of mass transit is the horrible state of disrepair that the city and state have allowed the system to fall into. Both the city and the state under both parties raided MTA funds like a piggy bank and now they want to stick people who don’t want to use the system they ruined with the bill. Hmmmm….

      Corruption in Albany and incompetence in city hall are a much deeper thorn in the side of the city than who parks on the street.

    78. Gail says:

      I am a disabled senior. I am constantly having to avoid bikers as they fly thru red lights while I am carefully crossing the street with the light. Do not give bikers any more bike lanes until they are reined in by tickets. They have taken over the streets like a lawless gang. More Nike users are endangering our lives.
      Secondly where will service people park? Getting anyone to come to fix or install something will be impossibly expensive.
      Thirdly, if there is no street parking people will stop coming to NYC to spend money, not because they can’t afford a garage for the event but there will be no spaces in garages.
      And lastly, if you want us to use public transportation improve it. When I was working it took me 25 minutes by car and 2 hours and 20 minutes by subway bus and taxi to get to work.
      This will cost the city money, quality of life and destroy neighborhoods.
      To paraphrase Fagin from the play Oliver, I think you better think it out again!

      • Paul says:

        “Thirdly, if there is no street parking people will stop coming to NYC to spend money, not because they can’t afford a garage for the event but there will be no spaces in garages.”


    79. ST says:

      This is the OPPOSITE of what should have happened.
      Why do ZERO public servants look out for resident citizens? Residents should have been asssured of free parking, particularly in the face of The odious Congestion Parking, while out of town visitors should have to garage and pay. Parking spots are already taken up with out of townera and construction vehicles. If someone wants to street park in New York, let them register it in New York State and only those plates houls be allowed to park free on our streets.
      How is it that our supposed public servants never represent us? It’s everybody but us. An outrage.

    80. Buddy Revell says:

      This is great.Its not like the city is banning parking for residents. It is actually protecting residents. However, the mere thought f parking not being free is driving ya’ll mad. I guess its okay to tax others but an outrage when it hits your wallet. Is $2 a day for a parking permit really too much considering the private alternatives?

      • Scott says:

        Well said. There seems to be a lot of confusion around here about how a paid permit would help us. It would help us a lot. Possibly there are posters here from NJ and CT screeching about “free parking” in order to cloud the issue and get people riled up.

    81. UWS Craig says:

      Bogus controversy. Parking will be obsolete in the next 3 years. Tesla’s autonomous fleet of robo taxis will debut shortly.

    82. manhattan mark says:

      I got rid of my car when alt. side parking arrived and saved a lot of money by just renting a car when I needed one, now I also use a local car sevice or public transportation which as a senior only costs $1.35 for two bus rides (north and south and east and west. But mostly I walk where I have to go on the UWS…about 2 miles a day, it’s the best way for to keep in shape, especially my legs and back.

      • dannyboy says:

        I walk a lot more.

        But I still like you manhattan mark, you make sense.

        • Manhttan mark says:

          Dannyboy thanks for the compliment. I did pass a car parked on 75th & WEA with a license plate that said “Dannyboy”, was that you?

          • dannyboy says:


            my ride is a junker

            earns me so much respect that no one even drives closely.

            maybe it’s the dings, dents and scratches.

    83. Marci says:

      I agree with LIsa and John that free permits on free permits for residents. I don’t go along with a guest pass for visitors because that opens a whole different can of worms.

      But only the wealthy have cars? I beg to differ. I’ll have to work until I drop to afford to live in this city until then – but I also have a car. It was my mother’s, I took it when she died, and it’s 22 years old. And drives like a charm. And I see lots of similar cars on the streets, so the “only the wealthier” argument is lost on me.

    84. sjc says:

      Simple utilitarian solution for the greatest good for the community:
      parking permits for residents at $100 per month. A bargain compared to garages.
      24/7 metered parking for out of town drivers and those falsely registered in other states to avoid higher costs and registration fees.
      All revenues are for public transportation.

      PS: I own a car currently parked on the street and I bike daily.

    85. EB says:

      If the idea is to penalize non-residents than do that. Have free parking stickers for residents and non-residents get ticketed. If each ticket aren’t paid within a specified time frame, the car gets towed. It’s too easy to say just use mass transit. Our transit system is pathetic. My family shares use of a car with another family. I use the car to get to get to a disabled relative in Brooklyn. Driving, it takes about 45 minutes. By subway, it takes 1.5 to 2 hrs. AND, don’t get me started on the horrible Access-a-Ride program.

    86. Ed says:

      The challenge should not be to raise revenue for the city – it should be to prevent non-residents from smothering the streets looking for free parking to avoid driving below 60th Street. How about just requiriung parking permits, and issuing them only to residents whose cars are registered in Manhattan?

      • dannyboy says:

        Ed, you hit on it.

        The government goes awry every time it focuses on money as their objective. The objective, in reality, is the Public Good.

        So many politicians can’t keep that straight.

        • Frank says:

          The odd thing about this proposal is that people who do not have cars are supporting it. Why should they care? What good does it do them to ban parking by other people? I realize that like so many other things they are in favor of something that hurts other people so long as it does not hurt them. But banning parking does nothing for them except perhaps making them feel good that they struck a blow against people who are able to own a car. So I just see this as another sign of jealousy and small mindedness.

          • Ed says:

            If you’re going to allow free parking on public streets, it’s in the interest of all UWS residents – car-owners and non-car-owners – to limit those spaces to residents with Manhattan car registrations, given the likelihood that failing to do that will result in a massive influx of non-resident drivers looking to ditch their cars to avoid driving below 60th Street.

    87. Gart says:

      To be objective, the studies on who is wealthier should be done over the affected areas.

    88. Lincoln says:

      This is disturbing. The argument that car owners are wealthier than others is ludicrous. I live on a street filled with other WORKING CLASS FAMILIES that rely on their older model cars to travel to and from work, buy groceries for their familiestravelling to COSTCO and Walmart and Target in New Jersey and Westchester to save money.We have a 15 year old car that we use for just that purpose. Furthermore, our NY license plates cost money to have on our cars, to the tune of $220 every two years, as well as the yearly inspections @$35 each plus whatever repairs must be made to fulfill the inspection criteria. If anything residents should be given a free-of-charge sticker to park on the street: we are already paying real estate taxes for our rentals and owners pay even higher taxes. Much of the congestion that happens on our 107th Street block is from out of town vehicles–many service trucks and cars: UPS, Verizon, Spectrum, Fedex, constructions vehicles, food delivery trucks; additionally, out of town license plates to cars who are clearly registered at “homes” in Conn, NJ, PA, VT, NC, FL…so why are they parking in NYC during the year? Also note the closing of the garages on 108th street to make for new housing (without garages) has pushed an enormous amount of “WEALTHY” car owners paying$400-800/mo for parking on to the street. Add to that the proliferation of UBER/LYFT/ etc cars that also now park on the street, wheterh double parked during the day, or overnight as well.The solution is a simple “Resident” sticker for those with PROVEN legal residences on each street or 3 block radius. Ultimately the big corporations like UPS, Fedex, Verizon can afford multiple tickets that get tucked into windshields, fluttering like leaves as they double and triple park in front of our homes. We working class folks should not now have to pay more. We are already paying for the privilege of having a car, why should we now pay to subsidize an out of towner who won’t feel the pinch paying for a metered spot.
      If you visit any of the older buildings on west 107th Street, you will find several generations of families who have older cars they use for work. Contrary to several opinions below, these folks, some are supers, are not unionized, are not high income. They do not have ‘wealthy’ incomes. One family uses their car to deliver the New York Times every day of the week. Claiming that car owners are wealthy is a disturbingly arrogant and uninformed.

      • Stefan says:

        I owned a car, as my workplace was in NJ.
        We were bought by another corporation and now I work in midtown. So I gave up my car, as working and living in Manhattan makes a car unnecessary and difficult with alternate side parking regulations.
        This had and has nothing to do with wealth. I could easily afford a car, but also needed one.
        Why are some of you ( the non car owners) just selfish and show your jealousy and envy?
        How about some “wealthy” car owners that do not have children, but pay a lot of taxes for the schooling and education of other families’ children?
        Or some immigrant families (like us) that pay social security to other people’s parents as part of the generational contract we have in our country?
        Should we all ask for our tax money back?
        This seems to be the argument some of you are making about penalizing car owners.
        Can we all accept that our life is to some extent a collective undertaking and we all pay for lots of stuff that benefits others. This is a good thing, but we do not need to descent into a socialist frame of mind where work and effort and having tools to do so (=a car) are being penalized.
        Socialism has NEVER worked in the history of mankind.

        • Bruce E. Bernstein says:


          actually, socialism, or at least socialistic programs, are working very well right now, including in the United States.

          the Social Security system you describe is a socialist program, as is Medicare. you are paying taxes for someone else’s Medicare, but you will receive the benefits (paid for by others) when you turn 65.

          European countries are replete with socialistic programs that work very well in areas like family support (child care, support payments), employment support, and many other areas. in family support, the US offers almost nothing, a shameful record.

          if you want to call taxing parking benefits “socialism”, then let’s call these beneficial programs “socialism” as well.

    89. cici says:

      NYC has ALWAYS had limited access to free parking; what little exists is subject to a “competitive” system that actually favors residents on the UWS. CB7 exists to help UWS residents, not penalize them. Because of DEVELOPMENT on the west side, there IS an increase in commercial/construction traffic that competes with resident free parking, which stands to get worse with the high rise projects at Columbus/66th st and 10th/Amsterdam and everywhere else where buildings are overhauled. But we deal with it, rather then penalize our residents with policies that affect them economically. Affordable lot/garage is limited, and the city just announced a 50% increase in garage tax rates. NYC’s mass transit system is notorious for it’s inadequacies to to service the public, and the promised increased bus service has not and probably won’t happen. Car owners who park on the block do not have easy access to affordable private parking, and for the most part need and use their cars for work related reasons, or have made the analysis that, for their needs, having a car is more economical that other available transportation. The “wealthy”, or people who have nicer, newer cars, park in garages for safety reasons. While car owners may have more income, they also pay more taxes, including registration fees and insurance for those vehicles, and pay more for housing and related property taxes. Those who do not own cars full time should have free access to park a rental car for special needs, as well as those who share cars. Congestion pricing is a cover for implementing a toll charge to all cars who come into the city, targeted at traffic flow, not parking on side streets. Of more concern are the Uber etc drivers who zoom/cruise and clog the streets for fares. The current system is not broken, so whatever this is about is something else; the concern is the potential for the streets to fill with larger, louder, more environmentally destructive commercial and construction traffic, rather than a balance of use for residents who need, or want, to have a car. It is unfair discriminate in this manner.

    90. Openupfreeparking says:

      How about moving all the citibike terminals that the city has given to MOTIVATE for free and take up multiple parking spots. There are at least 40 parking spaces lost in the UWS that were once metered because of these bike stations and another 40 that were alternate side spaces. Parking on the UWS is getting out of hand shouldn’t be this way.

    91. Spendfreely says:

      The city took away revenue giving away metered spaces to CitiBike terminals all over the UWS. This isn’t revenue issue. It’s a spending issue. We have a corrupt and mismanaged leadership driving NYC into the toilet.

    92. Sal says:

      No one with higher income is going to be driving around looking for parking almost everyday!!! It’s many that drive to work, use their car for work or go outside the city because they can’t afford the highest prices around for services, products and necessities.

    93. Joey says:

      I and a lot of othere people from the outer boroughs,NJ, Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester Rockland and Orange won’t be visiting Manhattan as much to spend our money on dinners, shows and consumer goods if the possibility of a free parking space is totally eliminated.

    94. KL says:

      The car-owners have been getting a freebie until now and are complaining about the gravy train being taken away.

      If one owns a car (and thus can pay insurance, gas, maintenance), then one is rich enough to pay for a monthly pass on public transit. Car-ownership in Manhattan is a luxury and not strictly needed by the vast majority of residents given the options for subway, busses, bikes, uber, car rentals for special occasions, etc. Car-owners are polluting our environment and clogging our streets so that ambulances have a tough time moving in emergencies.

      And yes, a car in the city makes you rich enough. If the car owner can afford to live in Manhattan in non-project or non-shelter housing, then they are wealthy. If they claim they are so poor, they should move to live in cheaper locations and not ask the rest of us to subsidize their lazy and selfish luxuries.

      The rest of us go through our daily lives and long commutes without feeling entitled for free stuff and without insisting on filling other humans’ lungs with soot.

      CB7, please put metered parking all around. Increase city-bike parking and bike lanes, enlarge the sidewalks and plant more trees. I am not the only taxpayer resident that would vote for politicians that truly support such green actions.